FLORIDA’S MULTI-TIERED SYSTEM OF STUDENT SUPPORTS:
CONNECTIONS FOR IMPLEMENTING A STATE-WIDE
PROBLEM SOLVING/RTI AND POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT
NASDSE 74th Annual Convention and Business Meeting
Chicago, Illinois
Don Kincaid, Ed.D.
Goerge M. Batsche, Ed.D.
University of South Florida
MTSS: Integrating Two Evidence-Based Models to Improve
the Academic and Behavior Outcomes for ALL Students
• Challenging Times In Which to Educate
America’s Children and Youth
ESEA Accountability Waivers
Performance Evaluations Tied to Student Growth
Economic Crises
Alternatives to Public K-12 Education
AYP Projections and Expectations
Recruitment and Retention of Qualified
Professionals
– Common Language/Common Understanding with
Educators, Parents and the Community
–
–
–
–
–
–
Strategies for Successfully Addressing
These Challenges
• Focus on efficiency in delivery systems
• Ensure that “critical skill sets” are present in all schools—
not “titles”
• Cross-training of staff is essential when you have fewer staff
• Integrating multiple initiatives/programs into fewer, more
efficient delivery systems
• Use of highly effective practices—time is not a luxury
anymore
• Data to evidence those practices
• Staff support-Coaching is a skill set, not a person
• Dynamic professional development—based on current and
emerging needs, focused at the building level
What We Have Learned About
Statewide Implementation
• Full implementation with integrity takes 4-6 years.
• Integration of academic and behavior problemsolving is critical
• Level of implementation is directly related to student
outcomes
• Implementation is a district-wide systems change
process
• Success of Tiers 2 and 3 determined by
effectiveness of Tier 1
• This HAS TO BE a general education initiative
• On-going evaluation is critical to implementation
effectiveness
What We Have Learned About
Statewide Implementation
• Impact on students and teachers is significant
• This model has poised educators for the challenges
schools now face. NCLB Waivers
• Intervention sufficiency and integrity is critical to
improved student performance
• Time is the critical factor and must be built into
schedules
• Poor literacy skills are the greatest threat to school
success—more than poverty.
• Moved from “RtI” to MTSS—multi-tiered system of
supports.
The Future:
Re-Authorization of ESEA
• Data-Based Problem-Solving (MTSS)
– Learn Act (Literacy) S. 929IS
• (x) applying the principles of universal design for learning;
• (xi) using age-appropriate screening assessments, diagnostic assessments,
formative assessments, and summative assessments to identify individual
learning needs, to inform instruction, and to monitor-– (I) student progress and the effects of instruction over time
• (xv) using strategies to enhance children's-– (I) motivation to communicate, read, and write; and
– (II) engagement in self-directed learning
– Blueprint for Reform 2010
• "Instead of labeling failures, we will reward success. Instead of a single
snapshot, we will recognize progress and growth. And instead of investing in
the status quo, we must reform our schools to accelerate student
achievement, close achievement gaps..."
Senate Bill 541
• Achievement through Prevention Act (PBIS)
– “The Achievement Through Prevention Act provides
support for states, local educational agencies and
schools to increase implementation of school-wide
positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS)
and early intervening services. This bill promises to
improve student academic achievement and to reduce
disciplinary problems in schools while improving
coordination with similar activities and services provided
under the federal special education law.”
