The implementation of the RTI change initiative gave the greatest autonomy to remediation teachers. Before the remedial classes were implemented, these teachers regularly led their common planning teams, differentiated instruction for students, and consistently involved parents in their classrooms. Consequently, the administrative team asked these “master” teachers to not only instruct the remedial courses, but to help implement the RTI process as a change initiative. Having these teachers as a part of the planning team helped further define their roles as instructors of remedial courses. They were able to analyze data together, assess needs, choose targeted curricula for those needs, and design procedures for the entire school to implement …show more content…
This goal did not appear to be farfetched in the planning stages. The teachers of Florence Middle School were engaged in a culture where subject area teams regularly planned lessons together. Furthermore, grade level teams were meeting once a month. These teams already had a history of clearly articulating their ideas, goals, and plans to the administrative team on initiatives other than the RTI process. On the outside looking in, it appeared professional learning communities (PLCs) were in place at Florence Middle …show more content…
149). While our plans for the grade level meetings did not require outside professional learning, we hoped to see these five elements manifest as the intervention meetings progressed. Conversely, we would have been better served if we had first assessed the existing PLCs according to the five critical elements. Although teachers planned together at FMS, they were not in the habit of reflecting deeply on their practice together. Further, shared norms and values did not exist consistently among all planning teams. For example, one of the English teams shared the same lesson plans. However, only one teacher actually wrote the lesson plans. The other two teachers on the team passively followed her lead. Another subject area team shared their lesson plans with one another and reflected briefly on activities. These teachers then chose individually if they would use the recommended activities. Essentially, FMS had “planning teams,” but not “professional learning
The intervention model we use in our school is RTI. With Response to Intervention the instruction that as a function of the outcomes of the assessments. RTI drives changes in hopes to see in students succeed, who are identified at some level of risk for not meeting academic expectations. Tiered instruction represents a model in which the instruction delivered to students varies and are related to the nature and severity of the student's difficulties. This model is sub divided by 3 tiers:
Once the team’s vision had been established, we became very honest about our personal and professional strengths and our target areas of growth. From this conversation, the team was able to clearly define the focus and responsibilities of the PLC Leader and individual team members. The meeting was successful and everyone is excited about working together. Our vision will remain in the forefront of our meetings, reminding us to always provide a climate in our classrooms that fosters thoughtful and respectful consideration of all viewpoints.
Teaching is moving from an individual to a collective activity. The level of agreement and alignment across classrooms around powerful practices are increasing. The school is aligning its organizational resources around support for instructional improvement.
The role of the central office in the Response to Intervention (RTI) change initiative at Florence Middle School (FMS) began when the superintendent requested the school board approve the positions of the middle school interventionists in the district. Prior to the 2014-2015 school year, two high schools and the three middle schools in the district requested interventionists in anticipation of the new accountability model from the Mississippi Department of Education (MDE). The new accountability model calculated a school’s academic performance according to students’ growth on state assessments from one year to the next. Therefore, in 2013-2014, the schools requested interventionists be added to their faculties to better meet the needs of struggling students with significant learning gaps. The school board was unable to approve this request because the district’s budget could not afford the expense of the positions.
Response to Intervention (RTI) is a three-tiered system that provides for increasingly interventions as students move upward through the tiers. The first tier involves all students on a campus. During this tier, all students are provided with effective instruction using research-based teaching and learning strategies. Students are benchmarked at the beginning, middle, and end of each year. About 65%-75% of all students respond to the initial tier of interventions and no further intervention is required. Tier 2 interventions take place in small groups and are in addition to the interventions of Tier 1. The areas of weakness are targeted, and instruction may be provided by the general education teacher or other school personnel. Student progress
You are fortunate to have so many sources of support in your school. The fact that you have two RTI facilitators perform much the work instead of the classroom teacher is great. Their assistance with pulling students for instruction and progress monitoring is a tremendous time saver for the teacher. Also, having the remedial class teachers responsible for interventions is wonderful assistance. Finally, you have two inclusion teachers to provide support for these processes. All of this cooperation is fantastic for students and teachers. It shows a well thought out system that works well for your school.
