A Research-Based View of the Specific Learning Disabilities Determination Process: Responsiveness to Intervention Overv

1. A Research-Based View of the Specific Learning Disabilities Determination Process:Responsiveness to Intervention Overview National Research Center on Learning Disabilities (NRCLD) A collaboration of Vanderbilt University and the University of Kansas Funded by U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Ren�e Bradley, Project Officer - Award No. H324U010004 Winter 2007 Welcome to a presentation about responsiveness to intervention and specific learning disabilities determination.Welcome to a presentation about responsiveness to intervention and specific learning disabilities determination.

2. 2 Overview Presentation Topics Specific learning disabilities (SLD) defined A model of responsiveness to intervention (RTI) current "best practices" in the scientific literature Getting started in your state education agency (SEA) or local education agency (LEA) Overview of NRCLD This presentation provides background information regarding SLD determination, responsiveness to intervention, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. RTI is based on a clinical/public health model �response to treatment� or �responsiveness to intervention,� hence the name. Adapting and applying this type of model to education has led to experimental research on RTI. This presentation attempts to lay the foundation for LEAs and SEAs as they think about implementing RTI and applying it to SLD determination practices.This presentation provides background information regarding SLD determination, responsiveness to intervention, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. RTI is based on a clinical/public health model �response to treatment� or �responsiveness to intervention,� hence the name. Adapting and applying this type of model to education has led to experimental research on RTI. This presentation attempts to lay the foundation for LEAs and SEAs as they think about implementing RTI and applying it to SLD determination practices.

3. 3 Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) Defined �The term specific learning disability means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, which disorder may manifest itself in [the] imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations. �Such term includes such conditions as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. �Such term does not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, or mental retardation, or emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage� IDEA 2004 Sec. 602(30) When talking about SLD, emphasize the following words in the definition: �disorder,� �basic psychological process.� In general, the definition is very academically based, which can be a problem when children move beyond school. These terms, however, are more universal and less academic.The definition specifically includes traumatic �brain injury� as one condition associated with SLD. It excludes �environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.� The term disorder includes basic psychological processes, such as using language, reading, writing, math (terms included in the definition). Brain injury presents a different profile of disorder when included in the definition. Environmental, cultural and economic disadvantage are excluded from the terms of the definition. This language is derived from history: i.e., from research of Jack Fletcher, Michael Best. There are still issues with the SLD definition that will continue to cause difficulty in the determination process.When talking about SLD, emphasize the following words in the definition: �disorder,� �basic psychological process.� In general, the definition is very academically based, which can be a problem when children move beyond school. These terms, however, are more universal and less academic.The definition specifically includes traumatic �brain injury� as one condition associated with SLD. It excludes �environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.� The term disorder includes basic psychological processes, such as using language, reading, writing, math (terms included in the definition). Brain injury presents a different profile of disorder when included in the definition. Environmental, cultural and economic disadvantage are excluded from the terms of the definition. This language is derived from history: i.e., from research of Jack Fletcher, Michael Best. There are still issues with the SLD definition that will continue to cause difficulty in the determination process.

4. 4 RTI and IDEA 2004 (P.L. 108-446) New language in IDEA: �� 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�.� Sec. 614(b)6B The language of IDEA 2004 does not specifically use the term �responsiveness to intervention (RTI).� In the special education research literature, the process mentioned in this language is generally considered as referring to responsiveness to intervention (RTI). RTI is not mandated (e.g., �. . . a local agency may use a process. . .�).

