1 Intervention: Lessons Learned Kathlan Latimer Education Programs Consultant Mathematics and Science Leadership Unit California Department of Education.

1

Intervention: Lessons Learned

Kathlan LatimerEducation Programs Consultant

Mathematics and Science Leadership UnitCalifornia Department of Education

[email protected](916) 323-5252

2

Write fifty-seven.507

Write six hundred forty-two.6004020

Write seven hundred fifty thousand, fifty-eight.

70050000508Sherman (20-

28)

Colin

3

What does this student know?

4

What does this student know?

Write numerals. Read number words. Write/read left to right. Recognize single digits.

5

What doesn’t he know?

6

What doesn’t he know?

Structure of place value system Positionality

7

What is your response?

8

Intervention Defined

Focused instruction to help students whose achievement is significantly below grade level in order to accelerate their learning to grade level.

9

The Intervention Implementation Process

Features Design Implementation Materials Support

10

Features

Focused instruction for students whose achievement is significantly below grade level in order to accelerate learning to grade level.

Targeted-Key below level understandings and skills

Flexible-Specific entry and exit criteria

11

Assessments to monitor progress, provide feedback

-ongoing -specific

Systematic -regularly scheduled

-dedicated time

Features

12

Features

Balanced• Mathematical reasoning threaded throughout

Misconceptions addressed

Practice that accelerates learning and facilitates acquisition of new concepts and procedures

13

Mathematics Framework for California Public Schools

Appendix E: Balanced Prioritize concepts and skills taught Provide suggestions for monitoring Periodic assessments Provide engaging materials Require mathematical reasoning Reflects interests of students at current age

14

State Board Adopted Intervention Programs for Grades 4-7

Publisher Program

Compass Learning, Inc. Odyssey Focus Math

Glencoe/McGraw-Hill California Math Triumphs

Harcourt School Publishers/Holt, Rinehart and Winston

California Fast Forward Math

iLearn, Inc. iPASS Math Intervention

Kaplan K-12 Learning Services, Momentum Math

Houghton Mifflin Learning Technology (formerly Riverdeep),

Destination Math California Intervention

SRA/McGraw-Hill SRA Number Worlds

Wright Group/McGraw-Hill Pinpoint

15

Design

What’s your status quo?

-audit (informal/formal)

-Opportunities to learn variables analysis

-survey/self assessment Delivery Identifying students Matching materials

-Lens/Toolkit

16

Opportunities to Learn

Content Exposure and Coverage

Content Emphasis

Quality of Instruction

17

What’s your status quo?

For improved achievement:

effective instruction of standards-aligned core curriculum plus intervention for students in need

18

Core At least 50-60 minutes 3 phase lesson

• Guided practice• Checking for understanding (CFU)

Formative Assessment Immediate remediation

• Error analysis• Content knowledge packets• Extensive tool bag of strategies and practices

Differentiation of instruction

19

Three Phase Lesson Direct Instruction: 20% state learning objective CFU warm up/review (connect to prior learning) CFU

introduce/teach (direct instruction): model, discuss, demonstrate CFU

Guided Practice: 55% students follow teacher example CFU teacher gradually removes support CFU

Goal: move students to independent work CFUHow do you know when they are ready?When 80% or better are CONSISTENTLY correct.

CFU CFU CFU CFU CFU

Independent Practice: 20% Remediation = less need for intervention later CFU enrichment

Closure: 5% CFU

CFU, Checking For Understanding, at these points leads to more FOCUSED remediation later.

20

Programs in support of core

Maintenance programsDaily review

Facts practice

Calendar programs

Homework correction/feedback

21

Formative Assessment

Formative assessment is a process used by teachers and students during instruction that provides feedback to adjust ongoing teaching and learning to improve students’ achievement of intended instructional outcomes.

Council of Chief State School Officers

22

InstructionalAssessment

Long-cycle Span: across units, terms Length: four weeks to one year

Medium-cycle Span: within and between teaching units Length: one to four weeks

Short-cycle Span: within and between lessons Length: day-by-day- 24 to 48 hours minute-by-minute- 5 seconds to 2 hours

Wiliam, Dylan, What Does Research Say the Benefits of Formative Assessment Are?

http://www.nctm.org/news/content.aspx?id=11466.

23

Short Cycle Assessment

Teacher Collected Evidence: Whole group response Random questioning Target problems Ticket out the door 3-2-1 cards Warm up Daily quiz

24

Wiliam, 2006

25

Teacher Decisions

Adjustment points Evidence to collect Adjustment triggers

Transformative Assessment, Popham

26

Student Adjustments

• Understand learning goals and criteria for success

• Self- and peer- assessment

• Using feedback

27

National Math Panel on FA Based on its review of research, the Panel

recommends regular use of formative assessment, particularly for students in the elementary grades. These assessments need to provide information … (i.e., correlation of these measures with other measures of mathematics proficiency). For struggling students, frequent (e.g., weekly or biweekly) use of these assessments appears optimal, so that instruction can be adapted based on student progress.

• National Mathematics Panel, 2008

28

Three Tiered Intervention: RTI

In this model key instructional decisions are based on assessment data.

Data is collected and analyzed for strategic planning of targeting instruction.

29

Three Tiered Intervention: RTITier 1 All students receive core instruction prevention,

and/or remediation. Differentiating instruction to meet the needs of diverse learners

is a key consideration at this level. Universal screening in core academic areas to identify each student’s proficiency level (typically 3 times a year).

This data is used to 1) plan for the instructional needs of all students, 2) identify students who need extra support, and 3) determine whether the school’s instructional program is meeting the needs of the majority of students (80%).

