An Interview with Jeff Livingston: About  McGraw-Hill’s Education Response to Intervention Virtual Conference May 2009

Michael F. Shaughnessy - May 20, 2008
Senior Columnist EducationNews.org
Eastern New Mexico University

Portales, New Mexico

Jeff Livingston is senior vice president of marketing for SRA/McGraw-Hill and Wright Group/McGraw-Hill. Jeff previously served as vice president of Urban Markets, Database Marketing and Inside Sales. Before joining the McGraw-Hill education companies in 2004, Jeff was a successful entrepreneur with specialties in instructional technology and marketing to urban school systems. In this interview, he responds to some critical questions about Response to Intervention and the difficulties in implementation.

1)      Jeff, there has been a lot of talk about “response to intervention” or “response to instruction” as some call it. When, and where did this start and how did it come about?

Response to Intervention (RTI) came about initially in response to the over-identification of special education students – students being identified as disabled not because they had a disability but because they had not been successful in a general education program.

With IDEA 2004, the U.S. DOE strongly recommended the use of RTI over the former LD Discrepancy model/IQ Discrepancy model as way of helping address the increasingly high percentages of students being misidentified as learning disabled.

IDEA requires the use of scientifically based research to guide decisions about which interventions to implement. Since the passage of IDEA 2004, all states have implemented some type of RTI initiative/model framework or guidance for districts to model. To learn more about RTI in your state, state RTI initiatives can be found at:

o   The IDEA Partnership: http://www.ideapartnership.org/report.cfm?repoRTId=309

o   The Regional Resource Center Program (RRCP):

http://www.rrfcnetwork.org/component/option,com_bookmarks/Itemid,28/mode,0/catid,86/navstart,0/search,*/

Because the U.S. DOE does not specify a recommended RTI model it is left open to wide interpretation of what are the appropriate models of intervention. National educational organizations, states, non-profit education agencies/organizations and educational publishers have all “interpreted” RTI differently. That said, most would agree that RTI is about improving education for all students. What may have initially started as a way of improving the identification and referral of students with learning disabilities has become a framework for systematic intervention for all students to improve learning across general education.

2)      As teachers hear about this strategy, the question repeatedly comes up “When am I going to find time to do this?” and “How can I be expected to do this when I have so many students in my classes?”

According to James B. Hale, Ph.D. in Response to Intervention: Guidelines for Parents and Practitioners, “RTI is what good teachers have always done to help struggling children learn.”

In its simplest form, RTI is “when a teacher modifies instruction (intervention) to help a struggling child, and then checks the child’s progress regularly (called progress monitoring) to see if the intervention is working. If the intervention is working, the problem is solved. If the intervention is not working, you change the intervention and monitor progress. This process continues until the child improves.”

The current version of RTI is novel because it mandates good instructional practices (i.e. empirically or research-based) and evaluation of academic progress (i.e. progress monitoring) for all children. With RTI schools, all school personnel—classroom teachers, reading specialists, special education teachers, and administrators—work together in a partnership to identify and address the learning needs of children. RTI does require new ways of thinking about aligning support, grouping children for instruction, and scheduling supplemental and intensive instruction, but the classroom teacher is not solely responsible.

One of the challenges of implementing RTI is determining who will provide the intervention. If the classroom teacher will provide the intervention, then small group instruction could occur when students are working independently at classroom learning centers. If a person other than the classroom teacher is providing the intervention, intervention lessons can occur at times that do not conflict with other critical content areas, such as mathematics.

3)      Will educational assistants be able to do Response to Intervention?

Effective implementations of RTI depend on the child receiving quality instruction and the support they need to be successful. In RTI schools, one function of the leadership team is to ensure that implementers are adequately trained to use materials and teaching strategies. To the extent that educational assistants have the training, knowledge, and skills, they can participate by running interventions, listening to students read, helping to monitor progress, etc.

4)      Now, let’s talk about student absences. A great many students are sick, ill, and have doctor’s appointments. How can teachers do any type of consistent intervention when kids are so frequently out of school for illness?

This problem is not limited to RTI. If students are out frequently for illness, it is an instructional problem… period. The benefit of having RTI in place is that classroom teachers have access to someone—a facilitator, a coach—who can assist by troubleshooting problems and providing appropriate resources as necessary to address the problem.

5)      Many familiar with Response to Intervention describe it as a “Pin Ball” phenomenon, meaning the student gets better for a while, then regresses. They are moved to Level II, then back to Level I then back up to Level II. What is this data telling teachers and parents?

This is indeed a challenge for those who want to use an RTI framework. This “pin ball” phenomenon signals a point at which the RTI team needs to determine why the pattern exists. Not only do they have to consider student achievement data, they have to analyze broader implementation data. It may be that additional materials or practices need to be added to support a weak area within the core program rather than different instruction in Tier II. It could be that the Tier II instruction should continue for a longer period of time or that another level of intensity is needed.

6)      Some see Response to Intervention as simply “delaying the inevitable”—with very serious dire consequences and a lot of time wasted before the child gets the intervention they need. Your thoughts?

Coordinated, multi-tier instruction efforts like RTI can potentially prevent many struggling readers from falling behind and provide educational assistance in a timely manner to prevent more students from falling between the cracks.

