1 of 67

Building Your Last Mile: �Preparing to Use RTI Data for Specific Learning Disability Eligibility Determinations

Rachel Brown-Chidsey, Ph.D., NCSP

University of Alaska Anchorage

rbrown77@alaska.edu

William Rasplica, MS Ed.

Executive Director of Learning Support Services, Retired

University of Washington Bothell Goodlad Institute

Advisor, National Center on Intensive Intervention

rasplw@uw.edu

Susan Ruby, Ph.D., NCSP

Eastern Washington University

sruby@ewu.edu

​

Stephanie King, Ph.D., Director of MTSS

Issaquah School District

KingS@issaquah.wednet.edu

2 of 67

Overview

  • Overview of Last Mile project
  • WAC 392-172A-03060 data requirements
  • RTI/MTSS structural components
  • MTSS handbook
  • Roles
  • Resources

2

3 of 67

Overview of Last Mile Project

  • The project is a partnership between OSPI and UW Bothell Goodlad Institute.
  • OSPI interested in a pilot of a process to support district’s implementation of an RTI-based model for SLD identification.

​

3

4 of 67

4

  • School districts in Washington now have two years to shift to an RTI-based system for special education eligibility determination for students with specific learning disabilities.
  • Finalizing implementation of complex systems like RTI depends on skillful local leadership.
  • The "last mile" in the journey from research to practice can be the most difficult. 
  • This project is premised on evidence that districts will have more success in the transition to RTI if they can see successful examples in other districts.
  • Align local capacity, existing programs, and district structures with critical RTI/MTSS practices.
  • In addition to successful examples of new RTI/MTSS systems, districts could also benefit from information about how other districts have navigated the last mile of the implementation effort. ��

Theory of Action

5 of 67

Last Mile Project

  • Supt. Cabinet representative
  • Special education administrator
  • Teaching and Learning
  • Compensatory services (Title, LAP and ML)
  • Principal representative
  • School Psychologist representative

District Implementation Team

5

6 of 67

Last Mile Project

  • Use of the MTSS Rubric
  • Valid & Reliable Universal Screening Tool
  • Valid & Reliable Progress Monitoring Tool
  • Tiered Instruction
    • Support for a minimum of 2 evidence-based interventions
  • Decision rules Developed
  • School Teams

Key Components & Indicators

6

7 of 67

Last Mile Project

  • District Policy 2161 & Procedures 2161P Revised
  • District Policy 2163
  • Finalize Participation Agreements
    • Support for district lead
    • Minimum number of consultations and schedule
    • Participation in project data collection
      • Feedback that can support iterative improvements in the project work
  • Commit to Participate in Three Face-to-Face Cross-Project ”Community of Practice" Events

Key Components & Indicators

7

8 of 67

WAC 392-172A-03060

8

WAC 392-172A-03060

Process based on a student's response to scientific research-based intervention.

(1) School districts using a process based on a student's response to scientific, research-based interventions to determine if a student has a specific learning disability shall adopt procedures to ensure that such process includes the following elements:

(a) Universal screening and/or benchmarking at fixed intervals at least three times throughout the school year;

(b) A high quality core curriculum designed to meet the instructional needs of all students;

(c) Scientific research-based interventions as defined in WAC 392-172A-01165 are identified for use with students needing additional instruction;

(d) Scientific research-based interventions used with a student are appropriate for the student's identified need and are implemented with fidelity;

(e) A multitiered model is developed for delivering both the core curriculum and strategic and intensive scientific research-based interventions in the general education setting;

(f) Frequent monitoring of individual student progress occurs in accordance with the constructs of the multitiered delivery system implemented in the school consistent with the intervention and tier at which it is being applied; and

(g) Decision making using problem solving or standard treatment protocol techniques is based upon, but not limited to, student centered data including the use of curriculum based measures, available standardized assessment data, intensive interventions, and instructional performance level.

(2) Such policies and procedures outlined in subsection (1) of this section shall be designed so that districts can establish that:

(a) The student's general education core curriculum instruction provided the student the opportunity to increase her or his rate of learning;

(b) Two or more intensive scientific research-based interventions, identified to allow the student to progress toward his or her improvement targets, were implemented with fidelity and for a sufficient duration to establish that the student's rate of learning using intensive scientific research-based interventions in the general education setting, in addition to or in place of the core curriculum, did not increase or allow the student to reach the targets identified for the student;

(c) The duration of the intensive scientific research-based interventions that were implemented was long enough to gather sufficient data points below the student's aim line to demonstrate student response for each of the interventions through progress monitoring to determine the effectiveness of the interventions.

