CEC's RTI Blog

Drumroll, please!

By Dr. Evelyn Johnson
Boise State University

This will be my final blog entry, so I’d like to thank all of you for reading. I’d also like to thank the CEC for inviting me to participate in this forum.

I’ve been promising to post outcome data from schools I have worked with, so let's get to it right away!

One middle school that started the RTI process only a year ago has already seen a reduction in the number of failing core course grades from 38 to 6. They accomplished this by restructuring the schedule to allow teachers to have time to provide a targeted support class for students identified as struggling in the core courses. While this isn’t a complete RTI framework (for example, there is no standardized treatment protocol, screening is accomplished through grades only, and there is no emphasis on first examining the Tier 1 program), it represents a first step toward school improvement.

Can RTI Predict High School Dropout Rates?

By Dr. Evelyn Johnson
Boise State University

Last Wednesday, together with Dr. Juli Pool from Boise State University, I gave a webinar on screening for reading problems within an RTI framework. The event was hosted by the National Council for Learning Disabilities (NCLD) and is archived on their Web site. The goal of the webinar was to provide an overview of the screening process and to discuss specific issues and measures related to screening for reading problems across the grade levels.

By far, the majority of the questions we received when our presentation ended related to secondary screening tools, so I thought I would highlight here some of the elements we discussed in that webinar (and in other articles on the NCLD’s RTI Action Network). One question we received was whether there were no-cost options for screening at the secondary level. To this question I gave a fairly long answer (as I’m unfortunately prone to do!).

How screening is conducted depends on a number of factors (Jenkins, 2003), including:

• What is the outcome we are trying to predict?
• How have we defined that outcome?
• What level of risk are we interested in identifying?

Screening Measures and Models

By Dr. Evelyn Johnson
Boise State University

This past week, I worked closely with an elementary school to develop a screening process for quickly identifying students who may be at risk for not meeting performance standards in reading, math, and behavioral expectations. A lot of interesting discussions came up regarding the role of assessment, the requirements for developing and implementing an effective screening process, and the need to consider the costs and logistics of implementation against the benefit of improving the accuracy of screening decisions.

So, with this entry I’m going to digress from secondary issues for just a minute to discuss more general issues related to screening in an RTI framework. Screening is one of the essential components of an RTI framework -- kids are screened for academic and behavior issues about three times a year to identify as early as possible those who may need support to meet grade-level performance standards.

RTI Implementation: Easy as 1, 2, 3?

By Dr. Evelyn Johnson
Boise State University

A lot of technical assistance is available on RTI -- for example, on its specific components and how those are operationalized through the use of specific assessments, curricula, and instructional programs.

Reading about the specific components of RTI might lead someone to believe that successful RTI implementation is largely a technical issue -- meaning, if we adopt the specific tools specified within an RTI model, implementation will be successful. The technical component of RTI is only one part of the story, though. Schools also need to pay attention to the school culture, context, and values as they adopt an RTI model.

RTI at the Secondary Level -- Where Do You Start?

By Dr. Evelyn Johnson
Boise State University

Thanks to CEC for inviting me to contribute to their RTI blog this month! I’m Evelyn Johnson, an associate professor of special education at Boise State University in Boise, Idaho. For the last several years, I’ve had the great privilege of working with the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities as well as with the current National Center on RTI. Within Idaho, I work closely with our state RTI coordinator on issues related to the use of RTI within the SLD determination process, district level implementation of RTI, and the implementation of RTI at the secondary level (grades 6-12).

Last month on this blog, Dr. Patti Ralabate explained how RTI can be transformational. This month, we’ll consider what that might mean for secondary implementation.

By now, many educators are familiar with the tiered service delivery model. The goal is to provide a strong core instructional program that meets the needs of all students, recognizing that even with an effective instructional core in place, there will be students who require additional support to be successful. In an RTI model, students who struggle are provided with research-based interventions, their progress in the targeted skill is closely monitored, and adjustments to the program of intervention are made as necessary.