How to Turn a Puzzle into a Pyramid: Fitting Together the

Interactive Pieces of Problem Solving, SST and RTI

 

Lynn LeLoup Pennington  Education Consultant, President of SSTAGE

and Frank Smith

  GaDOE, Psychological Services & SST

How do we create and harness the power of data-driven problem solving; and make it the "glue" for integrating :

  

• assessment • progress monitoring• instruction and learning• interventions

-in your school's Pyramid of Interventions? 

Why the pyramid and why now?It can provide:

• a common sense framework to continuously improve results for all students

• an integrated approach to service delivery that encompasses general and special education

• a structure for logically embedding research based assessment and teaching/learning practices

Why the pyramid and why now?

• New federal and state regulations (have caught up with emerging defensible practices)

State Special Ed rules (eff. July 1)

have exclusionary clauses for 5 areas

that require retrospective proof that student did not learn despite appropriate teaching match.

A child must not be determined to be [EBD, ID, OHI, SDD]

if the primary factor for that determination is:

a. Lack of appropriate instruction in reading, including the essential components of reading instruction;

b. Lack of appropriate instruction in math;

c. Lack of appropriate instruction in writing;

d. Limited English proficiency;

e. Visual, hearing or motor disability;

f. [EBD add intellectual], [ID add emotional], [OHI add both] disabilities, [SDD subtract atypical attendance history]

g. Cultural factors;

h. Environmental or economic disadvantage; or

i. Atypical education history (multiple school attendance, lack of attendance, etc.).

A child must not be determined to be a child with a specific learning disability if the determinant factor is:

a. Lack of appropriate instruction in reading, [specifically:]

(phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension);

b. Lack of appropriate instruction in math;

c. Lack of appropriate instruction in writing;

d. Limited English proficiency;

e. Visual, hearing or motor disability;

f. Intellectual disabilities;

g. Emotional disturbances;

h. Cultural factors;

i. Environmental or economic disadvantage; or

j. Atypical educational history

Specific Learning Disability160-4-7-.05 Appendix (i)

(b) Supplementary instruction is provided:

(i) that lasts for a minimum of 12 weeks;

(ii) At least four data collections of progress monitoring occur during the twelve weeks;

(iii) the strategies used and the progress monitoring results are presented to the parents at regular intervals

Paradigm Shift

• From - the problem is within the student

To - the problem is due to a breakdown in the teaching and learning interaction

• From – thinking in terms of Special Ed categories

To - solving the problems of students • From – a “wait to fail” approach

To - prevent failure, enable success

Randy Allison & Martin Ikeda

Paradigm Shift• From – searching for pathology

To – focusing on what instructional and learning variables are needed for success

• From – generalized discussions of students’ problems (can’t read, doesn’t comprehend, not motivated, etc.)

To – using a data-driven, decision making process (specifically, “what is he expected to do; and what can he do now?”)

Randy Allison & Martin Ikeda

Pyramid basics – What we do know

• The pieces of the puzzle include –

I. Standards-based classroom learning

II. Needs-based learning

III. SST-driven learning

IV. Specially designed learning

But how do they all work together?

What is the glue that holds all the pieces together at each of the tiers?

Tier 3

Tier 2

Tier 1

It’s a Data-Based

Problem SolvingProcess!

Data-driven problem solving is the engine within the pyramid which provides educators with the power and know-how to make informed decisions at each tier by putting together all the pieces.

SEE (Steps 1 & 2)

(Step 6) CHECK

PLAN (Steps 3 & 4)

DO (Step 5)

The Problem Solving Process…Data-Driven Decision Making

Problem solving in a nutshell…

SEESEE - PLANPLAN - DODO - CHECKCHECK

1. Identify problem (descriptive & measurable) 2. Gather information and analyze data3. Establish instructional/behavioral objectives4. Develop an educational plan (which specifies

teaching/learning strategies and ongoing assessment measures)

5. Implement plan6. Evaluate plan periodically, adjust as needed Source: Student Support Team Coordinator Standards, PSC Endorsement (2005)

• Data-based problem solving represents the core conceptual basis of addressing students’ academic and behavioral problems whether we are focusing on …– the entire school– a single grade level– one classroom– a small group– one student

Data-based problem solving has usually been identified as a Tier 3 and Tier 4 process, but it is not limited to only those two tiers.

