Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Florida Association of School Psychologists (FASP) 2008Presented by:
Joshua Nadeau, MA
Amanda March, NCSP
University of South Florida
Presentation Overview
• Florida PS/RtI Project Overview• Key Stakeholders• Staff Roles & Skill-Sets• Professional Development, Coaching, &
Treatment Fidelity• PS/RtI Skills & Evaluation Results• Conclusion• Implications for School Psychologists
What Systemic Changes Influence the Role of the School Psychologist?
• NCLB– Accountability (Differentiated)– Disaggregated Data– State-Approved, State-Level Benchmarks– Evidence-based practices
• Impact on School Psychology– Change in the priority of data valued and needed– Label became less important than progress toward proficiency– “Discrepancy” that matters is performance against
standards/benchmarks– Need for additional services/supports at the “core” and
“supplemental” levels
What Systemic Changes Influence the Role of the School Psychologist?
• IDEIA– Insistence on “effective instruction” in general education– Requirement for different type of assessment
• Continuous Progress Monitoring• Universal screening
– USDOE statement regarding “processing” assessment– New SLD Regulations and “bleed over” impact
• Impact on School Psychology– Focus on different type of data and unit of analysis– Reduction in traditional assessments– Increase in services related to intervention development,
implementation, integrity– Label is last resort and not related to instruction/intervention
Federal and State LegislationNCLB
• Proposed changes to NCLB and AYP– Currently, AYP is based on percentage of
students making proficiency in academic areas– Proposed change: States and Schools use
growth rates of students (more than a year in a years time) as equivalent to proficiency to calculate AYP. This model values significant improvement that indicates GAP closure as well as actual proficiency levels.
Regulatory Basis forRtI in Florida
• New Rule (6A-6.0331)– Evidence-based interventions– Interventions in general education
environment– Progress Monitoring Plan (PMP)
• New EBD Rule (6A-6.03016)– Evidence-based interventions– Student’s response to intervention
determines EBD
National Association of School Psychologists
Role of the School Psychologist in the RtI Process: How to Meet the Challenge(NASP, 2006, Nasponline.org)
• Open to:– Changing how students are identified for interventions– Changing how interventions are selected, designed and
implemented– Changing how student performance is measured and
evaluated– Changing how evaluations are conducted– Changing how decisions are made
Role of the School Psychologist in the RtI Process: How to Meet the Challenge(NASP, 2006, Nasponline.org)
• Open to improving:– Skills in evidence-based intervention strategies– Progress monitoring methods– Designing problem-solving models– Evaluating instructional and program outcomes– Conducting ecological assessment procedures
• Willing to:– Adapt a more individualize approach to services students– Adapt to a more systemic approach to serving schools
• Willing and able to communicate their worth to administrators and policymakers.
Florida DOE Statewide Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI) Implementation Plan
http://www.florida-rti.org/
Foreword“It is the responsibility of every educator, organization, and parent to actively
engage in collaborative efforts to meet Florida’s goals. In the unified effort, all
schools in Florida should ensure evidence-based practices, instructionally
relevant assessments, systematic problem-solving to meet all students’ needs,
data-based decision making, effective professional development, supportive
leadership, and meaningful family involvement. These are the foundation
principles of a Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI) system which provides
us the framework to elevate the efficacy of our statewide improvement efforts.”Dr. Eric J. Smith
Commissioner of EducationJune 2008
State Infrastructure
• State Management GroupTodd Clark, Bureau Chief, Bureau of Instruction and InnovationShan Goff, Executive Director, Office of Early LearningEvan Lefsky, Executive Director, Just Read, Florida!Bambi Lockman, Bureau Chief, Bureau of Exceptional
Education & Student ServicesJay Pfeiffer, Deputy Commissioner, Accountability Research and
Measurement Hue Reynolds, Director of Communications and Public Affairs, Office of
Communications and Public AffairsMary Jane Tappen, Deputy Chancellor for Curriculum, Instruction, and
Student Services, Office of the ChancellorIris Wilson, Deputy Chancellor for Student Achievement, Office of the
ChancellorRepresentatives from State Transformation Team
State Infrastructure
• State Transformation TeamGinger Alberto, Office of Achievement through Language Acquisition,
FLDOEGeorge Batsche, Mike Curtis, Clark Dorman – Problem Solving/Response to
Intervention Project, USFLiz Crawford, Florida Center for Reading Research, FSUHeather Diamond, Bureau of Exceptional Education & Student Services,
FLDOESandy Dilger, Bureau of School Improvement, FLDOEDon Kincaid, Heather George, Karen Childs – PBS Project, USFMary Little, Response to Intervention’s Teaching Learning Connections, UCFMartha Murray, Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services,
FLDOE Rob Schoen, Office of Mathematics and Science, FLDOEMelinda Webster, Just Read, Florida!, FLDOE
State Infrastructure
• State Advisory Group - representatives from:Regional Implementation Teams (district contacts, coaches, etc.)