5. 5 Why RTI? IDEA 2004 specifies special rules for eligibility determination (IDEA 2004, B. 614.b.(5)), by stating: In making a determination of eligibility under paragraph (4)(A), a child shall not be determined to be a child with a disability if the determinant factor for such determination is� (A) lack of appropriate instruction in reading, including in the essential components of reading instruction (as defined in section 1208(3) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; (B) lack of instruction in math; or (C) limited English proficiency. Based on a multi-tiered public health model for providing appropriate learning experiences for all students No systematic process was outlined in the earlier regulations for ensuring that the �learning experiences� provided before referral for evaluation were those that have been found to be typically effective for the child�s age and ability levels (i.e., �appropriate�). The responsiveness to scientific-based intervention (e.g., RTI) concept in IDEA 2004 is an elaboration or greater specification of this basic concept. With this emphasis, school staffs must consider how a youngster�s performance in general education and, more specifically, the youngster�s performance in response to specific scientific research-based instruction, informs SLD determination. The RTI structure is based on a clinical/public health model �response to treatment� or �responsiveness to intervention,� hence the name. Adapting and applying this type of model to education has led to experimental research on RTI. RTI allows schools to have more confidence that they are providing appropriate learning experiences to ALL students. No systematic process was outlined in the earlier regulations for ensuring that the �learning experiences� provided before referral for evaluation were those that have been found to be typically effective for the child�s age and ability levels (i.e., �appropriate�). The responsiveness to scientific-based intervention (e.g., RTI) concept in IDEA 2004 is an elaboration or greater specification of this basic concept. With this emphasis, school staffs must consider how a youngster�s performance in general education and, more specifically, the youngster�s performance in response to specific scientific research-based instruction, informs SLD determination. The RTI structure is based on a clinical/public health model �response to treatment� or �responsiveness to intervention,� hence the name. Adapting and applying this type of model to education has led to experimental research on RTI. RTI allows schools to have more confidence that they are providing appropriate learning experiences to ALL students.

6. 6 Three Models (Uses) of RTI Three uses: Prediction & Prevention prediction of at-risk students and preventing students from falling behind Remediation intervention for students with academic or behavioral difficulties Disability Assessment an intensive intervention test that is one component in the SLD determination process There are three commonly described uses of RTI: Prediction and Prevention: Students in their early school experiences (e.g., pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, and early first grade) are screened for potential indicators of academic or behavioral difficulties. Some are determined to be at risk and others not at risk. Those who are at risk receive additional intervention with the hope of preventing these students from falling behind. (General education environment) Remediation: This type of model focuses on children in late first grade through upper grades. A secondary level of intervention is provided for those general education students who are not progressing at an achievement rate or level commensurate with their peers. These students are then provided more intense interventions within small groups. (General education environment) Disability Assessment: This type of model focuses on children who are non-responsive to the remediation interventions. These students begin the SLD determination process -- are provided more intensive interventions (1:1) for a period of time in order to determine whether they are responsive to different types of instruction, curriculum, and individual instruction. If they are not responsive, they will receive further assessment (standardized assessments & IQ evaluation) to determine whether they have a specific learning disability. There are three commonly described uses of RTI: Prediction and Prevention: Students in their early school experiences (e.g., pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, and early first grade) are screened for potential indicators of academic or behavioral difficulties. Some are determined to be at risk and others not at risk. Those who are at risk receive additional intervention with the hope of preventing these students from falling behind. (General education environment) Remediation: This type of model focuses on children in late first grade through upper grades. A secondary level of intervention is provided for those general education students who are not progressing at an achievement rate or level commensurate with their peers. These students are then provided more intense interventions within small groups. (General education environment) Disability Assessment: This type of model focuses on children who are non-responsive to the remediation interventions. These students begin the SLD determination process -- are provided more intensive interventions (1:1) for a period of time in order to determine whether they are responsive to different types of instruction, curriculum, and individual instruction. If they are not responsive, they will receive further assessment (standardized assessments & IQ evaluation) to determine whether they have a specific learning disability.

7. 7 Research Identifies Critical Elements of RTI Implementation of a differentiated curriculum with different instructional methods Two or more tiers of increasingly intense, scientific, research-based interventions We want to emphasize curriculum AND method of delivery (research-based with fidelity of implementation). Research indicates it is better to use �increasingly intense� interventions that address duration and frequency. RTI research is focusing on these aspects of intensity (i.e., 8-10 weeks, 4-5 times per week for 30-60 minutes each session). We want to emphasize curriculum AND method of delivery (research-based with fidelity of implementation). Research indicates it is better to use �increasingly intense� interventions that address duration and frequency. RTI research is focusing on these aspects of intensity (i.e., 8-10 weeks, 4-5 times per week for 30-60 minutes each session).