It MUST BE the process that guides decision making at every tier!

Otherwise, we will miss the opportunity to have an integrated and coordinated approach to service delivery across the pyramid.

??

Problem solving is a cyclical process which repeats at each tier, but in a more formal and systematic way as it moves up the pyramid in response to the intensity of the problem and the intensity of the services needed to address the needs of the student.

• At Tier 1, look for what are the “common” needs of students rather than looking for the differences.

• Problem solve on school-level, grade-level or course-level effects.

The problem solving process is not about proving what’s wrong with the

student.

• It’s ALL about finding out

how to teach the student

so he can learn.• It’s discovering who that child is

…as a LEARNER.

Who guides the processat each of the tiers and who will answer these questions?

• Are our students learning?

• How do we know they are learning?

• Which students are not learning?

• Why aren’t they learning?

• What do they need in order to learn?

• What must we do to provide it? (who, when, where and for how long)

Collaborative Teams and Partnerships Tier 1 Teams and support personnel

Grade level teams? Department teams? Professional Learning Communities ?

Tier 2 Teams and support personnel Grade level teams? Professional Learning Communities ? RTI Teams?

Tier 3 Student Support Teams Other decision-making teams ?

Tier 4 IEP/Gifted Teams

What are we doing to engage parents and families at the different tiers?

Can the framework of the pyramid and the six Student, Family, and Community Involvement and Support Standards lead us to improve how we address the needs of parents and families?

• Parenting • Communicating• Learning at Home• Decision-Making • Advocacy • Collaborating with

Community

Is one of these team members a parent?

What is this?

Greater Expectations for SST

• Get ready– Data-based problem solving including:

• Problem analysis• Data gathering, diagnostic assessment, and interpretation • Monitoring student performance

– Researched-based strategies and interventions

– Evidence of intervention fidelity and integrity– Follow-up support and coaching

Problem Solving is Systems Thinking

“We tend to focus on snapshots of isolated parts of the system, and wonder why our deepest problems never seem to get solved.” Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline, 1990

Achieving Full Scale Implementation

• It may take years of preparation for schools to reach the point at which they can actually use data to make informed decisions to guide intervention and learning disability eligibility (RTI).

• There is a developmental progression of practices that have to be adopted, implemented and eventually institutionalized (Fullan, 2001) before teams will have adequate assessment data for eligibility decisions. (Nebraska DOE)

Developmental Progression Toward Full Scale Implementation of RTI (Nebraska DOE)

Avoiding Pitfalls to Full Scale Implementation• Build awareness and understanding of the

Pyramid of Interventions and the need for problem solving and RTI. – How they relate to other mandates. – How they relate to shared values in the school.

• Build infrastructure before innovation is added.– On-going professional learning for all staff– Time for professionals to collaborate, problem solve– Re-examine roles and resources

Do not oversimplify the innovation and the process. Some people think they understand what to do, when in reality they do not grasp the complexity and the intricacies of the innovation, in particular the data-based problem solving.

Lessons learned from others…

• Teams and schools require substantial training to effectively implement data-based problem solving (explicit training, modeling, controlled opportunities to apply, onsite support)

• Devote intense focus to systems change

• Requires a significant paradigm shift (Callender & Ruby)

Where do we begin?

• Take stock of what you already have in place. In other words, what’s your baseline or entry level in terms of…– Perceptions, attitudes and understanding?– Tier 1 learning and instructional practices?– Assessment and progress monitoring tools?– Which students are receiving supplemental

interventions and what are they? – Problem solving teams?– Roles and responsibilities?– Resources?

