Docstoc

gsrtikeynote ppt PowerPoint Presentation Intervention

Document Sample
gsrtikeynote ppt PowerPoint Presentation Intervention Powered By Docstoc
					   RTI: Reasons,
Practices, Systems, &
   Considerations
         George Sugai
       OSEP Center on PBIS
      University of Connecticut
            December 6, 2007

  www.pbis.org   www.cber.org
    George.sugai@uconn.edu
     My “Task”
  Rationale

  Influences

  “Triangle”

Considerations
                   STUDENT
                 ACHIEVEMENT

    Good Teaching       Social Behavior Support




Increasing District & State Competency and Capacity


Investing in Outcomes, Data, Practices, and Systems
Comprehensive                  Instructional
  screening                   accountability
                              & justification
                Support for
                   non-
Early &         responders
 timely                       Assessment-
decision                       instruction
making                         alignment

 Data-          Need for              Resource
 based           better               & time use
decision
making
 RtI: Good “IDEiA” Policy
    Approach for redesigning &
  establishing teaching & learning
  environments that are effective,
  efficient, relevant, & durable for
 all students, families & educators

• NOT program, curriculum, strategy,
  intervention
• NOT limited to special education
• NOT new
                       CBM
     Precision                   Prereferral
     Teaching                   Interventions



                    EARLY
Applied
                 INFLUENCES             Teacher
Behavior                               Assistance
Analysis                                Teaming

           Behavioral &      Diagnostic
           Instructional     Prescriptive
           Consultation       Teaching
               IMPLEMENTATION W/
                    FIDELITY

                                      CONTINUUM OF
   UNIVERSAL                        EVIDENCE-BASED
   SCREENING                         INTERVENTIONS



                         RtI
   DATA-BASED
DECISION MAKING &
                                       STUDENT
PROBLEM SOLVING
                                     PERFORMANCE



                       CONTINUOUS
                        PROGRESS
                       MONITORING
           Sounds simple, but
            IMPLICATIONS

Curricular &                    Special
Instructional                  Educator
 Decisions                    Functioning
                 General
                 Educator
                Functioning


     Measurement          Implementation
     Requirements             Fidelity
Where’d “triangle”
 come from….a
PBIS perspective?
         “Triangle” ?’s

• Why triangle?
• Why not pyramid or octagon?
• Why not 12 tiers? 2 tiers?
• What’s it got to do w/ education?
• Where’d those %’s come from?
     Continuum of Effective Behavior
               Support

                                                        Specialized Individual
                          Tertiary Prevention           Interventions
Students with
Chronic/Intense                                         (Individual Student
Problem Behavior                                        System)
(1 - 7%)                   Secondary Prevention
                                                        Specialized Group
Students At-Risk                                        Interventions
for Problem                                             (At-Risk System)
Behavior
(5-15%)




Students
without
                                   Primary Prevention   Universal Interventions
Serious
Problem                                                 (School-Wide System
Behaviors                                               Classroom System)
(80 -90%)




                   All Students in School
                                                    Circa 1994
Public Health & Disease Prevention
           Kutash et al., 2006; Larson, 1994

• Tertiary (FEW)
  – Reduce complications,
    intensity, severity of
    current cases

• Secondary
  (SOME)
  – Reduce current cases
    of problem behavior

• Primary (ALL)
  – Reduce new cases of
    problem behavior
   Prevention Logic for All
                Walker et al., 1996

                              Redesign
                             learning &
 Decrease       Prevent        teaching     Teach,
development   worsening of environments   monitor, &
   of new       existing    to eliminate acknowledge
  problem       problem       triggers &   prosocial
 behaviors     behaviors   maintainers of  behavior
                               problem
                             behaviors
                                            Tertiary Prevention:
  CONTINUUM OF                                  Specialized
   SCHOOL-WIDE                                 Individualized
 INSTRUCTIONAL &                           Systems for Students
POSITIVE BEHAVIOR           ~5%           with High-Risk Behavior
     SUPPORT
                                          Secondary Prevention:
                            ~15%
                                            Specialized Group
                                          Systems for Students
                                          with At-Risk Behavior
 Primary Prevention:
 School-/Classroom-
  Wide Systems for
    All Students,
  Staff, & Settings




