WCASS 2/2/12 1Wisconsin RtI Center. 2/2/12 2 RtI Definition Response to Intervention In Wisconsin an organizational framework for achieving higher levels.

Wisconsin RtI Center1

WCASS

2/2/12

Wisconsin RtI Center

2 2/2/12

Response to InterventionIn Wisconsin

an organizational framework

forachieving higher levels of academic and behavioral

successfor all students


3 2/2/12


4

Good Teaching Social Behavior Support

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

Increasing District & State Competency and Capacity

Investing in Outcomes, Data, Practices, and Systems

2/2/12

5

General Education

Sea of Ineligibility

Special Education??

Without Multi-Level System of Support

Intensity of Problem

Am

ount

of

Res

ourc

es N

eede

d to

Sol

ve P

robl

em

G/T??

Title I?

ELL??

Struggling learners??

2/2/12



6

Bridging the Gap

General + Intensive Resources

General Resources

Intensity of Problem

Am

ount

of

Res

ourc

es N

eede

d to

Sol

ve P

robl

em

General + Supplemental Resources

2/2/12


7

Tier 3/Tertiary/Intensive 1-5%•Few students

1-5% Tier 3/Targeted/Intensive• Few students

Tier 2/Secondary/Selected 5-15%•Some students

5-15% Tier 2/Secondary/Selected• Some students

Tier 1/Universal/Core 80-90%•All students

80-90% Tier 1/Universal/Core• All settings, all students

Academic Systems Behavioral Systems

2/2/12


8

You all know this, now how do we get schools to do this

2/2/12


9

Academics & Behavior: A Symbiotic Relationship

2/2/12

High quality academic instruction (e.g., content matched to student success level, frequent opportunity to respond, frequent feedback) by itself can reduce problem behavior (Filter & Horner, 2009; Preciado, Horner, Scott, & Baker, 2009; Sanford, 2006)

Implementation of school-wide positive behavior support leads to increased academic engaged time and enhanced academic outcomes (Algozzine & Algozzine, 2007; Horner et al., 2009; Lassen, Steele, & Sailor, 2006)


10

Potential benefits of combined data setsAt the school level…Combined data sets can reveal

system gapsAt the student levelCombined data sets can help you

better understand locus of concern

2/2/12


11

Potential Benefits for……integrating data

For students flagged for BOTH academic and behavior, could signal more significant underlying needs (e.g. anxiety, depression)

With very young students: Poor academic progress is often a predictor of later behavior issuesWith older students: Poor academic and behavioral issues combined could signal drop-out risk

…integrating delivery of supportsFor students with needs in both academic and behavioral areas, can capitalize on small group academic setting for re-teaching and reinforcing of pro-social behaviors

2/2/12

12

Coherent Implementation Infrastructure

2/2/12

“We cannot continue to see initiatives as discrete and insular programs. Rather, we must see them as a system of interconnected strategies for improvement.”

“Rethinking the Scale-Up Challenge,” West Wind, 2009


13

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

Avoiding False Over/Under Identifying

2/2/12


SUSTAINABLE IMPLEMENTATION & DURABLE RESULTS THROUGH CONTINUOUS REGENERATION

ContinuousSelf-Assessment

ValuedOutcomes

Practice Implementation

EffectivePractices

Relevance

Priority Efficacy

Fidelity

2/2/1214



15

Wisconsin School-wide Implementation Review

2/2/12


16

Translate the Wisconsin RtI vision

actions

into

Purpose #12/2/12


17

Where are we now? Baseline

Where are we going?

Action Planning

How far have we come?

Progress Monitoring

Purpose #22/2/12

18

Leadership and Organizational

Structures+

2/2/12


19

Universal

Selected & Intensive Support

2/2/12



20 2/2/12

21 2/2/12



22

Dean Fixsen Doug Reeves

2/2/12


23

Levels of Implementation

3 – 5 years Purpose Building

Infrastructure

Initial Implementation

Full Implementation

Not in Place

Sustainability

2/2/12


24

www.wisconsinRtIcenter.org

2/2/12

25

SIRs Completed

Completed Total

Overall 259

Math 84

Reading 175

Both 54

School Type Math Readin

g

Total

Elementary 38 110 148

Middle 23 33 56

High 24 27 51

Mixed 0 4 4

CESA Total

1 58

2 36

3 13

4 7

5 14

6 31

7 13

8 6

9 18

10 9

11 44

12 12

2/2/12


26

SIR ResultsMath-Overall Reading-Overall

Not in placePurpose-building

Full implementationInfrastructureInitial implementationKey:

