EDPY 556 RTI Powerpoint

80 %
20 %
Information about EDPY 556 RTI Powerpoint

Published on March 16, 2014

Author: Tbird1961

Source: authorstream.com

PowerPoint Presentation: RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION EFFECTIVE EVIDENCE BASED INSTRUCTION WITH CONTINUOUS ASSESSMENT Thomas E. Daniels EDPY 556 Professor Heather Maguire, PsyD , NCSP, BCBA-D Azusa Pacific University RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION: RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION RTI puts instruction first and is a systematic method for assessment and instruction of students which uses progress monitoring to help pinpoint students who may need intervention (Hughes & Dexter, 2011). As originally designed, the goal of RTI is to reduce the number of students identified for special education services primarily due to reading problems. It is a general education initiative which takes place prior to evaluation for placement in special education ( Hazelkorn , Bucholz , Goodman, Duffy , & Brady , 2011). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 2004, incorporated language to allow RTI to be used as an alternative to the IQ-discrepancy model to prevent the wait to fail syndrome. RTI uses a three-tiered approach to identify and help struggling learners with each tier requiring an increase in intensity of the teaching intervention. Response to Intervention THREE TIERED CONTINUUM : Response to Intervention THREE TIERED CONTINUUM RTI’s Importance to Education Professionals: RTI’s Importance to Education Professionals Counselors Early identifier of learning and reading disabled children, instead of waiting to fail ( www.centerforcsri.org , 2008). Utilized for academic as well as behavior assessments. Helps address high school student disengagement. School Psychologists Reduces the number of children being identified as learning disabled, ( Hazelkorn & Bucholz , 2011 ). Promotes collaboration with Student Study Teams. Evidence-based approach provides credibility to assessments and interventions. FIVE KEY COMPONENTS TO EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTION WITH RTI: FIVE KEY COMPONENTS TO EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTION WITH RTI Content: Matched to what students need to learn in order to progress in the curriculum and school program. Compliments the knowledge or skills students gain in traditional instruction. Delivery: Explicit description of skills to be learned provided by teacher. Multiple opportunities for students to rehearse new skills. All students actively engaged with skill development. Pace: Intensive practice provided in early stages of acquisition. Judicious review of previously learned knowledge/skills. Responses: Correct responses reinforced by teacher with verbal praise. Incorrect responses addressed immediately with correct response rehearsed. Assessment: Students assessed continuously with daily progress recorded. Progress data reviewed weekly to determine if changes to instruction required. Brown- Chidsey & Steege , 2010 Four Purposes of Assessment : Four Purposes of Assessment Program Evaluation: How is the education system working for students overall? Screening: Which of my students are not meeting grade level expectations given Universal instruction? Diagnostic: What are the specific needs of students with reading, math, behavior? Monitoring Progress: What does the student’s growth look like? Burns, M., NASP, 2014 Resources: Resources www.whatworks.ed.gov http://reading.uoregon.edu/appendices/con_guide_3.1.03.pdf www.rti4success.org www.nasponline.org www.studentprogress.org www.rtinetwork.org No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB ) IDEA 2004 References: References Brown- Chidsey , R. & Steege , M. (2010). Response to Intervention: Principles and Strategies for Effective Practice, 2 nd Edition. The Guilford Press, New York and London, Ch. 6, p. 75 . Burns, M. (2014). The Role of School Psychologists in RTI Grade-Level Teams. University of Minnesota. Lecture: NASP Conference, 2014 Crepeau -Hobson , F., & Sobel , D. M. (2010). School psychologists and RTI: Analysis of training and professional development needs. School Psychology Forum: Research in Practice, 4 (4), 22-32 . Doabler , C., Strand-Cary, M., Clarke, B., Fien , H., Baker, S., & Jungjohann , K. (2011). Using a scientific process for curriculum development and formative evaluation: Project fusion. SREE Fall 2011 Conference Dunn, M. W. (2007). Diagnosing reading disability: Reading recovery as a component of a Response-to-Intervention assessment method. Learning Disabilites : A Contemporary Journal, 5 (2), 31-47. Hart, J. E. (2009). Strategies for culturally and linguistically diverse students with special needs. Preventing School Failure, 53 (3), 197-206. Hazelkorn , M., Bucholz , J. L., Goodman, J. I., Duffy, M. L., & Brady, M. P. (2011). Response to Intervention: General or special education? Who is responsible? The Educational Forum, 75 , 17-25. doi:10.1080/00131725.2010.528552 Hughes, C. A., & Dexter, D. D. (2011). Response to intervention: A research-based summary. Theory Into Practice, 50 , 4-11. doi:10.1080/00405841.2011.534909 Response to Intevention : Possibilities for service delivery at the secondary school level. (2008, June 1). The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvment : Newsletter . Retrieved from www.centerforscri.org

Add a comment

Related presentations