Harkin Draft of ESEA
Re-Authorization
October 12, 2011
• States devise own systems for accountability
• Retain requirements for assessments in
reading and math, Grades 3-8 and once in HS
• 10% of schools held to requirement to raise
proficiency
– Fed oversight for worst performing 5%
– 5% with greatest gap between minority and white
students
• “MTSS” is included--again
Pushback
• “Districts and states have not been effective in delivering quality
education to children from low socioeconomic backgrounds, so
why should we think they’ll be effective this time around?” (Grover
Whitehurst, Brookings Institution)
• Represents a step back for minority students and students with
disabilities (Various Advocacy Groups)
• “Congress, parents and taxpayers would have no meaningful
mechanism by which to hold schools, districts, or states
accountable for improving student outcomes.” (Education Trust, Children’s Defense
Fund, National Council of La Raza)
• “I’d like to have federal targets, but that’s one of the
compromises. I refuse to allow the perfect to be the
enemy of the good.” (Senator Harkin)
State Perspective
• Revised Special Education Rules
• SLD
• Language Impaired
• Emotional/Behavior Disorders
• Revised Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs)
• SKILLS educators must know and be able to do to get certified
• Race to the Top
• Statewide Common Assessments
• New Educator Evaluation Requirements
• 50% of Teacher evaluations tied to student growth
• Florida RtI Implementation Plan
*** Within context of severe budget problems
Capacity to Implement MTSS
District Level
Self-Assessment of Problem Solving Implementation (SAPSI)
Infrastructure Development: Data Utilization
3.00
Status
2.00
Year 1_BOY
Year 1_EOY
Year 2_EOY
Year 3_EOY
Year 4_EOY
1.00
.00
6. Data is 7. Data used 8. Data
9. Data used
collected
to make presented to to evaluate
decisions
staff
core acad
programs
10. Data
11. CBM
12. ODR
13. Data
14. Data
used to data used to data used to used to
used to
evaluate ID students ID students evaluate Tier determine
core beh
needing needing beh
2
Tier 3 RtI
programs interventions interventions interventions
Item
3= Maintaining
2= Achieved
1= In Progress
0= Not Started
Capacity to Implement PBS
# Florida Schools' Initial PBS Training
350
305
300
266
250
220
200
150
119
100
87
81
61
77
53
50
12
0
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
Percent Annual Growth, Students with Disabilities
and Selected Disability Programs
2004-05 through 2009-10
2010 FCAT Math
Students with Disabilities
Grades 3-10
Collaboration
• Approximately 2 years ago, leadership in
both projects and from DOE began to
discuss the commonalities and collaboration
of the two projects.
• The formal collaboration between projects
began last year and was reflected in shared
trainings, work groups, and similar action
steps in RFAs.
Initial Collaborative Efforts
Regional District Training
Participation on State Transformation Team
More formal collaboration (RFAs)
Unified Behavioral and Educational Resource Team
(UBER) formed – Inter-Project Leadership Team (ILT)
• Established workgroups and process for
collaborating
• Realized need for shared mission and vision
• Established Summer Institute and Fall
implementation deadlines
•
•
•
•
District Feedback
• Project Specific Feedback (Informal)
– Can’t do PBS, have to do RtI now..
– RtI and PBS have to be separate…Don says
– Can’t address behavior because we HAVE to
address academics
– We are looking at behavioral engagement and
not PBS…
– What else have you heard?
District Feedback
• Statewide District Needs Assessment Results:
–Integrate Practices to Reduce Duplication, Increase
Effective Use of Personnel and Provide Greater Support for
Instruction Less is More.
–Focus Resource Development and District Resources On:
Evidence-based Coaching Strategies
Leadership Skills to Support MTSSS
Family and Community Engagement
Aligning K-12 MTSS
Evaluation Models to Demonstrate Outcomes
Common Language/Common Understanding Around an
Integrated Data-Based Problem-Solving Process
– Integrating Technology and Universal Design for Learning
–
–
–
–
–
–
Big Idea!
• We need to model a collaborative, integrated MultiTiered System of Supports (MTSS) process at the
state level so that we can advocate for it at the
district and school level.
• We need a common language and common
understanding!
• We need a consistent voice and collaborative
intervention approach!
• We need more personnel with common training
available at the state, district and school levels to
meet the expanding needs of students, teachers and
families
Highly Effective Practices:
Research
• High quality academic instruction (e.g., content matched to student
success level, frequent opportunity to respond, frequent feedback) by
itself can reduce problem behavior (Filter & Horner, 2009; Preciado,
Horner, Scott, & Baker, 2009, Sanford, 2006)
• Implementation of school-wide positive behavior support leads to
increased academic engaged time and enhanced academic outcomes
(Algozzine & Algozzine, 2007; Horner et al., 2009; Lassen, Steele, &
Sailor, 2006)
• “Viewed as outcomes, achievement and behavior are related; viewed as
causes of the other, achievement and behavior are unrelated.
(Algozzine, et al., 2011)
• Children who fall behind academically will be more likely to find
academic work aversive and also find escape-maintained problem
behaviors reinforcing (McIntosh, 2008; McIntosh, Sadler, & Brown,
2010)
20
Cycle of Academic and Behavioral Failure:
Aggressive Response
(McIntosh, 2008)
Teacher presents
student with grade
level academic task
So, which is it…
Academic problems
lead to behavior
Not sure…
problems?
Student engages
Student’s academic
Probably
a combination
of bothin problem
skills do not
improve
or
behavior
Behavior problems lead to academic
problems?
Student escapes
academic task
Teacher removes
academic task or
removes student
21
Reading Problems and Dropout
• A student who can’t read on grade level by 3rd grade is 4 times less
likely to graduate by age 19 than a child who reads proficiently by that
time. Add POVERTY to the mix, and a student is 13 times less likely to
graduate on time.
