Response To Intervention
Making the Most of Progress Monitoring by Jung
How to implement response to intervention at the secondary level by Caposey
Caposey’s article I truly found fascinating since I am not super familiar with the RTI process. In my mind, I assumed RTI was intended for reading only as we have read and learned has strong development. I do understand that reading is a primary focus as that is a skill that is transferable to all subjects. However, RTI is truly meant to improve the core curriculum. Furthermore, I learned that there is a triangle model that focuses on students whose current needs are not being met. Additionally, RTI can be for students who are not currently in need of interventions but could need interventions in the future for a variety of reasons. This reminded me of the AVID program that our district put into place a few years ago. This program helps students who are in the bubble of struggling, but not enough to need a legally binding plan. I could very well not be describing it to its full potential, but I know they support students by teaching them skills needed to be successful in school and outside of the classroom. This article also communicated the importance of the professional learning community but stressed the value of the PLCs being more than just content specific, but age/grade level specific as well. For example, it is great that the entire English department meets, but would it not be even better if the English freshmen group of core teachers met. Adding in grade level/age will help provide a circular visual of the students across a variety of settings. Jung’s article implied more intimate meetings, however, the scale is a bit smaller at elementary versus upper grades. Jung’s article communicated how RTI can be extremely effective, but did not communicate the reasonings behind the need for RTI. Caposey went into detail that RTI should not be the permanent solution to help students who are struggling academically, the root issue that is being missed is our curriculum. Adjustments are needed within the curriculum to solidify alignments with our standards, there are gaps in some areas and also redundancies in others (Caposey, 2011). I believe the curriculum is an area of struggle in my entire district. Working in special education, we individually created our own curriculum. Looking back I know there were gaps and redundancies. Therefore, I communicated to my school that our root issue is curriculum and the impact this has on RTI is something that needs to be shared. This then trickles down to 504 or special services referrals, which could be reduced if alignments with standards and curriculum are addressed.
The title of Engels' article jumped out at me when I was doing my own research, so I wanted to share pieces from his article that I think teachers at times want to shout from the rooftops. Teachers and students alike get tired of assessment after assessment. Teachers will slowly begin to fade back on expressing the importance of them and students in return become less motivated by taking them when they are occurring frequently. This leads to less reliable results especially when the assessments are of a variety and growth is shown on one, but regression on another by they were taken days apart. It offers confusion that typically cannot be explained. Jung’s article communicated how consistency is key when collecting data, however, Engels addresses how teachers' levels of skills and expertise can cause varying results (2015). PLCs were also discussed, but Engels adds that the value of ensuring reteach time and implementation of how to reteach are topics of conversation during team meetings. Reteach was not something I recall the other articles discussing, however, reteach could help reduce RTI referrals. As we know, all students learn differently and at different paces, Yes, we want progress to consistently trend upwards, but realistically that does not always happen. Data collection is crucial and necessary for a student's overall success, however, teachers are too. A teacher by the first couple of weeks of school can tell you anything and everything you need to know about a student in their classroom. Can a computer or data tracking system? The computer does not know the child, therefore, professional judgment and knowledge should be considered closer to equal with data according to Engels (2015). This is something the administration should highly consider and would be helpful in all schools. Teachers have the ability to motivate students by knowing the ends and outs of them, the computer causes a loss of intimate connection with students if that remains the primary focus.
Overall, I learned a great deal about RTI since secondary does not have such a strong foundation. I wanted to conclude my blog with the quote below as we learned RTI is for more than just reading. “We must know, value, and support all learners in our building. We must study our local data, and intervene with as much fervor for a student with a social-emotional issue as we do for a student with an achievement issue” (Caposey, 2011).
References
Caposey, P. (2011, September 8). How to implement response to intervention at the secondary level. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/blog/response-to-intervention-secondary-school-philip-caposey
Engels, K. (2015, November 1). Commentary / RTI: What teachers know that computers don’t. ASCD. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/rti-what-teachers-know-that-computers-dont
Jung, L. A. (2011, June 1). Making the most of progress monitoring. ASCD. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/making-the-most-of-progress-monitoring
Comments
Post a Comment