+

Keeping MTSS Going Strong: What it Takes to Sustain the System

+

Morris County USD 417 (Council Grove and surrounding communities) Approx. 730 students District-wide  2009-2010

Reading Structuring

 2010-2011

Reading Implementation, Math Structuring

 2011-2012

Math Partial Implementation

 2012-2013

Both Reading & Math Fully Implemented

 2013-2014

Behavior Training, All Buildings

 2014-2015

Monthly Training with Consultant, Refinement Behavior Implementation at High School

+

Our System in Year 6 Five years worth of reading data (K-12) Data was not moving – basically same mediocre to good results as years previous Biggest concern were grade levels that were not at 80% On Target Foundation solidly in place: leadership teams, schedules, staff, assessment routines Working very hard to just maintain students.

+

Our Advice: Ask for Help  Access

support from KS MTSS State Trainers and the TASN website  Webinars, regional trainings, on-site consultants  We

began district-level meetings with consultant about once/month  Focus: analyze our data  With each “ah-ha!” there were frustrations, but also hope

+

Issue 1: Is your Core really in place?  It

took us over two years to do this well. During that time, we did not invest time or money on interventions.

 Core

must meet time recommendations and have differentiation embedded

 Tier

Interventions can’t fix Core if Core is weak.

+

Issue 2: Curriculum Protocol  Identifies

and fills in intervention gaps  Highlights how to align interventions to needs  Allows teams to select the right intervention based on needs  Base revisions to your Protocol on what your data says you need  Do one – with help, if possible

+

+

+

Issue 3: Interventions 

Implement Interventions with Fidelity – time, components of the intervention, frequency, group size



Tier III students: only use Tier III interventions and provide the full 60 minutes of time with that intervention



It is OK to use the same materials for both identified and nonidentified students



If student graphs aren’t moving, the intervention itself may not be the problem. It may be a mismatch to needs. (example: kids doing a fluency intervention but their real problem is phonics)

+

Interventions con’t… importance of Grades K and 1  Get

help, if necessary, to really understand details of MTSS at Kindergarten and 1st Grade

 Implementation

Guide: Collaborative Team

Reading  Universal  The

Screening Flow Charts

importance of PSF and NWF

 Slowing

kids down through the QPS

+

+ Matching Progress Monitoring to Focus of Instruction (p. 53 Collaborative Guide)

+

+

Issue 4: Progress Monitoring and Goal Setting 

Set up Progress Monitoring (PM) graphs correctly!



Set appropriate goals, based on correct targets, and move kids when they reach their PM goals



There is a big difference when moving off-grade level belowtarget kids from moving on-grade level below-target kids



The decision making rules in Step 10 only work if the graph is constructed correctly in the first place.

+

+

+

+

+

Issue 5: System-wide Accountability Quarterly

Data Reviews (QDRs)

SpEd/GenEd SpEd

PLC for leaders

member representation on all district committees

+

For Special Education, MTSS provides… 

Rich data for SpEd goals, re-evals, and evals



Data helps us create a data picture



Curriculum Protocol helps us analyze what resources to use



We have great conversations with GenEd counterparts about how to tweak interventions to be more effective



Same interventions can be used for identified kids…increase intensity of delivery, if necessary: group size, duration, frequency, response generation

+

Issue 6: Professional Development  MTSS

System materials – establish a yearly routine to distribute and explain updates

 Intervention

materials (eg: Read Naturally) and technology (eg: AIMSweb) – create local expert(s)

 Paraeducators, classroom

aides – need their own PD: LETRS “ParaReading” Training is excellent

 Staff

one

turnover and Reviews for all staff – hardest

+

Tweaking, Revising, Updating… is the Norm  It’s

exhausting  Keep the reason you are doing this in front of you at all times: SUPPORTING ALL STUDENTS IN THEIR ABILITY TO ACHIEVE HIGH ACADEMIC AND BEHAVIORAL STANDARDS  It’s

worth it!

+

+

Questions?

