What is RtI?

In the 21st century, one of the easiest things that any person can do is to access any type of information, from nearly anywhere and at any time. If you are searching for the most accurate and correctly worded definition of RtI, I suggest you use Google, and I can assure you that this blog will not appear in the first page of results. As an education student taking a class called "Introduction to Students with Disabilities", my assignment (the fruit of which you see here) is not so much to copy-and-paste from reliable sources. Rather, I am presenting my own version of the facts which I have learned and been exposed to. Don't worry, I have reliable sources to consult so that I don't fly of the handle; but I hope to present this information in a non-teacher-lingo fashion, so that the average reader might understand what this discussion is about without having to refer to a dictionary or Google at every other word.
      So let's dive in! What is RtI? (Heads up: the education profession uses quite a few acronyms.) This stands for "Response to Intervention", and refers to the model for a categorized approach to assisting students who are struggling in school. Most teachers can identify three main groups of students in any given class: the bright ones who get all A's and B's, the average ones who get B's, C's and occasional D's, and the struggling students who get C's on a good day. Students will struggle for all kinds of reasons, some of which the students themselves might be able to help, but some of which they might need professionals to help them with. Currently, one out of every ten students in American classrooms receive special education services, and these can range from students who have physical disabilities to those who are intellectually disabled to those who just don't speak English well enough to understand what is being taught in a regular classroom. However, a student may not necessarily need special education services just because they are struggling. Sometimes they just need an extra boost to get to the same average level as their fellow students, and this is where RtI comes in.

      The diagram above shows the thinking behind the RtI model, and this paragraph is a brief rundown of what it means. It all starts with Tier I, in the regular classroom, but this expression should not mislead you. The idea is that, at Tier I, all students are receiving a high-quality educational experience which incorporates (ready for a big word?) evidence-based practices. This means activities, methods and strategies that have been studied and proven to have the best results when used in a classroom; that is, the students learn best when these practices are used in the classroom. And they aren't only teaching practices; they include practices for behavior management, social interaction and other factors that contribute to a safe, enjoyable and engaging learning environment. This is what RtI envisions at Tier I, for all students. Now, some students will need a bit more than that in order to succeed in school, so Tier II aims to provide the additional assistance to make sure this happens. Students may receive after-school support (such as reading practice or math skills practice) with tutors, and more personalized support from their teachers and teacher aides in the classroom. The few students for whom this is still not enough go on to receive Tier III interventions, which may require a team of people working to assess the students' needs and formulate specialized plans (known as IEPs, for Individualized Education Programs) for making progress in school and usually in other areas of development as well. So Tier III is the level that special education services may enter the picture.

      A few notes about RtI: this model is handy for several reasons. The cost to provide special education services to students is not low, so this model provides a way to help students who may not necessarily require that higher level of assistance, but also for whom the regular classroom support is just not enough. It does require a bit more work for the teachers, as they need to frequently assess their students' level of progress to verify whether each student is advancing adequately. But this would result in the teachers understanding their students better and catching on sooner than later to any difficulties the students are having with their learning. As was mentioned earlier, this model is not just about the academic part of learning. Some students may get good grades, but may need help in learning appropriate social behavior or to get along well with their classmates, and this approach would aid teachers in assisting them in these ways as well. 

      So this is just a brief summary, based on the textbook ""Educating Exceptional Children". Read on for more insight into each tier of the model and what it entails for the students, teachers, parents and other professionals who are involved in providing a quality education to all children. Thanks for reading!

References

Kirk, S., Gallagher, J., & Coleman, M. R. (2015). Educating Exceptional Children. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

Tier I: Core Instruction

      Ah, Tier I... the ideal condition of the regular classroom! Since we live in an imperfect world, we cannot expect that every classroom will be perfect, but since legislation is requiring schools to improve their services, classrooms delivering high-quality instruction are not difficult to find. But this is only one part of the Tier I experience, so we'll also take a look at what goes on at home.

