The SPRINT Team Process:

Effective Data-Based Functional Assessment, Response-to-Intervention, and Intervention Teams to Solve

Students’ Academic and Behavioral Problems

Howard M. Knoff, Ph.D.

Director, Project ACHIEVEDirector, Arkansas Department of

EducationState Improvement Grant

knoffprojectachieve@earthlink.net

Howard M. Knoff, Ph.D.Director, Project ACHIEVE

49 Woodberry RoadLittle Rock, AR 72212

E-mail: knoffprojectachieve@earthlink.netPhone: 501-312-1484

Websites: www.projectachieve.info www.acc.k12.ar.us/sig

Presentation Overview

An Introduction to RtI An Inductive Analysis and Determination

of the Characteristics of RtI The SPRINT (School Prevention, Review,

and Intervention Team) Process Critical SPRINT Points Our Path to a National Research Agenda

Introduction to RtI. . .

What are the Regulatory versus Functional Foundations of the

Response to Intervention process?

The Reauthorization of IDEA

The “Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act”

Passed House in 2003, Senate in 2004 Signed by President Bush, December, 2004 Fully in effect on July 1, 2005 Proposed Regulations out for Comment—

Closed in November, 2005 Regulations approved– August, 2006 ??????

Changes in Legal Requirements(IDEA, 2004)

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 607(b), when determining whether a child has a specific learning disability as defined in section 602, a local educational agency shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability in oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading comprehension, mathematical calculation, or mathematical reasoning.

Response to Intervention (IDEA, 2004)

‘‘(B) ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY.—In determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, a local educational agency may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as a part of the evaluation procedures described in paragraphs (2) and (3).”

So. . . What does this Mean???

State regulation can’t require only a Discrepancy approach to LD eligibility

An LEA can use a Problem-solving “process” as their approach to LD eligibility

This “process” can involve a child’s “response” to “research-based intervention”

But. . . What does this Mean in a Real Classroom with Real

Students?

An Inductive Analysis of RtI:

1. In order to determine if a student is responding to an intervention, there needs to be a need for the intervention, and there needs to be an intervention.

An Inductive Analysis of RtI . . .Continued

2. In order for there to be a need for an intervention, there must be some gap between a desired academic outcome or behavior, and the student’s actual academic or behavioral status.

An Inductive Analysis of RtI . . .Continued

3. Once we functionally analyze the identified gap and determine WHY it is occurring, we should be able to identify and implement the highest probability of success evidence-based or research-based intervention.

An Inductive Analysis of RtI . . .Continued

4. The scientific process use to identify academic or behavioral student-oriented gaps, to functionally analyze the gaps and WHY they are occurring, and to identify, implement, and evaluate the impact of the interventions linked to the functional assessment involves a:

Data-based Problem-Solving Process

Problem/Functional Analysis

Formative andSummative Evaluation

Strategic Intervention

Problem Solving and Data-Based Functional Assessment

Problem Identification

P/FA: WHY?

F&SE: DID IT WORK?

SI: HOW?

Problem Solving and Data-Based Functional Assessment Questions

PI: WHAT?

So. . .functionally. . . What is a RtI???

A student’s response to an “intervention” can be either a process (or moderator) variable or an outcome (dependent) variable

* Process Variable: Typically, a student-specific condition or reaction (e.g., to the intervention or its implementation process) that either enhances or diminishes the student’s ability (or, for example, motivation) to benefit from the intervention.

* Outcome Variable: In a concrete sense, a student’s outcome behavior that demonstrates that the intervention either did or did not work.

What Determines the Success of an RtI Process ???

Accurate Identification of the “Problem” and the Gap between this and a desired Outcome

Successful Differentiation between the “Problem” and a “Symptom”

Accurate Functional Analysis of the Gap (i.e., WHY the gap exists)

Successful Selection of the Research-based Intervention that links to the Functional Analysis

Appropriate Training, Preparation, Implementation, and Evaluation of the Intervention

Introducing the SPRINT Process

SPRINT: S chool P revention, R eview, and IN tervention T eam

What are the Goals of the SPRINT Process?

To address the needs of students experiencing academic or behavioral difficulties by:

Using a systematic problem-solving process that links functional assessment to evidence-based or research-based interventions.

Consulting with classroom teachers so that the identified interventions are implemented with integrity and success.

To establish assessment and intervention baselines in case more intensive interventions are needed later.

To increase the knowledge and skills of all of the teachers and other professionals involved.

Key Points

SPRINT is available for any academic, behavioral, teacher or student concern

Teachers, support staff, administrators, or parents can request a SPRINT Team consultation

The SPRINT Process focuses on the ….

General education/classroom

environment

General education/classroom teacher

Use of collegial consultation

What is the SPRINT’s Primary Service Delivery Model ???