Florida Center for Reading Research (FCRR)
Florida Center for Research – Science, Technology, Engineering, Math (FCR-STEM)
Early Childhood Association of Florida (ECA)
Florida Association of District School Superintendents (FADSS)
Florida Association of School Administrators (FASA)
Florida Educators Association (FEA)
Council of Administrators of Special Education (CASE)
Family Network for Students with Disabilities (FND)
Florida Association of Student Services Administrators (FASSA)
• Statewide Leadership in PS/RtI
• Statewide Technical Assistance in PS/RtI
• Emphasizes the Need for Districts to Develop District-Wide RtI Plan
• Identifies Resources for PS/RtI Implementation
• Statewide Implementation Plan
Funding Statewide Implementation ProjectsPartnershipsTechnical AssistanceProfessional Development
Critical Components of RtI Implementation
Successful implementation of RtI is…
– Based on Professional Development
– Informed by Data
– Supported by Coaching
Brief FL PS/RtI Project Description
Two purposes of PS/RtI Project:
– Statewide training in PS/RtI
– Evaluate the impact of PS/RtI on educator, student, and systemic outcomes in pilot sites implementing the model
Statewide Training Sites
Pilot Site Project Overview
• 3 year project
• School, District and Project personnel work collaboratively to implement PS/RtI model
• Training, technical assistance, and support provided to schools
• Purpose = Program Evaluation
Demonstration Districts
District Superintendent District Size
Clay David L. Owens Medium
Miami-Dade Alberto Carvalho Very Large
Monroe Randy Acevedo Medium/Small
Pasco Heather Fiorentino Large
Pinellas Dr. Julie Janssen Very Large
Polk Dr. Gail F. McKinzie Large
St. Johns Dr. Joseph G. Joyner Medium
Walton Carlene H. Anderson Small
Services Provided by Project
I. Services Provided to Demonstration Sites by Statewide Project Staff
– Funding for up to two Coaches– Training, T/A for Coaches & Building Administrators– Training, T/A for School-based Teams– T/A in use of Technology and Data
Expectations for Pilot Sites
II. Expectations of Demonstration Districts and Pilot Sites -
– Collaboration between General Ed, Special Ed, and other projects
– People with expertise - district and school level teams
– Funds/Resources - evidenced based instruction and intervention,
– Professional Development - support and attend
– Policies and Procedures
– Technology/Data Systems
– Making changes when the data indicate
What is the relationship between training in RtI and the development of skills in school-based professionals?
Three-Tiered Model of School Supports & the Problem-Solving Process
ACADEMIC SYSTEMS
Tier 3: Comprehensive & Intensive Students who need individualized interventions.
Tier 2: Strategic Interventions Students who
need more support in addition to the core
curriculum.
Tier 1: Core Curriculum All students, including students
who require curricular enhancements for
acceleration.
BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS
Tier 3: Intensive Interventions Students who
need individualized intervention.
Tier 2: Targeted Group Interventions Students who
need more support in addition to school-wide
positive behavior program.
Tier 1: Universal Interventions All students in
all settings.
The Model is Based on the Following Skills
• Problem-Solving skills at all tier levels• Selection, implementation, aggregation, display and
analysis of data at all three tiers• Developing, implementing and integrating
instruction/interventions at all three tiers• Supporting and documenting intervention
implementation at all three tiers• Communicating and mentoring RtI skill sets
ConsensusConsensus
InfrastructureInfrastructure
Implementation
Implementation
Change Model
Stages of Implementing Problem-Solving/RtI
• Consensus– Belief is shared– Vision is agreed upon– Implementation requirements understood
• Infrastructure Development– Problem-Solving Process– Data System– Policies/Procedures– Training– Tier I and II intervention systems
• E.g., K-3 Academic Support Plan– Technology support– Decision-making criteria established
• Implementation
Consensus Building
• Educators will embrace new ideas when two conditions exist:– They understand the NEED for the idea– They perceive that they either have the SKILLS to
implement the idea OR they have the SUPPORT to develop the skills
What is required of school
personnel?