2/2/12


27

SIR Results: Essential ElementsHigh Quality Instruction

Math

Reading

Balanced Assessment

CollaborationLeadership & Organizational

Structure

2/2/12


28

SIR Results: Further AnalysisUniversal Level

Selected &Intensive

Math

Reading

2/2/12


29

SIR Results: Further AnalysisCulturally Responsive Family

Engagement

Math

Reading

2/2/12



30

Benchmarks of Quality

2/2/12


31

What is the BoQ?2/2/12

• Reliable, valid, useful, and efficient (~10 minutes for team members and 60-90 minutes for coaches)

• Measures degree (fidelity) of implementation of the universal level of PBIS in a school

• Allows teams to review their progress toward implementing the critical elements of PBIS

• Provides clear information regarding areas of strength and weakness in implementation efforts to be used for developing action plans

• Completed at least annually in March/April/May


32

Subscales on the BoQ2/2/12

PBIS Team Faculty Commitment Effective Procedures

for Dealing with Discipline

Data Entry & Analysis Plan Established

Expectations & Rules Developed

Reward/Recognition Program Established

Lesson Plans for Teaching Expectations/Rules

Implementation Plans Classroom Systems Evaluation


33

BoQs Completed

School Type Total

Early Education 1

Elementary 221

High 40

Middle 58

Other 14

PreK-12 1

PreK-8 59

Total 394

CESA Total

1 157

2 117

3 0

4 10

5 6

6 27

7 32

8 8

9 2

10 31

11 0

12 4

2/2/12

34 2/2/12


Over-all

PBIS Team

Fac-ulty

Com-mit-

ment

Disci-pline

Proce-dures

Data Entry

& Analy-

sis

Expec-tations

De-velope

d

Re-ward/Recognition Pro-

gram

Lesson Plans

Im-ple-

men-tation Plan

Class-room Sys-tems

Evalu-ation

0 to 1.5 years be-fore training (n=17)

71.9470588235294

80.5117647058823

59.8058823529412

85.6470588235294

77.5352941176471

86.6176470588235

67.2705882352941

68 62.4411764705882

61.8888888888889

66.0529411764706

0 to .5 years af-ter training (n=51)

38.8764705882353

82.356862745098

33.656862745098

55.9392156862745

37.2803921568627

44.9235294117647

33.8705882352941

29.8509803921569

28.6588235294118

34.4782608695652

28.9627450980392

.5 to 1 year af-ter training (n=68)

69.575 86.2597014925373

62.7925373134328

81.0373134328358

69.0402985074627

81.8119402985075

64.5388059701493

60.565671641791

59.7059701492537

64.1076923076923

66.1925373134328

1 to 1.5 years af-ter training (n=117)

74.2974358974359

85.7547008547009

63.8068376068376

87.0350427350427

74.4367521367521

87.0230769230769

69.6794871794872

70.2034188034188

65.2735042735043

70.5436893203883

72.9444444444444

1.5 to 2 years af-ter training (n=63)

76.215873015873

85.831746031746

66.6539682539683

87.1634920634921

72.9936507936508

90.1952380952381

70.9714285714286

72.5206349206349

69.0396825396825

73.6921568627451

75.6714285714286

2 to 2.5 years af-ter training (n=29)

73.5793103448276

83.0103448275862

64.8551724137931

80.9310344827586

74.8655172413793

84.348275862069

70.5689655172414

64.1689655172414

67.6551724137931

68.5185185185185

74.7793103448276

2.5 to 4.5 years af-ter training (n=28)

73.9785714285714

83.9214285714286

58.9178571428571

81.5857142857143

74.7035714285714

83.8321428571428

69.2821428571429

69.4642857142857

78.4178571428571

78.1071428571429

74.4642857142857

5.0

15.0

25.0

35.0

45.0

55.0

65.0

75.0

85.0

95.0

BoQ Results by Time Since Training


35

BoQ and SIR Parallels2/2/12

Annual Leadership Team Overall score and Subscale scores Action Planning Thorough measure fidelity of implementation of

systems


36 2/2/12

Math, PBIS, Reading; 0.45% Math, PBIS ; 0.62% Math, Reading; 1.83%PBIS, Reading; 2.59%Math; 0.85%