8. 8 Research Identifies Critical Elements of RTI (cont.) Individual problem-solving model or standardized intervention protocol for intervention tiers (possibly in combination) Progress monitoring to assess entire class progress and individual student progress Explicit decision rules for assessing learners� progress (e.g., level and/or rate) Standardized treatment protocol is the old jargon. The new term is standardized intervention protocol. Treatment is a more medical/public health term, while intervention is more of an education term. Individual problem-solving model is an alternative to assessments and diagnostic categories as a method of identifying students who need special services. Progress monitoring is a critical part of assessing that interventions are having a positive effect on individual students and the entire class. There are really few examples of explicit decision rules for assessing learners� progress, but there are some guidelines for cut scores/benchmarks. Dual discrepancy is currently recommended as the most promising method identifying whether or not a student is responding to intervention. By simultaneously considering slope of improvement and final status, the dual discrepancy approach permits the unresponsive classification only when a student (a) fails to make adequate growth and (b) completes intervention below the normalized or benchmark criterion. In recent research, this method was found to have adequate sensitivity and specificity with respect to future low reading performance, even as it identified students with a severe form of reading disability with realistic prevalence rates Standardized treatment protocol is the old jargon. The new term is standardized intervention protocol. Treatment is a more medical/public health term, while intervention is more of an education term. Individual problem-solving model is an alternative to assessments and diagnostic categories as a method of identifying students who need special services. Progress monitoring is a critical part of assessing that interventions are having a positive effect on individual students and the entire class. There are really few examples of explicit decision rules for assessing learners� progress, but there are some guidelines for cut scores/benchmarks. Dual discrepancy is currently recommended as the most promising method identifying whether or not a student is responding to intervention. By simultaneously considering slope of improvement and final status, the dual discrepancy approach permits the unresponsive classification only when a student (a) fails to make adequate growth and (b) completes intervention below the normalized or benchmark criterion. In recent research, this method was found to have adequate sensitivity and specificity with respect to future low reading performance, even as it identified students with a severe form of reading disability with realistic prevalence rates

9. 9 What Does RTI Implementation Look Like? Students receive high-quality, research-based instruction by qualified staff in their general education setting (primary intervention) General education instructors and staff assume an active role in students� assessment in that curriculum School staff conduct universal screening of (a)�academics and (b)�behavior (> 1/yr) School staff implement specific, research-based interventions to address the students� difficulties RTI models call for students to receive high-quality, scientific-based instruction in their general education classrooms. Data are collected to ensure the efficacy of instruction. Many, if not all, children in a class, school, or district are tested by one-point-in-time tests or by repeated measurement in a circumscribed period. �At-risk� students are identified for intervention on the basis of their performance level or growth rate or both. Intervention is implemented and students are tested after, or throughout, the intervention period. Students who do not respond are identified as requiring: Multidisciplinary team evaluation for possible disability certification and special education placement, OR More intensive intervention(s). Effective staff and instructors take a much more active role with students � making up a portfolio, conducting screening. The best models conduct screenings at least three times per year. This is in general education setting (Tier 1). RTI models call for students to receive high-quality, scientific-based instruction in their general education classrooms. Data are collected to ensure the efficacy of instruction. Many, if not all, children in a class, school, or district are tested by one-point-in-time tests or by repeated measurement in a circumscribed period. �At-risk� students are identified for intervention on the basis of their performance level or growth rate or both. Intervention is implemented and students are tested after, or throughout, the intervention period. Students who do not respond are identified as requiring: Multidisciplinary team evaluation for possible disability certification and special education placement, OR More intensive intervention(s). Effective staff and instructors take a much more active role with students � making up a portfolio, conducting screening. The best models conduct screenings at least three times per year. This is in general education setting (Tier 1).

10. 10 What Does RTI Implementation Look Like? (continued) School staff conducts continuous progress monitoring of student performance (e.g., weekly or twice a week) for secondary and tertiary tier interventions, less frequently in general education (primary intervention) School staff use progress monitoring data and explicit decision rules to determine interventions� effectiveness and needed modifications Systematic assessment is made regarding the fidelity or integrity with which instruction and interventions are implemented Referral for comprehensive evaluation; free, appropriate public education (FAPE); due process protections We have emphasized weekly and twice a week monitoring of student progress. It is important that there is official and continuing assessment of fidelity with which interventions are implemented. Researchers have discussed progress monitoring and how/whether it includes assessment of comprehension; there is no consensus.We have emphasized weekly and twice a week monitoring of student progress. It is important that there is official and continuing assessment of fidelity with which interventions are implemented. Researchers have discussed progress monitoring and how/whether it includes assessment of comprehension; there is no consensus.