Problem-Solving – Consultation – Intervention

NOT

Wait to Fail – Refer – Test – Place

Intervention Roulette

Problem/Functional Analysis

Formative andSummative Evaluation

Strategic Intervention

Problem Solving and Data-Based Functional Assessment

Problem Identification

Framing “The Gap”

PREREQUISITES:

A Grade-Level “Academic Roadmap” in all Curricular Areas that Specifies the Functional Academic Skills that Students should master and be able to demonstrate and apply

A Developmentally-Sensitive “Behavioral Roadmap” that Specifies the Personal/Self-Management, Interpersonal, and Environmental/Situational Behaviors that Students should master and be able to demonstrate and apply in the school setting

The Grade-Level “Academic Roadmap”

NEED, IN EACH CURRICULAR AREA, FROM PREKINDERGARTEN THROUGH HIGH SCHOOL:

State Standards, Benchmarks, Outcomes Curricular Scope & Sequence Goals and

Objectives that cross-reference the State Standards and Benchmarks

Criteria for Student Mastery of these Standards, Benchmarks, Goals, and Objectives

Authentic and Functional Assessments that reliably and validly determine Mastery

The Developmentally-Sensitive “Behavioral Roadmap”

NEED AT EACH DEVELOPMENTAL/MATURATIONAL/GRADE LEVEL, FROM PREKINDERGARTEN THROUGH HIGH SCHOOL, SPECIFIC BEHAVIORAL EXPECTATIONS RELATED TO:

Personal/Self-Management BehaviorsAttention Control SkillsEmotional Control SkillsSelf-Concept/Self-Esteem Skills

Interpersonal BehaviorsEngagement/Response SkillsProblem-Solving Skills Conflict Resolution Skills

Environmental/Situational BehaviorsClassroom Routine SkillsAcademic Supporting BehaviorsBuilding Routine Skills

Defining the Academic Gap

The Difference between Students’ Instructional Mastery of Academic Skills as Contrasted with their Expected Mastery—based on State and Curricular Benchmarks at their Chronological Age—in: Literacy: phonemic awareness, sound-symbol

association/phonics, decoding/ fluency, vocabulary, comprehension

Mathematics: numeration, calculation, application Language arts Science, social studies

The Difference between Students’ Mastery of Functional Behavioral Skills as Contrasted with the Expected Mastery—based on Developmental and Normative “Standards” at their Chronological Age.

Many behavioral gaps result in the need to:

Increase or establish new behaviors Decrease or eliminate inappropriate behaviors Learn attention & engagement skills Learn social, self-management & self-control skills Address externalizing behavior (anger, acting out, aggression) Address internalizing behavior (anxiety, withdrawal, depression) Increase motivation Learn/Increase Peer engagement & management skills

Defining the Behavioral Gap

Explaining Academic and Behavioral Gaps

Home/Community Factors

School/Classroom Factors

Teacher/ Instructional Factors

Curricular Factors

Student Factors

Causal vs. Correlational “Whys”

The Causal “Whys”:StudentTeacher/InstructionCurriculum

The Correlational “Whys”:Classroom/PeersSchool/DistrictHome/Community

Functional Assessment: The Two “Whys”: Causal Whys versus Correlational Whys

Home/Community Factors

School/Classroom Factors

Teacher/ Instructional Factors

Curricular Factors

Student Factors

Problem Analysis EvaluationInterventionProblem Identification

The “Continuum of Consultation” Involving Teachers, and the Grade-Level and Building-Level SPRINT Teams

Teacher

Grade-Level

Building-Level

Problem Identification Problem Analysis Intervention Evaluation

Problem Analysis EvaluationInterventionProblem Identification

Consultation Goals for the Classroom Teacher

Solve the current student situation Implement successful, strategic

interventions Increase the intervention skill levels

of those involved in the process Enhance the future problem-solving

and intervention skills of those involved

Prototypical Building-Level SPRINT Team Meeting

Teacher presents the situation to the Team through a systematic Record Review Form

Team Round-Robin: Student Contacts and Clarifying Questions

Relevant-Known Evaluation: Collect or Continue

Consultant Selection and Assignment

Case Review Time Determined

Characteristics of Effective Interventions within the

SPRINT Process

They are: ORGANIZED along a Flexible Continuum that is

Anchored by Effective (General Education) Classroom Instruction

LINKED to the Functional Assessment of “The Gap” and are Evidence-based

ATTENTIVE to: Social Validity, Acceptability, Treatment Integrity, Shared Benefits, Generalization

Strategically ORGANIZED and IMPLEMENTED through a Written Academic/Behavioral Intervention Plan

Continuously (Formatively) and Responsively (Summatively) EVALUATED

A Continuum of Responses to Students’ Challenges Relative to Learning and

Achievement

Effective Instruction

General Education Modification

Remediation

with Consultation

Accommodations

Intervention with Intervention

Assistive Supports

Compensation

Modifications vs. Accommodations

Modifications change CONTENT (Scope, depth, breadth,

complexity).

