During day 2 of the RTI training, Dr. Austin Buffum led us through a series of activities. Since there were so many staff members from my school present, we chose to meet in collaborative grade level teams. Throughout the day we listed and revised our next steps. These are the steps our team came up with:
Ineffective interventions included the following:
At the end of the two-day workshop, our school system was left with a firm understanding of tiered instruction as well as steps for further development of our student-centered, success-for-all programs and practices. In the days following the workshop, a smaller system-wide team met to think more deeply about how we’ll implement the new learning. Later individual schools will move forward with the guidance of system-wide recommendations and the more specific grade-level action lists created during the workshop.
In summary, Buffum led us through a process which will deepen and broaden our practice with respect to success for all students--that’s a mission educators in our system care deeply about. I will support the research-based actions Buffum encouraged, and collaborate with my team to better effect success for all in the standards we deem essential. Next spring, I'll return to these notes and comment about what worked and the challenges that remain.
- Create time/spaces in schedule for effective RTI collaborative efforts: intervention/instruction time, PLCs, professional development time.
- Coordinate schedules so that SPED teachers, reading intervention teachers and others can meet with classroom teachers during PLCs and intervention blocks.
- Determine essential skills in reading, writing, math.
- In PLCs, determine norms, topic time line, and common formative assessments based on essential skills.
- Develop school-wide leadership team to report back on grade level efforts.
Ineffective interventions included the following:
- Leaving interventions up to individual teachers, rather than collective, collaborative decisions.
- Remedial classes.
- Summer school unless it is highly targeted and timely.
- Retention
- Punitive actions.
- A sense of urgency -- when we notice a need for intervention, act.
- A systematic approach to intervention.
- Research-based interventions (FCRR, RELNIE, and PBIS were cited as optimal resources)
- Directive interventions during the school day, not invitational.
- Timely interventions, feedback and multiple opportunities for practice/growth to develop mastery.
- Positive, constructive, frequent feedback and practice. (coaching)
- Trained professionals, matching professional skills/experience with targeted intervention.
- Targeted instruction at tier one, strategies that make learning accessible to all. (the core)
- Tier two, interventions for those who miss the learning at tier one. (core and more)
- Tier three, often individualized and highly specific intervention for those who miss the learning at tier one and two - not just special education.
At the end of the two-day workshop, our school system was left with a firm understanding of tiered instruction as well as steps for further development of our student-centered, success-for-all programs and practices. In the days following the workshop, a smaller system-wide team met to think more deeply about how we’ll implement the new learning. Later individual schools will move forward with the guidance of system-wide recommendations and the more specific grade-level action lists created during the workshop.
In summary, Buffum led us through a process which will deepen and broaden our practice with respect to success for all students--that’s a mission educators in our system care deeply about. I will support the research-based actions Buffum encouraged, and collaborate with my team to better effect success for all in the standards we deem essential. Next spring, I'll return to these notes and comment about what worked and the challenges that remain.