PBIS; 30.91%

Reading; 2.94%

None; 59.81%

% of Schools withState-level Implementation Data

PBIS/Reading RtI/Math RtI


37 2/2/12

Of the schools tak-ing a self-assess-ment, what is the break down


38 2/2/12

• Team schedule and structure• Collaborative Team processes

and protocols• Student Data collected• Student Data analysis


39 2/2/12

• Total District Enrollment- 917• Total Elementary Enrollment- 470

Crandon Elementary


40 2/2/12

Crandon Elementary

Reading SIR PBIS TIC PBIS SAS

10/20/2011 9/30/2011 11/4/2011

Overall Infrastructure Overall 77%Overall75%

High Quality Instruction Infrastructure Commitment 75%Monitoring78%

Balanced AssessmentInitial Implementation Team 83%Management

78%

Collaboration Infrastructure Self Assessment 50%District Support80%

Leadership & Organizational Structures

Initial Implementation Define Expectations 67%Define Expectations

94%

UniversalInitial Implementation Teach Expectations 100%Teach Expectations

84%

Selected & Intensive Infrastructure Reward 100%Reward System88%

Culturally Responsive Purpose BuildingViolations 50%Violations System64%

Family Engagement Infrastructure Classroom 67%

Information System 100%

Function Based Support 100%


41 2/2/12

Team Structures

• Grade Level Common Planning Time• Once a week• Scheduled during a special• One week, grade level meets with Literacy Coach

• To improve instruction in reading• Other week, grade level meets with Interventionist

• To discuss student’s of concern • Review behavior and academic data

• Meet in book room to review Data Wall

Crandon Elementary


42 2/2/12

Team Structures

• Leadership Team- PBIS team (trained at Universal)• Two fourth grade teachers• Principal• Internal PBIS coach (school councilor)• 5th grade teacher• Interventionist (systems coach)• School psychologist

• Meets every other Wednesday- After school• Planning stage• Discuss what is happening at Tier I

• Discuss Tier 2 options or plan• Review intervention plans

• Review behavioral and academic data

Crandon Elementary


43 2/2/12

Team Structures

• Leadership Team- REACh Team (academics)• Second grade teacher• Title I teacher• Principal• Internal PBIS coach (school councilor)• 5th grade teacher• Interventionist (systems coach)• School psychologist

• Meets every other Wednesday• Discuss students who are not making gains

• Discuss Tier 2 options or plans• Review intervention plans

• Review academic and behavioral data

Crandon Elementary


44 2/2/12

Team Structures

• Building Leadership Team- team of 8• Principal• Grade level teachers• Title Teachers• Special Education teachers• School Counselor

• Meets once a week• Review academic and behavioral data• Discuss how school is doing as a whole• Discuss progress on building levels goals that are tied to

data retreat

Crandon Elementary


45 2/2/12

Team schedules

• PBIS and REACh share four members• Duty of the shared members to inform both teams• Bring whole picture together• Ensure whole child data review

• PBIS and REACh- Elementary teams meet with MS/HS team• Goal is to meet quarterly• Currently meeting weekly to help MS/HS teams set up

• All Day Common Planning time• 5 times a year• Half day at grade level• Half day cross grade level

Crandon Elementary


46 2/2/12

Collaborative Processes/procedures

• Use data wall with all student data• Update data wall once a quarter, after benchmarking is

done• Use green folder with common documentation papers

• Same documentation paper, different colors for academic or behavioral concerns

• Currently working on same form to document each personnel actions

• Progress monitor once a month• Tier 3 interventions progress monitor every two weeks• Review data at all meetings

Crandon Elementary


47 2/2/12

Crandon Elementary Data Wall

Crandon Elementary Data Wall- Quarter One

Crandon Elementary Data Wall- Quarter TwoCrandon Student Data Card


48 2/2/12

Student Data Collected and Analyzed

• DIBELS data• SWIS data• COMPASS data• Reading Levels• On the Mark data• Scholastic Reading Inventory

data• Scholastic Math Inventory

data• Behavior Intervention Plan

data• Attendance data

Crandon Elementary

• Set up data wall to identify students at

• Basic• Minimal• Proficient • Advanced

• All data sets are analyzed to determine where to place student (i.e. if students scores low on one measure and higher on others. Team discusses where to place student)