                       ~80% of Students
      Designing School-Wide Systems
           for Student Success
      Academic Systems                                        Behavioral Systems
 Intensive, Individual Interventions                                  Intensive, Individual Interventions
 •Individual Students                           1-5%   1-5%
                                                                      •Individual Students
 •Assessment-based                                                    •Assessment-based
 •High Intensity                                                      •Intense, durable procedures
 Targeted Group Interventions               5-10%        5-10%               Targeted Group Interventions
 •Some students (at-risk)                                                    •Some students (at-risk)
 •High efficiency                                                            •High efficiency
 •Rapid response                                                             •Rapid response




Universal Interventions            80-90%                        80-90%           Universal Interventions
•All students                                                                     •All settings, all students
•Preventive, proactive                                                            •Preventive, proactive




 Circa 1996
               RtI Application Examples
                  EARLY READING/LITERACY                          SOCIAL BEHAVIOR


                    General educator, special             General educator, special educator,
    TEAM        educator, reading specialist, Title I,     behavior specialist, Title I, school
                    school psychologist, etc.                     psychologist, etc.


 UNIVERSAL
                 Curriculum based measurement                 SSBD, record review, gating
 SCREENING

 PROGRESS                                                    ODR, suspensions, behavior
                 Curriculum based measurement
 MONITORING                                                  incidents, precision teaching
                                                         Direct social skills instruction, positive
                                                         reinforcement, token economy, active
                5-specific reading skills: phonemic
  EFFECTIVE                                               supervision, behavioral contracting,
                   awareness, phonics, fluency,
INTERVENTIONS                                               group contingency management,
                    vocabulary, comprehension
                                                              function-based support, self-
                                                                      management
  DECISION
                     Core, strategic, intensive             Primary, secondary, tertiary tiers
MAKING RULES
Responsiveness to
   Intervention

   Academic
        +
 Social Behavior
          Intensive   Few        RTI
                             A Continuum of
       Targeted       Some   Support for All




Universal             All


Dec 6, 2007
       Major Office Discipline Referrals (05-06)
             Mean Proportion of Students
                        0-1     '2-5   '6+


100%
               3%                        10%             11%
90%            8%
                                         16%             18%
80%
70%
60%
               89%                       74%             71%
50%
40%
30%
20%             ODR rates vary by level
10%
 0%
       K=6 (N = 1010)         6-9 (N = 312)    9-12 (N = 104)
        Major Office Discipline Referrals (05-06)
        Percentage of ODRs by Student Group

                         '0-1    '2-5   '6+

              A few kids get many ODRs
100%
                   32%                        48%              45%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%                43%                        37%              40%

20%
10%                25%                        15%              15%

 0%
       K-6 (N = 1010)           6-9 (N = 312)       9-12 (N = 104)
Has triangle
been useful?
                            Central Illinois Elem, Middle Schools
                                 Triangle Summary 03-04

                      1               05%
                                                            20%
                                      11%
Mean Proportion of




                     0.8
                                                            22%
    Students




                     0.6                                             6+ ODR
                                        84%                 58%
                                                                     2-5 ODR
                     0.4
                                                                     0-1 ODR

                     0.2
                           SWPBS schools are more preventive
                      0
                            Met SET (N = 23)   Not Met SET (N =12)
                            North Illinois Schools (Elem, Middle)
                                 Triangle Summary 03-04

                      1
                                      04%
                                                           14%
                                       08%
Mean Proportion of