Identification of at-risk students usually occurs in the first month of the school year. Once at-risk students are selected, their responsiveness to general classroom instruction is monitored. At the end of a relatively short period (e.g., eight weeks), students who are unresponsive to classroom instruction are provided more intensive instruction, either in or outside of the classroom.

The intervention phase serves two purposes: to provide struggling students with early, effective instruction and to provide a valid means of assessing learner needs. Students’ rate of growth—their responsiveness—replaces test performance.

When there is a lack of progress, despite the intensity of the intervention and the expertise and efforts of their instructors, a learning disability is suspected, further evaluation undertaken and special education assistance considered. The data that has been collected during the intervention phase generates diagnostic information that helps practitioners make classification and placement decisions.

In contrast, the IQ-achievement discrepancy model, which was widely used before RTI, is a “wait to fail” approach. Students had to fall dramatically behind their peers in academic achievement to be diagnosed with a learning disability, often not until Grade 2 or Grade 3.

7)    Now, how much empirical evidence is there that this intervention really works?

As is common in education, more research is needed. However, view pretty much everyone, from the U.S. DOE to states, districts and national organizations RTI as a way of improving education for ALL students.

A new report, Assisting Students Struggling with Reading: Response to Intervention (RTI) and Multi-tier Intervention in the Primary Grades, which is available through What Works Clearinghouse, provides clear information on critical RTI topics, based on the best available evidence. For example, the report found strong evidence that supports Tier II intervention, in which students receive small group instruction in homogeneous groups for 20 to 40 minutes, three to five days a week. The report also cited studies which showed that progress monitoring in reading (oral reading fluency or word identification fluency in Grades 1 and 2) increases teachers’ awareness of students’ current level of reading proficiency and has a positive effect on the instructional decisions teachers make.

In addition, of those districts with enough data to measure, nearly tree times as many report improvements in AYP using RTI. Districts that are fully implementing RTI report better results than those that are piloting it, according to the Response to Intervention Adoption Survey from Spectrum K12 School Solutions Inc.

For states, districts, and teachers looking for tools and information relating to assessment of students and assessment of RTI models as a whole, they can download a process for assessing whether Response to Intervention is working in a school or district presented by Vanderbilt University professors Doug and Lynn Fuchs, (who also are co-authors of SRA/McGraw-Hill’s Imagine It! program).

8)   What about second language students whose classroom learning difficulty is due to the fact that they are still learning English?

Effective Literacy and English Language Instruction for English Learners in the Elementary Grades: A Practice Guide recently released through What Works Clearing House made instructional recommendations based on a review of high-quality research. The recommendations emphasized the importance of intensive, interactive English language development for all English language users. The recommendations also closely resembled many of the practices used in RTI schools.

For example, the guide recommended that schools conduct formative assessments with English learners using English lan­guage measures of phonological pro­cessing, letter knowledge, and word and text reading and that the schools use these data to identify English learners who require additional instructional support and to monitor their reading progress over time.

The guide also recommended that schools provide focused, intensive small-group interventions for English learners de­termined to be at risk for reading prob­lems. The report indicated the amount of time in small-group instruction and the inten­sity of this instruction should reflect the degree of risk, determined by read­ing assessment data and other indica­tors, just like RTI.

9)      Could you tell us about some scientifically based interventions for written expression or oral expression, or science or math? Are there packaged programs available?

SRA/Wright Group/McGraw-Hill have a wide array of scientifically based interventions programs for reading, math, and science. Both the SRA and Wright Group Web sites have Response to Intervention sections, which call-out the tier the program fits and the research behind the program.

In addition, we’ve launched InterventionResources.com where educators can create their own customized solution base on their intervention needs.

We also recently hosted our first virtual conference for school principals and district leaders, focusing on Response to Intervention. The online seminar allowed educators to:

·         Attend general sessions and listen to experts on RTI

·         Learn more about Pre-K–12 reading, math, and science intervention strategies

·         Hear about education trends and federal funding opportunities

·         Visit booths for free samples, product information, and presentations

·         Chat with product specialists

·         Network with other educators

The conference is available to download on-demand.

10)     How much in-service are teachers going to need to implement RTI with integrity?

Lack of teacher training has actually been identified as the biggest obstacle to implementing RTI. The exact amount of in-service required will depend on the knowledge and skills of the leadership team and of the staff. But it is safe to say that teachers will need professional development on the use of information gathered through progress monitoring, instructional strategies, as well as continuing support and ongoing coaching. One-shot professional development will not lead to improvements being implemented.

11)     What have I neglected to ask?

I would just like to talk more about the SRA/Wright Group/McGraw-Hill Response to Intervention virtual conference a bit more. We came up with this idea so that we can better serve our customers. It is a totally free professional development opportunity for school and district leaders, and it was a great success with more than 400 participants on our April 8 launch date.

We fully expect to continue offering this type of resource to our customers. Our Response to Intervention conference included a survey asking participants to rate the event and to offer suggestions for future subjects such as Strategic Uses of Stimulus Funds or English-language learners, so our topics will be decided upon with input from the audience.

At the end of the day, the medium is the message, and McGraw-Hill Education is using every possible mechanism to reach educators and provide them with the information they need to be successful. Response to Intervention is a growing trend as an effective framework for diagnosing, intervening, and monitoring struggling students. But there are many varying definitions and interpretations of Response to Intervention (RTI). The virtual conference was intended to host a conversation on what RTI looks like and what more can be done to support educators in implementing the RTI model.