How RTI Works in Secondary Schools

Evelyn S. Johnson, Lori A. Smith, Monica L. Harris

• Publisher: Corwin
• Year: 2009
• ISBN:
  9781452273495
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Secondary Education

Practical solutions for implementing RTI and improving student outcomes in Grades 6–12!

This comprehensive book provides the specific guidance secondary administrators need to successfully implement Response to Intervention (RTI) and help their struggling adolescent learners. Using the latest research, the authors identify the current best practices for key components of RTI and demonstrate how teams can work together to implement an assessment- and data-driven decision-making process. The book provides:

• Guidance on building leadership capacity for RTI implementation
• Case studies illustrating middle and high school RTI models
• Instructional strategies for tiers one, two, and three
• Forms, checklists, and Web and print resources

1

---

What Is RTI?

Response to Intervention, or RTI, is a multitiered approach to providing instruction and targeted intervention to improve student outcomes. Although there are variations on the number of tiers included in RTI models, RTI is most often conceptualized as a three-tiered system (see Figure 1.1), in which Tier 1 represents the general education instruction, Tier 2 represents a secondary level of intervention for students who require additional supports to be successful, and Tier 3 represents special education. RTI has roots in the preventive sciences, with its reliance on a population-based, proactive approach to ensuring strong educational experiences for all students. It is estimated that with this emphasis on providing high-quality, research-based instruction to the general population, approximately eighty percent of students will achieve targeted outcomes with general education instruction alone. However, even with a strong general education program in place, a small percentage of students, approximately fifteen percent, will require more intense interventions to make adequate academic progress. RTI relies on a system of early identification to determine which students will require this level of intensity. Finally, for approximately five percent of the population, tertiary intervention (or special education) will be needed for students to make progress toward alternate performance benchmarks and high school completion requirements. As Figure 1.1 demonstrates, all students should participate in and access the Tier 1 program in some way. For some students, that may require the additional support of an intervention (Tier 2), or it may require specially designed instruction (Tier 3) that provides access to the general education curriculum.

Figure 1.1 A Tiered Model of Service Delivery

PURPOSE OF RTI AT THE SECONDARY LEVEL

RTI is a schoolwide initiative that has as its ultimate goal school improvement across the K–12 grade-level spectrum. At the elementary level, RTI models have been described as having three primary purposes: (a) screening and prevention of academic skill deficits primarily related to reading and mathematics, (b) early identification and intervention for students at risk for developing learning problems, and (c) learning disability determination (Mellard & Johnson, 2008). The primary goal is to identify early those students at risk for not developing the foundation of academic skills that will enable them to become successful and independent learners as they progress through the K–12 system. With this system in place, the expectation is that all students will exit the elementary setting ready to meet the challenges of the more demanding content at junior high and, finally, to develop and learn in high school the skills and knowledge that will enable them to be successful once they leave high school.

Although RTI at the elementary school level is designed to help individual students develop the capacity to read, write, and perform mathematics at a level that will enable them to be successful in a secondary setting, not all students will meet this rigorous standard. Students who enter secondary schools without strong basic academic skills are at risk for learning problems across numerous content areas as their teachers require them to read and write to learn content. An increasing number of students enter secondary schools ill-prepared to meet the demands of a challenging junior and senior high curriculum (Jerald, 2006). Many biology, history, health, and economics teachers find their traditional approach to teaching is not effective in meeting the needs of many of their students.

In addition to the changing demands in content, once students enter the secondary grades, they encounter noticeable structural changes in the school setting. First, they no longer have one classroom teacher who teaches “ninth grade” the way an elementary teacher teaches “third grade.” Teachers at the secondary level focus on content (e.g., “I’m a history teacher” or “I teach biology”). Most junior and senior high schools do not teach students how to read but rather use reading and writing as the primary means through which teaching and learning occur. Finally, the goals and outcomes at secondary levels are quite different from those at elementary levels. Whereas elementary schools prepare students to develop skills to be successful in later school years, what is the goal of secondary schools? Not all students will have the same long-term goals. For example, some students will attend a four-year college or university. Others will seek vocational or technical training. Others may attend a local community college to continue preparation for a four-year institution of higher learning. Still others will immediately join the workforce or armed services.

