RTI and Problem-Solving

By Joseph Kovaleski, Indiana University of Pennsylvania

Many people trace the beginnings of RTI to team-based structures that were developed in the 1980s and 1990s. Beginning as teacher assistance teams (TATs), team structures such as instructional support teams (ISTs), instructional consultation teams (ICTs), and mainstream assistance teams evolved. Although there were substantial differences among these teams, all shared a problem-solving process as their central operating procedure.

Briefly, the problem-solving process involves the following steps:

• identify the problem
• set a measurable goal
• develop solutions to address the problem
• implement the solutions
• evaluate the effectiveness of the solutions

Today, most multi-tier (RTI) models continue to incorporate a problem-solving process as a key component. However, it cannot be said that problem-solving teams are equivalent to RTI. There are some crucial differences that need to be recognized.

First, problem-solving teams have historically addressed the needs of individual students. Typically, teachers would identify students who displayed academic or behavioral problems in their classrooms and request assistance from the problem-solving teams. The problem-solving teams would often conduct a thorough, curriculum-based assessment of the individual student and devise unique, customized strategies. In today’s terminology, these would be considered Tier 2 interventions.

In contemporary multi-tier models, on the other hand, teams of teachers are often working at Tier 1 to address the needs of all students based on universal screening data. Mike Schmoker has been credited with coming up with the idea of using the collaborative process to analyze group data to help teachers make instructional improvements with the goal of moving all students toward proficiency. Schmoker’s ideas have been incorporated into multi-tier models as data analysis teams.

In my experience in multiple states, I have found these teams to be excellent vehicles for helping teachers reflect on their work and improve their instruction. A good place to read more about the operation of data analysis teams is the RTI Network Web site. Search for “data analysis teams” when you get to the site. Of course, it should be noted that the problem-solving process, as described above, is recommended as the undergirding process for data analysis teams.

The second difference in contemporary teaming practices is at Tier 2. Instead of initially focusing on individual students, as we did in the past, teams analyze data from universal screening and progress monitoring to identify groups of students who have similar instructional needs. Interventions are then planned for these groups, often during supplemental instructional periods that have been variously called “tier time,” “power hour,” etc. The team then matches the students’ needs with carefully selected interventions that are research-based (i.e., highly likely to produce student gains). These interventions have been called “standard protocol” strategies because they are designed to be used with small groups in a highly scripted approach, so implementers can approximate the conditions that produced the gains in the research studies.

This approach is uniquely different from what was practiced 20 years ago in problem-solving teams. The reason for the change is that we now have a great deal of empirical evidence regarding effective instructional procedures that we just didn’t have in 1990. Without that research, problem-solving teams had to “brainstorm” strategies, often without regard to any evidence base. Nowadays, we can select research-based programs, many of which are commercially available.

So do we ever conduct individual problem-solving in RTI as we did with problem-solving teams? Certainly. Despite the fact that research indicates that standard protocol interventions can be successful with high percentages of students who are deficient in basic skills, there will still be students who do not respond to these robust interventions. Customizing interventions through problem solving will continue to be an important feature of multi-tier models, although this procedure would tend to be used with fewer students than in the past and would occur later in the process.

Another difference with the RTI process is that problem solving would be enhanced by in-depth assessment of the students, such as that provided by curriculum-based assessment (CBA) or curriculum-based evaluation (CBE) procedures (see my last blog post for more details). In addition, for behavioral concerns, functional behavioral assessment (FBA) would also be indicated. These data should give us precise ideas about interventions, which is a far cry from the days when we brainstormed or invented ideas to help our students.

It should be noted that it was just five years ago or so that various authors were distinguishing two types of RTI processes -- problem-solving versus standard protocol approaches. Now many school districts and states have incorporated both approaches into their RTI models. Clearly, the problem-solving process continues to offer a structure that helps teams systematically address students’ problems. However, it is also clear that utilizing standard protocol interventions as the first step to addressing the needs of struggling students has added immeasurably to teams’ effectiveness.

Comments

[Charles Johns]

Excellent and incredibly important post.

I have traveled quite a bit in my discussion on RtI and I routinely find Tier 2 teams attempting to continue their focus on an individual student level as opposed to groups of of students with common needs. These practices inevitably clog a system. Typically, at the high school level, these teams are mini-versions of the Tier 3 team. By not focusing on groups, schools are simply putting more work on the plate of a few over-burdened staff who, in turn, usually are the implementers of the solution.

Keep up the great work.

Charles

[Joe Kovaleski]

Thanks, Charles. You do the same. I like to think that, as we learn to not repeat the mistakes of the past, we move from a pendulum-swing to an upward moving spiral.

