National Research Center on Learning Disabilities PowerPoint Presentation

Slide 1 -

National Research Center on Learning Disabilities A collaboration of Vanderbilt University and the University of Kansas Funded by U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs, Renee Bradley, Project Officer Award No. H324U010004 Daryl Mellard National Association of School Psychologists, April 1, 2005 Atlanta, Georgia

Slide 2 -

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 University of Kansas Don Deshler, Co-Director & Principal Investigator Daryl Mellard, Principal Investigator Sonja de Boer-Ott, Project Coordinator Julie Tollefson, Dissemination Coordinator Melinda McKnight, Research Assistant Barb Starrett, Research Assistant

Slide 3 -

Regional Resource Centers Federal Resource Center Rex Shipp Region 1: Northeast Kristin Reedy, Director Rich Reid, Representative Region 2: Mid-South Ken Olsen, Director Kathy Chapman, Representative Nancy Sander, Representative Region 3: Southeast Elizabeth Beal, Director Larry Martin, Representative Region 4: North Central Michael Sharpe, Director Kristen Kask, Representative Region 5: Mountain Plains John Copenhaver, Director Carol Massanari, Co-director/Representative Geralynn Olvey, Representative Region 6: Western Caroline Moore, Co-director Dick Zeller, Co-director Brad Lenhardt, Representative

Slide 4 -

Purposes of the NRCLD To understand how alternative approaches to identification affect who is identified. To investigate state and local identification policies and practices and LD prevalence. To provide technical assistance and conduct dissemination to enhance state and local practice in identification. To identify sites that effectively use responsiveness-to-intervention as a method of identification.

Slide 5 -

Goal 1: Enhance understanding of LD and how alternative approaches to LD identification affect who gets identified (Vanderbilt)

Slide 6 -

Goal 2: Investigate state and local LD identification policies, practices, and prevalence (Vanderbilt)

Slide 7 -

Goal 3: Design, implement, and evaluate a dissemination and technical assistance approach that links research to practice and promotes the use of current knowledge and ongoing research findings (KU)

Slide 8 -

1. What is the LD problem? Too many students Minority over/under representation Identification requires students to fail The wrong students Cost in assessment and services Identification occurs too late What is the LD problem?

Slide 9 -

Why do you suppose this happens? The LD identification model isn’t clearly explicated Schools are not held accountable for decisions The values in the current model don’t match the school’s or district’s values

Slide 10 -

ppt slide no 10 content not found

Slide 11 -

What are the critical attributes of an LD identification model? Accurate, valid, research based Definite criteria Early identification Prescriptive nature; child centered Age-developmentally appropriate General education accountability Efficient process National standards

Slide 12 -

Groups’ Attribute Preferences Building admin Spec ed directors Gen ed teachers LD teachers Parents School psych Accurate, valid Definite criteria Definite criteria; early identification Accurate, valid Early identification Accurate, valid Four groups (#2, 3, 4, & 5) had these three attributes in their top 3 choices.

Slide 13 -

Critical Attributes Survey (Mn ranks/ordinal position)

Slide 14 -

Goal 3: Analyzing Change vs. Stability William Reid (1987) School Culture (Social System) Team relationships Team chemistry SLD Identification (Technology) Current practices Change agent Perceived Role (Theory) Professional beliefs Context

Slide 15 -

Goal 3: Premise Changes in technology and policy are not sufficient. Practitioners’ perceived role Practitioners’ social interaction pattern School culture supports current practices

Slide 16 -

Intervention Framework

Slide 17 -

Components of Organization Change Passion Readiness Mobilization Implementation

Slide 18 -

Components of Individual Transitions Ending Searching Engaging

Slide 19 -

Understanding the role of “human sense-making” Successful implementation of complex policies usually necessitates substantial changes in the implementing agents’ schemas. Most conventional theories of change fail to take into account the complexity of human sense making…… Viewing failure in implementation as demonstrating lack of capacity or deliberate attempt to ignore policy overlooks the complexity of the sense-making process. Sense-making is not a simple decoding of the policy message, in general, the process of comprehension is an active process of interpretation that draws on the individual’s rich knowledge base of understandings, beliefs, and attitudes. Spillane, Reiser, & Reimer, 2002

Slide 20 -

Allowing time for reformulation No one can resolve the crisis of reintegration on behalf of another. When those who have power to manipulate changes act as if they have only to explain, and when their explanations are not at once accepted, shrug off opposition as ignorance or prejudice, they express a profound contempt for the meaning of lives other than their own. For the reformers have already assimilated these changes to their purposes, and worked out a reformulation which makes sense to them perhaps through months or years of analysis and debate. If they deny others the chance to do the same, they treat them as puppets dangling by the threads of their own conceptions. Marris, 1975

Slide 21 -

Understanding RTI Identifying school districts as model site implementers of RTI Six RRC sought nominations 41 school applications under review Symposium on critical issues

Slide 22 -

What do we mean by RTI? RTI has two goals: prevent academic problems and determine students with LD. 2 or more tiers of increasingly intense interventions. Use a problem solving model or standardized treatment protocol for intervention tiers. Implementation of a differentiated curriculum with different instructional methods. Varied duration, frequency, and time of interventions, and Explicit decision rules for judging learners’ progress.

Slide 23 -

What does RTI implementation look like? Students receive high quality, research-based instruction by qualified staff in their general education setting. 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. School staff implement specific, research-based interventions to address the student’s difficulties.

