Tier System Interventions - Case Study Example

Tier System Interventions Question Response to intervention (RTI) deals with identification of child learning disabilities; this is doneearly in life to help children overcome such difficulties in their future life. Learning disability (LD) diagnosis is done based on the results of an RTI systematic test. When a child shows certain characteristics that according to RTI define a certain learning disability, conclusion can be drawn and necessary intervention can be made. For Maria’s case, she shows varied performance results across all the aspects of a child’s life. In math lessons, the teacher admits that Maria at certain times fail to complete her assignments in time, she appears not to ask question or participate in class work irrespective of the topic, however, her results shows that she understands the concepts1. Multi tire systems is an intervention aimed at helping young children overcome learning difficulties. Each tire is characterized by different intensities of instruction to help develop certain skills in the child. Multi-Tier system have different levels of instruction in each tire, they are designed to fit each pupil’s academic needs1. The first tire involves the application of evidences to help students gain reading skills. Classroom assessments and the evaluation of student progress is also an essential component to this Tier. These assessments allow school districts to not only evaluate individual student achievement, but also the quality of instructional practices and its effect on group achievement1. The second Tier involves assessing and identifying students who are not responding to general instructional methods and providing more intense training in areas of weakness. Assessment is a significant component at this level, as results allow schools to determine students’ baseline abilities and whether they are responding to additional instruction1. Tier 3 is an intervention reserved for those students who do not respond to more intense instruction methods. Formal referrals for special education evaluations are frequently necessary at this point. Data gathered from the pre-referral intervention provides important information in the special education evaluation process by allowing diagnosticians the ability to determine effective learning strategies. After assessment is complete, an eligibility determination for special education is then made2. A three-Tiered model for instruction and intervention is based on the principle that academic and behavioral supports are first provided at a core or universal level to effectively address the needs of all students in a school. However, not all students will respond to the same curricula and teaching strategies. As a result, some students with identified needs receive supplemental or targeted instruction and intervention at Tier 2. Finally, at Tier 3, a few students with the most severe needs receive intensive and individualized behavioral and/or academic support2. There are a number of factors, which qualifies a child to fit in Tier 3; this can be evaluated by multiple methods as no single method is likely to identify all students who would benefit from Tier 3 supports. An effective “screening” process should provide the following information3: 1. Students who exhibit externalizing behaviors 2. Students who exhibit internalizing behaviors 3. Students who present many classroom challenges 4. Students experiencing in-class consequences but do not get a discipline referral 5. Students in ESE settings who may still need additional behavioral supports Internalizing behaviors are behavior problems that the student directs inwardly toward him or herself. Internalizing behaviors are often based on social deficits and avoidance. Examples of internalizing behaviors include may be exhibiting by3. 1. shy, timid, or nonassertive behavior 2. avoiding or withdrawing from social situations (e.g., not talking with peers; not participating in activities or games); 3. non-responsiveness to social overtures from others. Externalizing behaviors are behavior problems that are observable and overt, often directed toward people and/or objects in the social environment. Behavior problems in the externalizing dimension are exhibited at high rates and/or intensity and are considered inappropriate in school settings. Examples of externalizing behaviors includes3: 1. aggression toward people 2. destruction of property 3. theft 4. disruptions (e.g., tantrums, out of seat, disturbing others) 5. serious violation of rules (e.g., overt noncompliance, not following rules). These trends are not present in Maria and as a result, she definitely does not need tire 1 intervention, evaluating his ability based on tire 2 needs, she shows need for support. Her lack of ability to participate in math lessons can be attributed the fact that she feels insufficient in mathematics and fears that her arguments may be wrong or she does not believe in her knowledge of mathematics3. She also shows some other behaviors that relates to learning difficulties, they include inability to complete mathematics assignments in time, inability to read properly and the need to be assisted in maintaining a constant performance graph3. The teacher’s opinion to subject Maria to Tier 2 intervention is right. Although implementing core components of Tier 3 in Maria’s case with limited resources can be a challenging and requires a shift in philosophies, policies, and procedures along with commitment from everyone involved2. To build