                     0.8
                                                           17%
    Students




                     0.6
                                                                     6+ ODR
                                         88%               69%
                     0.4                                             2-5 ODR
                                                                     0-1 ODR
                     0.2
                           SWPBS schools are more preventive
                      0
                              Met SET N = 28    Not Met SET N = 11
                   CONTINUUM of SWPBS

         Tertiary Prevention
         • Function-based support
         •
         •
                                      Audit
      ~5%•
         •         1. Identify existing efforts   by tier
      ~15%       2. Specify
         Secondary Prevention outcome for each effort
         • Check in/out
         •       3. Evaluate implementation accuracy
         •
         •
                     & outcome effectiveness
         •
                 4. Eliminate/integrate based on
                    outcomes
         Primary Prevention
         • SWPBS
         •     5. Establish    decision rules (RtI)
         •
         •
         •

~80% of Students
 RtI Systems &
Considerations?
       Quotable Fixsen
• “Policy is
  – allocation of limited resources for
    unlimited needs”
  – Opportunity, not guarantee, for good
    action”
• “Training does not predict action”
  – “Manualized treatments have created
    overly rigid & rapid applications”
  “Train & Hope”
      WAIT for             REACT to
        New                Problem
      Problem              Behavior




  Expect, But
                                 Select &
   HOPE for
                                  ADD
Implementation
                                 Practice


             Hire EXPERT
                to Train
               Practice
  Possible RtI Outcomes
               Gresham, 2005


         Responder         Non-Responder

High       False +              True +
Risk   Adequate response   Inadequate response


No         True –               False –
Risk   Adequate response   Inadequate response
Avoiding False +/-
  Technically adequate assessments

         Integrated initiatives

   Continuum of effective practices

      Fidelity of implementation

  Timely team-based decision making

  Efficient & accurate decision rules

     Regular systems level audits

         Training to Fluency
  Still not so
simple: EBD?
 Gresham 2005
Implications & Complexities
     (E.g., Gresham, Grimes, Kratochwill, Tilly, etc.)
• Psychometric features of measures?
• Standardized measurement procedures?
• Documented “cut” criteria for determining responsiveness?
• Interventions efficacy, effectiveness, & relevance?
• Cultural, familial, language, etc. considerations?
• Students with disabilities?
• Professional development?
• Applications across grades/schools & curriculum areas?
• Treatment integrity & accountability?
• Functioning of general v. special education?
• K-12 applications
•
                  Supporting Social Competence &
 Simple               Academic Achievement
Systems
Elements                  OUTCOMES


                                               Supporting
  Supporting                                    Decision
 Staff Behavior                                 Making



                          PRACTICES



                           Supporting
                        Student Behavior
   Need,                      Local
Agreements,               Demonstration
Adoption, &     1.
                            w/ Fidelity
 Outcomes
         IMPLEMENTATION 2.
             PHASES
   4. Systems                 Sustained
Adoption, Scaling,             Capacity,
                     3.     Elaboration, &
  & Continuous
  Regeneration               Replication
SUSTAINABLE IMPLEMENTATION & DURABLE RESULTS
     THROUGH CONTINUOUS REGENERATION


                 Continuous
               Self-Assessment

                  Relevance

   Valued     Priority   Efficacy   Effective
   Outcomes                         Practices
                   Fidelity

                  Practice
               Implementation
   Future: Document…
• Technical adequacy of RtI components
  (measurement, decision rules, etc.)
• Full implementation across range of
  contexts
• Impact & relationship of academic &
  social behavior interaction
• Systems, resources, competence
  needed to maintain effects, support high
  fidelity of implementation, expand
  applications, & sustain implementation
  of practices
            Messages
• RtI logic is “good thing” for all
  students, families, & schools
• Still some work to refine technology,
  practices, & systems
• Consider implications &
  complexities for practice & systems
  implementation
  Keynote “Homework”
1. Work as team
2. Think/work systemically
3. Develop fluency w/ “Big Ideas”
4. Work smarter w/ existing
   resources
5. Conduct self-audit

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:20
posted:1/9/2011
language:English
pages:44