11. 11 Potential Confounders to RTI Implementation Low-quality interventions (not scientific, research-based) Lack of fidelity of implementation (checklists, outside monitoring) Insufficient implementation process (time, frequency, duration, knowledgeable teachers) Inappropriate target of progress monitoring (word ID fluency, passage reading, Maze task) Limited to K-3rd grade reading research (few math and 4th-12th grade findings) Inconsistent professional development (staff transition in/out of schools, training opportunities) Insufficient evidence for SLD determination RTI works well when implemented with integrity. As with any intervention, when implementation is altered/expanded in a manner never intended or supported by the research, the results may vary. This list provides potential confounders of which to be aware when implementing RTI. RTI works well when implemented with integrity. As with any intervention, when implementation is altered/expanded in a manner never intended or supported by the research, the results may vary. This list provides potential confounders of which to be aware when implementing RTI.

12. 12 This diagram has been used in a number of contexts related to learning disabilities. It was introduced through the positive behavior support research and adapted for other areas of SLD. The concepts of primary, secondary, and tertiary interventions are derived from the medical/public health care model. As with positive behavior support, the 80-15-5 percentages of students requiring more intense intervention tend to hold true across RTI�s multiple tiers. This diagram has been used in a number of contexts related to learning disabilities. It was introduced through the positive behavior support research and adapted for other areas of SLD. The concepts of primary, secondary, and tertiary interventions are derived from the medical/public health care model. As with positive behavior support, the 80-15-5 percentages of students requiring more intense intervention tend to hold true across RTI�s multiple tiers.

13. 13 One Example of RTI Multi-Tier Intervention Differences This graph provides a scenario of the service, instruction, and responsibility differences within a multi-tiered RTI model. This is merely one example of configuring an RTI model. Tier 1: �Screening� can be linked to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) testing and adequate yearly progress (AYP) reports. At a minimum, screening occurs once per year, with twice a year (once each semester) a better sequencing, and three or four times per year optimal sequencing. Tier 1 consists of �whole group instruction,� wherein all students continue to receive about 90 minutes of core reading general education instruction per week (no differentiation of instruction time, frequency, duration occurs). In Tier 1, there is an assumption the curriculum is scientifically research-based, instruction is provided by highly-qualified general education teachers, and there is continual monitoring of student progress. Early Intervening Services (EIS) funds can be used to provide Tier 1 services (subject to no prior disability designation for individual students). Tier 2: �Supplementary, diagnostic instruction� consists of small-group intervention designed to add to/supplement (not replace) the continuing Tier 1 general education curriculum. Small-group instruction is provided by one instructor working with three to five students for 30 minutes per day for 10-12 weeks duration (approx. 50 sessions) with continual monitoring of student progress. Instruction can be provided in the general classroom setting by the general education teacher and/or possibly Title I staff. EIS funds can be used to provide Tier 2 services (subject to no prior disability designation for individual students). Cycles of Tier 2 instruction can be repeated, as needed. Tier 3: �Designation/classification of disability� (i.e., special education designation) prompting �special intensive instruction� consists of an individualized, iterative, data-based, strategic intervention provided by one special education specialist working with no more than three students for 50-60 minutes per day for 10-12 weeks duration (approx. 100 sessions) with continual monitoring of student progress. Similar to Tier 2 instruction, Tier 3 supplements the Tier 1 instruction. EIS funds cannot be used for special education.This graph provides a scenario of the service, instruction, and responsibility differences within a multi-tiered RTI model. This is merely one example of configuring an RTI model. Tier 1: �Screening� can be linked to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) testing and adequate yearly progress (AYP) reports. At a minimum, screening occurs once per year, with twice a year (once each semester) a better sequencing, and three or four times per year optimal sequencing. Tier 1 consists of �whole group instruction,� wherein all students continue to receive about 90 minutes of core reading general education instruction per week (no differentiation of instruction time, frequency, duration occurs). In Tier 1, there is an assumption the curriculum is scientifically research-based, instruction is provided by highly-qualified general education teachers, and there is continual monitoring of student progress. Early Intervening Services (EIS) funds can be used to provide Tier 1 services (subject to no prior disability designation for individual students). Tier 2: �Supplementary, diagnostic instruction� consists of small-group intervention designed to add to/supplement (not replace) the continuing Tier 1 general education curriculum. Small-group instruction is provided by one instructor working with three to five students for 30 minutes per day for 10-12 weeks duration (approx. 50 sessions) with continual monitoring of student progress. Instruction can be provided in the general classroom setting by the general education teacher and/or possibly Title I staff. EIS funds can be used to provide Tier 2 services (subject to no prior disability designation for individual students). Cycles of Tier 2 instruction can be repeated, as needed. Tier 3: �Designation/classification of disability� (i.e., special education designation) prompting �special intensive instruction� consists of an individualized, iterative, data-based, strategic intervention provided by one special education specialist working with no more than three students for 50-60 minutes per day for 10-12 weeks duration (approx. 100 sessions) with continual monitoring of student progress. Similar to Tier 2 instruction, Tier 3 supplements the Tier 1 instruction. EIS funds cannot be used for special education.

