Elementary Intervention System Problem-Solving Worksheet



Elementary Intervention System Problem-Solving WorksheetThe purpose of this worksheet is to support the School Leadership Team with a cyclical four-step problem solving process using MiMTSS and other data sources. The team will begin by reviewing the final step in the problem-solving process, Plan Implementation & Evaluation, before moving onto Problem Identification, Problem Analysis and Plan Development.Author: Michigan’s Integrated Behavior and Learning Support InitiativeVersion: 3.0Date: December 2019Directions for Use: Team, review your coach’s prompts in red and respond to all team prompts in purple. Keep the same font colors.Data Review Date:Team Members Involved:lefttopPlan Implementation and Evaluation (30 minutes)Did We Implement Our Plan?To answer this question, we need to look at the status of our activities, our accomplishments and our barriers since our last data review. We have three types of activities to monitor: installation, implementation and coaching.Status of Installation ActivitiesCoach: Review the Installation Checklists tab on your school’s MiMTSS Data System dashboard and be prepared to help your team compare progress with the goals listed in Table 1.0 to determine if the installation work in on or off track. Remove any rows in Table 1.0 that do not yet apply.Team: Go to MiMTSS School Dashboard, Installation Checklists tab and follow along as your coach guides you through the table below.Table 1.0 Installation checklist data from MiMTSS Data SystemInstallation ChecklistGoalOn Track / Off TrackPBIS100% by Winter Data Review, year 2On/Off TrackStrengthening PBIS100% by Winter Data Review, year 2On/Off TrackSchool-wide Reading Model100% by Fall Data Review, year 3On/Off TrackSecondary Content Area Reading 100% by Fall Data Review, year 3On/Off TrackIntervention System100% on all three checklists by end of year 3On/Off TrackCheck-in, Check-Out100% by Fall Data Review, year 3On/Off TrackIntensifying Interventions100% by end of year 4On/Off TrackStatus of MTSS Implementation PlanCoach: Review the status of the MTSS Implementation Plan activities (ignore any activities already accounted for in the installation checklist data). Complete the following:Date the MTSS Implementation Plan was last reviewed and updated by the team:#% Complete#% In Progress#% Not StartedStatus of Coaching ActivitiesCoach: Review your current Individualized Coaching Service Delivery Plan and record the status of activities for each concept you have been coaching.Concept 1:#% Complete#% In Progress#% Not StartedConcept 2:#% Complete#% In Progress#% Not StartedCoach: Add more coaching concepts if needed.Summary of Current Implementation (Including Accomplishments and Barriers)Team: Based on the information above, (a) summarize your implementation, (b) take note of your accomplishments, and (c) record any barriers that may be impeding progress along with the steps your team is taking to address the barriers. (Example: We are on-track with most of our installation activities. Only about half of our implementation activities have been completed since last data review, but our coach is doing an amazing job completing nearly all of her coaching activities. We are very proud of the roll out of our first school-wide PBIS kick-off, and we are already noticing a positive difference in student behavior in the cafeteria. We continue to struggle to find adequate time to meet as a team, but we’ve reported this barrier to the DIT, and they will be meeting next month to assess needs across the district.)Is Our Plan Working?We know our plan is working when we see progress being made toward achieving our MTSS objectives for fidelity AND student outcomes.Status of MTSS ObjectivesMTSS Implementation Plan (hyperlink)Coach: Add a hyperlink to the MTSS Implementation. Update the current status of each objective in your MTSS Implementation plan, along with the date the data were collected to determine if your team has met the goal, is on track, or not on track. Be prepared to quickly review the status of each objective with your team and to help them develop a summary. Summary of EffectivenessTeam: Based on the status update provided by your coach, is your plan working? Summarize the status of your objectives in two to three sentences. (Example: Our plan is working. We have improved our TFI totals score by 25% for reading and 30% for behavior over the past year. We met our goal of 70% on both TFIs by fall of 2019. Our annual ODR rate has decreased each of the past three years, and our Acadience scores have increased each year at K and 1, but we have not met our goal of 80% at benchmark school-wide. In spring of 2019 72% of our students were reading at benchmark.)Problem Identification (90 minutes)Today our problem solving will focus on the Intervention System for both reading and behavior supports.Coach: Insert rationale for why the Intervention System will be your team’s focus for today. (See rationale from the webpage if needed.) With support from your administrator, be prepared to address questions from the team.What Was Our Previous Tier 2/Tier 3 Reading Problem?To answer this question, we need to consider any Tier 2/Tier 3 Reading problems we have previously identified.Coach: If your team developed a precise problem statement and short-term objective related to Tier 2/Tier 3 Reading at their last data review, complete the sentences below. Otherwise, delete this section. At our last data review in ______ we identified the following precise problem statement(s) related to Tier 2/Tier 3 Reading:We set the following short-term objective(s) to evaluate our effectiveness at solving this/these problem(s):Team: If you focused on Tier 2/Tier 3 Reading at your last data review, keep your previous precise problem statement(s) and short-term objective(s) in mind as you work to identify your current Intervention System problem.What Is Our Current Tier 2/Tier 3 Reading Problem?To answer this question, we need to consider any new student outcome data related to the Intervention System. Team: Go to MiMTSS School Dashboard, Reading Outcomes tab, Tier 2 and Tier 3 buttons and follow along as your coach guides you through interpretation of the data. Your goals in this section are to understand the data your coach is presenting and to identify as a team one or two precise problem statements to address for problem solving.Coach: Prepopulate the status column in the table(s) below to assist with your own interpretation of the data. On the data review day use the questions and sentence frames in the table(s) as teaching tools when needed to guide your team through interpreting the visual displays of the data in MiMTSS Data System. Your team should be focused on the data displays while you use the table(s) to assist your coaching. Coach: Prepopulate the status column in the table(s) below. Begin by considering the validity of the data.Tier2/Tier 3 Reading OutcomesTable 2.0 Tier 2/Tier 3 reading outcomes statusReading Outcomes QuestionsStatusAre there concerns with the validity of any of the Tier 2/Tier 3 Reading student outcome data? If so, describe concerns. Y/NConcerns: TEXTTier 2Are 15% (or fewer) of students performing below benchmark on their basic reading skills?School-wide: Y/NSchool-wide, #% of students performed below benchmark based on the Acadience Reading composite score, indicating these students may need additional support in order to reach benchmark.Grades #, #, # have more than 15% of students performing below benchmark based on the Acadience Reading composite score, indicating these grade levels may need more support to strengthen Tier 1 and/or Tier 2.Tier 2(Winter and Spring) From one benchmark to the next, did at least 80% of students who performed below benchmark move to performing at or above benchmark?School-wide: Y/NSchool-wide: From last benchmark to this benchmark, #% of students moved from performing below benchmark to performing at or above benchmark based on their Acadience Reading Composite scores.From last benchmark to this benchmark, grade levels #, #, # had less than 80% of students who performed below benchmark move to performing at or above benchmark based on their Acadience Reading Composite scores, indicating these grade levels may need more support to strengthen Tier 1 and/or Tier 2.Tier 2Are there any noteworthy school-wide patterns of reading performance for students needing Tier 2 supports? (Example: How do Tier 2 needs this year compared to last year, across grade levels?)Describe noteworthy patterns: TEXTTier 3Are 5% (or fewer) of students performing well below benchmark on their basic reading skills?School-wide: Y/NSchool-wide, #% of students performed well below benchmark based on the Acadience Reading composite score, indicating a need for additional support in order to reach benchmark.Grades #, #, # have more than 5% of students performing well below benchmark based on the Acadience Reading composite score, indicating these grade levels may need more support to strengthen Tier 1, Tier 2, and/or Tier 3.Tier 3(Winter and Spring) From one benchmark to the next, did at least 80% of students who performed well below benchmark move to performing below or at/above benchmark?School-wide: Y/NSchool-wide: From last benchmark to this benchmark, #% of students moved from performing well below benchmark to performing below or at/above benchmark based on their Acadience Reading Composite scores.From last benchmark to this benchmark, grade levels #, #, # had less than 80% of students who performed well below benchmark move to performing below or at/above benchmark based on their Acadience Reading Composite scores, indicating these grade levels may need more support to strengthen Tier 1, Tier 2, and/or Tier 3.Tier 3Are