Critical Assessment Within a Response to Intervention Model
April 7–11 Online Discussion Summary
Critical assessment strategies within the Response to Intervention (RTI) framework was the featured topic of discussion on the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality’s (TQ Center) online discussion board, the TQ Connection. Dr. Kimberly Gibbons, executive director of the St. Croix River Education District (SCRED) was the discussion’s featured expert. Dr. Gibbons provides a unique perspective due to SCREDs long history with implementing RTI and her oversight of the newly funded RTI center,
Minnesota Response to Intervention Center. Dr. Gibbons recently coauthored a book with Dr. Matthew Burns titled
Implementing Response-to-Intervention in Elementary and Secondary Schools: Procedures to Assure Scientific-Based Practices. A chapter in this book,
Assessments Within a Response to Intervention System, (
http://www.tqsource.org/forum/documents/GibbonsPaper.doc) was offered as prereading material to help stimulate discussion.
Four key topics were the focus of the week’s discussion:
• RTI funding
• Required teacher and related service personnel competencies
• RTI implementation barriers and strategies
• State RTI assessment tools
RTI FundingDr. Gibbons reported that a new RTI and Early Intervening bill required two interventions prior to special education referral. The new bill allowed districts to meet these requirements and establish an early intervening services program that established a system of scientifically based instruction and intervention, measurement, and collaborative teaming. The Minnesota Response to Intervention Center received funding by a Minnesota Legislative grant. The majority of the Center’s funding is given to local education agencies (LEAs) to receive coaching assistance through the Center. According to Dr. Gibbons, funding also is used to develop professional development products, provide technical assistance, and to work with higher education faculty to determine strategies to incorporate RTI into preservice training. Dr. Gibbons commented that in the beginning, without the legislative funding, SCRED reallocated existing resources and utilized various grant opportunities.
Each state education agency (SEA) and LEA funds its RTI efforts differently. Some states have elected to fund centers to establish and provide specific training, some have developed LEA subgrants, and others have provided guidance on reallocating existing resources. As Dr. Gibbons noted, districts are required to allocate 5 percent of their Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part B flow-through funds for professional development that could be directed toward RTI efforts. According to Dr. Gibbons, districts also “have the discretion to use up to 15 percent of federal special education funds to support implementation, prevention, and early identification/early treatment intervention in general education.” Several examples of state RTI implementation plans, which include guidance on funding RTI efforts, are posted at:
http://www.tqsource.org/forum/index.php/topic,21.0.html.
Required Teacher and Related Service Personnel CompetenciesThe competencies required to implement RTI sparked a generous amount of discussion. Dr. Gibbons indicated that teachers within their district currently have the competencies to implement a measurement system within an RTI model; however, this level of competency required continuous training and support over a long period of time (SCRED has been implementing RTI for 12 years). Principals and teachers who recognize the value in student data and possess the skills to make data-based instructional decisions are more prepared to thrive within an RTI framework. Dr. Gibbons noted that new hires—most particularly regular education teachers—are not necessarily equipped with the essential assessment competencies. The Minnesota Response to Intervention Center has identified specific teacher and related services personnel competencies (see
http://www.tqsource.org/forum/index.php/topic,23.0.html) and is charged with working with institutions of higher education (IHEs) to determine ways to infuse the RTI framework and critical concepts into preservice coursework. The Minnesota Response to Intervention Center has found that most of these competencies are addressed in special education programs in Minnesota; however they are not commonly addressed in regular education preservice teacher education programs.
RTI Implementation Barriers and StrategiesDr. Gibbons remarked that the barriers to implementing RTI in the beginning were plentiful, but many were eradicated through persistent training and support. Establishing a culture that recognizes the need to frequently assess student performance begins with school administration. Administrative leadership was acknowledged as critical, and when it is provided, barriers (i.e., time constraints, test measure resistance) were reduced. The Minnesota Response to Intervention Center provides direct, hands-on training and support through the use of instructional coaches and measurement specialists within the school. Coaches attend grade-level team meetings and facilitate discussion about data-decision making rules and intervention selection criteria. Teachers analyze and communicate student data to teachers, principals, parents, and superintendents. The direct hands-on support for teachers, coupled with progress monitoring and observed student growth, facilitate both staff empowerment and buy in. Persistence in training and continual support is instrumental to RTI success.
State RTI Assessment ToolsThe strengths, needs, and resources within each district and school vary. RTI implementation strategies are dependent on many factors, including the school or district’s readiness to implement RTI, current knowledge base, and leadership within the school. Many states have developed self-assessment templates to assist districts in determining their readiness to implement RTI for all students. In general, the self-assessment tools assist in gathering baseline information about current resources and the status of implementing scientifically based instructional strategies, progress monitoring, problem solving, and levels of intervention. A sampling of states’ self-assessment tools can be found at
http://www.tqsource.org/forum/index.php/topic,24.15.html.
Thank you for taking the time to visit the TQ Connection. Participant questions and comments offer excellent discussion opportunities among general and special education professionals. A complete description of the online discussion can be accessed at
http://www.tqsource.org/forum/index.php/topic,24.0.html.
Mark your calendar for next month’s discussion, “Response to Intervention: Evidenced-Based Instructional Strategies” which is scheduled to begin
May 5, 2008.