Assessment Tools• We have more assessment data available

in the classroom than ever before, but are we extracting meaning from what we already have?

• Are we using it to transform

our instructional practices?

• Data must have “instructional utility” or it’s a waste of time for educators and students.

Assessment ToolsWhat do we currently have available?

What does it measure?

For which grade level(s) is the assessment appropriate?

Are we using the data from this assessment effectively?

Additional information and recommendations

Additional questions -

• When it is this assessment given and how often?• Is the tool designed or suitable as a benchmark assessment, a universal screening tool, or for progress monitoring?• For progress monitoring tools, use the evaluation criteria of the National Center on Student Progress Monitoring www.studentprogress.org

Problem Solving is Professional Learning

• When teachers use the data-driven problem solving in a culture of teamwork, teachers’ skills grow and their professional knowledge deepens.

• Problem solving connects teacher learning to student learning. (Deojay & Pennington, 2004)

With the Pyramid of Interventions we may…

• Provide increasingly more intensive interventions

• Embed systematic, collaborative, data-based problem solving processes

• Engage parents as partners in assisting student learning

With the Pyramid of Interventions we may…

• Embrace a model of prevention, not a model of failure

• Focus on results, not procedural and process compliance

• Assess to inform instruction, not to determine classification

References:• Allison, R., & Ikeda, M., From Theory to Practice: Critical Considerations for

Response to Intervention, Iowa Department of Education, (2006)• Batsche, G., Elliot, J., Graden, J.L., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J.F., Prasse, D., Reschly,

D.J., Schrag, J., & Tilly III, W.D., (2005), Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation, Alexandria, VA, National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Inc.

• Batsche, George, Problem-Solving and Response to Intervention: Implications for Policy and Practice, G-CASE Presentation, 11-9-06

• Bergan, J.R. (1977) Behavioral consultation. Columbus, OH, Charles E. Merrill• Brown-Chidsey, Rachel & Steege, Mark W. (2005) Response to intervention:

principals and strategies for effective instruction. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.• Callender, Wayne and Ruby, Susan Getting Started with Response to Intervention

(RTI): Big Ideas and Essential Components, www.k12.wa.us/conferences/summerinstitute2006/Materials/CallenderW2/OSPIhandouts1.pdf

• Chalfant, J.C., Pysh, M.V. & Moultrie, R. (1979). Teacher assistance teams: A model for within-building problem solving. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 2, 85-95.

References:• Deojay, T.R., & Pennington, L.L. (2004) Content: Connecting data, professional

development, and student achievement. In Powerful designs for professional learning. Easton, L. (ed.), Oxford, OH, National Staff Development Council

• DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., Karhanek, G. (2004), Whatever it takes: How professional learning communities respond when kids don’t learn. Bloomington, IN, National Educational Service

• Fullan, M. G. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York, NY : Teachers College Press.

• Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D., Applying Progress Monitoring to RTI Prevention and Identification,, Vanderbilt University, [www.studentprogress.org]

• Jenkins, Tom, Problem Solving Model in Detail Preparation for Implementation, North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, Exceptional Children Division

• Hofmeister, A.M. (2000). Strategies for effective academic instruction: What is an instructional program? The Utah Special Educator, 20(4), 4-5.

• Response-to-Intervention Technical Assistance Document, Nebraska Department of Education and the University of Nebraska (June 2006)

• Tilly, D. (2003, December). Heartland Area Education Agency’s evolution from four to three tiers: Our journey - our results. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

Websites • Intervention Central,

www.interventioncentral.org• National Center for Student Progress

Monitoring, www.studentprogress.org• What Works Clearinghouse,

www.whatworks.ed.gov• National Research Center on Learning

Disabilities, www.nrcld.org• National Association of School

Psychologists, www.nasponline.org

To contact us:

Lynn L. Pennington

Office: 770-752-9941

lynchpenn@aol.com

Frank Smith

Office: 404-656-5805

fsmith@doe.k12.ga.us