there any noteworthy school-wide patterns of reading performance for students needing Tier 3 supports? (Example: How do Tier 3 needs this year compared to last year, across grade levels?)Describe noteworthy patterns: TEXTAdditional Data Sources Coach: Consider if additional data sources are needed and make a plan to gather that data prior to the data review date. Prepopulate the status column in the table below and be prepared to review with your team.Table 2.1 Additional data sourcesAdditional DataStatusWhat additional student outcome data sources might you consider when identifying areas of need with respect to Tier 2/Tier 3 Reading (e.g., benchmark assessments)?Data Source: TEXTNoteworthy patterns or observations: TEXTTier 2/Tier 3 Reading Precise Problem Statement(s)Based on the information gathered above, where will we focus our problem-solving efforts as a School Leadership Team?Team: Identify one or two Precise Problem Statement(s) in the area of Tier 2/Tier 3 Reading. If you have focused on Tier 2/Tier 3 Reading before, go back to your previous precise problem statement(s) to see if these problems are still relevant and should be pasted in the table below or if new problem statements should be developed. Table 2.2 Precise problem statement(s) for Tier 2/Tier 3 readingWho/WhenWhat/WhereAs Measured ByExample 1: At winter benchmark, 2018, of our students who performed below benchmark in the fall . . .only 50% of them performed at/above benchmark at winter compared to our goal of 80% improvement from fall to winteras measured by change in benchmark status on Acadience Reading Composite scores from fall to winter.Example 2: At spring benchmark, 2019, 12% of our students school-wide . . .performed in the well below benchmark range compared to our goal of 5% or less,as measured by their Acadience Reading Composite scores.1. as measured by the Acadience Reading . . .2. as measured by the Acadience Reading . . .Coach: See your Coaching Guide for additional examples.What Was Our Previous Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior Problem?To answer this question, we need to consider any Tier 2/Tier3 Behavior problems we have previously identified.Coach: If your team developed a precise problem statement and short-term objective related to Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior at their last data review, complete the sentences below. Otherwise, delete this section. At our last data review in ______ we identified the following precise problem statement(s) related to Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior:We set the following short-term objective(s) to evaluate our effectiveness at solving this/these problem(s):Team: If you focused on Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior at your last data review, keep your previous precise problem statement(s) and short-term objective(s) in mind as you work to identify your current Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior problem.What Is Our Current Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior Problem?To answer this question, we need to consider any new student outcome data related to Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior. First, we will examine Student Risk Screening Scale data. Then we will examine SWIS data and any other additional data sources.Team: Go to MiMTSS School Dashboard, Behavior Outcomes tab, SRSS Moderate Risk button and High Risk button and follow along as your coach guides you through interpretation of the data. Then follow along as your coach guides you through any additional data sources that have been gathered. Your goals in this section are to understand the data your coach is presenting and to identify as a team one or two precise problem statements to address for problem solving.Coach: Prepopulate the status column in the table(s) below to assist with your own interpretation of the data. On the data review day use the questions and sentence frames in the table(s) as teaching tools when needed to guide your team through interpreting the visual displays of the data in MiMTSS Data System and SWIS. Your team should be focused on the data displays while you use the table(s) to assist your coaching.Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior OutcomesTable 2.3 Students with ratings of moderate or high risk on the Student Risk Screening Scale Behavior Outcomes QuestionsStatusAre there concerns with the validity of any of the Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior student outcome data (SRSS and/or SWIS)? If so, describe concerns. Y/NConcerns: TEXTSRSS Moderate Risk Are 15% (or fewer) of students identified as at moderate risk for externalizing and internalizing problem behaviors? School-wide: Y/NSchool-wide, #% of students were identified as at moderate risk for externalizing behavior problems and #% of students were identified as at moderate risk for internalizing behavior problems based on teacher ratings on the Student Risk Screening Scale. Grades #, #, # have more than 15% of students identified as at moderate risk for externalizing and/or internalizing problem behaviors based on teacher ratings on the Student Risk Screen Scale, indicating these grade level(s) may need more support to strengthen Tier 1 and/or Tier 2. SRSS High Risk Are 5% (or fewer) of students identified as at high risk for externalizing and internalizing problem behaviors? School-wide: Y/NSchool-wide, #% of students were identified as at high risk for externalizing behavior problems and #% of students were identified as at high risk for internalizing behavior problems based on teacher ratings on the Student Risk Screening Scale. Grades #, #, # have more than 5% of students identified as at high risk for externalizing and/or internalizing problem behaviors based on teacher ratings on the Student Risk Screen Scale, indicating these grade level(s) may need more support to strengthen Tier 1, Tier 2 and/or Tier 3.Coach: Pull up your saved report template in SWIS labeled “Students with 2-5 major ODRs” and set the new date range or set up the template using the directions in your Coach’s Guide. Practice answering the questions below and take note of patterns to share with your team.Table 2.4 Students with two or more office discipline referrals (Majors)Behavior Outcome QuestionsStatusAt this point in the school year, is your school on track to have 15% or fewer students with 2-5 office discipline referrals by the end of this school year?Look at the Summary table and record the total number of students listed. Use that number to calculate a percentage based on your school’s enrollment.School-wide: Y/NAt this point in the year, #% students have received 2-5 ODRs for major problem behaviors. We are on track/not on track to meet the goal of 15% or fewer students with 2-5 ODRs by the end of the year. Which grade level(s) have the most students with 2-5 major ODRs?Change graph type to GradeGrade(s) #, # have more students with 2-5 major ODRs than other grades, indicating these grades may need more support.At this point in the school year, is your school on track to have 5% or fewer students with 6 or more office discipline referrals by the end of this school year?Remove Range from the Dataset and replace with Greater Than (under Referral, Student Referral Count) and set to 5 ReferralsLook at the Summary table and record the total number of students listed. Use that number to calculate a percentage based on your school’s enrollment.School-wide: Y/NAt this point in the year, #% students have received 6 or more ODRs for major problem behaviors. We are on track/not on track to meet the goal of 5% or fewer students with 6 or more ODRs by the end of the year.Which grade level(s) have the most students with 6 or more major ODRs?Change graph type to GradeGrade(s) #, # have more students with 6 or more major ODRs than other grades, indicating these grades may need more support.Additional Data Sources Coach: Spring only: See your coach’s guide for directions on how to run the Triangle Data Report in SWIS and look for noteworthy patterns across years. Consider if additional data sources are needed and make a plan to gather that data prior to the data review date. Prepopulate the status column in the table below and be prepared to review with your team. Table 2.5 Additional data sourcesAdditional DataStatusSWIS Triangle Data ReportAre there any noteworthy patterns across years? For example, is the percentage of students with two or more referrals decreasing from one year to the next?Noteworthy patterns or observations: TEXTWhat additional student outcome data sources might you consider when identifying areas of need with respect to Tier 1 Behavior (e.g., suspensions, use of seclusion and/or restraint)?Data Source: TEXTNoteworthy patterns or observations: TEXTTier 2/Tier 3 Behavior Precise Problem Statement(s)Based on the information just reviewed will we focus our problem-solving efforts as a School Leadership Team?Team: Identify one or two Precise Problem Statement(s) in the area of Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior. If you have focused on Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior before, go back to your previous precise problem statement(s) to see if these problems are still relevant and should be pasted in the table below or if new problem statements should be developed.Table 2.6 Precise problem statement(s) for Tier 2/Tier 3 behaviorWho/WhenWhat/Where(Problem, Location)As Measured ByExample 1: As of May, 2019, 33% of our students school-wide . . .are identified by their teachers as at moderate or high risk for Internalizing behavior problems compared to our goal of 20% or fewer,as measured by the Student Risk Screening ScaleExample 2: As of January, 2019, 18% of our students school-wide . . .have 