a sustainable, effective, efficient, and feasible Tier 3 system, it is important to ensure that Maria qualifies for tire 3 instruction. Tiers 1 and 2 are implemented with fidelity and are effective for the majority of students to demonstrate progress towards Tier 1 and Tier 2 goals. The intensity of Tier 3 supports necessitates a significant investment of time and resources from school staff3. Tier 3 interventions are designed to address the needs of students who are experiencing significant problems and/or are unresponsive to Tier 1 and Tier 2 supports. However, there may be instances when a student is experiencing very severe or significant academic, behavioral, or social-emotional problems and may need Tier 3 interventions. Such a group includes students receiving Tier 1 or Tier 2 supports but are not making adequate progress and/or are unresponsive to the continuum of supports available at Tier1 or Tier 24. Second, students who are experiencing very severe or significant academic and behavioral challenges also need Tier 3 support. Decisions about Tier 3 processes and strategies should be made accurately to ensure that the problems are solved4. At times, Tier 3 supports for students must expand beyond the scope of services the school provides to adequately address behaviors. Students may have mental health needs, or families may need more access to available community supports. Having a coordinated, integrated Tier 3 plan for service delivery involving community resources and agencies, such as mental health, public health, transportation, childcare, social services, recreation, and other community services, will provide a wider array of supports to best meet Maria’s needs if she fits in tire 3. If a child does not show chronic challenges or the shows improvement, it is time to subject the child to a less intensive care4. Question 2 When EL/SLD students enter the school program, the comprehensive benchmarked curriculum in which they are instructed, including heritage language development and support and instruction4. During Tier 1 instruction, if concerns arise about EL/SLD students’ progress, the instructional program itself must be examined to determine the match between the demands of the curriculum and the child’s current level of proficiency in the language of instruction. It is important to examine the achievement of the student’s peers (similar language proficiencies, culture, and experiential background) to see if they are excelling or not. If similar culture and language peers are struggling, this is an indication that the instruction is less than optimal for that group of students4. A typical instructional strategy at Tier 1 for EL/SLD students is primary language instruction to strengthen their literacy readiness (e.g., Spanish phonics, reading readiness, and primers in Spanish). When this strategy is used for sequential translation (i.e., the teacher speaks and then the aide speaks), EL/SEP students may become dependent on the bilingual aide and remain unengaged while the teacher speaks in English, waiting for the interpretation and explanation by the bilingual aide5. Modifications needed may include: Better use would be for the aide to prepare the EL/SEP students for the English lesson by reviewing key vocabulary words, explaining what will be occurring, and discussing what the teacher’s expectations will be for the students’ performance. The teacher presenting the lesson in English would then follow this. Students would be given the opportunity to ask for specific clarification only during the lesson6. Students should work on their projects subsequent to the English lesson with the assistance of the bilingual aide, as needed. Content discussion and clarification should be in the students’ most proficient language while they are preparing their task or project for presentation in English with the rest of the class6. Teacher must be prepared to deal with prejudice between populations where language is the same but culture, class, or racial issues may impede comfort and communication. American all togetherness may come in time, but teachers must proceed slowly and not push. Students may interact more as they become more comfortable in the classroom or more trusting that they are accepted and valued6. Reference. 1. Moore J, Montgomery K, and Bielinski J (2005) Responsiveness to intervention: Teaching before testing helps avoid labeling. Topics in Language Disorders 25(2): 148–67. 2. Nancollis A, Lawrie A, and Dodd B (2005) Phonological awareness intervention and the acquisition of literacy skills in children from deprived social background. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools 36: 325–35. 3. Walker, H. & Severson, H. (1991). Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD): User’s guide and technical manual. Longmont, CO: Sopris West. 4. Gresham, F. MacMillan, D. Beebe-Frankenberger, M. & Bocian, K. (2000). Treatment integrity in learning disabilities intervention research: Do we really know how treatments are implemented? Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 198–205. 5. Iovannone, R., Kincaid, D. and Christiansen, K. (2011). Current functional behavior assessment practices in schools: An examination of technical adequacy. Manuscript in preparation. National Association of State Directors of Special Education (2006). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Author. 6. Scott, T. & Kamps, D. (2007). The future of functional behavior assessment in school settings. Behavioral Disorders, 32, 146–157. Read More