Come to the National Council for Exceptional Children 2013 Conference in San Antonio, TX on April 2, 2013.
Come and hear Julie and I speak about this critical issue. For registration please visiti www.cec.sped.org.
Leader: Julie Esparza Brown, Portland State University, and Claudia Rinaldi, Urban Special Education Leadership Collaborative, EDC, Inc.
MTSS and ELLs– Bridging the research to practice divide with examples from Dual language programs, Sheltered ENglish programs, and transitional bilingual programs.
Since the passage of NCLB schools are charged with educating all groups of students to high levels. Given the varying backgrounds and diversity of English learners (ELs), schools are challenged to provide appropriate and effective instruction that leads to grade-level achievement. Through interactive presentations and case studies from different states, this workshop will review the critical student characteristics that must guide instruction and interventions in all bilingual program models AND English-only programs. Progress monitoring tools with demonstrated effectiveness with ELs will be reviewed and a unique framework for enhancing interventions (in English or another language) will be presented. Finally, a framework for least biased Tier 3 assessment will be analyzed and discussed. Do not miss this opportunity to become familiar with examples of work is working to increase the success of your English Learners!
At the end of this workshop, participants will be able to:
Consider the unique factors in EL students’ background and make appropriate adjustments to instruction and interventions.
Choose progress monitoring tools with demonstrated reliability and validity for ELs.
Make decisions on appropriate growth for each EL student in consideration of their unique context.
Determine appropriate language of intervention in all bilingual program models (early-exit to dual language).
Apply a framework for least biased assessment in Tier 3 that systematically considers the cultural loading and linguistic demand of assessments.
Who Should Attend? K-12 General and Special Educators, Higher Education Educators
Do you have this question–
We have a student who is a formerly Limited English Proficient (FLEP) and is now failing. He has already been retained. Looking at his data, we are concerned that there may be issues that are beyond language with which he is struggling. In the mean time, as we transition to the WIDA MODEL and have no assessment program here at the school, what do I use and where do I get it?
I understand the challenge you are having and it seems as though you are going down a checklist of what would be an appropriate referral to special education. I am assuming this student is not a student receiving special education services right now.
Here are a few questions that can help guiden your problem solving process
If you can help me answer a few questions:
What grade is the student?
What is his/her background?
How long has he been in the US?
What is the family composition? Which language is spoken at home?
Has the child received interventions with fidelity (as intended for two cycles of 4-6 weeks?)
Does the student, as a FLEP, have average and age appropriate vocabulary in social situations? In academic situations?
Has there been a traumatic experience recently (i.e. Death in the family, shooting, family violence, divorce, loss of shelter, etc)?
What is the students reading level? Is there a history of DIBELS scores and what are they?
Was the child showing growth academically as he gained English and now he is not or has he/she been brought up for special education evaluation before and been denied?
Are there records of the assessments from previous years?
Is the SEI classroom, if in one, using category strategies consistently?
A Boston dual Language school, the Joseph J. Hurley K-8th School in the center of Boston, gets selected as one of the three finalists from 128 schools in the district for its growth in students achievement from 2007-2012. This is the second dual language school selected by the prestigious EdVestors philanthropic investment firm in Urban Public Education. As a dual Language school The Hurley was highlighted for its strong use of creative scheduling to provide strategic and intensive intervention for all students, a part of the change effort to adopt a Response to Intervention framework. The school has seen significant growth (3 and 4 times more than the average school in Boston, in the state assessment, MCAS, over the past five years as well as in the district wide formative assessments (i.e. DIBELS, Galileo, Achievement Network). Dr. Carol Johnson, Superintendent, stated that the Hurley doesn’t only prepare our students to be successful in our district but by teaching in two languages they are preparing all students, those learning Spanish and those learning English, to be prepared and successful in a global economy. Kudos for Boston Public Schools for supporting dual language options for students. Offering this option for parents shows the investment the district has to create a culturally responsive schools! Congratulations to Marjorie Soto, Principal of the Hurley for her successful strategic leadership and her focus on the mission of the school.