Joe

[Jacquie Lunser]

Every child is different and needs special attention to be able to meet their goals, academic and life. It is a special educators job to study, learn, implement,and observe changes in the student's skills. There does need to be a push to loo at the students individually and not as a level. Providing equal education includes giving support so that each students can learn and absorb knowledge.

Jacquie

[Tracee]

Every child deserves to recieve a quality education, and we as teachers need to make sure that they get one. RTI is an important process. The problem that I am seeing and reading about in schools the Tier teams understanding what goes into each Tier. Most teachers use interventions, but they are not researched based. The teachers are also not making nots about which interventions work. In the districts I have worked in, Tier 2 has been individual students instead of groups,and the assessment of the student has not been indepth. The middle & primary students are multipling in Tier 3 because of the teachers not doing groups of students.

[Laurie Somma]

I particularly found this information very interesting. The special education teachers in the school I teach decided to utilize RTI as a way to increase CAPT scores. We had the students read and respond to various types of articles. We will not know if this strategy was effective until CAPT scores are posted. What we did notice is that many of the students who participated in this intervention saw an improvement in their responding to stories.

[Sandra Yeager]

In my district it is like Tier 2 and Tier 3 are one and the same. The beginning of referral starts with a rgular education teacher noticing problems and making a referral to the "referral team". The team then assigns someone to, usually the special education teacher, to make observations of the child and come back to the team with recommendations for assistance (tier 1). Then in a few weeks the team meets to see if the recommendations are working if not a referral is made to test for special education services. It seems we miss the entire help in the classroom in tier 2.
I agree that every child is different and needs some type of service. The students I believe we are talking about need the additional help they usually can not receive in the regular classroom.
Sandra

[Misty Nemeth]

I know that each student legally has the same rights to an equal education reguardless of their exeptionalities and I agree. I have a question on the appropriate timimg of services from support staff and the services that they can offer. For instance, at what level of the three tiered intervention do you request an observation of a student with problems forming blends? At what level of intervention do they begin servicing the student? This is a question that I have about behavioral issue, learning deficits, speech delays, etc. Educators would be more likely to do the appropriate steps of intervention if they were more mapped out. I am not insinuating that teachers can not think for themselves, rather (the teachers I have spoken with would feel better if they knew they were correctly going through the steps. There is nothing worse than feeling obligated to a student to intervene but not knowing exactly sure how to go about it.

[Lisa Diamandis]

The classrooms today are filled with so many students that are on different levels and teachers are required to implement differentiated instruction. Our school RTI teams are implemented when a teacher refers a student who cannot keep up with the daily work. First we begin with limited supports such as tutoring and if they are still struggling then we develop a plan for their needs and incorporate the appropriate supports and if needed request for testing for special education. However, the RTI team is very effective but there are so many students that need these supports it is hard to accommodate all of them with the limited staffing and the large classes.

[Mackenze]

I think as mentioned above that a big problem is using the research based interventions. At least this was a problem at my school. Our special education director developed a website for our title teachers to use with proven research based interventions. These ar eth eonly interventions that can be used with our tier 2 students. It is then documented which interventions are being used with the students. In a virtual school it is alot easier to work with small groups of students. I can see how it would be difficult to implement time with small groups ina traditional classroom setting with a high studnet teacher ratio.

[Hugette Miller]

My district requires intervention strategies to be tried for a nine week period. If there has been no improvements in this time, then another strategy has to be tried for another nine weeks. Interventions have to be tried for at least these two nine week periods before a student can be recommended for testing. It usually ends up taking more then a year for a student to actually be tested. Also, tier two and tier three are treated as the same for the intereventions done out side of the classroom. There are no individual interventions done out side of the classroom. Individual intervetions are done by the classroom teachers.

[Lynne Hagan]

As I dig deeper into truly effective RTI frameworks, I see the value of a problem-solving approach to matching students (small groups of students) with interventions.

As a first step, take a look at what is currently available in the school and create an inventory of possible instructional resources found throughout the school and assign recommendations for using the resource. I love the idea of creating a data base that can hold basic information that might be sortable or searchable, as well as hold comments from teachers who have used the resource. Next, take a step back and identify the areas of literacy that may not have enough alternatives for teachers to meet the learning and behavioral needs of students.

The flexibility that supplemental resources provides is endless in an RTI framework. It allows teachers to make the necessary shifts in instruction quickly.

How have some of you utilized supplemental resources in your RTI implementations? What has worked for you?

[Amazing Water Fuel]

Interventions have to be tried for at least these two nine week periods before a student can be recommended for testing. It usually ends up taking more then a year for a student to actually be tested. Also, tier two and tier three are treated as the same for the intereventions done out side of the classroom. There are no individual interventions done out side of the classroom.