More About RTI
Response to Intervention (RTI)-Streamlining Our Education System
Response to Intervention (RTI) is not new; it emerged around 20 years ago, but is now being hailed as a major educational reform movement, which many school districts across the US are adopting. The purpose behind this system change is to ensure that “every classroom is one that you would put your child in” (Ann Casey PhD) by reorganizing the service delivery system, breaking down the divisions between regular and special education, and providing consistent, research based interventions to all students.
The vision driving RTI is definitely ambitious, and there is no doubt that systems change takes time. Educators and administrators will be acclimating to different expectations, and new policies and procedures. This is going to take hard work and commitment, and on a district and an individual school level, there will need to be consensus that action must be taken. Building consensus is a crucial first step, because if everyone is happy with the current outcomes for students (including the typical 5-10% failure/drop out rate), it will be hard to get agreement on the need for change.
Principals have a key role in fostering consensus within school teams, and the success of RTI in an individual school will start with their understanding, and belief, in the need for change and their leadership during the process of change. The Principal is also a major force, driving the level of parental involvement that RTI requires, and demonstrating a commitment to creative problem solving, in which a parent’s input is valued equally to that of educators. It is crucial if partnerships between parents and educators are to be effective in educational planning for students.
School principals can help teams develop their knowledge and skills through professional development opportunities and by scheduling dedicated time during the school day for teams to learn together and plan together. Principals also have their finger on the pulse of the whole school. They will hear about many of the concerns their staff and parents are expressing, and, especially at the elementary level, they may know every child by name.
Teachers will be required to gain new knowledge and skills and throw out some old habits. In the absence of consensus, these changes will be forced upon educators who are skeptical about RTI. Where principals see uncertainty or skepticism among teachers, they can offer support and education. When a principal notices that large groups of students are underperforming, they can look at the quality of core instruction. When large groups of students are not meeting state standards, it is very possible that the road block lies, not with the students’ ability to access core instruction, but with the quality of the instruction itself. This would suggest to a principal that the teacher needs opportunities to develop their instructional skills, rather than that the entire student body that needs intervention. Principals also have an important role in promoting teacher accountability for student outcomes. It would certainly be less overwhelming for a principal to focus on quality core instruction than to provide interventions to every student who falls victim to poor teaching. It is obviously unfair to expect teachers to do things they have not been taught to do, and building capacity in educators is essential as the system prepares to change direction.
So, assuming that the necessary training has been carried out and that capacity has been built within educators, administrators and school districts, what will look different in our schools? The first change will be the universal screening of all students up to three or four times each school year (some schools have already been screening students routinely for some time). Screening tests will need to be simple and have genuine predictive integrity (actually identify those kids at risk of failing). Screening will need to be time efficient, and schools may need to get creative about utilizing district personnel in ways not previously envisioned. In addition to screening and evaluating test results three or four times a year, data on progress for those students identified as needing specific interventions will have to be gathered and results analyzed. This involves not only people, but time set aside in the master schedule so that team meetings can take place and decisions about interventions made based upon the data. This level of data collection and analysis is not typical in schools today, even for those students who have IEP goals and objectives, which require progress monitoring via data collection and analysis. It seems that this attention to detail creates a challenge for schools. I suspect that a major challenge for educators will be streamlining the data collection and analysis process, rather than conducting the screening itself, because this will be an ongoing task rather than three or four brief events a year.
Beyond screening and data collection, RTI interventions are implemented using a three-tiered model (imagine a triangle).
• Tier One (the wide end of the
triangle-the base) comprises 75-85% of students who
receive good quality instruction in typical classrooms
with no additional intervention needed in order to
access the core curriculum and make adequate progress.
• Tier Two (the middle of the triangle) consists of
around 10% of students who require some intervention
beyond core instruction in order to access and progress
within the curriculum.
• Tier Three (the tip of the triangle) embraces 5-10% of
students who need either an alternative to the core
curriculum or very time-intensive interventions in order
to benefit from core instruction.
Students can receive tier three interventions in one or more subject areas and tier one or two in others; they do not need to qualify for special education services in order to receive tier two or three services, and receiving tier two or three services is not automatically related to special education placement; such services can be delivered by regular educators in a general education setting with typical peers. It would be wise for parents to discuss inclusion in general education as a very important consideration, while planning interventions under RTI.
RTI has had a mixed reception among educators, many of whom have expressed concern that it is “just one more thing to do”. While it is true that the education system is awash with initiatives targeting specific groups of students, the purpose of RTI is to re-align these initiatives along with the funding streams that support service delivery, and ensure that every area of educational and social development is monitored and optimized for all students. Rather than being one more thing to do, RTI could eliminate practices and interventions which, when evaluated honestly, prove to be ineffective or inefficient. This could reduce the number of “things” educators are expected to do, and allow them to focus on data-driven instruction, which really produces positive outcomes for students; assuming of course that our teachers have the professional development and support they need to be successful.