Slide 24 -

Other features of RTI Continuous progress monitoring of student performance occurs (weekly or biweekly). School staff use progress-monitoring data and decision rules to determine interventions’ effectiveness and needed modifications. Systematic assessment of the fidelity or integrity with which instruction and interventions are implemented.

Slide 25 -

Standard Treatment Protocol Approach To Responsive-to-Intervention The standard treatment is for the student to receive a validated, intense intervention The bad news is that all students receive the same intervention The good news is that the interventions are well-specified, sequenced with clear outcomes The interventions are more likely to be delivered with fidelity; training is consistent Increases the consistency of services; easy to check for implementation

Slide 26 -

Advantages of Response-to-Intervention Approach Provides assistance to needy children in timely fashion. Helps ensure that the student’s poor academic performance is not due to poor instruction. Assessment data are collected to inform the teacher and improve instruction. Assessments and interventions are closely linked.

Slide 27 -

Goal 4: Assist the RRCs in designing, implementing, and analyzing results of an evaluation of responsiveness-to-intervention (RTI) programs in local schools in six RRC regions (KU)

Slide 28 -

Goal 4: Goals Determine whether/how an RTI model is being implemented Clarify whether/how an RTI model is used to determine LD eligibility Establish whether/how an RTI model is an effective prevention system Validate whether/how an RTI model enhances LD identification

Slide 29 -

Phase I: RTI Model Site Applications Reviewed 41 applications Blind reviews Review panel of six NRCLD staff Minimum of two reviews for applications not meeting the selection criteria 19 evaluation items (6 items/tier); % possible Items scored: 0, .5, 1, 1.5, and 2 0 = no information 2 = fully specified, descriptive

Slide 30 -

Phase 1 Sample Items School uses multiple tiers The building level administrator is involved in instruction fidelity checks, and RTI implementation The schools have a designated cut score to distinguish “responsiveness” and “unresponsiveness.”

Slide 31 -

Phase I: Two Selection Rules Score of > 1.5: RTI is used in LD identification Grade levels implemented Additional assessments? Due process procedures On what information is LD determination made? Total points: > 80% by two judges

Slide 32 -

Phase 1 Nominations

Slide 33 -

A Closer Look at the 5 Sites LD Determination

Slide 34 -

Phase 2 review Parent and school staff Activity involvement Time engagement RTI implementation Fidelity checks Prevention evidence Reading score Referral patterns LD determination Demographic markers LD vs. non-SPED char LD enhancement Instructional differences Exit criteria

Slide 35 -

Barriers: Disconnect Between Research and Practice Theory of practice: For schools, the issue is about getting services to students, not disability determination RRC staff reporting positive climates of the schools; yet low % implementation Research examples markedly different than school examples

Slide 36 -

RTI Symposium Participants included advocates, instructional staff, researchers, and state-level education officials Speakers shared knowledge / expertise, organized around six questions related to RTI implementation in both school districts and research sites Symposium materials (e.g., papers, PowerPoint presentations, video highlights) are available on our website: www.nrcld.org

Slide 37 -

Symposium Sessions 1-3 1. How should screening for secondary intervention occur? Presenters: David Francis, Joe Jenkins, Deborah Speece Discussant: Barbara Foorman 2. How should secondary intervention be formulated? Presenters: Doug Fuchs, Jeff Grimes & Sharon Kurns, Debra Kamps Discussant: Joe Kovaleski 3. What are the feasibility and consequences of RTI? Presenters: Mike Gerber, Dan Reschly Discussants: Larry Gloeckler, Margo Mastropieri

Slide 38 -

Symposium Sessions 4-6 4. How should “unresponsiveness” to secondary intervention be operationalized in an RTI approach to LD identification? Presenters: Roland Good, Joe Torgesen, Frank Vellutino Discussant: Don Compton 5. How many tiers are needed within RTI to achieve acceptable prevention outcomes and to achieve acceptable patterns of LD identification? Presenters: Rollanda O’Connor, David Tilly, Sharon Vaughn Discussant: Doug Marston 6. What are alternative models to LD identification other than RTI? Presenters: Jack Fletcher, Ken Kavale, Tom Scruggs, Margaret Semrud-Clikeman

Slide 39 -

Goal 4: Future Activities Specifying the RTI components, procedures, criteria, and implementation plan with LD determination Technical assistance to SEAs Scaling up activities through dissemination Materials: Descriptions of RTI components and of districts which have implemented RTI (focus on process)

Slide 40 -

Lessons from Thomas Bayes P [ LD | X ] = P [X|LD] * P [LD] P [X|LD] P [LD] + P[X|LD’] P [LD’] Accuracy depends on Base rate Diagnosticity Stakeholder values

Slide 41 -

Applying Bayes’ Formula to LD Identification P [LD] = .05; or 5 students in 100 have LD P[LD’] = .95 or 95 students of 100 do not have LD Test LD LD’ ld 1.00 .10 ld’ 0 .90 P [LD|X] = (1.00 x .05) / ((1.00 x .05) + (.10 x .95)) = .05 / .05 + .095 = .05 / .145 = .34

Slide 42 -

Thoughts for Your Consideration What values do we want to underlie our SLD model? Are we committed to supporting those values? What characterizes identification models that get implemented with fidelity?

Slide 43 -

Conclusion on LD identification Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations we shall soon know nothing about it at all. -- Mark Twain

Slide 44 -

Thank You Daryl Mellard DMellard@ku.edu 785-864-7081