Personnel Critical to Successful Implementation
• District-Level Leaders
• Building Leaders
• Facilitator
• Teachers/Student Services
• Parents
• Students
www.nasdse.org (Chapter 4 of RtI Policy Manual)
PS/RtI Content: All Personnel
• Understanding of:– National, state, district policies regarding RtI– Link between NCLB, IDEA 04, AYP and RtI– Beliefs, knowledge and skills that support
implementation of RtI– PS steps, multilevel RtI model, and how eligibility is
determined using RtI– Fundamental utility of using progress monitoring
Role of District Leaders
• Give “permission” for model• Provide a vision for outcome-based service delivery• Reinforce effective practices• Expect accountability• Provide tangible support for effort
– Training– Coaching– Technology– Policies
District Leaders: Content Knowledge
• Understanding of:
– Professional development delivery model that best supports implementation
– Staff and budget requirements to integrate general and special education services for the implementation of RtI
– Relationship between implementation and expectations for improved student performance
– Barriers that will occur and that must be addressed during implementation
– Use of, and support for, technology necessary to ensure efficient and effective implementation
– Essential stages of change and variables necessary for the smooth transition to the use of PS/RtI
Role of the Principal
• Sets vision for problem-solving process
• Supports development of expectations
• Responsible for allocation of resources
• Facilitates priority setting
• Ensures follow-up
• Supports program evaluation
• Monitors staff support/climate
The Principal: Content Knowledge
• Understanding of:
– Need for universal, supplemental and intensive instructional strategies and interventions
– Components of a successful PDP– Need for and skills in data-based decision-making
and the need to share outcome data frequently– Need to publicly recognize the relationship between
staff efforts and student outcomes– Need to involve and inform parents of the essential
elements of RtI and their role in the process
Role of the Facilitator
• Ensures pre-meeting preparation
• Reviews steps in process and desired outcomes
• Facilitates movement through steps
• Facilitates consensus building
• Sets follow-up schedule/communication
• Creates evaluation criteria/protocol
• Ensures parent involvement
Role of Participants
• Review Data, Request for Assistance forms, etc. prior to meeting
• Complete individual problem-solving• Attitude of consensus building• Understand data• Research instructional strategies/interventions for
problem area
The Participants: Content Knowledge
• An understanding of:– The relationship between RtI and student achievement– Need to increase the range of empirically validated
instructional practices in the general education classroom– Uses of the problem-solving steps– Technology and other supports available and necessary to
implement RtI– Administrative and leadership support necessary to
maximize the implementation of RtI– Need to provide practical models and examples with
sufficient student outcome data– Need for demonstration and guided practice opportunities
Student Services Staff: Content Knowledge
• An understanding of:– The different models for evaluating student performance
differences and their impact on the development of instructional and assessment practices
– Evaluation strategies to assess instructional quality in general and special education classrooms and programs
– CBM and related continuous progress monitoring technologies to relate individual student performance to instructional quality data
– Need for and models of social support and the role of support staff in the provision of that support for school staff
– Specific training in coaching, mentoring and data management strategies
Parents & Students
Role of Parent– Review Request for Assistance form prior to meeting– Complete individual problem solving– Prioritize concerns– Attitude of consensus building
Student Involvement– Increases motivation of student– Reduces teacher load– Teaches self-responsibility
Team Representation
• What educational areas need to be represented on the school-based team?
– General Education– Remedial Education– Special Education– Administration– Data Person– Facilitator
School-Based Leadership Team
• Principal• General Education
Teachers • Special Education
Teachers• Reading Specialist• School Psychologist• School Social Worker• Speech Language
Pathologist
• School Nurse• Behavior Specialist• Guidance Counselor• Instructional
Assistants• Coach• Facilitator
– Note-taker– Timekeeper
Effective Professional Development is...
• On-site• Participant-driven• Collaborative• Supported by modeling, coaching, problem-
solving• Connected to other aspects of school
change• Engaging
What is coaching?
Seeking to improve instructional practice, and ultimately student learning…school districts have adopted “coaching” as a model, and given it new application to systems-change processes.
Coaching is…– Providing Professional Development
– Collaborating with Staff
– Improving Instruction & Decision-Making
– Supporting Staff
– Developing Capacity
– Ensuring Treatment Fidelity
What is coaching? (cont.)