(3) OSPI has developed guidelines for using response to intervention to assist districts in developing the procedures required under this section.

9 of 67

Kovaleski et al. (2022)

  • Rule in
  • Rule out

9

10 of 67

Data Requirements

  • Universal screening scores
    • 3 times per year
  • Names of interventions
    • Scientific, research-based
    • Two or more
  • Progress data collected during intervention
    • Enough data to demonstrate response

​

​

10

11 of 67

MTSS Components

  • Evidence-based Tier 1 core instruction
  • Universal screening
  • Supplemental Tier 2 interventions
  • Progress monitoring
  • Intensive Tier 3 interventions
  • Progress monitoring

​

11

12 of 67

What Should Screening Look Like?

  • Reliable and valid standardized assessment
  • Multiple time points
    • K-5: Fall, Winter, Spring
    • 6-8: Fall, Winter
    • 9-12: Fall and for all new students

12

13 of 67

Secondary Screening (6-12)

  • More data about students already available
  • Can be less frequent
  • Needs to measure essential skills

13

14 of 67

Examples of Screeners

  • NWEA Measures of Academic Progress
  • Renaissance
    • Star
    • FastBridge aMath and aReading
  • iReady

​

Computer-Adaptive Tests

14

Curriculum-Based Measures

  • Acadience
  • aimswebPlus
  • easyCBM
  • DIBELS 8
  • FastBridge
  • Star CBM

​

​

15 of 67

Timely Team-Based Review of Screening Data

  • Schedule data review before the screenings happen
    • Build it into the master schedule

​

  • Make this an expectation for all building leaders

15

16 of 67

Understanding Screening Data

16

How effective is core instruction?

What are the learning gaps?

How can we enhance core instruction?

Which students might need intervention?

Key Questions

17 of 67

Essential Role of Data Teams

“Teamwork makes the dream work”

​

  • An MTSS requires team-based review of student data
  • Team members bring multiple perspectives about students’ needs
  • Meeting agenda protocols support objective data review

17

18 of 67

MTSS Teams

District Teams

  • Support development of infrastructure & guidance, across schools
  • Data-based Decision Making at District Level

School Teams

  • Support cohesion and process at school level
  • Data-based Decision Making across Tiers

18

19 of 67

School Level - Data Team Organization

19

20 of 67

Meeting Protocols

  • Agendas
  • Notes
  • Procedures

20

21 of 67

Pause and Reflect

  • Who is developing district-wide guidance?

​

  • Who currently reviews screening data in your schools?

​

  • Who else needs to be included?

21

22 of 67

Screening Data: Decision Type

Prevent

​

​

Respond

22

23 of 67

Actions with Screening Data

  • Identify students who score below the expected criterion.
    • “Some Risk” = Tier 2
    • “Significant Risk” = Tier 3
  • Conduct Needs Verification with at least two additional data sources.
  • Develop and utilize Placement Protocols
    • Requires Diagnostic Assessments and Intervention Inventories

23

24 of 67

Progress Monitoring

Show me the data!

24

25 of 67

Ensuring Progress Monitoring Happens

  • Assessments
  • Schedules
  • Training
  • Reviewing progress data

​

25

26 of 67

Progress Monitoring Assessments

  • Brief
  • Sensitive to change in small increments of time
  • Matched to the intervention skill
  • CBM designed for this!

26

27 of 67

Progress Monitoring Schedules

  • Time for PM must be planned in advance
    • Example: the end of an intervention session
  • Tier 2
    • Every 2 – 4 weeks
  • Tier 3
    • Weekly

27

28 of 67

  • Selecting Progress Measures

28

29 of 67

Understanding the Bubbles

  • Ratings based on what publishers submit

​

29

30 of 67

Performance Level Standards

  • Basic psychometrics

30

31 of 67

Growth Standards

  • Rates accuracy of scores over time

31

32 of 67

Usability

  • Details about test features

32

33 of 67

Progress Monitoring Training

  • Determines interpretability of data
  • Online training tools for many measures
    • Acadience = free!

​

  • Check to confirm training when PM schedule is created

33

34 of 67

Reviewing Progress Data

  • Review each student at least monthly
    • Make the data are being collected
    • Are there any train wrecks?
  • Making decisions
    • Analysis method
    • Typical trends

​

34

35 of 67

Questions to Consider

35

36 of 67

Trend Analysis Methods

  • Four-point analysis
  • Trendline analysis
  • Median of last 3 data points

36

37 of 67

Most Accurate Analysis Method

37

38 of 67

Typical Trends

  • Three types;
    • Improving and on track
    • Improving but not on track
    • Not improving

38

39 of 67

Improving and On Track

39

40 of 67

40

41 of 67

41

42 of 67

Pause and Reflect

  • Who reviews your progress data?

