Summit 2007

Second Annual Summit on Evidence-based Special Education Agenda

Response to Intervention (RtI): An Evidence-Based education Review

April 26, 2007

8:30 Introduction to The Wing Institute and Summit Outcomes
  View presentation
  Randy Keyworth, The Wing Institute
Keyworth reviewed the mission and activities of The Wing Institute, set the context for discussing Response to Intervention (RtI), reviewed the result of the pre-Summit survey, and  discussed the desired Summit outcomes.
8:50 RtI:  What it is and What it Isn't
  View presentation

Detrich, R., States, J., & Keyworth, R. (2008). Response to Intervention: What it Is and What it Is Not. Journal of Evidence-based Practices for Schools, 9(2), 60-83.

  Ronnie Detrich, The Wing Institute
Detrich provided an introduction and overview of RtI, identifying it as a systematic data-based process rather than specific interventions or initiatives.  He reviewed the fundamental components of RtI including:  multi-tiered interventions, evidence-based interventions, progress monitoring and data-based decision making.
9:10 Research on RtI:  How Do We Know It  Works?
  View presentation
  Jack States, The Wing Institute
States reviewed the hierarchies of evidence for reviewing RtI, examined the existing efficacy and effectiveness research supporting RtI and its components, discussed a meta-analysis study of four large scale RtI models, reviewed the opportunities and challenges for future research, and presented recommendations for next steps.
9:30 RtI in California
  Allan Lloyd-Jones, Ph.D, California Department of Education
Lloyd-Jones presented a history of RtI in California and identified its relationship to various state-wide initiatives, best practices, and legislative mandates.  He discussed some of the obstacles to implementation of RtI as well as some of the successes.  Finally, he reviewed the resources available from the California Department of Education for supporting RtI, including a DVD for training California educators.
10:00 Identifying Research-based Practices for RtI:  Scientifically Based Reading
  View presentation

Twyman, J. S., & Sota, M. (2008). Identifying research-based practices for response to intervention: Scientifically based instruction. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 9(2), 86–101.

  Janet Twyman, Ph.D, Headsprout
Twyman examined RtI in the context of scientifically-based reading curriculum.  She reviewed the legislative mandates and policy issues requiring "research-based" programs.  She then did an extensive presentation on the types of research to consider when evaluating programs, how to know what "evidence' to use, and continuums of evidence (quantity of the evidence, quality of the evidence, and program development).  She then examined actual research studies related to reading programs.  Finally, she provided a wide range of on-line resources for consumers interested in seeking our evidence-based programs.
11:05 Work Group:  Evaluating Evidence
Using Twyman's "continuum of evidence" worksheet, each work group reviewed the "evidenced-based " claims of a specific reading curriculum program.  Each curriculum program had published a report touting the research supporting their program.  The group examined the published report to identify whether or not the research presented was adequate to substantiate their claims.  By in large, the groups found that the presented material was inadequate, and often misleading.  The continuum of evidence worksheet proved to be an excellent tool for reviewing these materials.
11:45 Lunch
12:45 Evaluating Student Response to Instruction Using a 3 Tier RtI Progress Monitoring System
  View presentation

Hintze, J. M. (2008). Conceptual and empirical issues related to developing a response-to-intervention framework. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 9(2), 128–147.

  John Hintze, Ph.D, University of Massachusetts-Amherst
Hintze discussed the two methods for identification of students with learning disabilities—the traditional IQ/achievement discrepancy model and RtI—highlighting the value of the RtI option.  He next identified five dimensions when implementing RtI:  the tier model, identification of "at risk students", preventative treatment, progress monitoring, and strategies for nonresponders.   He then presented two case studies showing how curriculum based measurement was used to develop customized education programs students with varying educational challenges.
1:50 Developing and Implementing a Quality RtI Process
  View presentation

Daly, III, E. J., Kupzyk, S., Bossard, M., Street, J., & Dymacel, R. (2008). Taking Response to Intervention to Scale: Developing and Implementing a Quality Response-to-Intervention Process. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 9(2), 102–127.

  Edward Daly, III, Ph.D, University of Nebraska/Lincoln
Daly presented RtI as a continuous evaluation cycle: problem identification, problem analysis, goal setting, plans implementation and plan evaluation.  He identified "technical adequacy"—reliability and validity of decisions, problem solving as a continuous evaluation cycle, and local validation—as  critical to successful implementation.  He distinguished between "empirical validation (scientific supported interventions) and "local validation" (is it working for individual students), highlighting the importance of the latter.  He then quality indicators to track when implementing RtI system wide, stressing the importance of integrating RtI with existing practices and tracking procedural integrity
2:55 Work Group:  Implementation Questions
The work groups reconvened with the assignment of doing a "plus/delta" on RtI as it might apply to their specific school settings, and
3:10 Speaker Panel
  Janet Twyman, Ph.D, Headsprout
  John Hintze, Ph.D, University of Massachusetts
  Edward Daly, III, Ph.D, University of Nebraska/Lincoln
2:15 Wrap-Up