RTI Goes to Pre-KRTI Goes to Pre-K
Virginia BuysseEllen Peisner-
Feinberg
Virginia BuysseEllen Peisner-
Feinberg
An Early Intervening System Called Recognition and Response An Early Intervening System Called Recognition and Response
In collaboration with:
National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD)
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC)
Communications Consortium Media Center (CCMC)
With funding from: Emily Hall Tremaine Foundation
In collaboration with:
National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD)
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC)
Communications Consortium Media Center (CCMC)
With funding from: Emily Hall Tremaine Foundation
ObjectivesObjectives
1. Describe a conceptual framework for Recognition and Response (R&R)
2. Consider the origins of R&R in RTI and existing tiered approaches in early childhood
3. Identify key considerations for implementing & evaluating R&R in early childhood
Defining Features of RTI
Defining Features of RTI
A core curriculum & effective instruction for all children
Targeted interventions for some students who meet screening criteria
Integrated system for universal screening and progress monitoring linked to instructional planning
Broad Support for RTIBroad Support for RTI
Widespread local implementation in public schools
Additional authority under IDEA
National leadership
Evidence of the efficacy of targeted interventions within an RTI framework for school-age children (Coleman, Buysse, & Neitzel, 2006)
RTI offers a promising approach for improving program quality & instruction in pre-k
Growing Support for RTI in Early Childhood
Growing Support for RTI in Early Childhood
Special issue on early childhood tiered models in School Psychology Review (2006), Vol. 35, No. 4
Topics in Early Childhood Special Education (Winter, 2007), Vol. 27, No. 4
DEC brief position statement on RTI in early childhood (2007; DEC Communicator Vol. 1[3])
Capitol Hill Briefing & RTI national summit presentations
New National Center to be established in 2008 on RTI in early childhood funded by US DOE (IES)
Existing Tiered Models in Early
Childhood
Existing Tiered Models in Early
ChildhoodBuilding Blocks (Sandall & Schwartz, 2002)
Positive Behavioral Supports (PBS; Barnett et al., 2006)
Intervention Hierarchy (Brown, Odom, & Conroy, 2001)
Teaching Pyramid (Hemmeter, Ostrosky, & Fox, 2006)
Conceptual Framework for R&R SystemConceptual Framework for R&R System
Recognition: Screening & Progress
Monitoring
Recognition: Screening & Progress
Monitoring
Universal Screening & Progress Monitoring
Universal Screening & Progress Monitoring
• Universal screening within first 2 months (NAEYC, 2005) and on a set schedule after that (fall, winter, spring)
• Tier 1: Do most children (~70-80%) meet screening criteria?
• Tier 2: Some children (~15-25%) may need targeted interventions, along with progress monitoring
Universal Screening & Progress Monitoring
Universal Screening & Progress Monitoring
• Tier 3: A few children (~5%) will need more individualized interventions & get more frequent progress monitoring
• Children with identified disabilities are not required to go through RTI process; RTI should not delay referral of children with suspected disabilities (CEC, 2007)
Screening & Progress Monitoring Tools
Screening & Progress Monitoring Tools
• Purpose is for instructional planning, not for diagnostic evaluation
• Designed to be used repeatedly
• Quick, easy to administer
• Correlated with long-term educational goals; not tied to a particular curriculum
• Information on both level & rate of growth
Examples of Screening & Progress Monitoring
Measures in Early Childhood
Examples of Screening & Progress Monitoring
Measures in Early Childhood
• Individual Growth & Development Indicators (IGDIs)
• Letter naming, picture naming, alliteration, rhyming
• Get It! Got It! Go! (http://ggg.umn.edu/)
Examples of Screening & Progress Monitoring
Measures in Early Childhood
Examples of Screening & Progress Monitoring
Measures in Early Childhood
• Math CBM (VanDerHeyden et al., 2007)
Counting objects, number selection, number naming, counting, & visual discrimination
Note: To be published in 2008
Response:
Research-Based Curricula, Intentional
Teaching, & Interventions
Response:
Research-Based Curricula, Intentional
Teaching, & Interventions
What are the responses within each tier?
What are the responses within each tier?
• Tier 1: Core curriculum and intentional teaching for all children
Core curriculum is research-based & comprehensive across all domains
May also include content-specific curricula (e.g., early literacy or math)
Intentional teaching of key content areas, including planning and evaluating instruction
What are the responses within each tier?
What are the responses within each tier?
• Tier 2: Explicit small group interventions augmented with embedded interventions
Explicit: structured, teacher-directed, content-specific interventions
Embedded: occur within daily activities, build on children’s strengths & interests, complement explicit interventions
What are the responses within each tier?
What are the responses within each tier?
• Tier 3: Intensive & individualized interventions
Research-based methods for scaffolding-- prompting, modeling, giving a directive & waiting for a response
Within the context of explicit approaches under Tier 2
Continue use of embedded interventions
Effectiveness Ratings for Early Childhood Interventions
Effectiveness Ratings for Early Childhood Interventions
An Example of a Tier 2 Intervention
An Example of a Tier 2 Intervention
• Read It Again! (Justice, McGinty, Beckman, & Kilday, 2006)
• Language & literacy supplement for pre-k programs:
• Guidelines for implementing lessons (before, during, & after reading)
• Repeated use of storybooks, picture cards, & other literacy materials
• Repetition of key concepts
• Appropriate for small groups
An Example of a Tier 2 Intervention
An Example of a Tier 2 Intervention
• Four domains of learning: vocabulary, narrative, phonological awareness, & print/alphabet knowledge
• Consists of 60 lessons, each addressing multiple domains (20 min/lesson)
• Preliminary research evidence of efficacy in pre-k (Justice et al., 2007)
Collaborative Problem-Solving Process
Collaborative Problem-Solving Process
Steps in Problem-SolvingSteps in Problem-Solving
• May involve teachers, parents, & specialists
• Establish desired outcomes
• Interpret assessment results
• Implement interventions
• Evaluate & adjust
Next Steps: A Pilot Study of R&R
Next Steps: A Pilot Study of R&R
• Piloting R&R in two states in 20-40 pre-k classes
• Intervention package:
• Implementation based on the R&R manual
• An existing assessment system and language & literacy intervention
• Problem-solving component
Next Steps: A Pilot Study of R&R
Next Steps: A Pilot Study of R&R
• Professional development to ensure acquisition of knowledge & skills
• Linked to manualized R&R framework and curriculum & assessment materials
• Full-day institutes
• Individualized consultation support
• Community of practice meetings
Next Steps: A Pilot Study of R&R
Next Steps: A Pilot Study of R&R
• Research questions:
• Can teachers implement the R&R system with fidelity?
• Do teachers find the R&R system acceptable and useful?
• Is there evidence that R&R is beneficial in promoting the development of children with learning difficulties?
Future ConsiderationsFuture Considerations
• How should R&R be adapted for diverse learners (e.g., ELLs, children with disabilities)?
• How can R&R be implemented across multiple domains of development & learning?
• Need more evidence-based pre-k interventions linked to assessments for use in R&R
• What infrastructure could best support R&R?
www.recognitionandresponse.org
Top Related