2-5 office discipline referrals for major problem behaviors as compared to our goal of 15% or fewer by the end of the year, as measured by SWIS data1. as measured by SWIS.2. as measured by SWIS.Coach: See your Coaching Guide for additional examples.Team: Before moving on to Problem Analysis, review the precise problem statements developed for both Tier 2/Tier 3 Reading and Tier 2/Tier 3 Behavior. Consider posting these problem statements or restating them with a partner.Problem Analysis (90 minutes)Why Is the Problem Happening?To answer this question, we need to brainstorm what factors might be contributing to the problems we just identified. Given the reciprocal relationship between reading and behavior, we need to consider if there are common factors that are contributing to both sets of problems. We also need to examine our data to make sure we have identified the right factors. BrainstormTeam: Brainstorm any school-level factors that may be contributing to the problems. There are likely to be specific grade-level factors contributing to the problems as well, but your job as the School Leadership Team is to focus on school-wide factors (e.g., time, resources, training, coaching, leadership). If you have identified the same problems that you identified at your last data review, focus on why your previous solutions have not worked. List all ideas from the team in the table below that are within your control.Table 3.0 Potential contributing factors (within your control)AreaContributing FactorsTier 2/Tier 3 Reading TEXTTier 2/Tier 3 Behavior TEXTReview and ValidateWhen looking for reasons why our Intervention System is not yet producing the desired student outcomes, we need to study our data around intervention access and effectiveness. Access data looks at how many students who need an intervention are actually getting an intervention, and effectiveness data looks at the proportion of students within each type of intervention who are actually responding positively to that intervention. Coach: See your Coach’s Guide for guidance on measuring intervention access and effectiveness. Preview Tables 3.1 and 3.2 and determine what data you can gather and populate in these tables prior to your team’s data review day. Team: Refer to MIBLSI’s Intervention Access and Effectiveness Monitoring Tool (or other similar data sources that measure intervention access and effectiveness) as your coach guides you through Tables 3.1 and 3.2 below.Are ALL students who need intervention support currently receiving some type of intervention support (i.e., Tier 2, Tier 3 and special education services in reading, behavior interventions, social skills instruction, etc.)?Table 3.1 Intervention accessType of SupportAccess to SupportTier 2/Tier 3 ReadingSchool-wide, #% (#) of students were identified as needing reading intervention supports. Of these students, #% (#) were receiving reading intervention supports as of DATE. Grade level(s) #, # have students who need reading supports but were not receiving these supports as of DATE, indicating these grade levels may need more support to increase access to reading interventions.Tier 2/Tier 3 BehaviorSchool-wide, #% (#) of students were identified as needing behavior intervention supports. Of these students, #% (#) are receiving behavior intervention supports as of DATE. Grade level(s) #, # have students who need behavior supports but are not currently receiving these supports, indicating these grade levels may need more support to increase access to behavior interventions.Are most students who are receiving some type of intervention support (i.e., Tier 2, Tier 3 and/or special education services) currently responding to that support (e.g., most students performing at or above the mastery criteria for the intervention program assessment, most students on-track to meet (or have met) the exit criteria for the intervention program)?Table 3.2 Intervention effectivenessType of SupportEffectiveness of SupportSmall Group ReadingAs of DATE, there were # different intervention groups for reading, school-wide. Group size ranged from # to # students, compared to our target group size of 8 or fewer students.The following groups do not have a majority of their students currently responding to the intervention: TEXT (group name/instructor/program/grade level), indicating these groups may need more support to increase their effectiveness.Small Group BehaviorAs of DATE, there were # different intervention groups for behavior, school-wide. Group size ranged from # to # students.The following groups do not have a majority of their students currently responding to the intervention: TEXT (group name/instructor/program/grade level), indicating these groups may need more support to increase their effectiveness.Individualized Supports for Reading and/or BehaviorAs of DATE, there were # students receiving individualized reading and/or behavior