Accommodations change CONDITIONS;

They DO NOT change content.

Accommodations vs. Interventions

Accommodations are NOT the same as Interventions

Accommodations: help students compensate for learning

processes that cannot be remediated. do not change the specific nature of the

student’s area of weakness or disability. minimize, eliminate, or circumvent the impact

of a student’s area of weakness or disability so the student can make academic and/or behavioral progress or demonstrate existing knowledge.

Critical Points . . .

All Staff in a School need to be Trained in and Utilize Data-based Functional Assessment and Problem-Solving.

Effective Instruction and Primary Prevention Activities are anchored in Problem-Solving approaches.

Without Primary Prevention Activities, the need for Secondary and Tertiary Interventions is not known.

The Severity of a Student’s “Problem” (especially in the absence of Primary Prevention) does not predict the Intensity of the Interventions needed

Critical Points . . .

All SPRINT referrals are referrals for problem solving.

Students are not referred. . . Instructional environments are referred.

The focus is on early intervention, not “waiting to fail.”

Coordinated & well-integrated resources are needed early on to maximize success.

Components of the Instructional Environment

Teacher-Instructional Factors:Are teachers well-matched to their students and curricula?

Curricular Factors:Are curricula well-matched to students and teachers?

Student Factors:Are students prepared and “programmed”for success?

Fundamental Points…cont.

All interventions must be outcome-based. Interventions must be formatively evaluated to

monitor progress over time. Progress monitoring is but one approach to formative (and summative) evaluation.

The primary goals of intervention: Help students to master and demonstrate academic

and behavioral skills and succeed in general education environment.

Help students to increase (???) their Speed of Skill Mastery and Acquisition.

So. . .What is our Path?

We Need: To Analyze, Recognize, and Publicize our Research and

Practice Gaps. Curricular Areas

To Utilize Evidence-based Blueprints for the Effective School-wide Implementation of Instructional Support Systems and Positive Behavioral Support Systems for All Students across All Grades

To Recognize that RtI’s Inclusion in IDEA is a Great Opportunity, but that it was probably Premature

To Question the Need for a “Tiered Model” System or Forge a National Consensus on it

The Current Tiered Model System:

Is Confusing because there is not one agreed-

upon system and this is making professional conversation and communication challenging

Is Unnecessary as it is not required by IDEA, nor does it facilitate problem-solving, student identification, or student intervention

May be a Disservice to Students because it may guide generic eligibility decisions and directions at the expense of individual educational

planning

May be Epidemiologically Inaccurate relative to the population numbers suggested at the

different tiers.

So. . .What is Our National RtI Research Agenda Path?

The Focus: preK through Grade 12 (or through at least age 21)

All Curricular/Academic Areas All Behavioral/Behavioral Disorder Areas Integration and Coordination across:

Data-based Functional Assessment and Problem-Solving (including Progress Monitoring and Formative/Summative Evaluation approaches)

So. . .What is our Path. . .or. . . Our National RtI Research Agenda?

Integration and Coordination across: Consultation Processes Linking Assessment to Intervention Intervention (Again– preK to Grade 12;

All Academic/Behavioral Areas; for“Typical,” “Strategic Intervention,”

“Intensive Need” Students; for Students across the Disability areas)

Behavioral Intervention: Primary Prevention

Positive School and Classroom ClimatesEffective Classroom InstructionEffective Instructional Grouping

Effective Classroom ManagementStudent Instruction in “Zones of Success”

Social Skill Instruction and UseWell-Designed and Implemented

Accountability SystemsConsistency

Student Modifications & AccommodationsEarly Intervention

Behavioral Intervention: Secondary Prevention/

Strategic Intervention Programs

Peer/Adult Mentoring ProgramsPeer/Adult Mediation Programs

Strategic Behavioral Interventions (Behavioral Matrix Intensity II and III)

[Response Cost, Positive Practice/Restitutional Overcorrection, Group Contingencies, Cognitive-Behavioral Strategies, etc.]

Small Group Social Skills/Socialization TrainingAnger-/Emotion-/Self- Control Training

Attention-Control Training

Special Situation Groups: Ex. Divorce, Loss, PTSD, Self-Concept

Behavioral Intervention:Tertiary Prevention-- Intensive Needs/Crisis

Management Programs

Individual Counseling/Behavior Therapy(Behavioral Matrix Intensity III and IV)[Relaxation Therapy, Desensitization,

Cognitive-Behavioral Strategies, etc.]

School-Based Mental Health Services

Intensive Wrap-Around/Continuum of Care Programming

Academic InterventionsPrimary, Secondary, and Tertiary Prevention

LiteracyMathematicsWritten Expression/Language ArtsScienceSocial StudiesThe “Arts”

For more information

See the Arkansas School Improvement Grant Website at

http://acc.k12.ar.us/sig/Click the link for

Technical Assistance Papers select article

Functional Assessment and Data-based Problem Solving