However, students who did not read proficiently at 3rd grade constitute
88% of those who did not earn a diploma.
Low reading skills in 3rd grade are a stronger predictor of dropping out
of school than having spent at least one year in poverty.
Donald J. Hernandez
“Double Jeopardy: How Third-Grade Reading Skills and Poverty Influence
High School Graduation.” Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2011
School-wide Behavior & Reading Support
The integration/combination of the two:
•are critical for school success
•utilize the three tiered prevention model
•incorporate a team approach at school level, grade
level, and individual level
•share the critical feature of data-based decision
making
•produce larger gains in literacy skills than the
reading-only model
–
(Stewart, Benner, Martella, & Marchand-Martella,
2007)
23
Collective Capacity
PSRtI Personnel
Academic supports
Problem solving
Intervention at the
school level
RtI evaluation
System change
State linkages
Leadership
Research
experience
FLPBS Personnel
Behavior support
District action
planning
Team facilitation
skills
Training expertise
Systems change
PBS evaluation
Implementation
experience
Collective Capacity
Inter-Project Personnel
Training
Implementation
Team
facilitation
Problemsolving
Leadership
coaching
Content
Data
support
Mission and Vision
Multi-Tiered System of Student Supports - Inter-Project Collaborative
The collaborative vision of the Florida Problem-Solving/Response to Intervention
(FL PS/RtI) and the Florida Positive Behavior Support/Response to Intervention for
Behavior (FLPBS/RtI:B) Projects is to:
•Enhance the capacity of all Florida school districts to successfully implement and
sustain a multi-tiered system of student supports with fidelity in every school;
•Accelerate and maximize student academic and social-emotional outcomes
through the application of data-based problem solving utilized by effective
leadership at all levels of the educational system;
•Inform the development, implementation, and ongoing evaluation of an
integrated, aligned, and sustainable system of service delivery that prepares all
students for post-secondary education and/or successful employment within our
global society.
Translating Mission to Motion
• Created workgroups to develop vision and resources:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Leadership
Coaching
DBPS
Evaluation
K-12 Alignment
Family and Community Engagement
Sub Leadership team – protocol and logistics
Technology?
Leadership Team Workgroup
• To provide a framework for educational
leadership comprised of those leadership
skills and practices contributing to
successful and sustained system reform
leading to improved instructional practices
and student outcomes.
Evidence-based Definition
Effective district leadership is evidenced by teams or individuals who:
• Establish and articulate a clear vision with a sense of urgency for change,
maintain focus and deliver a consistent message of implementation over
time
• Focus on schools (districts are successful when schools are successful)
• Create relationships with stakeholders based upon mutual respect and
shared responsibility
• Engage in expert problem solving
• Identify the correct barriers and goals efficiently and effectively
Evidence-based Definition
Effective district leadership is evidenced by teams or individuals who:
• Engage in good problem analysis with an understanding that there are many
typical barriers to attaining school goals.
• Know that there are several identified strategies for removing barriers and
achieving the vision and apply appropriate strategies based upon schoolspecific needs
• Evaluate the effectiveness of implemented strategies
• Invest in professional development
(Leithwood, 2010; Barnhardt, 2009; Crawford & Torgeson, 2007)
Crosswalk:
Coaching Workgroup
• Develop a working model of Coaching Functions
that addresses the core
skills/competencies/and knowledge sets
needed to lead/support/and evaluate
implementation and sustainability of the MTSS
model in schools/districts.
• The Coaching model will be created specifically
for use by district leadership teams to enhance
capacity of their schools to support the MTSS
initiative. Therefore, district level personnel will
be the target audience for use of the Coaching
model.
Coaching Domains
Professional Development
Leadership Support
Problem-Solving
Facilitation Skills
Content
Knowledge
DBPS Workgroup
• Develop a model/template for data-based
decision-making at the entire school, group
of student or individual student levels that
can be applied by schools and districts. The
primary outcome will be the development of
the conceptual framework, training
resources, and exemplars that will be used
for professional development at the district
level.
Problem Solving Process
Define the Problem
What Do We Want Students to KNOW and Be Able to DO?
Evaluate
Did It WORK?
(Response to Intervention –RtI)
Problem Analysis
Why Can’t They DO It?
Implement Plan
What Are WE Going To DO About It?
Program Evaluation Workgroup
• To develop an integrated program evaluation model
for academic and behavior domains. The model will
be driven by evaluation questions derived from the
literature and other data sources (e.g., Projects’
program evaluation data) on implementing and
evaluating multi-tiered systems of (MTSS).