supports. Of these students, # are not responding to their supports.Now that we have examined our data specific to intervention access and effectiveness, we need to broaden our scope of analysis to consider our Intervention System as a whole. Coach: Locate your team’s most recent TFI scores AND their Intervention System document. Go through Tables 3.3 and 3.4 below paying careful attention to the TFI items listed in the second column and the corresponding sections of the Intervention System document. Highlight any TFI items that were scored a 0 or 1. Refer to the TFI scoring rubrics and item-level notes for more information on each item and add notes in the tables if needed. Do not check any of the boxes; your team will do that together if the team agrees that the factor is potentially related to the identified problems.If there are Tier 1 items that still need to be strengthened, make sure those items get identified in the “Maintenance of Tier 1” row in Table 3.3. Refer to the TFI Cultural Responsiveness Companion (Section II of the PBIS Cultural Responsiveness Field Guide) in your analysis of Tier 1 items. Team: Go through Tables 3.3 through 3.4 focusing first on factors with highlighted TFI item numbers. (Highlighted item numbers indicate a score of 0 or 1 on a TFI item related to that factor.) If the team agrees that this factor could potentially be related to any of the identified problems, place a check mark in the box (two left clicks, one right click). Consider any evidence you have available and place a “Y” in the right-hand column for any factors you are able to validate. Factors have been prioritized within each table to give you guidance on which factors you might choose to address first in your problem solving. Table 3.3 General contributing factors that may impact the intervention system Common Factors (Related Data Source)TFI ItemsValidatedY or NPlan Implementation and EvaluationInstallation activities and/or activities in the MTSS Implementation plan are not being completed because activities are not feasible and/or the staff assigned to complete these activities do not understand what to do or when to do it (See “Did we implement our plan?” section of this worksheet)Plan does not include activities focused on developing and monitoring the Intervention System (MTSS Implementation Plan)Plan is hard to find, hard to use, or not well developed Plan is not routinely monitored (e.g., monthly) (R-TFI 1.25)Relevant activities in the plan are not embedded into the school improvement plan (R-TFI 1.8)R-TFI 1.8, 1.25Maintenance of Tier 1Even though Tier 1 fidelity scores are strong, there are specific Tier 1 activities that are not being maintained (or still need to be strengthened) as the focus gets shifted to the Intervention System (Any Tier 1 R-TFI or SW-PBIS TFI items that still need to be addressed AND R-TFI 2.2, 3.1; SWPBIS TFI 2.8, 3.13)R-TFI Tier 1 items: #.#, #.# PLUS 2.2, 3.1 SWPBIS-TFI Tier 1 items: #. #, #, # PLUS 2.8, 3.13Buy In / Readiness for Tier 2/Tier 3Staff are not bought in and/or ready to make changes to Tier 2/3 supports (Feedback from readiness activities, interviews, surveys)Team: Table 3.4 has been organized to align to each part of your Intervention System. Access your Intervention System document as another data source in addition to your TFI scores as you review this section.Table 3.4 Contributing factors unique to the intervention systemCommon Factors (Related Data Source)TFI ItemsValidatedY or NTeam Structure (Intervention System documentation, Part 1)School Leadership Team (SLT) needs to build its own capacity to support the Intervention System (e.g., set aside additional meeting time to develop and monitor the school’s Intervention System, identify personnel with specific qualifications or expertise to join the team when needed, strengthen its operating procedures) (SWPBIS TFI 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2)SLT does not have the capacity to develop and monitor the Intervention System, and a new Intervention System Team has not been formed (SWPBIS TFI 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2)An Intervention System Team has been formed but the team needs to build its own capacity to support the Intervention System (e.g., ensure communication with the SLT, identify personnel with specific qualifications or expertise to join the team, strengthen its operating procedures) (SWPBIS TFI 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2)Grade-level Teams do not have a process to follow (or need more help from the SLT to learn and use the process) for supporting students with skill deficits (R-TFI 2.1)Student Support Teams are not established and/or do not use an effective team meeting process (R-TFI 3.2, 3.4, SWPBIS TFI 3.4)R-TFI, 2.1, 3.2, 3.4SWPBIS TFI 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4Identifying Students (Part 2)Data sources and entrance