In the Classroom 

      Classrooms that aspire to Tier I standards will have some common factors, namely these: 1) evidence-based practices, 2) universal screening and 3) progress monitoring. The first factor has the function of eliminating inadequate teaching as a cause for failure in school. Even students who are bright as pins will have trouble if their teachers are ill-qualified, the curriculum is faulty, and the strategies used to teach them are ineffectual. The second factor helps to determine if students are struggling with learning or at risk for learning difficulties. Such screening is carried out three times a year at least, and includes all students. This is connected to the third factor, which specifically focuses on the students performing in the lower 25% of the class. Monthly progress monitoring helps to determine if the standard classroom help makes a difference in the student's achievement, or if more enhanced supports are needed. (Hughes & Dexter, 2011)

      Allow me to elaborate a bit here, if I may. Evidence-based practices go beyond ensuring the teacher is highly qualified or that the curriculum meets the Common Core State Standards. The strategies that the teachers use also make a difference, such as differentiating instruction for the students (based on their strengths and interests), organizing the classroom environment to make it welcoming and conducive to learning (exploratory versus lecture-based), and basing assessment on projects or demonstrations as well as (rather than only) on exams. The data that the teachers gather based on their assessments, whether formal or informal, is a necessary complement to the data gathered from screenings and progress monitoring. Test scores are important, of course, but understanding what the areas of weakness are, both in knowledge and in performance, for the students provides insight into the type of assistance they would best benefit from.

In the Home

      Again, in a perfect world, all students would have a warm, supportive family environment that helps them to flourish. Tier I conditions at school can only do so much, and we educators can play a role in getting the family involved as well. Most people think of support as helping with homework, making sure the students' physical needs are met (enough sleep, good nutrition, safety, etc.), but it can go farther. Parents can encourage literacy and knowledge in the home by reading with and to the children, taking time to speak with them and to explore their environment. Caregivers of all kinds (including grandparents and babysitters) can be aware of incidents, behaviors and moods, and communicating regularly with the teachers about questions, concerns and developments will make for a school experience that is both understanding of the students' needs and informed of the students' lives outside of school so that their needs can be met in the best ways possible.

References 

Hughes, C. A., & Dexter, D. D. (2011). Response to Intervention: A Research-Based Summary. Theory Into Practice, 50(1), 4-11.

Tier II: Enhanced Instruction

      Let's kick this post off with an example: Young Pearson is in the third grade, but the screening from the fall shows that the student is reading at the first-grade level. Second grade was tough, but Pearson's next teacher sees, from progress reports, test scores and other data, that they are at risk to fail the third grade without additional support, above what their classroom offers. So Tier II support must come into play, which involves more specialized support and services, often provided collaboratively, and more frequent progress monitoring, usually on a weekly basis.

In the Classroom 

      Classroom time for Tier II students may sometimes be divided into time spent in and out of the classroom. They often receive small-group tutoring several times a week for time periods not longer than 30 minutes, and the group they are in depends on the skill they are deficient in. These support programs are usually carefully formulated and research-based, and instructors are trained in the methodology before they deliver the lessons. In the classroom, teacher aides or peer helpers or other assistants may be present, or small-group activities may be used more frequently with more targeted foci to help the student with the content. Teachers will carefully track the students' progress on a regular basis, with the understanding that they are not necessarily looking for quick results. They will likely include other opinions in analyzing homework, in-class performance, test scores and informal observations, to determine if and when to change strategies, and whether (if at all) the student should be moved to another tier of support. This could be Tier III or Tier I, depending on the student's response. As Dr. Friedman states (2011), "an important feature in an RTI model is expectation of potential movement back to the starting point: the regular classroom setting." 

In the Home 

      If I was a parent, I would probably have mixed emotions if I was told my child needed to receive specialized services. I suppose I would be glad that the slack was noticed and that they were going to receive additional support, but I would definitely be concerned. If my child does not improve, what then? What implications could this have for their future learning? Parents are entitled to be informed by the school of the RtI process that is implemented there, and they would also likely communicate regularly with the teacher and anyone else involved in their child's process. The teachers would want more information about the child's skills and/or behaviors outside the classroom, and to pass on information about how the parents could support the child as they receive enhanced assistance. Again, all of this depends on what the student is struggling with and what strategies have been found to be most effective in assisting them.

References 

Friedman, E. K. (2010). Secondary Prevention in an RTI Model: A Step toward Academic Recovery. Reading Teacher, 64(3), 207-210.