• The model will have applications at all levels of the
educational system (e.g., school-, district-, and statelevels) and result in data that can be used by
multiple stakeholders (e.g., Projects’ staff, State
Transformation Team, district and school leadership
teams) to inform decision-making.
Important MTSS Evaluation Issues
• Stakeholders should be involved in all aspects
of planning and carrying out the evaluation
process as well as in decision-making
• Goals through planning should drive the
process
• Information obtained to:
– Determine where you currently are (needs)
– Take ongoing looks at how things are working
– Make decisions about what to keep doing and what
to change or eliminate
K-12 Alignment Workgroup
• Develop state, district and school capacity for
RtI implementation at the secondary school
level through the development of a state-wide
secondary RtI model and the provision of
professional development, technical assistance,
and relevant resources. Efforts will be focused
on developing the following critical PS/RtI
components:
– Early Warning Systems (EWS) Model
– Instructional Review “Lite”
– Intensifying literacy and mathematics instruction
and targeted supplemental and intensive supports
Family and Community Engagement
The mission of the Inter-Project Family and Community
Engagement Workgroup is to build the capacity of
families and educators to engage in collaborative, databased problem-solving in order to support student
learning within MTSSS.
•Communication networks will be developed to share information and
products among key stakeholders in order to increase families’
awareness and understanding of PS/RtI as well as educators’
awareness and understanding of families’ role in PS/RtI.
•Training modules, informational videos, and tools will be developed
in order to build families’ and educators’ skills in collaborative, databased problem-solving.
Technology Support
• Created five statewide Regional Technology
Centers, each with a Director and regional IT
specialists.
• AT, IT AIM and UDL (Universal Design for
Learning)
• Provide technology support and integration to
facilitate the implementation of MTSS and
enhance district capacity to implement and
sustain effective instruction/intervention
practices for ALL students
Organizing for Collaboration
Inter-Project (FLPBS & FL PS/RtI)
Leadership Team
Statewide Education
Collaborative Partners and
Agencies
Logistics, Communication, & Technology
MTSS Model
Development
Work Group
MTSS Component
Models
“Leadership”
“MTSS Coaching”
“Data-based
Problem-solving”
“PK-12
Alignment”
“Family &
Community
Engagement”
“Accountability,
Evaluation &
Sustainability”
Service Delivery Model
Development
MTSS Model
Curriculum
&
Assessment
Development
Inter-Project
Staff
Development
Inter-Project Program Evaluation
Development
Training &
TA Service
Data
Evaluation
System
Project &
Process
Capacity
Data
Evaluation
System
MTSSS Project “Consultants”
Inter-Project Web-based
Resource Warehouse
Specialized DLT Support Services
Differentiated Accountability
Race to the Top
Leadership
Policy & Budget
District/School Improvement
Just Read, Florida
FCRR & FCR-STEM,
ESE
FLPBS – FLPS/RtI – Secondary RTI
Student Services & Technology
District Action Planning & ProblemSolving (DAPPS) Process
District Readiness
Needs Assessment
Small Group Planning Process
(Org. Problem Solving)
Resources/Training/Tech. Assist
Evaluation of MTSS Fidelity &
Effectiveness
District
Leadership
Team
Parents
&
Community
Partners
School
Leadership Teams
Grade/Content
Instructional Teams
Students
District Action Planning and
Problem-Solving Process
DAPPS
• The goal is to promote the DAPPS as…
1. an assessment of capacity that can be
used
2. to align district support activities across
initiatives,
3. and, not burden districts to conduct
similar assessments multiple times.
What Can This Integrated System
DLT Capacity Building?
• Observing and providing feedback on their
strategic planning efforts (e.g., development of
an action plan, problem-solving, team
facilitation, etc.)
• Providing them with tools they can use for
action planning (forms to record planning
process, etc.),
• Collaborating with them on the development of
an action plan;
• Facilitating and training the DLT leader/contact
on effective strategic planning to build their
capacity
What Can This Integrated
System Offer?
• Facilitating districts to use a a structured smallgroup PS process to ensure sufficiency and
integrity of MTSS implementation;
• Providing targeted training and technical
assistance that the DLT identified a need for;
• Linking external resources to district assets to
provide additional support to sustain
implementation; and
• Engaging in a TOT process for members of the
leadership team or their designees to sustain
the DAPPS as an on-going process.
District Action Planning Process
• Collaboration of PSRtI, FLPBS and DA staff
– 2-4 person district support teams
• Protocol for DAPP Process
– Step 1: Organizing/preparing for DAPPS
– Step 2: Needs Assessment
– Step 3: Action Planning – Group problem-solving
used
– Step 4: Delivery of Training and TA
– Step 5: Evaluation