criteria have not been determined or are not being used to identify which students need Tier 2/3 supports (R-TFI 2.1, SWPBIS TFI 2.3, 3.3)R-TFI 2.1SWPBIS TFI 2.3, 3.3Intervention Grid (Part 3)No interventions are currently available and/or in use (staff survey, master schedule)No formal process exists for selecting interventions (R-TFI 2.3) No (or only one) Tier 2 intervention with documented evidence of effectiveness is in use (SW-PBIS TFI 2.5)Existing interventions are not well aligned to common needs within the school (e.g., Data indicate a need for interventions in basic decoding, but only fluency building interventions are available) Tier 2 interventions do not provide additional instruction/time, improved structure or increased feedback (SWPBIS TFI 2.6)Intervention grids have not been developed to match student needs to intervention through a data-based process (R-TFI 2.4, SWPBIS TFI 2.7, 3.3)R-TFI 2.3, 2.4SWPBIS TFI 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 3.3Placement and Grouping Procedures (Part 4) Intervention grids are not being used to match student needs to intervention through a data-based process (R-TFI 2.4, SWPBIS TFI 2.7, 3.3)Once an intervention has been selected, no guidance is available on how to appropriately place the student in the intervention or group the student with other students with similar needs (Placement and grouping flowcharts)Intervention groupings are not appropriate (e.g., students grouped together with dissimilar needs, too large of groups, inefficient use of resources) (R-TFI 2.5)R-TFI 2.4, 2.5SWPBIS TFI 2.7, 3.3Interventionist Training and Implementation Supports (Part 5)Professional learning, both initial and on-going, is not provided, or is not sufficient for staff responsible for implementing Tier 2 and/or Tier 3 interventions (R-TFI 2.8, 3.8, SWPBIS TFI 2.9, 3.7)Interventionists need more professional learning and/or implementation supports in order to effectively teach, acknowledge and re-teach behavioral expectations and routines during intervention time (ODRs by staff member, observations)The scheduling of interventions is not coordinated with Tier 1 (R-TFI 2.7, SWPBIS TFI 2.8)Announcements/assemblies/specialized events are unintentionally causing disruptions to intervention timeStaff are not assigned to facilitate individualized plans for Tier 3 behavior supports (SWPBIS TFI 3.5)R-TFI 2.7, 2.8, 3.8SWPBIS TFI 2.8, 2.9, 3.5, 3.7Fidelity (Part 6) Fidelity of interventions is not adequately monitored (R-TFI 2.12, SWPBIS TFI 2.12)Fidelity of the intervention system is not measured at least annually (TFI administration record in MiMTSS, SWPBIS TFI 2.13, 3.17)R-TFI 2.12SWPBIS TFI 2.12, 2.13, 3.17Data Use and Analysis (Part 7)Progress monitoring data are not collected, not a good match, and/or not being administered or scored with fidelity (R-TFI 2.10, SWPBIS TFI 2.11, 3.15)Data system is not adequate to display student progress and/or not easily accessible to teaching staff (R-TFI 2.11)Grade level instructional plans do not include decisions on when and how progress monitoring will occur for students receiving Tier 2 (R-TFI 2.2)Data is not being gathered on the percent of students who are accessing Tier 2 or Tier 3 supports from the total number of students who need these supports (R-TFI 2.9, 3.10, SWPBIS TFI 2.10, 3.16) Intervention access data are not being used to identify strengths and areas for improvement in the Intervention System (R-TFI 2.9, SWPBIS TFI 2.10, 3.16)The percent of students responding to each type of Tier 2 and Tier 3 support is not being monitored (R-TFI 2.13, SWPBIS TFI 2.11, 3.14)Intervention effectiveness data are not being used to evaluate the effectiveness of Tier 2 and Tier 3 supports or to adjust supports (R-TFI 2.13, 2.14, SWPBIS TFI 2.11, 2.13, 3.14, 3.17)Student attendance data are not collected and/or analyzed for each intervention (R-TFI 2.12, Intervention attendance log)R-TFI 2.2, 2.9, 2.10, 2.11, 2.12, 2.13, 2.14, 3.10SWPBIS TFI 2.10, 2.11, 2.13, 3.15, 3.16, 3.17Intensifying Interventions (Part 8)Multiple data sources are not used to inform intensive intervention plans (R-TFI 3.5, SWPBIS TFI 3.9)Diagnostic data are not collected at all (or with fidelity) when more in-depth information is needed to inform intensive intervention plans (R-TFI 3.9)Intensive intervention plans are not adjusted based on decision rules (R-TFI 3.11)Intervention variables (core features: precision, engagement, feedback, practice; enablers: time, grouping, instructor) are not altered to intensify supports (R-TFI 3.6)Hypothesis statements are not developed to inform individualized support plans (SWPBIS TFI 3.10) Individualized behavior support plans do not include all seven core features (SWPBIS TFI 3.11)Aggregated data for all individualized behavior support plans are not routinely shared with staff (SWPBIS TFI 3.14)Each student’s individual support team does not