For a press release and more information directly from Edvestors Organization please click here http://www.edvestors.org/other-files/2012_SOM_PressRelease.pdf
For more information on the Joseph J. Hurley click here
For more information on how to support the Hurley please visit their website under development
For more information on the Response to Intervention model implemented in the school please visit the Boston Public School Academic Achievement Framework website
Another wonderful school, The Sumner Elementary in Roslindale, serving English language learners (ELLs) and students with disabilities was also nominated today. This school has led the district in their effective instruction of ELLs and serves as a model for the rest of the district! Hurray for the Summer Elementary principal and staff. For more information click here
How does RTI affect affect English language learner (ELL) students who are already receiving ELL pull out supports? Are we still providing Tier 2 interventions in addition to the ELL class?
This response recently posted on the RTI Action Network is summarized below:
In her response Dr. Claudia Rinaldi provides recommendations to help teachers working with ELL students within any tier of RTI. One key consideration for serving ELL students is how to leverage RTI teams to increase collaboration and data-driven instructional planning and progress monitoring for all students, including ELL students with and without disabilities.
http://rtinetwork.org/connect/593-diversity-and-disproportionality-q7
I just finished reading the article Progress Monitoring to Support Science Learning for All Students by my colleague Kimberly Vannest and co-authors. In this article she presents a progress monitoring strategy for science and perhaps even a way to think about it for social studies/history, etc. The idea is simple lets identify the key words by grade level from state standards, curriculum, and experts in the field and create a probe that would allow the teacher to measure how well the students are learning those concepts over the year. Yes, this is called curriculum-based measurement and it works. In fact it has 30 years of research backing it up. To read the how to article please visit the Council for Exceptional Children website and under the publications look for Teaching Exceptional Children journal -July/August 2012 vol.44 (6) pages 66-72.
Dr. Vannest also has developed a free online web tool that will help you create this method for progress monitoring using key words so visit her free website Data to Knowledge (D2K)at http://d2k.tamu.edu/index.php
Thanks Kimber– great work!
Rollanda O’Connor, researcher and faculty member fromt he University of California Riverside is providing a very rich perspective on RtI for ELLs with clear guidance for K-3 grade teachers — bridging research and practice at the Council for Exceptional Children Conference in Denver, CO.
Some recommendations:
1. Teach patterns in the 100 most common words: th, or, ch, wh, ee, al, ou, er, ar– match this to the 100 most common words
2. Interventions for second grade recommendations: common letter patterns and fixes, fluency (if we can increase 20 words increase we increase comprehension level) for ELLs this is usually slower so fluency is CRITICAL! conversations and justifications — why do you think that…..? type questions
3. evaluate of reading fluency and accuracy is important–
4. Work on common affixes– inflected endings: -ed, -ing, -s, -es
prefixes
5. In 2nd and 3rd grade work on morphemes– meaningful parts of words– improves decoding, spelling, and reinforces word meanings- ex. “not” — un, dis, in, im (disloyal, unaware, invisible”
6. Work on cognates– for English/Spanish– google for list of cognates ex. adult/adulto, enter/entrar, intelligence/inteligencia– there programs that you can purchase but you can start with a google search for the lists
7. Examine multi-syllable words and refer back to morpheme work
8. Create exit criteria for ELLs that is a bit higher that reported– always ensuring access to RtI
She emphasizes from her research outcomes that there is a cost of waiting to provide Tier 2 supports for ELL and that we will get a significant boost if we start preventive Tier 2 interventions in K and have better outcomes by 3rd grade even above English only students! WOW– we have a lot of promise.
9. In K use pictures in phonemic awareness and stretch blending so that it sounds more like music than chopped up sounds
If we start we have 25% less of students needing later support or being identified for special education if we start in K!
This research suggest we can close the achievement gap by having similar identification rates for ELLs as English only students if we adopt early intervening
Under identification in lower grades, over identification in upper grades– can be prevented!
In this post I would like to describe what is SMART RTI and the latest research from its authors as to how to continue improving RTI in school district and schools.