Tier III: Individualized Instruction

      Now we come to the last level, Tier III... it can sound ominous, especially since it is represented by the red pinnacle of the pyramid in the first post's diagram. The thing is, dedicated teachers get that ominous feeling at the beginning of every year. The responsibility for these students is not one that teachers take lightly, no matter how how far up or down they are on the pyramid. When students get to the point where they need Tier III interventions, nine out of ten times it is because the regular classroom teacher went above and beyond to support the student, but they still need more than that in order to succeed. So (to paraphrase Tom Lehrer) when the data confirms it, send the Marines! (I mean, a multidisciplinary team...)

      In the previously-referenced textbook ("Educating Exceptional Children"), though perhaps not always the case in practice, the explanations for interventions at Tier III consistently include Individualized Education Programs, or IEPs. These are put together when the student's response to lower-level interventions have not met with success in helping the student advance academically. This is a result of circumstance, so a team of professionals comes together to help make these circumstances more favorable. It usually involves the regular education teacher, a special education teacher, the parents and a representative of the school administration. Depending on the needs of the student, the team may also include a psychologist, several therapists (occupational, behavioral, physical, speech, etc.) and even a physician. In a nutshell, they evaluate the student's current situation and needs, set goals for the student's achievement (often beyond only scholastics) and decide on methods and strategies for reaching those goals, and determine a time frame and necessary resources needed to fulfill these goals. Evaluation is an important part of this process, as the goals, strategies and time frames are reviewed for viability and effectiveness. The successful implementation of such a program requires teachers and families to play important roles in supporting the student, both in the classroom and at home. It should be noted that the focus is more on reaching the milestones and less on when the student reaches them. We are all lifelong learners, but not all of us reach the same levels as others. 

      It is also worth noting here that not all RtI interventions require that students go through the first two tiers before receiving Tier III supports. Students with a documented history with their disability may be given Tier III interventions upon entry, as would happen (for example) with a student entering middle school with an IEP. Some research suggests that this could become a profitable practice for Tier II interventions as well. Al Otaiba et al. (2015) demonstrated increased positive outcomes by supporting students according to the tier which would best serve their needs, which were determined by the initial screening. While resources to do this are not readily available to all schools, the point of the RtI model is not to operate on a "wait-to-fail" basis, but rather to take a proactive stance in improving student outcomes. While evidence-based practices do require more than one study, they are worth researching regardless of the cost.

References
Kirk, S., Gallagher, J., & Coleman, M. R. (2015). Educating Exceptional Children. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

Al Otaiba, S., Connor, C. M., Folsom, J. S., Wanzek, J., Greulich, L., Schatschneider, C., & ... Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, (. (2015). To Wait in Tier 1 or Intervene Immediately: A Randomized Experiment Examining First Grade Response to Intervention (RTI) in Reading. Society For Research On Educational Effectiveness,

In Practice: An Interview and a Reflection

For my clinical component this semester, I volunteer every Saturday with NWSRA (that is, the NorthWest Special Recreation Association, http://www.nwsra.org) at a program called Saturday Clubhouse, which is run by the incomparable Ms. Katrina Place. She has worked for NWSRA for 8 years as a program specialist/camp coordinator. She has a bachelor's degree in science of recreation therapy, and has worked with a variety of adults and children with various disabilities: physical, developmental and cognitive. Although Rtl is not used specifically, various other methods are employed to observe and assess our participants. Here's a little of her insight into RtI:

Do you think RtI could be applied to students who didn't need academic support? 

Yes, I believe it could be applied to students who need behavioral and social skills support. The process of Rtl is set up to assist a student in many different ways, not just academically. 

What is your opinion of RtI in comparison to other or previous methods/models of assessing students and providing support? 

I believe this is a good model for schools, as it steps in before the child/student has fallen behind or missed out. It gives the school the opportunity to meet the student at their level and provide the needs, tools and assistance to succeed with the rest of the class

Do you have any ideas for how this model could be improved?

I don't have any improvements on Rtl, I would just suggest it be used in other ways and not only for learning disabilities. 

How do you think RtI could be applied to gifted students? 

I believe it would apply in the same manner: Rtl finds the areas the child needs extra support or assistance with. It also brings together the whole team, teachers, parents and the students together working towards one goal, student success.

Case Study Responses

The following case studies demonstrate the process for decision-making regarding the tiers of support that students are assigned to. These (and accompanying images) were taken from the case study unit of the IRIS Center's "RtI: Data-Based Decision-Making" course from Vanderbilt University, created by Janice Brown and Kim Skow. The responses and opinions given are my own!