Coach: “a person internal or external to the school/district who provides leadership for implementing a three-tier model”--Stollar, Schaeffer, Skelton, Stine, Lateer-Huhn, & Poth (2008)
The Overarching Role of a Coach in PS/RtI:• Facilitating consensus, infrastructure, and
implementation of PS/RtI in schools• Providing leadership in designing and
delivering professional development in systems-change activities
Building Capacity by Transferring Skills
Professional Development (Joyce & Showers)
• Theory: providing a rationale = knowledge gained• Demonstration: opportunity to see practical
application (model, model, model)• Practice: opportunity for sustained practice• Feedback: immediate, corrective, constructive,
consistent
COACHES MAKE THE DIFFERENCE! (professional development study)
Year 1 Training Curriculum
• Year 1 training focus for schools– Day 1 = Historical and legislative pushes toward implementing the
PSM/RtI– Day 2 = Problem Identification– Day 3 = Problem Analysis– Day 4 = Intervention Development & Implementation– Day 5 = Program Evaluation/RtI
• Considerable attention during Year 1 trainings is focused on improving Tier I instruction
Florida PS/RtI Coaching Model
• Three Year Training Curriculum
• Regional Coordinators as primary trainers
• Coach as building-based support– Collect and manage data (school, grade and
classroom level)– Participate on school based PS team– Model effective group process using the 4 steps of
PS– Partner with the school principal to facilitate the
change initiatives– Ensure treatment fidelity
How do we assess the degree to which skills have improved?
Year One Implementation
Questions:1) To what extent did educators report that
their skills improved in Project schools?
2) To what extent did changes in self-report skills differ in pilot versus comparison schools?
3) To what extent did SBLT members in pilot schools demonstrate skills on which they were trained?
Data Collection and Analysis
• Three sources of data:– School Based Leadership Team (SBLT)– Other Instructional Staff in pilot schools– Comparison School Staff
• Three methods of data collection:– Perceptions of RtI Skills (PS) Survey– Direct Assessments of RtI Skills – Interviews with Principals, Regional
Coordinators, & Coaches
RtI Survey Data Analysis
• Assessed perceived skills such as:– 4 steps of Problem-Solving– Data Interpretation– Use of Technology– Evaluating RtI
• 5 point Likert-type scale used
• Means calculated and graphed for coaches & schools to use to help drive professional development
Example School-Level Academic Pre & Post Perception of Skills Survey Graph
1
2
3
4
5
2a -
Acc
ess D
ata
3a -
Use
dat
a to
mak
e de
cisi
ons
4a -
Defi
ne r
efer
ral c
once
rn re
late
d to
re
plac
emen
t beh
avio
r
4b -
Dat
a to
defi
ne c
urre
nt ta
rget
beh
avio
r pe
rfor
man
ce le
vel
4c -
Dat
a to
det
erm
ine
benc
hmar
ks
4d -
Det
erm
ine
peer
per
form
ance
leve
ls
4e -
Calc
ulat
e ga
p be
twee
n st
uden
t an
d be
nchm
ark
4f -
Gap
dat
a to
det
erm
ine
focu
s of
in
stru
ction
al a
djus
tmen
ts
5a -
Dev
elop
hyp
othe
ses
6a -
Iden
tify
appr
opri
ate
data
to
dete
rmin
e hy
poth
eses
8a -
Acc
ess r
esou
rces
to d
evel
op E
BIs
10a
-Ens
ure
inte
rven
tion
is s
uppo
rted
by
colle
cted
dat
a
11a
-Pro
vide
nec
essa
ry im
plem
enta
tion
supp
ort
12a
-Det
erm
ine
impl
emen
tatio
n in
tegr
ity
13a
-Sel
ect d
ata
to u
se fo
r pr
ogre
ss
mon
itori
ng
15 -
Inte
rpre
t gra
phed
PM
dat
a fo
r de
cisi
on-
mak
ing
16 -
Mod
ify in
terv
entio
ns b
ased
on
stud
ent
RtI
19 -
Dis
aggr
egat
e da
ta a
s ne
cess
ary
Skill
Lev
el
Survey Item
Total School Staff Perception of RtI Skills Comparison(Academic)
Elementary
BOY
EOY
Example School-Level Behavior Pre & Post Perception of Skills Survey Graph
1
2
3
4
5
2b -
Acc
ess D
ata
3b -
Use
dat
a to
mak
e de
cisi
ons
4a2
-Defi
ne r
efer
ral c
once
rn re
late
d to
re
plac
emen
t beh
avio
r
4b2
-Dat
a to
defi
ne c
urre
nt ta
rget
beh
avio
r pe
rfor
man
ce le
vel
4c2
-Dat
a to
det
erm
ine
benc
hmar
ks
4d2
-Det
erm
ine
peer
per
form
ance
leve
ls
4e -
Calc
ulat
e ga
p be
twee
n st
uden
t an
d be
nchm
ark
4f2
-Gap
dat
a to
det
erm
ine
focu
s of
in
stru
ction
al a
djus
tmen
ts
5b -
Dev
elop
hyp
othe
ses
6b -
Iden
tify
appr
opri
ate
data
to
dete
rmin
e hy
poth
eses
8b -
Acc
ess r
esou
rces
to d
evel
op E
BIs
10b
-Ens
ure
inte
rven
tion
is s
uppo
rted
by
colle
cted
dat
a
11b
-Pro
vide
nec
essa
ry im
plem
enta
tion
supp
ort
12b
-Det
erm
ine
impl
emen
tatio
n in
tegr
ity
13b
-Sel
ect d
ata
to u
se fo
r pr
ogre
ss
mon
itori
ng
15 -
Inte
rpre
t gra
phed
PM
dat
a fo
r de
cisi
on-
mak
ing
16 -
Mod
ify in
terv
entio
ns b
ased
on
stud
ent
RtI
19 -
Dis
aggr
egat
e da
ta a
s ne
cess
ary
Skill
Lev
el
Survey Item
Total School Staff Perception of RtI Skills Comparison(Behavior)
Elementary
BOY
EOY
To what extent did educators report that their skills improved in Project schools?
