Implementing District Wide Response to Intervention (RTI)
The School and Community Relations
Michelle Fattig-Smith, Ed.S., RTI Facilitator

"Education is a social process. Education is growth. Education is, not a preparation for life; education is life itself."
                                                        John Dewey

Over the past 25 years, the percentage of students placed in programs for Learning Disabilities has increased to the point that 50% of all students in special education are labeled learning disabled (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Speece, 2002).  The debate over the discrepancy model for placement in learning disability programs has been ongoing.  Utilizing a Curriculum Based Decision Making team, and monitoring the student's response to intervention (RTI), as a replacement model, was included in the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and more recently in Nebraska's Rule 51.  This approach to identification utilizing an intervention responsiveness approach (Fuchs, Mock, Morgan, & Young, 2003), attempts to examine levels of student performance, gauge the effects of individual student adaptation to regular education interventions and accommodations, and finally verify the effectiveness of special education programming prior to placement (Fuchs, et al, 2002).  Realizing that there is a developmental progression that schools must go through before full implementation can be achieved, our plan involves building support in the schools and community to best facilitate and sustain the CBDM and RTI philosophical paradigm shift as we are ramping up for systems-wide implementation in a proactive rather than reactive manner.  In order for real change to occur and be sustained, educational leaders must take 'purposeful and persistent action,' (Schlechty, 2001, p. 9), to include building staff involvement and relationships through training, professional development, and appreciation.  Dynamic educational leaders must encourage and support personal and organizational systematic improvement (Schlechty, 2001, p. 2). 
Policy and Effect

        There has always been a divide between educational policy and actual practice; therefore, meaningful and lasting school reform efforts have struggled.  Policymakers continue to propose educational reforms that fail to consider real schools, educators, parents, and students.  Unfortunately, the public does not trust the reformers.  While there appears to be agreement between the public and the reformers in a broad view regarding the goals of education, there remains a deep chasm in the perspectives on how best to meet these goals (Schorr, 1997).  Although more children are graduating than ever before, and more enrolling in college, dissatisfaction with public education, in urban areas in particular, stands at an all time high (Schorr, 1997).  Parents, academics, school reformers, educators, and politicians agree that drastic change is needed.  Schools need to be able to provide students with the skills and abilities to create a world where people will have the best that humanity and technology have to offer, and the ability and desire to engage in lifelong learning in this complex, competitive world.  People should always be placed over economic profits (Taylor, 2002). 
When implemented with integrity and fidelity, Curriculum Based Decision Making (CBDM) with RTI, allows us to reach all students at the point of need, which potentially eliminates the need for placement and labels in special education programs.  Critics of traditional ability testing question the appropriateness of using child-based characteristics for treatment matching rather than classroom accommodation and varied instructional interventions.  Response to Instruction models focus on the context of learning and instruction as a potential reason for the child's difficulties rather than automatically considering the problems to be a "child's deficit" (Fuchs, et al., 2003); however, the traditional, standardized testing remains crucial in identifying underlying strengths, weaknesses, causal factors, as well as learning styles.
Regular Education Intervention
General education intervention, previously termed "pre-assessment," is based in the problem-solving model.  The CBDM (RTI) team should be flexible and should be determined by the area(s) of concern including age and needs of the child.  In addition to the parents of the child, the team may consist of:  building principal, referring teacher, regular education teachers, special education teachers, counselor, transition coordinator, related services personnel, school nurse, Title I or Section 504 coordinator, or others as deemed appropriate by the team. 
The team bases their interventions on a child's strengths and concerns.  The team attempts to remediate the child's concerns through regular education interventions.  When a child demonstrates a need for supports or is struggling behind his or her peers, the team meets to discuss potential accommodations and supports needed in order to best meet the child's needs.  A child may not be referred for a comprehensive evaluation until such time that a team has documented the exhaustion of regular education intervention supports utilizing scientifically based interventions, and they suspect that the child has a disability or the parent requests the evaluation and the school agrees that the evaluation is appropriate.