Though long-term goals may vary, for all students, obtaining a high school diploma is a shared short-term outcome. Without a high school diploma, students have very little chance of being successful later in life. Indeed, research indicates that high school dropouts face significantly higher probabilities of incarceration, poverty, and need for social services (Schweinhart, 2004). Although districts and states differ on the specifics of high school graduation requirements, most include a combination of successful course and credit completion, successful performance on exit exams, and other requirements such as senior projects. As an increasing number of states require successful completion of exit exams to receive a high school diploma, performance on these assessments, along with other graduation requirements such as senior projects and credit attainment, help provide a common system of evaluation for all students.

In summary, as depicted in Figure 1.2, the purposes of RTI at the secondary level are similar to but distinct from the purposes at the elementary level. The primary purpose of RTI at the secondary level is to build the capacity of the school to meet the increasing demands for a diverse student population to meet rigorous standards for graduation. A secondary purpose is to ensure appropriate instruction and intervention is provided to all students. A final purpose is to provide a system that will support continuous school improvement to improve outcomes for all students.

Figure 1.2 Purposes of RTI at Different Levels

HOW RTI WORKS

Tiered System of Instruction and Intervention

A strong general education program is the foundation for a successful RTI program. At the secondary level (grades 6–12), one of the most positive potential outcomes of RTI implementation is the provision of a systematic process through which schools can improve their general education instruction. Integrating the use of evidence-based practices that meet the needs of a diverse population of students across the content areas is the fundamental requirement for a successful Tier 1 (or general education) component.

Even with strong general education instruction, some students will require additional support to be successful in the general education program. This level of support is provided in Tier 2. In Tier 2, interventions that focus on specific, targeted skills are provided for students who struggle with the Tier 1 curriculum. These include academic, behavior, and engagement skills delivered through either a standard protocol approach or a problem-solving approach (these approaches are further explained in Chapter 6). For example, students who have difficulties in reading may require interventions that support their reading development. In addition to receiving these interventions, they also may require accommodations in the content area (e.g., science) classroom, such as graphic organizers or alternate presentation formats. A layered approach that provides targeted skill instruction as well as accommodations has been demonstrated to be very effective in supporting struggling students (Swanson & Deshler, 2003).

Finally, although many students with disabilities can have many of their needs met through accommodations in the general education class and the support of Tier 2, special education services will be required for a small percentage of students. In this text, we define Tier 3 as special education. In some cases, special education may consist of more intense interventions than those provided in Tier 2. In other cases, special education may consist of alternate performance benchmarks, curriculum, and instruction.

Integrated Assessment and Instruction System

High-quality, research-based general education instruction and targeted interventions that increase in intensity depending on student need are the hallmarks of an effective RTI system. RTI is also characterized by the integration of the instructional system with an assessment system that accomplishes many things, to include the following:

1. The system screens all students to determine who may be at risk for poor academic outcomes.
2. It monitors student progress at all tiers.
3. It integrates a diagnostic procedure for students who are at risk to determine the nature and extent of their learning problems and to determine appropriate courses of action.
4. It provides program-and school-level data that may serve as the basis for making decisions about continuous school improvement efforts.

A Systemic Approach

Although we discuss the components of RTI throughout this text, RTI is not simply a number of components implemented in a disjointed fashion. If a school has all of the required components but lacks the integrated system that makes the components work, RTI will not be successful. For example, early reports on RTI implementation at the secondary level indicate that some schools adopted an intervention program that targeted reading but then failed to make changes in the schedule and to connect the intervention to the general education program (Vaughn, Speece, & Linan-Thompson, 2008). In addition, the general education curriculum was not examined to determine how struggling readers could make progress in the content-area courses. Finally, placement in the intervention was driven by administrative factors (e.g., scheduling) rather than by Data-based Decision Making (DBDM). The result is a haphazard approach to RTI that does not promote strong student achievement.