14. 14 This is an example of assessment results for a student in first grade. The skill assessed is Word Identification Fluency, but it could be representative of a variety of other assessments: i.e., Reading Mastery Test, Word Attack, Spelling, or Reading Assessment, to name a few. In this example, Taylor did not do well during screening, did not respond well to Tier 1 intervention, and did not respond well to Tier 2 intervention. Additional intervention would seem appropriate considering the benchmarks for first-graders (indicated on graph). Benchmarks for CBM Word Identification Fluency in first grade are: child considered at risk at beginning of first grade if Word Identification Fluency is fewer than 15 words per minute child benchmark at the end of first grade in Word Identification Fluency is more than or equal to 40 words per minute first grade Word Identification Fluency growth benchmark is 1.8 words per week Benchmarks for Word Identification Fluency in other grades include: K: one letter sound increase per week Second: one word (passage reading fluency) increase per week Third: .75 word (passage reading fluency) increase per week Fourth-fifth: .25 correct replacement (Maze fluency task) increase per weekThis is an example of assessment results for a student in first grade. The skill assessed is Word Identification Fluency, but it could be representative of a variety of other assessments: i.e., Reading Mastery Test, Word Attack, Spelling, or Reading Assessment, to name a few. In this example, Taylor did not do well during screening, did not respond well to Tier 1 intervention, and did not respond well to Tier 2 intervention. Additional intervention would seem appropriate considering the benchmarks for first-graders (indicated on graph). Benchmarks for CBM Word Identification Fluency in first grade are: child considered at risk at beginning of first grade if Word Identification Fluency is fewer than 15 words per minute child benchmark at the end of first grade in Word Identification Fluency is more than or equal to 40 words per minute first grade Word Identification Fluency growth benchmark is 1.8 words per week Benchmarks for Word Identification Fluency in other grades include: K: one letter sound increase per week Second: one word (passage reading fluency) increase per week Third: .75 word (passage reading fluency) increase per week Fourth-fifth: .25 correct replacement (Maze fluency task) increase per week

15. 15 Another Example of RTI Multi-Tier Intervention Differences This is another example of a multi-tiered RTI implementation, based on the work of staff in the Tigard-Tualatin School District in Oregon. This model includes four tiers: � Tier 1 = general education � Tier 2 = small group instruction in general education environment � Tier 3 = individualized or small group instruction in general education environment � Tier 4 = special educationThis is another example of a multi-tiered RTI implementation, based on the work of staff in the Tigard-Tualatin School District in Oregon. This model includes four tiers: � Tier 1 = general education � Tier 2 = small group instruction in general education environment � Tier 3 = individualized or small group instruction in general education environment � Tier 4 = special education

16. 16 Assessing Response in Tigard-Tualatin School District This flowchart illustrates the RTI implementation at Tigard-Tualatin School District. Note several opportunities for parents to be informed about and involved in their child�s educational program.This flowchart illustrates the RTI implementation at Tigard-Tualatin School District. Note several opportunities for parents to be informed about and involved in their child�s educational program.

17. 17 RTI promotes a multi-tiered intervention model. The checklist provided has listed three tiers for convenience, but could easily be expanded as needed for use with models of more than three tiers. This checklist can help a district or school to determine what RTI practices they are currently implementing and those they are not and still need to.RTI promotes a multi-tiered intervention model. The checklist provided has listed three tiers for convenience, but could easily be expanded as needed for use with models of more than three tiers. This checklist can help a district or school to determine what RTI practices they are currently implementing and those they are not and still need to.