Identification and Placement
Federal Regulation:  Sec 300.540 mandates that the determination of whether or not a child suspected of having a specific learning disability must be made by the child's parents and a team of qualified professionals, which must include the child's regular education teacher, at least one person qualified to conduct individual diagnostic examinations and interpret such information such as a school psychologist, speech language pathologist, or remedial reading teacher.  Prior to the most recent reauthorization, the team was required to determine if a suspected student demonstrated a severe discrepancy between ability and achievement.  Meaning the child's achievement in math, reading, writing, or language was significantly different than the child's measure of ability (commonly referred to as IQ score).
The reauthorization of IDEA, removed the requirement to show a discrepancy between ability and achievement using an IQ test.  This does not indicate that ability testing will be banned, but there will be a strong possibility that psychologists will forgo this piece of the comprehensive evaluation in certain circumstances, the model being implemented at Columbus Public School will maintain the need for standardized testing, if a child fails to make adequate progress and the placement in special education becomes a consideration.  We will; however, be shifting our focus in education planning and strategies.
Shifting Focus
The central question in CBDM is not:  "What about the learner is causing the performance discrepancy?"
The central question in CBDM is:  "What about the interaction of the curriculum instruction, learner and learning environment should be altered so that the child will learn?"
The emphasis of our CBDM teams' inquiry will be, the target of the educational interaction --- learning.  And learning is illustrated with measures that show us how the student's behavior is changing in the areas (academic, social or task-related) in which he or she is being taught (Howell, 2005).
Problem Solving: Shifting the Emphasis from Measurement to Evaluation
Evaluation is a process of comparison that leads ultimately to the drawing of conclusions and the making of judgments.  To make good decisions we need to elevate the role of evaluation over measurement, (Howell, 2005), stressing the dynamic nature of the problem-solving process, and utilizing measures (in the form of reviews, interviews, observations and tests), which are utilized to answer specific questions, not as part of a standard menu (Allison, 2006).
Shifting the focus from unalterable to alterable variables 
Moving the focus from unalterable variables to alterable variables allows educators to get information about things that they can do something about. 
      Unalterable Variables
·        IQ
·        Physical/medical status
·        Lives with a single parent
·        Unalterable does not mean unimportant!
·        Prior knowledge
Alterable Variable - something that can be altered through instruction (Howell, 2005).
Core Principles of CBDM (RTI)
Effectively teach all children.  All RTI practices are founded on the assumption and belief that all children can learn.  The corollary is that it is our responsibility to identify the curricular, instructional and environmental conditions that enable learning and determine the means and systems to provide those resources.
Intervene early.  It is best to intervene early with learning and behavior problems, when problems are relatively small.  At a general level, solving small problems is both more efficient and more successful than working with more intense and severe problems.  Highly effective universal intervention in K-3 informed, by sensitive continuous progress monitoring enjoy strong empirical support for their effectiveness with at-risk students. 
Use a multi-tier model of service delivery.  Use efficient, needs-driven, resource deployment systems to match instructional resources with student need.  To achieve high rates of student success for all students, instruction in the schools must be differentiated in both nature and intensity.  To efficiently differentiate instruction for all students, tiered models of service delivery are used in RTI systems. 
Use a problem-solving method to make decisions within a multi-tier model.  Research has supported the effectiveness of using a clearly defined method to determine student need and to develop and evaluate interventions.  At its core, the problem-solving method requires answering four interrelated questions: 
(1) Is there a problem and what is it? 
(2) Why is it happening? 
(3) What are we going to do about it? 
(4) Did our intervention work? 
This thinking process can be applied to all students in a system, to small groups of students and to individual students. 
Use research-based, scientifically validated interventions/instruction to the extent available.  NCLB and the IDEA 2004 both require use of scientifically based curricula and interventions.  The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that students are exposed to curriculum and teaching that has demonstrated effectiveness for the type of student and the setting.  Research-based, scientifically validated interventions/instruction provide our best shot at implementing strategies that will be effective for a large majority of students.
Monitor student progress to inform instruction.  The only method to determine if a student is improving is to monitor the student's progress.  The use of assessments that can be collected frequently and that are sensitive to small changes in student behavior is recommended.  Determining the effectiveness (or lack of) of an intervention early is important to maximize the impact of that intervention for the student.
Use data to make decisions.  A data based decision regarding student response to intervention is central to RTI practices.  Decisions in RTI practice are based on professional judgment informed directly by student performance data.  This principle requires both that ongoing data collection systems are in place and that resulting data are used to make informed instructional decisions.