Level B, Case 2: Kateri (age 9, 3rd Grade) 

   This scenario regards Kateri, a student who had been performing poorly in reading for the first six weeks and has received Tier II instruction for ten following weeks. The support team at her elementary school is meeting to evaluate her progress and to determine if her level of skill and learning are conducive to one of the following three outcomes: 1) to upgrade back to Tier I instruction, 2) to continue receiving Tier II instruction, or 3) to begin receiving Tier III instruction. The team are using the dual-discrepancy approach, which analyzes a student's level of performance compared to a relevant benchmark, as well as their rate of improvement (growth) compared to a predetermined rate which would show adequate progress. The following chart summarizes the outcomes that can usually be expected based on these two criteria:

The criteria that Kateri's team are using to determine whether a student is responding adequately
to instruction is a performance level of 60 wpm (words per minute) and a rate of growth of 1.2. They have carefully gathered the data on Kateri's reading performance in the past 10 weeks using scores from a probe, with the organized information shown below: 

Kateri's performance level is the average of the last three scores on the left-hand chart, being (62 + 64 + 65) / 3 = 191/3 = 63.6, which exceeds the desired level of 60. Based on that alone, according to the first chart for determining tier placement, she could return to receiving Tier 1 instruction. However, the team would be wise to consider her growth rate as well. Using a formula (difference between Week 16 score minus Week 7 score, divided by the difference between the numbers of the last and first weeks of Tier II intervention) with the given numbers, we get the following rate: 65-40/17-7 = 25/10 = 2.5, which is certainly higher than the desired 1.2 rate of growth. So on both accounts, it would be safe to conclude Kateri has responded well to Tier II supports, and if I was one of the team, I would recommend that she be upgraded back to Tier I instruction. 

Level C, Case 1: Clay (age 7, 2nd Grade)

     

   This scenario regards Clay, a student who had been performing poorly in reading for the first seven weeks and has received Tier II instruction for thirteen following weeks. The support team at his elementary school is meeting to evaluate his progress and to determine if his level of skill and learning are conducive to one of the following three outcomes: 1) to upgrade back to Tier I instruction, 2) to continue receiving Tier II instruction, or 3) to begin receiving Tier III instruction. The team are using the dual-discrepancy approach, as was used with Kateri, but the criteria that Clay's team are using to determine whether a student is responding adequately to instruction is a performance level of 40 wpm and a rate of growth of 1.3. They have carefully gathered the data on Clay's reading performance in the past 13 weeks using scores from a probe, with the organized information shown below: 

Clay's performance level is the average of the last three scores on the left-hand chart, being (42 + 44 + 42) / 3 = 128/3 = 42.6, which exceeds the desired level of 40. Based on that alone, according to the first chart for determining tier placement, he could return to receiving Tier 1 instruction. However, the team would be wise to consider his growth rate as well. With the data from Clay's performance in the previously-used formula, we get the following rate: 42-25/20-8 = 17/12 = 1.417, which is higher than the desired 1.3 rate of growth. While the data shows that Clay is responding adequately to the Tier II instruction, I would be concerned by the inconsistency in the rate of growth as shown by the graph. Because of that, and because Clay's numbers are, in my opinion, too close the desired ones for comfort, I would recommend that Clay receive a second round of Tier II interventions. 

   If this recommendation was approved by the team, and I were to meet Clay's parents to explain the decision, I would imagine my end of the dialogue proceeding thus: 

"Hello Mr. and Mrs. C., thank you so much for meeting with me today. I'd like to discuss Clay's reading with you, and I am glad to say that I have great news! As you can see from this chart, our support team here at La Quinta Elementary kept track of the number of words per minute that Clay could read in the first couple of weeks of class. Because we saw that he was not quite attaining to the levels that were set based on the school's curriculum, we provided him with more specialized instruction for the next thirteen weeks. We have kept you informed of what supports we have been providing for him, and of course we have kept track of how he has responded to them. I recently sat down with our team to go over the numbers, and I am happy to report that Clay has responded quite well to the added help. As you can see on the chart, his number of words per minute are above the number that shows adequate progress, and we found that his rate of improvement is also higher than the average. We really are so proud for him, as this shows me that he is also making an effort to grow. I do want to let you know about a few things that the team and I discussed. Do you see these points here where his numbers go up then down below the line? I feel that this shows that, while he is obviously making progress, it's still a little wobbly. I think it's important that my students feel confident in their abilities, and that comes with being successful over time. I feel, and my colleagues agreed with me, that if we remove the supports that Clay has been receiving too soon, he may wobble back down to below the line. We want to make sure he maintains his winning streak, so we decided to provide him with another round of support during the upcoming weeks. I'd like your feedback on this decision, as I think you wanted to hear that Clay routine would normalize. We feel this is for the best, but I'd like to hear what you think and if you have any questions about what we've just discussed." 