For RTI to be effective, a school must not only put the necessary components into place, but must also integrate the components to become an effective system. To make that happen, leadership at all levels will be the linchpin for success. At the national level, for example, strong and coordinated technical assistance from research and technical assistance centers is needed to provide guidance on best practices that inform implementation. At the time of this writing, such assistance is emerging in full force (see the Resources section at the end of this text for more information).

At the state level, policies that support implementation and professional development for RTI are imperative. States that have strong, concise guidance documents that communicate a cohesive message about the purpose of RTI can effectively guide implementation efforts and support school districts. The development of policy is only the initial step, however. The states’ responsibility in making RTI work is to develop a comprehensive system of professional development and to coordinate policies and procedures across many areas, such as curriculum, instruction, special education, English language learner programs, and assessment.

Districts have the responsibility of aligning RTI efforts across the K–12 level by developing policies and supports for building-level implementation. Finally, at the school level, building leaders will need to coordinate the many moving parts and guide school staff through a large culture shift. For these reasons, we believe that in addition to providing the specifics about the process of RTI and its individual components, a strong focus on describing the leader responsibilities will better support secondary schools as they implement RTI. In this text, we focus on the leader requirements for implementation at the school level. Although we do not discuss state and district policy in detail, district-level and state-level leaders will also benefit from a more thorough understanding of the implementation process.

RTI as School Improvement

As described in this text, RTI is a comprehensive model for school improvement, encompassing nearly every aspect of school function. Because RTI is comprehensive in scope, schools may feel overwhelmed when beginning with RTI implementation. Implementing reform and system changes, especially in secondary schools, is a significant undertaking that requires strong leadership, a commitment from involved stake-holders and participants, and the acknowledgement that implementing change is a multiyear process (Fullan, 2004). In addition, RTI is just one of many recent policy initiatives that compete for a school’s resources (Mellard & Johnson, 2008). Schools are faced with an increasing number of policy initiatives, each targeting a specific population, or a specific aspect of school function, that often do not include information on how the particular initiative fits within the larger context of school functioning. When a policy initiative is interpreted on its own, as if its practices are unrelated to others, the result can be a fragmented, haphazard approach to school improvement that rarely has staying power (Spillane, Reiser, & Reimer, 2002). Instead, policy initiatives should be considered within the context of the school system, aligned with the school vision and mission and integrated to obtain stated school goals.

In this section, we briefly outline three current reform frameworks—Professional Learning Communities (PLC: DuFour & Eaker, 1998), Positive Behavior Intervention and Support (PBIS: Sugai & Horner, 1999), and Data-based Decision Making (DBDM: American Association of School Administrators [AASA], 2002)—that can work in conjunction with the RTI framework to effectively and efficiently guide school improvement efforts. Numerous other policy initiatives can also be aligned within an RTI framework. We focus on PLCs, PBIS, and DBDM because they have been successfully integrated within RTI models at the secondary schools profiled throughout this book. An in-depth description of these frameworks is beyond the scope of this text, but the Resources section of this text directs the interested reader to further, helpful guidance.

HOW RTI FITS WITH OTHER EDUCATION I...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Foreword
• Acknowledgments
• About the Authors
• 1. What Is RTI?
• 2. Implementation and Continuous Improvement
• 3. Leadership Perspectives on RTI
• 4. Universal Screening
• 5. Tier 1 Instruction
• 6. Tier 2 and Tier 3 Intervention
• 7. Progress Monitoring
• 8. Conclusion
• Appendix: RTI Implementation Checklist
• Resources
• References
• Index