In our district, Tier I is the 90 minute literacy block required for all students. Students who are some risk on Dibels must currently be progressed monitored every week or two. (Fall 09 these students must receive 30 extra minutes of small group instruction with a teacher (not independent or computer work) Students who score at risk on Dibels currently must receive 30 additional minutes of small group instruction with a teacher and be progress monitored every one to two weeks. (Fall 09 these students must receive 60 minutes additional small group instruction.) This is all for Reading. Fall 09 the same amount of time in additional support will be required for math. This means that a teacher could spend an extra hour to three hours working with the at risk students. I do not have a problem with the students getting extra help but I do worry about the impact on the rest of the class. In a non-title school with no interventionist and no math specialist or reading specialist t his is a logistical nightmare.
As far as the research based programs go, many of them do not have adequate research behind them. An article in Education Week not long ago discussed the lack of valid research. Some programs that are research based have very small studies behind them usually conducted by the company who put out the product. This is all very messed up. A college professor recently told me that the person who came up with idea for RTi or the tiers is unhappy with the way it has been put into practice. What started as a great idea has been taken to an extreme he never intended. Susan -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Beverlee Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Bev: I've been trying not to add anything to the RTI discussion because I > just > don't have much positive to say right now. My ENORMOUS frustration is the > "research-based" and "measurable" facets, not with the philosophy, which is > wonderful. Again, I believe the whole thing is profit-driven if you peel > back > enough layers. The same folk who gave us Reading First "programs" and > tutoring > "programs" and summer school "programs" just happen to also have intervention > "programs" for sale. And, once again, RtI must use "scientifically-based > programs" (and they of course tell you which those are). But, the clincher > remains the measurement. Just think about it--what meaningful intervention > can > be measured in 4-6 weeks??? DIBELS measures parts. Parts can be measured. > Part measurement can be charted. Documentation springs eternal. But...what > about the kind of learning that Ellin talks of in To Understand? What about > ANYTHING greater than parts? By setting the 4-week intervention requirement, > a > team MUST choose parts -- what else could change in that amount of time that > can > be easily measured and charted over and over? Maybe comprehension is the > problem (ya think?) -- what significant can be taught with a scientifically > based program, measured, charted, retaught, etc. etc. etc.?? > > This is why I try so hard to just steer clear of any discussion. I can't > imagine that there is absolutely anything other than a profit-motive for the > assessment- and program-makers AND a way to lower our swelling special > education > numbers, which is what big business and government is demanding. Do you > think > kids will really be referred if the classroom teacher knows what happens next > -- > documentation, leaving of other learners to fend for themselves, many > meetings, > the kind of interventions required that might not even fit the kid? I > believe > teachers deserve all the credit in the world--they are our nations' unseen > and > unheralded treasures. But, give me a break, they also have an abundance of > common sense. If they know a kid needs extra help AND they know what it will > cost to get it to them through RtI, what do we think they'll do? They'll > decide > to help them after school every night when they can choose interventions that > they believe are effective, even if they can't be documented quantitatively > and > quickly. They'll ask a para to give them extra support (now there's a new > idea, > right?). They'll pair them with peers. They'll do what teachers have always > done. And, if there's any way humanly possible to live with themselves and > their conscience, they'll ignore anyone on the margin - and those are the > very > ones that true, quality interventions would make all the difference for. > > *************************************************************** > > > Jennifer: Some schools seem to require 'research based programs" as part of > the > tier 1,2 or 3 interventions...but others seem to be looser in what counts as > intervention. What seems to be crucial is careful data collection to prove > that > a child is not responding to the series of interventions and then that can > get > them qualified as an Learning Disabled child and receive special ed outside > of > the discrepancy formula most districts have used before this time. > _________________________________________________________________ > Enjoy 5 GB of free, password-protected online storage. > http://www.windowslive.com/skydrive/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_skyd > rive_062008 > _______________________________________________ > Mosaic mailing list > Mosaic@literacyworkshop.org > To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to > http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. > > Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive. > _______________________________________________ Mosaic mailing list Mosaic@literacyworkshop.org To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive.