The leadership team discussed specific outcomes that they want accomplish, taking into consideration the issues they want to address. After careful deliberation, they decided that they wanted to create a process of implementation with a feedback loop in which teachers and staff discuss each lesson. Documentation would be written down of what worked and what did not work and modifications could be done for the upcoming lessons. This could be accomplished by setting time for staff to meet and discuss lesson implementation, areas of strength and weakness. After discussion the staff would discuss and change the lesson plans to meet the needs of classroom. By crating this process of implementation staff can course correct
RTI helps school districts recognize students who are below grade level and provides progress monitoring, interventions and intense instruction (O’Meara). The RTI framework consists of three components, the assessment process, tiered interventions and the problem solving method (Appelbaum). Tier 1 provides instruction that is curriculum aligned, utilizes differentiated instruction and feedback on progress (Searle). If a student is struggling in tier 1, they are moved to tier 2. Tier 2 offers students additional services and academic support (O’Meara). Students in tier 2, receive general classroom instruction in the classroom, with additional instruction in any weak areas of content (Searle). For students that need more support than offered in tier 2 are put into tier 3(O’Meara). Students in tier 3 require individualized instruction and academic support in a one on one setting with a special educator. Tier 3 students are pulled out of the classroom when students are working independently, this is so students in tier 3 do not miss out on general curriculum (Searle). This paper will explore further in depth the RTI framework.
First, initially creating a pacing guide deciding when to assess students involves collaboration. Teachers at an American urban elementary school brought samples of their students work to discuss. They compared their student’s work to students in other classes. They noticed similarities and
The author of the article also ascertain that the practice is an effective one since the RTI practice is capable of matching researched-based interventions that are of high quality to the behavioral and educational needs of the students. The practice also uses the concept of monitoring the progress used in assessing need for the require changes in goals or instructions, and finally, the practice may also include the additional tiers for the purpose of instructional intensity or if possible even to be eligible for special education (Rose & Howley,
RTI has three tier levels. At Tier 1, all students are at the general instruction and assessment stage. At Tier 2, some students are at the supplementary instruction and assessment stage. At Tier 3, few students are at the specialized instruction and assessment stage. This stage can take quite some time for students to get out of, but educational professionals need to continue to be patient and work with students. This is also an opportunity for educational professionals to collaborate with their team to come up with differentiated instructional
After careful deliberation, they decided that they wanted to create a process of implementation with a feedback loop in which teachers and staff discuss and reflect on each lesson. Documentation would be written down of what worked, and what did not work, and modifications could be done for the upcoming lessons. By crating this process of implementation staff can course correct as implementation of project-base learning takes place. To accomplish this the leadership team came up with three goals statements:
No longer should teachers see themselves as simply transmitters of content. Indeed, the role of the educator has shifted from the traditional position of being the giver of information to that of a process designer and coordinator. This role alteration from the traditional teacher-centered to the learner-centered approach is a paradigm shift that requires skill in needs assessment as well as the ability to involve learners in planning, link learners to learning resources, and encourage learner initiative (Knowles et al., 1998; Mangena & Chabeli,
Collaboration between teachers is a key component to professional development that will lead to higher student achievement. There is a need for schools to set up time for teachers to be able to collaborate together. This allows for teachers to help each other, matchup content, teach each other new and best practices, troubleshoot student issues just to name a few of the areas that collaboration time can help foster within a school. The key is to build time for teachers to be able to collaborate during the school day or week. This collaboration time needs to be between grade levels, departments, and cross curricular when needed. For many schools this is an afterthought to the school schedule or a fleeting thought after the master schedule is completed. A principal needs to keep an open mind to any strategy that will enable the teachers to be able to collaborate for the good of the students and the school.
During the implementation of this unit plan I followed and met all of Danielson’s framework domains almost every day. The lessons within the unit were very thought out and I planned then re-planned the unit because I realized that some lessons would not be enough and some lessons would be too much for kindergarteners to complete at one time. I also wrote out a timeline of how I would teach the lessons and had my cooperating teacher look over the timeline to help me ensure the layout of the lessons were appropriate. When planning my instruction I took the classroom environment and the student’s learning styles into a lot of consideration. I thought about the lessons and incorporated different learning styles so I would be reaching all