meet routinely to review the plan using both fidelity and student outcome data for decision making (SWPBIS TFI 3.15)Attempts to invite parents/guardians to collaborate on intervention plans are not made or are not sufficient (R-TFI 3.2, 3.7)R-TFI 3.2, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.9, 3.11SWPBIS TFI 3.10, 3.11, 3.14, 3.15Communication Protocols (Part 9)No written request form or formal process is in place for staff, families and/or students to request assistance or additional professional learning is needed to use the existing form/process (R-TFI 3.3, SWPBIS TFI 2.4, 2.9)R-TFI 3.3SWPBIS TFI 2.4, 2.9DecideTeam: Review the factors you selected and validated in Tables 3.1 through 3.3 above. Then come to agreement on the top three to five factors that are contributing to the problem(s). (Revisit your precise problem statements if needed to keep the connection strong between your hypotheses and your problems.)Table 3.5 Hypothesis statementsIf we develop a plan to address (this contributing factor)Then we should expect to see (this change in student outcomes)Example 1: If we address fidelity of implementation for the following reading intervention groups: Blue groups 1 and 3, Purple group 2 and Green group 1Then more students should respond to instruction within these groups and reach benchmark status by the end of the yearExample 2: If we address our process for matching Tier 2 behavior interventions to student need and contextThen we should improve both access to Tier 2 behavior supports and effectiveness of those supports1.2.3.4.5.ConsiderTeam: Is there any additional information that you need to collect to further verify the contributing factors (e.g., observations, permanent product review)? If so, record action items in your plan and move on to Plan Development with the information you have available today.What Is Our New Objective?To answer this question, we need to think about how to make our hypotheses measurable. We need to set specific short-term objectives related to our hypotheses so we can evaluate if our plan works or not.Team: Add a specific short-term objective or two to your MTSS Implementation plan to monitor the effectiveness of these new activities. (Also include the related problem statement and hypotheses to remind you of the problem you are trying to solve.)Example:Short-term objective(s): By May 2019 all of our reading interventionists will be implementing their reading interventions with at least 80% fidelity on at least two observations as measured by our fidelity observation tools for each intervention. This will result in at least 70% of our students who are receiving interventions this winter/spring achieving the end of year benchmark as measured by the Acadeince Reading composite score. Precise Problem Statement: As of winter benchmark 2018, of our students who performed below benchmark in the fall, only 50% of them performed at/above benchmark at winter compared to our goal of 80% improvement from fall to winter. Hypotheses: If we address fidelity of implementation for the following reading intervention groups: Blue groups 1 and 3, Purple group 2 and Green group 1, then more students should respond to instruction within these groups and reach benchmark status by the end of the year.Plan Development (60 minutes)What Is Our Plan?To answer this question, we need to identify specific activities that are based upon our hypotheses, then prioritize and plan for these activities.MTSS Implementation Plan (hyperlink)Team: List and prioritize your activities and then add them to your MTSS Implementation Plan. Make sure to identify who will do what by when.Who Needs to Know It?To answer this question, we need to consider what information from today should be shared with our various stakeholder groups.Accomplishments and BarriersCommunication Protocol (hyperlink)Barrier Removal Process (hyperlink)Team: Refer to your Communication Protocols and Barrier Removal Process as you answer the questions in the table below.Table 4.0 Accomplishments and barriers planAccomplishments & BarriersStatusWhat accomplishments have you identified from today that you want to share out? (Refer to tables 1 and 2 if needed.) Also, make sure barriers are recorded in your barrier removal log. TEXTWhat is your plan for communicating accomplishments and barriers from today to your DIT prior to District Data Review? TEXTWhich other roles/groups will you target for communication from today? (e.g., Is there anything that would be helpful for your data coordinator to know regarding data access and/or accuracy?) TEXTMTSS UpdateMTSS Update Slide Deck/Template (hyperlink)Team: Complete the MTSS Update slide deck or use your own method of communicating MTSS updates to staff and other stakeholders. Record your plan for sharing the update.Plan for sharing the MTSS Update: TEXT ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download