As I sat in my office this morning, I opened the most recent issue of the special education journal Exceptional Children and found SMART RTI!
According to the authors, SMART RTI is like SMART phones, cars or houses, which are using information oriented enhancements to make these tools work better and more efficiently–in Response to Intervention (RTI) this is an opportunity to look at the “Next Generation” approach to Multilevel prevention frameworks.
What is SMART RTI (or how I like to call it SmRTI?)
Fuchs, Fuchs, and Compton (2012) in their most recent article SMART RTI: A Next Generation Approach to Multilevel Prevention- explain that as districts and schools address the issue of RTI and the time and cost of resources for implementation they should also be thinking “out of the box” to improve the implementation of the model/framework. In their redesign of RTI their overall message recommends the following features:
1. Having multi- stage screening processed versus a 1 universal screening tool to determine the needed level of intervention (investment upfront with the hope of less false-positives).
2. Having Tier 3 or tertiary prevention that integrated data-based program modification with meaningful access to the curriculum, and clear explanation of movement across tiers inherent in student IEPs– for students with disabilities.
The authors make a great point in explaining the current limitations of RTI in districts and schools today, and offer new ideas that allow RTI to expand its ability to meet the needs of all students. The authors believe that primary (Tier 1) and secondary prevention (Tier 2) benefits from data-based problem solving and standard protocols practices but that we need “experimental” instruction in the tertiary interventions. Does this mean that Tier 3 is special education? No, I believe in their article the authors are talking about the unique needs of students with disabilities and how their needs will be met across the level of tiers recognizing that they will need tertiary interventions (Tier 3) that should be handled by special education teachers. At this point, special education teacher evaluate “meaningful” access to the general curriculum and wage it against the student’s current level of performance in designing instruction, but the authors don’t address the rest of the population of students who may at times need Tier 3 level of supports– students who are English language learners and low achievers in general, or students with emotional behavioral disorders.
The authors call for SMART RTI is welcome and critical at this point when districts and schools are hitting walls in time, resources, and the number of students who are not responding. We need to support this effort to move forward and to continue the current gains we have made to close the silos of education in practice. RTI has required by design that Offices of Special Education, Curriculum and Instruction, English Language Learners/Bilingual Education, and others collaborate; it has required that regular education, special education teachers and support personnel sit at the table and work together like never before to support all learners because of its ccles of progress monitoring, and its also made principals and headmasters become instructional leaders and consumers of data – we don’t want this to go away we want to make it more effective!
The article can be found at the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) in its premier publication Exceptional Children. Reference: Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L, Compton, D. (2012) SMART RTI: Next Generation Approach to Multilevel Prevention, Exceptional Children, 78(3), 23-279.
Please visit the The Journal of Multiculturalism in Education Volume 7 (December 2011) 1
Response to Intervention for English Learners
This article describes a framework for using Response to Intervention (RTI) with students
who are English Learners (ELs). It examines the characteristics of these students; defines
the RTI process; and then outlines how schools can use grade level teams, a school
leadership team, and professional development to support literacy instruction in this model. We
include specific recommendations to screen and monitor progress.
Here are great links to webinars and handouts that show how curriculum-based measurement (CBM) tools, including DIBLES for ELLs
http://www.studentprogress.org/library/Webinars.asp#ELLReading
Another good guidance simple piece by our leading researcher in the field of special education— Sharon Vaughn:
http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/diversity/englishlanguagelearners
Another by Jan Habrouck leading researcher in CBM— with a case study
http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/13026/
This website has some tools— look in the list of tools
http://www.interventioncentral.org/cbm_warehouse
Plus 1 tool from Louisiana that I like for any grade and 1 guide from the Center on Instruction on teaching ELLs.
Here is a great video to gear up high school staff to consider RTI/PBIS/MTSS at the high school level http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtTKuBZ-nvY
The district website also has great resources and information on implementation. They also have dual language schools who are implementing so this is great resource in this are. Here is the link to the school district http://www.ttsd.k12.or.us/.
If you have a great example to share please send it along!