18. 18 Common Stakeholder* Attributes of an SLD Identification Model Accuracy, validity, research-based process Definite criteria Developmentally age appropriate Early identification Efficient process General education accountability Prescriptive nature, child centered Reflective of national standards *Stakeholders: SPED Directors, Principals, Parents, Gen Ed Teachers, SLD Teachers, School Psychologists Adapted from Mellard et al. (2004). If you want to implement a research-based model, these are common attributes that would direct you toward that model. A site should be able to say �Our SLD determination model is good because�� These critical attributes were all identified within focus groups by pertinent stakeholders: special education directors, school administrators, teachers, parents. Each group listed them in a slightly different order of priority, so be prepared to be attentive to your particular state/district/school�s priorities. We have drawn the list of components from various stakeholders; how you put them together and use them depends on your situation. If you want to implement a research-based model, these are common attributes that would direct you toward that model. A site should be able to say �Our SLD determination model is good because�� These critical attributes were all identified within focus groups by pertinent stakeholders: special education directors, school administrators, teachers, parents. Each group listed them in a slightly different order of priority, so be prepared to be attentive to your particular state/district/school�s priorities. We have drawn the list of components from various stakeholders; how you put them together and use them depends on your situation.

19. 19 EIS and IDEA Reauthorization (P.L. 108-446) New language in IDEA: �A local educational agency (LEA) may not use more than 15% of the amount such agency receives under this part (Part B)� to develop and implement coordinated, early intervening services � for students in kindergarten through grade 12 (with particular emphasis on students in kindergarten through grade 3) who do not meet the definition of a child with a disability� but who need additional academic and behavioral support to succeed in a general education environment.� Sec. 613(f)(1)

20. 20 EIS and IDEA Reauthorization (P.L. 108-446) EIS Activities: The funds are intended to build school staff capacity for delivering scientifically-based academic and behavioral interventions, including �scientifically-based literacy instruction and � providing educational and behavioral evaluations, services, and supports, including scientifically-based literacy instruction.� Sec. 613(f)(2)

21. 21 EIS Provides an Assessment /Intervention Framework within General Education Early intervening services (EIS) is a process for ensuring students receive �appropriate learning experiences� in general education EIS is designed to be provided to children who have not previously been identified with an SLD, but who are exhibiting symptoms for being at risk. They can receive secondary levels of instruction in the general classroom. EIS provides a framework for prevention and intervention. EIS has staying power within the policy context because it is enacted and funded in IDEA 2004. EIS is about prevention and not pre-referral. EIS uses funding from special education, but special education is not involved in the delivery of EIS services. Students already diagnosed with a disability cannot receive services through EIS. If you are already incorporating EIS into your prevention/intervention system, you are a long way down the road toward integrating RTI into your SLD determination/intervention system - students who are at risk and receiving instruction in tiers beyond the typical general education instruction qualify for EIS.EIS is about prevention and not pre-referral. EIS uses funding from special education, but special education is not involved in the delivery of EIS services. Students already diagnosed with a disability cannot receive services through EIS. If you are already incorporating EIS into your prevention/intervention system, you are a long way down the road toward integrating RTI into your SLD determination/intervention system - students who are at risk and receiving instruction in tiers beyond the typical general education instruction qualify for EIS.

22. 22 EIS & RTI Comparisons EIS and RTI emphasize the use of scientifically based interventions; not �home grown� EIS is mandated for districts that have disproportionate over-representation of students with disabilities or of minorities. Under EIS, the LEA must annually report on students served; RTI does not have such a provision. EIS is not linked with SLD determination procedures. RTI, on the other hand, is. RTI is conceptualized as important to all students. EIS is focused as support services to students exhibiting academic and behavioral difficulties. There are many different types of early intervening services that can be used for students exhibiting academic and behavioral difficulties - some of these service may or may not be used within an RTI program.There are many different types of early intervening services that can be used for students exhibiting academic and behavioral difficulties - some of these service may or may not be used within an RTI program.