​

  • How are decisions about next steps made?

42

43 of 67

Intensifying Interventions

  • Method to improve the student’s progress toward the goal
  • Includes specific steps to make the intervention as strong and effective as possible for an individual student
  • Individualized process

43

44 of 67

Data-Based Individualization (DBI)

  • NCII model for implementing intensive intervention

​

  • Uses intensification taxonomy

44

45 of 67

45

46 of 67

MTSS Handbook

46

Why?

What?

How?

47 of 67

Why do You Need an MTSS Handbook?

“We must nail the pendulum to the wall”

(Dave Tilly)

  • Staff will change
  • Leaders will change
  • A handbook is the connective glue that keeps practices consistent over time

“If you want to make lasting change in a school, create a form.”

(Judy Loughlin)

47

48 of 67

MTSS Handbook Contents

  • Introduction and history
  • Purpose
  • Tier 1 materials and programs
  • Universal screening
  • Tier 2 interventions
  • Progress monitoring
  • Tier 3 interventions
  • Comprehensive evaluations
  • Appendices

48

49 of 67

Writing Schedule

  • Create a writing schedule
    • Who will draft what chapters?
    • Deadlines
    • Meeting dates

49

50 of 67

Compiling and Editing

  • Review and edit
    • Put chapters in order
    • Have one person edit for consistency
  • Have stakeholders review final draft
    • Classroom teacher
    • Special educator
    • Parent

50

51 of 67

MTSS Handbook: Finalizing

  • Determine who must “sign off” to approve publication
  • Add publication date

​

51

52 of 67

Handbook Implementation Schedule

52

Create a schedule to “launch” the handbook

Start with communicating that it’s coming

Email

Meetings

In person

Schedule learning sessions for different roles

53 of 67

Handbook Learning Sessions

  • Provide sessions specific to roles
    • Classroom teachers
    • Interventionists
    • Special educators
    • Specialists (e.g., school psychologists, speech-language)

​

53

54 of 67

Handbook Revisions

54

    • Opportunity to learn and improve

The handbook needs to be revised every year

    • Review and update interventions and assessments
    • Timelines for each step

Use data to make changes

55 of 67

Pause and Reflect

  • What Handbook elements do you already have?

​

  • What needs to be created and written?

​

  • Who needs to be on your handbook writing team?

55

56 of 67

Roles and Responsibilities

  • Vary by district
  • District Level
    • Planning for new procedures
    • Establishing data tools & protocols
    • Clarifying tiered supports
    • Writing the handbook
  • Schools
    • Supporting all Tiers
    • Gathering screening & progress monitoring data
    • Data-based Decision Making
    • Integrating screening and progress data into comprehensive evaluation and report
    • School-based Handbook

56

57 of 67

Planning

  • Be part of the team to start planning and creating the MTSS infrastructure needed
  • Provide resources to colleagues who might be new to MTSS
  • Conduct professional learning

57

58 of 67

Handbook Writing

  • Serve on the writing team
  • Share resources about
    • Effective MTSS practices
    • How to understand screening and progress data
  • Write the section about the comprehensive evaluation

58

59 of 67

Supporting Tiers

59

Tier 1

Tier 2

Tier 3

  • Universal data team
  • Curriculum selection
  • Reviewing screening data

​

  • Problem solving team
  • Consulting with teachers
  • Selecting interventions and progress measures
  • Reviewing progress data

​

  • Problem solving team
  • Consulting with teachers
  • Selecting interventions and progress measures
  • Reviewing progress data
  • Intensifying interventions

60 of 67

Integrating Data

  • Understand and use the Kovaleski et al. (2022) model
  • Include screening and progress data in evaluation plan and report
  • Assist other team members to understand the data

60

61 of 67

Resources - Google Folder Link

  • TAPs
  • Implementation rubric
  • Eligibility checklist
  • MTSS Center
  • NCII

​

61

62 of 67

OSPI SLD Technical Assistance Papers (TAP)

  1. Inadequate Achievement
  2. Insufficient Progress
  3. Ruling Out Alternative Primary Factors
  4. Ruling out Inadequate Instruction
  5. Observation of Students Suspected of Having a SLD
  6. Conducting Comprehensive Evaluations for SLD Eligibility

​

​

62

63 of 67

Implementation Rubric

63

64 of 67

  • SLD Eligibility Checklist

64

65 of 67

MTSS Center

65

66 of 67

NCII

66

67 of 67

Questions?

67