49

School Handbook of Practices

2/2/12

RtICulturally

Responsive Practices

PBIS

“Whole Child”Response Process

• Data-based decision-making processes

• Teaming calendar

• Family Communication

• Access to data


50

Suggestions for Explaining Multi-Level System of Support to staff Start with Shared Vision and Goals Review shared features of PBIS and RtI with

teachers At Universal AND Selected and Targeted Levels

Review student level “look” at the triangle Reiterate that all integrated support must be

guided by multiple data sets Define Multi-Level System of Support within

your local context

2/2/12



51

How to work smarterCreate Common team structures Common protocols for data-based decision-making Shared calendars for screening and collaborating Data boards with combined academic, behavior,

and demographic data Opportunities to infuse cultural considerations Family communication Common professional development in processes,

data-based decision-making

2/2/12


52

Problem Solving Team

Tertiary Systems

Team

Secondary Systems

Team

UniversalTeam

Blending our efforts through the use of teams: Common Team Structures

2/2/12


53

Multiple Levels of Support

2/2/12

Necessary Conversations (Teams)

Problem Solving Team

Tertiary Systems Team

Secondary Systems Team

UniversalTeam

•Plans school- & class-wide staff development and supports

•Reviews school-wide & Universal data trends

•Uses process data

•Determines overall intervention effectiveness

•Standing team

•Creates plans for one youth at a time

•Represents highest level of staff expertise

• Uses process data

• Determines overall intervention effectiveness


54 2/2/12

Teams to Connect the DataProblem Solving TeamStanding team; uses data driven process for one youth at a time

Universal TeamPlans school-wide support

Secondary Systems TeamUses data; determines overall intervention effectiveness

Tertiary Systems TeamUses data; determines overall intensive intervention effectivenessWho

When

What Data

Who

When

What Data

Who

When

What Data

Who

When

What Data

Academic

Behavior

Academic

Behavior

Academic

Behavior

Academic

Behavior


55

Tools

2/2/12

Data Audit Tool• District And School

Multi-Level System Tool

District Data Audit Tool

http://www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/assets/files/resources/1316104404_Wisconsin%20PBIS%20Network%20Data%20Audit%20Tool%20-%20District.pdfd

http://www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/assets/files/resources/1327530042_MLSS%20Triangle%20Charts%20blank.xls

56

Tool Links2/2/12


• Data Audit Tool-District• http://www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/assets/files/resources/131

6104404_Wisconsin%20PBIS%20Network%20Data%20Audit%20Tool%20-%20District.pdf

• Data Audit Tool-School• http://www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/assets/files/resources/131

6106031_Wisconsin%20PBIS%20Network%20Data%20Audit%20Tool%20-%20School.pdf

• Multi-Level System Tool• http://

www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/assets/files/resources/1327530042_MLSS%20Triangle%20Charts%20blank.xls

• School-wide Implementation Review• http://www.wisconsinrticenter.org/educators/getting-started/sir.h

tml• Benchmarks of Quality• http://

www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/coaches/pbis-in-action/fidelity-tools.html

http://www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/assets/files/resources/1316104404_Wisconsin%20PBIS%20Network%20Data%20Audit%20Tool%20-%20District.pdf




http://www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/assets/files/resources/1316106031_Wisconsin%20PBIS%20Network%20Data%20Audit%20Tool%20-%20School.pdf







http://www.wisconsinrticenter.org/educators/getting-started/sir.html

http://www.wisconsinrticenter.org/educators/getting-started/sir.html

http://www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/coaches/pbis-in-action/fidelity-tools.html



57

Think MARATHON, not SPRINT!

1. Recognize that successful implementation is a multiple- year commitment.

2. Begin implementation with components already nearly in place, then continue with subsequent components.

3. Integrate professional development and collaboration as the primary means for capacity building and sustainability.

2/2/12

Mellard & Johnson (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to implementing response to intervention.


WCASS 2/2/12 1Wisconsin RtI Center. 2/2/12 2 RtI Definition Response to Intervention In Wisconsin an organizational framework for achieving higher levels.

Documents

older students

young students

increased academic

rti definition response

poor academic progress

higher levels of academic

problem behavior filter

academics behavior