As the educational system attempts to move away from justifying the provision of intervention services by first labeling students with a disability, towards universal screening and early identification of those students at risk (either academically or behaviorally), our children should be able to receive support before they fail. This could be good news for those children who are struggling in school, but not to the extent that they are eligible for special education services, or whose challenges in school don’t fit neatly into one of the categorical disabilities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act 2004 (IDEA 2004). It is worth noting that IDEA 2004 discusses RTI primarily in terms of its role in the identification of students with specific learning disabilities in these areas: oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading fluency skills, reading comprehension, math calculation, and math problem solving. However, the literature and discourse around RTI clearly considers every area of a child’s educational and social development to be within its territory. The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) has stated that IDEA 2004 does not preclude a student who has an IEP from receiving RTI strategies where appropriate. In principle, a child with an IEP, which addresses needs in a distinct area (for example due to an emotional disability) but who, when the school conducts universal screening tests, is found to be “at risk” in reading and/or math, would have the same access to RTI interventions as any other child deemed “at risk” in these areas. This could be helpful in those situations where a parent suspects that underlying academic struggles are being overshadowed by an existing disability label, but cannot persuade the school to focus on providing research based academic interventions.
Concern has been expressed by many parents and advocates that RTI may delay or deny some student’s access to special education evaluations and, for those students who are eligible, much needed special education services. So where does RTI end and special education begin? In theory, any student who is “at risk” for not meeting state approved grade level standards should be identified early through the school district’s RTI screening program. A problem solving team, including teachers and parents, will meet to identify what skills the student has and where there are gaps. The team will then develop a hypothesis as to why the gaps exist, and a plan outlining which research based interventions are likely to help the student make progress; a review cycle will also be agreed upon. The plan will be implemented and data will be collected in order to measure how the student is responding to the interventions. Data can be collected daily, weekly or just prior to the review meeting. At the review meeting, the team will adjust the plan to focus on those interventions that are working, and any strategies they have tried which have not worked will be discontinued; the team will continue to meet to monitor progress and make adjustments to the plan. If the student does not make the progress the team is seeking, or makes progress, but starts to struggle again when interventions are withdrawn, this data can be used as part of the eligibility determination for special education. Students who are identified for special education services, through the RTI process, do not necessarily have to meet the rigid eligibility criteria which were previously in place for identifying students with a learning disability (which relied on a discrepancy formula), and this could reduce a great deal of frustration for parents, educators and students themselves who experience school failure.
RTI data is only a part of the process for determining whether a student is eligible for special education and it does not replace the need to carry out a comprehensive evaluation. In addition, if the parents and the school district agree that a child may be eligible for special education services, the child should be evaluated, and while RTI data could be helpful, it would not be a requirement. As a parent, it would be helpful to provide the school district with any evaluations you have which demonstrate that your child has a disability, this could reduce the possible delays in getting a comprehensive evaluation for special education services because the school is following the RTI process. It is also worth remembering that, as a parent, you can request an evaluation at any time and if the school district refuses your request, they must give you written notice and inform you of your due process rights. It is important to get legal advice if you find yourself in this situation.
The bottom line: if RTI rolls out in our school districts the way it is intended, it suggests that students who are “at risk” will be spotted early (one would hope even before the child’s learning challenges would ordinarily put them under the microscope for special education evaluations), their emerging needs will be identified, research based interventions will be provided without any delay and data will be collected on progress. If the student does not make adequate progress, the data can be used as part of the eligibility determination for special education, and some kids who do not qualify under previous IDEA eligibility criteria, may be able to receive special education services. In addition, students who have an IEP can also benefit from all that RTI has to offer to the same extent as any other student. It sounds like a win-win situation, but many people can feel their cynicism kicking in and the question in their mind arises: "When do any complex processes of change actually happen the way they are supposed to?" I’m an eternal optimist of course, but also a realist, so I am ramping up for RTI. I need to know how it is supposed to work and why we are even trying, so that I can recognize when it’s not going as planned (because it won’t all the time, everywhere), and so I can muster the energy to keep things on course in any way I can. I hope that this information will help parents start ramping up also; you have the most crucial role of all in your child’s success in school.
Some helpful resources for further reading:
National Center on response to Intervention: http://www.rti4success.org/
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services: http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/index.html
RTI Action Network: http://www.rtinetwork.org/Learn