Use assessment for three different purposes.  In RTI, three types of assessments are used: 
(1) Screening applied to all children to identify those who are not making academic or behavioral progress at expected rates;
(2) diagnostics to determine what children can and cannot do in important academic and behavioral domains; and
(3) progress monitoring to determine if academic or behavioral interventions are producing desired effects.  (Response to Intervention Policy Considerations and Implementation, 2005)
Implementing a Curriculum Based Decision Making Model with Response to Intervention Systems Level Planning
        Change is difficult on a small scale, and large-scale change can be overwhelming. In order to effectively take CBDM with RTI to scale, a systematic approach will be necessary to build 'buy in,' and the support of parents, staff, and community members. 
Sociological Inventory-to effectively implement the systems level process, we will provide an organizational inventory to staff members, and a parent inventory for our community members, in order to identify systems level strengths and needs (Gallagher, Bagin, & Moore, 2005, p. 16). Feedback will occur through a process of gathering the data, analyzing the results, determining relevant need for change or adaptation, and presenting the data in such a way as to reach the widest audience (e.g., professional development presentations, articles in The Helm-a publication for the staff of CPS, parent presentations, school news letters articles, website postings, radio stations, translated versions, and the local newspaper. 
Communication Channels-"Since the development of public opinion takes place through the exchange of ideas and information, it is necessary to know what community channels are available in the community, how effectively they are used, and which ones are the most effective for reaching different segments of the public," (Gallagher, et al, 2005, p. 18); therefore, parents, staff, and community members will be polled or surveyed, in order to define and develop a communication process for parents, community and staff. 
Staff and Community Relations-Concerted effort will be made by the RTI facilitator and administration in establishing cooperative, collegiate staff relations through communication, the organization od learning communities, and feedback opportunities.  Fostering good staff relations can help to further the 'buy in' needed to support the systems change, and improve achievement for our students (Gallagher, et al, 2005, p. 96)
RTI Implementation Prerequisites
1) Organized professional development (Daly & Glover, **)
A web page will be available to parents and staff, allowing interested parties to download a variety of professional development and parent informational power point presentations, white papers, overviews, specific learning strategies, and more, in order that access is readily available to staff, parents, and educators.
Professional development presentations will be ongoing throughout the year, on topics including, but not limited to, Modifications, Accommodations, Discipline, CBDM Team Development, CBDM Overview, CBDM Parent Involvement, DIBELS, Academic Strategies, Parent Rights in Education, IDEA, and more.
Parent Groups and Support systems, will be identified, and/or formed, in order to better educate, include, and build relationships with parents and community members, leading to stronger support networks, community resources, and interventionists beyond those of the schools walls.
               Improving the communications process; involving parents and community members on teams, organizations, and boards; creating a system involving continual, meaningful exchange of information between parents, community, and schools; builds on "the partnership concept," (Gallagher, et al, 2005, p. 127) which allows all parties to understand the process, strengths, difficulties, influences, and philosophical goals of the CBDM teams utilizing RTI to reach all students, to help them learn better.
Getting Started An Overview of CBDM in Columbus Public Schools
An Important Initial Step. . . Reflect!
Identifying what is in place that will help support our efforts or barriers to overcome, i.e. administrative support (leadership), personnel, resources, expertise, present problem solving process, change process, time, professional development, community, etc.
We need a to develop a better understanding of where we are, and where we want to be in three months, six months, a year, and in the future.  Our first steps will be is to identify the district level CBDM team, which will meet on a monthly or biweekly basis, and will be defining:
·        Facilitator's role-facilitating the process, or facilitating the team
·        Parent participation is an expectation and how that will be accomplished
·        Involve parents with intervention strategies to use at home
·        Collection of specific observations and data-who, what, where, how often
·        Problem Solving Team district level, school level, grade level
·        Classroom Teacher(s)
·        Educational Psychologist
·        Educational Consultant
·        Speech and Language Specialist
·        ELL Teacher
·        Principal
·        Title One Teacher
·        Change in Process
·        Problem solving vs. testing
·        Determine best use of academic resources outside the classroom
·        Decide who will do interventions and how students will be monitored
·        Determine a timeline
·        Communicate with teachers regularly and often as to goals and purpose of CBMD & RTI
·        Fits well into our school improvement process and ILCD process
·        Keep the focus on student learning and student outcomes
·        It's okay to start small (pilot a grade level, school, subject area such as reading, etc.)
