Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Team A: RTI Presentation
Transcript of Team A: RTI Presentation
January 14, 2013
Pamela Weir History of RTI Dual Role of RTI The Three Tiers of RTI Tier Two Tier Three Tier One Response to Instruction Origins during the 1970's
First Conceptualized in 1982
Created to avoid the Discrepancy Model
Was reauthorized in 2004 for the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Dr. Judy Elliot
Former Chief Academic Officer
Los Angeles Unified School District Academic:
Rapid response to
such students Academic:
High intensity for
longer duration Originally RTI was developed for
RTI can play the same role in identifying
areas non-special education students fall behind in
Specific intervention techniques can be
applied to close the gap for students
struggling in certain academic areas. Those techniques will be addressed in the Response to Intervention section Response to Intervention Multi-Level Prevention System Screening Progress Monitoring Data-Based Decision Making RTI's Effect on Schools RTI's Effect on School (Cont.) RTI's Effect on Schools:
Innovation RTI's Effect on Schools:
Legalities Five to 10 Year Analysis:
Sustainability Five to 10 Year Analysis Behavioral:
Rapid response Behavioral:
Intense, durable procedures History of RTI (Cont.) RTI was developed in order to
Identify children with learning disabilities. It gives teachers the opportunity to catch students before they fail.
Prior to RTI the discrepancy model was used to determine a child's level based on educational achievement and IQ. Most cases involved a child not being identified as needing intervention until the end of their courses. references The Future of RTI is strong and promising as it advocates taking a closer look at students and properly assessing the needs of students that have not been able to adequately demonstrate content knowledge.
It endeavors to meet the needs of students through intervention and prevention.
It is a widely used measurement tool and has been recognized since 2004.
Since its recognition in 2004 RTI has continue to grow as a trend and coupled with the Common Core Standards, it seems as though it has found a permanency in education The adoption of RTI by more school districts as an option beyond the reasons of special education only improves its evolution from intervention to the area of instruction
Continued effort in increasing data-base sizes
Multiple companies expanding and evolving software to accommodate new findings and needs from different districts Companies are emerging with better and faster data-base software
New questions are raised and deeper, more evolved approaches to common problems are being applied. New questions regarding the labeling of special education students through the use of RTI has arisen
No hindrance from a legal standpoint has taken place since RTI's acceptance in 2004.
With good reason, only the documentation for recommendations has changed as educators and the government alike have seen the positive effects of RTI Students receive one-on-one specialized instruction should they need it
Less students are perceived as special education students therefore both identifying their needs academically and behaviorally
Improves the savings of resources Rules out other deficits in learners
- educational or cultural disadvantages
- poor instruction
- motivational deficits After looking over the different tiers of students, one can now utilize the four areas of RTI to address said students.
Below is a diagram of the model used in RTI: Multi-level prevention system includes three levels of intensity or prevention
The primary level of prevention includes high quality core instruction
The secondary level includes evidence-based intervention(s) of moderate intensity
The last prevention level includes individualized intervention(s) of increased intensity for students who show minimal response to secondary prevention.
At all levels, attention should be on fidelity of implementation, with consideration for cultural and linguistic responsiveness and recognition of student strengths (National Center on Response to Intervention, 2012). Used to identify or predict which students may need intervention
Brief tests along with national tests are used in the screening phase of RTI (National Center on Response to Intervention, 2012). Assess student progression
Quantify any progression
Identify which intervention techniques worked best for the student or class
(National Center on Response to Intervention, 2012) Data analysis and decision making occur in this phase
Different interventions are analyzed for success
The labeling of students according to state law takes place (National Center on Response to Intervention, 2012)