30

Tier 2

Struggling students receive strategic instruction in addition to core.

Students receive individualized interventions. Assessment information is collected in order to determine why a student is not developing at the same pace as their peers.

OR All students who show similar, predictable difficulties

systematically receive the same standard set of interventions. Assessment data is used to help teams form hypotheses for why a problem is occurring.

31

Tier 3

Students receive intensive intervention. 1. Students show progress but need support not available in

general education in order to maintain this progress, OR 2. Students do not display meaningful progress in spite of the

intensive interventions. Students receive longer term, intensive instructional interventions designed to increase their rate of progress.

Special education eligibility might be considered at this level.

Information from the following source: National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Inc. (2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation

32

Sample Components of RTI Model: UT at Austin

Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3

Definition Core Support of core

Customized

Focus All Students with marked difficulties

Students with marked difficulties who haven’t responded to T-1 or T-2

Instruction Throughout the day

Additional

practice opportunity

Explicit, systematic intervention

33

Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3

grouping Flexible Homogeneous, small group

Homogeneous, small group

Time 60-90 min 20-30 min 2-30 min

34

http://sbcusd.k12.ca.us/new/24/uploads/Elementary%20Math%20Tiered%20Intervention%20Model.pdf

35

Tier 1

36

Tier 2

37

Tier 3

http://

sbcusd.k12.ca.us/new/24/uploads/Elementary%20Math%20Tiered%20Intervention%20Model.pdf

38

Delivery Decisions When?

• During day• Outside of day• Intersession/summer school

How much? How often?• Daily• ___sessions of ____minutes per week

Provided by whom?• Classroom teacher • Grade level/span• Specialists• Additional personnel

39

Delivery Decisions

Where? • Implications for scheduling

• Room assignments How many?

• Small group

• Individual Grouping?

• Within class• leveling within a grade

• Leveling across grades

40

Teacher Responses

Kindergarten (extended day or full day)

I hour twice weekly

swap: students move to leveled groups

Kindergarten (regular 3 hour schedule)

20 minutes, instructional aide and partner teacher assist with groups

41

Teacher Responses First grade level teamStudents assessed on priority standardsIn leveled groups for 30 min, twice weeklyVolunteers assist in larger classes to allow small group for

intensive group Second grade level teamFlexible group pulled for additional 20 minutes daily based

on standards assessment Third grade level teamTeacher volunteers to pilot program for implementationSpecialist approach to instruction with software program for

additional work.

42

Teacher Responses

Fifth grade

60 minute swap on Fridays

Reassessment each month

43

School Responses

School wide implementation:• Designated in class time for intervention

• Leveled across grade span Agreement of program to implement

• 30 minutes daily

• Teachers swap or peel off group during class time Specialist pulls groups for intensive work Before/after school groups Intersession

44

Identifying students Data driven What will be used? Administered how often?

CST District/school created

Teacher created Publisher created Teacher observations Target Groups

Strategic

Intensive

45

Decisions on materials

State Board adopted 4-7 intervention materials

Toolkit K-3/research

• What Works Clearinghouse [www.w-w-c.org]

• K-12 Mathematics Diagnostic-Intervention Programs, Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction

[www.k12.wa.us/curriculuminstruction]

46

Management

Implications for scheduling

room assignments, Changing groups Assessment data Keeping track

• SASI/attendance systems

Who keeps track?

47

Implementation

Professional development-ongoing on materials-strategies

When?• Collaborative planning

• Academic conferences

• Grade level meetings

• Staff meetings

48

Implementation

Piloting/buy in• Volunteers

• Broaden use

School wide small steps

49

What This Means

Process: not an isolated add on Ongoing maintenance/reassessment of

needs Ongoing professional development No magic bullet Flexibility required

50

Barriers

Time (additional minutes, common instructional time, scheduling)

Materials (determining needs, matching) Allowing for easy movement in/out of

groups What are the other kids doing?

51

Solid core• Adjusted instruction

• Immediate remediation

Intervention• Targeted

• Limited time, exit/entry point

• In addition to core

52

Next Steps

Raise questions.

Validate own process.

Provide direction for initial steps.

53

References California Department of Education, Mathematics Framework for

California Public Schools, Sacramento, 2006.• Universal access• Appendix E

Curriculum and Instruction Steering Committee/Mathematics Subcommittee, Mathematics Toolkit: A Data Driven Review of Instructional Materials, California County Superintendents Education Services Association, 2007.

Garner, Betty, Getting to Got It! Helping Struggling Students Learn How to Learn, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Division, Alexandria, Virginia, 2007.

Ma, Liping, Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics, Ehrlbaum, Mahwah, New Jersey, 1999.

54

References Popham, W. James, Transformative Assessment, ASCD,

Alexandria,Virginia, 2008.

Tate, William, Access and Opportunities to Learn Are Not Accidents: Engineering Mathematical Progress in Your School, SERVE, 2005 [www.serve.org]

Sherman, Helene, Lloyd Richardson, and George Yard, Teaching Children who Struggle with Mathematics: A Systematic Approach to Analysis and Correction, Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2005.

U.S. Department of Education, Foundations for Success: The Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel, 2008 [to order: www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html].

55

Resources for additional instructional strategies

Richardson, Kathy, Developing Number Concepts, Dale Seymour, New Jersey, 1999.

Van de Walle, John and Lou Ann Lovrin, Teaching Student-Centered Mathematics, Pearson, Boston, 2006.

56

Contact info

Kathlan Latimer

Education Programs Consultant

Mathematics and Science Leadership Unit

California Department of Education

[email protected]

(916) 323-5252