·        It's okay to move slowly as it is a time consuming process
·        Data and interventions go hand-in-hand (if you have good data you will make good decisions)
·        Interventions are NOT limited to kits
·        Develop a model that will work for you
·        There is more than one way to implement an RTI model (however do it with integrity)
·        Identify and support key people within your school/district (the "movers and shakers")
·        Develop a plan on the use and/or need for resources
We will need to foster risk taking, in the sense that we stay on the cutting edge of research, programming, curriculum, and best practice.  Curriculum choices will be based on scientifically based research outcomes, and teachers will be encouraged to find new and innovative approaches to educating children.  If we have a small group of resisters, with the 'arms-crossed-narrow-eyes-this-is-yet-another-pendulum-swing' affect, unwilling to try or even listen to the possibility of a new and improved way of serving children, we will work together to encourage understanding and awareness of the need for change.
        As a whole, we understand that our best assets are our parents, teachers, and staff.  We will encourage communication, independent thinking, diversity, and cohesiveness.  We will attempt to meet regularly in order to re-connect, share both professional and personal experiences, and gain moral support on a daily basis in order sustain the daunting effort of taking CBDM to scale.   
        Beyond the formal staff development days and training, new employees will need a mentor to provide less structured, but very important day-to-day kinds of guidance and support in understanding an implementing CBDM with RTI.  Every effort will be made to ensure that training provided is delivered with the idea of 'learning' involved.  We will try to provide multimodal, action opportunity, real life examples, and group activities.  Frequent, follow up sessions will occur, in order to reinforce the learning process. 
        To encourage whole-staff involvement and investment, the first staff days will include asking the entire group to break into teams, review the mission statement for CBDM and RTI, brain storm, and come up with suggestions for an improved goal for the year.  Each group presents their idea of a better plan, and the entire group works together to finalize the process.  The mission statement is communicated back to the group frequently throughout the year.   We will strive to be a strong Learning Organization, as evidenced by the apparent emphasis on providing employees, students, parents, and the greater community with the activities needed for learning, growing, and flourishing.  We will be invested in systems thinking and promoting an effective and dynamic learning organization for the improvement of learning for our students.  Hopefully, with continued systems-level improvement and improved outcomes, those with resistant or recalcitrant attitudes will become more open to change and the possibility of 'different sometimes being better.' 


References
Daly, E. & Glover, T. RTI implementation prerequisites. Retrieved August 15,
    2007 from:  http://www.nde.state.ne.us/SPED/RTI%20Video%20Conference
    /Ed%20Daly%20Todd%20Glover%20UNL.pdf
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Speece, D.L., (2002).  Treatment validity as a
    unifying construct for identifying learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly,25, 33-45.
Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P.L., & Young, C.L., (2003).  Responsiveness-to-
     Intervention:  Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct.  Learning
     Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 157-171.
Howell, K. (2005).  Response to Intervention. Professional Development
        Seminar. Kearney, NE: ESU 10.
NASDSE, 2005.  Response to Intervention Policy Considerations and
    Implementation, Alexandria, VA, pp 19-20.  Retrieved August 15, 2007 from:
http://www.nasdse.org/documents/RtI%20Order%20Form.pdf
Pre-referral Intervention Teams, Multidisciplinary Teams, and Section 504:  How can
    we possibly do it all? (1996). Workshop of the Professional Development Seminar Series.  Sponsored by the            University of Nebraska @ Kearney, Department of Counseling and School Psychology.
Schlechty, P. C. (2001).  Shaking up the school house:  How to support and sustain
        educational innovation.  San Francisco, California:  Jossey-Bass, pp. 3-38.
Schorr, L. B. (1997).  Common purpose strengthening families and neighborhoods to
        rebuild America.  New York, Anchor Books, pp. 3, 5, 15-18.   
Wright, J. The RTI tool kit. Retrieved August 15, 2007 from: 
        http://www.jimwrightonline.com/php/rti/rti_wire.php