23. 23 Placement and Intervention Coordination Early Intervening Services is the umbrella over everything - encompassing prevention. It can be used to determine SLD. The blue arrow on right indicates the need for continuous scientifically-based instruction throughout all types of instruction. The green arrow on left indicates the multi-tiered nature of the intensity of the intervention. The triangle represents the population of students in the school system and approximate percentages of student population at each tier. 80% of students will require a primary-level intervention through classroom instruction. 15% of students will require a secondary-level intervention through small group instruction. 5% of students will require a tertiary-level intervention through individualized or small group instruction. Scientifically-based instruction provided in the general education setting (potentially primary interventions and secondary interventions) are considered Early Intervening Services (EIS) if the child has not previously been identified as having a disability. Early Intervening Services is the umbrella over everything - encompassing prevention. It can be used to determine SLD. The blue arrow on right indicates the need for continuous scientifically-based instruction throughout all types of instruction. The green arrow on left indicates the multi-tiered nature of the intensity of the intervention. The triangle represents the population of students in the school system and approximate percentages of student population at each tier. 80% of students will require a primary-level intervention through classroom instruction. 15% of students will require a secondary-level intervention through small group instruction. 5% of students will require a tertiary-level intervention through individualized or small group instruction. Scientifically-based instruction provided in the general education setting (potentially primary interventions and secondary interventions) are considered Early Intervening Services (EIS) if the child has not previously been identified as having a disability.

24. 24 Parents� Rights Procedural safeguards language in the law: �Establishment of Procedures�Any State educational agency, State agency, or local educational agency that receives assistance under [Part B] shall establish and maintain procedures in accordance with this section to ensure that children with disabilities and their parents are guaranteed procedural safeguards with respect to the provision of a free appropriate public education by such agencies.� P.L. 108-446, Sec. 615(a) At what point should parents be �informed� or �involved�? Tier 1 or Tier 2 are usually part of the general education instructional setting. When tests are administered to determine for Tier 3, then parents need to be involved. This is where free appropriate public education (FAPE) comes in. Let�s review again the Tigard-Tualatin school district�s method for involving and informing parents throughout the RTI process. At what point should parents be �informed� or �involved�? Tier 1 or Tier 2 are usually part of the general education instructional setting. When tests are administered to determine for Tier 3, then parents need to be involved. This is where free appropriate public education (FAPE) comes in. Let�s review again the Tigard-Tualatin school district�s method for involving and informing parents throughout the RTI process.

25. 25 Parent Involvement in Tigard-Tualatin School District Parents are notified any time a team meets to discuss a specific student and makes a recommendation for additional or different services.Parents are notified any time a team meets to discuss a specific student and makes a recommendation for additional or different services.

26. 26 Where To Begin? What is your goal: prediction, remediation, disability assessment? What do you do well (e.g., universal screening, early intervening services, progress monitoring, targeting and monitoring effective interventions)? What tools/mechanisms do you currently have in place that can assist you with RTI? Check the �Getting Started� information, RTI Implementation Tool for Reading, and other resource materials at www.NRCLD.org When asking yourself where to begin, it�s good to contemplate how much self-assessment needs to occur. We�ve done the show and tell, now we ask you (the SEA/LEA audience member) what other initiatives in your school are under way? How can all these initiatives fit together seamlessly (AYP, disproportionality)? For EIS (and RTI) to work well�for prediction, remediation, or disability assessment�there needs to be a good working relationship between general education and special education staff. Organizational self-assessment is vital to determine what is done well and to address growth areas. See NRCLD�s Implementing Change PowerPoint slides.When asking yourself where to begin, it�s good to contemplate how much self-assessment needs to occur. We�ve done the show and tell, now we ask you (the SEA/LEA audience member) what other initiatives in your school are under way? How can all these initiatives fit together seamlessly (AYP, disproportionality)? For EIS (and RTI) to work well�for prediction, remediation, or disability assessment�there needs to be a good working relationship between general education and special education staff. Organizational self-assessment is vital to determine what is done well and to address growth areas. See NRCLD�s Implementing Change PowerPoint slides.

27. 27 NRCLD SLD and RTI Resource Products NRCLD has the following materials available for your review and use. Copies are located on the NRCLD web site (www.NRCLD.org).NRCLD has the following materials available for your review and use. Copies are located on the NRCLD web site (www.NRCLD.org).

28. 28 NRCLD Project Staff � Vanderbilt University Doug Fuchs, Co-Director & Principal Investigator Dan Reschly, Co-Director & Principal Investigator Lynn Fuchs, Principal Investigator Don Compton, Principal Investigator Joan Bryant, Project Coordinator NRCLD project staff share a common interest in SLD research, with particular emphasis on RTI and progress monitoring. NRCLD project staff share a common interest in SLD research, with particular emphasis on RTI and progress monitoring.

29. Thank you!