Pre & Post Academic Skills
To what extent did educators report that their skills improved in Project schools?
Pre & Post Behavior Skills
What do the data mean?
• Do these responses look different?
• What implications would any changes have for professional development?
• How can we pinpoint on which skills to focus?
To what extent did changes in self-report skills differ in pilot versus comparison schools?
(Academic)
To what extent did changes in self-report skills differ in pilot versus comparison schools?
(Behavior)
Example DSA Graph
2
1.71
1.58
0.96
1.75
0.75
0
1
2
1. Appropriate Goal
2. RtI Quality 3. Modifications Implemented
4. What modifications
5. Target Next 6. Problem ID
Sco
re
Questions
County School District: Direct Skills Assessment - Day 5
Possible points
To what extent did SBLT members in pilot schools demonstrate skills on which they were trained?
Thoughts on the use of DSA data
• Hypothetical case studies & use of real school data – Problem Identification– Problem Analysis– Intervention Development– RtI
• Response scoring– Degree of skill mastery– Conceptual understanding
• Why is this important?
Direct Skill Assessments4 Steps of Problem Solving
Direct Skill Assessments Problem ID: Unique Situation
Familiar Problem Novel Problem
What do Trainers & Coaches Say?
• Informal interviews with…– Coaches– Regional Coordinators
• Asked about skill development among staff members– “Qualitative Information”
Some themes already emerging…
Regional Coordinators:• Seeing an increase in problem-solving and decrease
in focus on barriers• Strong coaching is key
Coaches:• Using data more formatively• Using meeting time more wisely
Drawing conclusions
• Indications, or sweeping conclusions?
• What did we do well?
• How can we do better?
Practical Implications
• What does this mean for school psychologists?
• What can school psychologists do to prepare for and assist with PS/RtI in schools?
• What is the school psychologists role in consensus building?– Infrastructure Development?– PS/RtI Implementation?
National Resources to Support PS/RtI Implementation
• www.nasdse.org– Building and District Implementation Blueprints– Current research (evidence-based practices) that
supports use of RtI
• www.rtinetwork.org– Blueprints to support implementation– Monthly RtI Talks– Virtual visits to schools implementing RtI– Webinars– Progress Monitoring Tools to Assess Level of
Implementation
• www.floridarti.usf.edu
Florida Resources to Support PS/RtI Implementation
• Just Read, Florida! www.justreadflorida.com
• Florida Center for Reading Research
www.fcrr.org• Florida’s Positive Behavior
Support Project flpbs.fmhi.usf.edu
• Florida Response to Intervention, Florida Department of Education
www.florida-rti.org
• Office of Early Learning, Florida Department of Education www.fldoe.org/earlylearning
• Bureau of School Improvement, Florida Department of Education
www.flbsi.org• Bureau of Exceptional Education
and Student Services, Florida Department of Education
www.fldoe.org/ese• RtI: Teaching Learning
Connections
rtitlc.ucf.edu
Questions?
Presenter Contact Information:
Joshua Nadeau, Doctoral StudentUniversity of South Florida
Amanda March, Doctoral StudentUniversity of South Florida
References
• Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through professional development. In B. Joyce & B. Showers (Eds.), Designing training and peer coaching: Our need for learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1996). The evolution of peer coaching. Educational Leadership, 53(6), 12–16.
• Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1994). Student achievement through staff development. New York: Longman, Inc.
• Stollar, S.A., Schaeffer, K.R., Skelton, S.M., Stine, K.C., Lateer-Huhn, A., & Poth, R.L. (2008). Best practices in professional development: An integrated three-tier model of academic and behavior supports. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best Practices in School Psychology V (pp.195-208). Bethesda, MD: NASP Publications.