References 

Brown, J., Skow, K., & the IRIS Center. (2009). RTI: Data-based decision making. Retrieved
on April 03, 2016 from http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/wp-content/uploads/pdf_
case_studies/ics_rtidm.pdf

Bibliography Page and Rationales

References

Kirk, S., Gallagher, J., & Coleman, M. R. (2015). Educating Exceptional Children. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

Hughes, C. A., & Dexter, D. D. (2011). Response to Intervention: A Research-Based Summary. Theory Into Practice, 50(1), 4-11.

Friedman, E. K. (2010). Secondary Prevention in an RTI Model: A Step Toward Academic Recovery. Reading Teacher, 64(3), 207-210.

Al Otaiba, S., Connor, C. M., Folsom, J. S., Wanzek, J., Greulich, L., Schatschneider, C., & ... Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, (. (2015). To Wait in Tier 1 or Intervene Immediately: A Randomized Experiment Examining First Grade Response to Intervention (RTI) in Reading. Society For Research On Educational Effectiveness, 

***

Rationales

Artifact for Standard 8H: Understands concerns of families of students with disabilities and knows appropriate strategies to collaborate with students and their families in addressing these concerns.

Name of Artifact: RtI Blog Assignment

Date: 04/10/2016

Course: EDU 219-B01: Students with Disabilities

Rationale:

I have included this artifact of the RtI blog under Standard 8H, and I feel the assignment belongs under this standard because, while the RtI model does not necessarily involve students who officially have disabilities, it has been shown to be an effective strategy for addressing the concerns of both parents and teachers regarding students who may have disabilities. For this assignment, I read several articles on the topic of RtI and compiled my findings on an original blog. I also included the results of some case study activities which I completed, as well as some insights from an interview with the main instructor in an educational program which I have been observing this semester. I found that RtI is, among other things, an effective measure for assessing any additional educational needs that students may have at any point in their education. Because of the universal screening and frequent monitoring that occurs at all levels, teachers are able to present data to the families when discussing the students’ needs and progress, and so are able to help them make informed decisions about their children. In my future teaching, I intend to incorporate this model into my methodology, regardless of the extra work which doubtless comes with that, in order to ensure that my future students are receiving the needed supports and that their families are aware and informed of what supports they are receiving and why.

*********

Artifact for Standard 8I: Understands the roles and the importance of including students with disabilities, as appropriate, and all team members in planning individualized education programs (i.e, IEP, IFSP, Section 504 plan) for students with disabilities.

Name of Artifact: RtI Blog Assignment

Date: 04/10/2016

Course: EDU 219-B01: Students with Disabilities

Rationale:

I have included this artifact of the RtI blog under Standard 8I, and I feel the assignment belongs under this standard because, while the RtI model does not necessarily involve students who officially have disabilities, the process of implementing it effectively involves more people than just the teacher, the student and their family. For this assignment, I read several articles on the topic of RtI and compiled my findings on an original blog. I also included the results of some case study activities which I completed, as well as some insights from an interview with the main instructor in an educational program which I have been observing this semester. I was interested in the fact that, while RtI is not yet an intervention model at the level of an IEP, it still requires a fair amount of people to provide the additional supports for the students at the different levels. The individual student’s will to make the most of the supports provided to them is a key factor in helping them succeed, and this is often the result of keeping them informed and included (to varying degrees) in the planning processes. Other factors include physical and technical supports provided by the school, differentiated instruction from the teacher and aides, practice and assistance provided by tutors and/or special education teachers, and additional insights and support at home from the families. In my future teaching, I intend to make RtI supports for my students a team effort, both for the sake of my own sanity and for the sake of the students, who will benefit far more from a tribe of helpers than just one individual.