+ Kelly Gentry, Curriculum/Instruction [email protected]

Angela Harris, Special Education [email protected] Heather Honas (PreK-6) [email protected] Kelly McDiffett (JH/HS) [email protected]

         

Kaansas M Multi‐Tier System m of Sup pports

         

Errrors o of Imp pleme entatio on

Augu WWW.KA ANSASMTSS.O ORG   ust 2015    Thee focus of the K Kansas Multi‐TTier System off Supports (MTSS) is to provvide an integrated systemicc approach thaat supports  stud dents in their ability to achieve high academic and behavioral standaards, in a man nner that is inttentional, resp ponsive, and  prevventative.  The e ongoing work of an MTSSS is sustained tthrough effecttive leadership p, the creation n and nurturin ng of an  emp powering culture, and the targeted ongoiing profession nal developmeent of every sttakeholder invvolved.  At thee center of  thiss framework iss a set of evide ence‐based prractices and prrocedures in tthe areas of cu urriculum, insttruction and aassessment.  Theese practices are supported by research and promote the ability of thhe system to ggather, analyzze, and use data for the  purpose of instru uctional decisio on making acrross all levels, including the classroom, scchool buildingg, and district.  As straight  ward as this de escription of M MTSS may be, it is importan nt not to become side‐trackked allowing practices that ssupport  forw critiical features o of MTSS as desscribed in the Kansas Multi‐‐Tier System oof Supports: Innovation Conffiguration Ma atrix (ICM)  and d/or replacing component p parts of the mo odel with othe er informationn or strategiess that may con ntradict the research  beh hind MTSS practices.   

A crritical feature of the MTSS iss adherence to o a set of scientifically reseaarched and evvidence‐based d practices.  Th hrough  onggoing examination and study, researcherss have found e each of these practices to be effective witthin a specificc context, and wheen carried outt in a specific m manner.  Convversely, when adapted or vaaried it is not  possible to kn now if the pracctice will be  effeective (Baer, W Wolf, & Risley, 1987).  Thus tto achieve the e desired effecct of an MTSS (e.g. improveed student outtcomes,  funcctional system ms, etc.), it is im mperative that the system ccomponents, ppractices and procedures are implementted with  fideelity and monittored for effectiveness.   

In o order to help teams navigate e these waterss, some comm mon implemenntation errors and exampless are presenteed  belo ow. Because these same errrors have been n observed repeatedly to prroduce detrim mental effects on successful  imp plementation, teams need to take heed and avoid the ffollowing pitfaalls.   

Inap ppropriate Inttervention Pro otocols (aka Ussing the Old Syystem as the M Model):   Tier 3 DOES N NOT EQUAL Sp pecial Education (although ssome studentts receiving sp pecial educatio on services maay receive Tierr  3 supports)  ould NOT only be supported d by a “Specialist” (e.g. SPED D students witth SPED teacher, Title studeents with   Students sho Title teacher,, etc.)  es not replace the building‐w wide system fo or moving stu dents into and out of intervvention (See B Brief titled   SIT team doe “Student Imp provement Teaams and the M Multi‐Tier Systtem of Supporrts, April 20111)   

Usin ng the Wrong Tool or Misussing Universal Screening Information:   Determining student intervvention group ps and plannin ng interventionn instruction b based on statee assessment indicators  dress the unde erlying academ mic deficits or needs for enrrichment and ttherefore is unlikely to impact long term does not add student outcomes   Not using offfice discipline data (ODR) to o inform schoo ol‐wide behavvior systems att the Tier 1 levvel does not allow  for analysis o of the core beh havioral curricculum, and the erefore will reesult in overwhelm of resou urces at Tiers 2 2 and  3.   

Lackk of Systemic Intervention System:  S  Providing intervention time during core instruction is NOT an MTSSS practice. Wh hen student daata indicate th hat  support beyo ond the core iss necessary, th his interventio on time shouldd be provided IN ADDITION TO the core  instruction time as recomm mended in MTTSS Structuringg.  on is a key com mponent of efffective core in nstruction andd does not con nstitute “interrvention.” (Seee Brief   Differentiatio titled “Differe entiated Instruction Within MTSS”, Januaary 2011).      Kan nsas MTSS is fu unded by KSDEE ECSETS throu gh IDEA VI‐B FFederal Funds  Page 1 of 2  P

Errors of Implementation  August 2015    MTSS is not a “buffet style” initiative where individual teachers choose what pieces they would like to implement and IF they  would like to implement. Benefits for students will be most robust when all adults in the building participate in a collaborative  manner, from delivering instruction and intervention to reviewing data and making instructional decisions and modifications  based on those data.   Efforts must be across the whole system, with a district leadership team and building leadership teams taking  responsibility for creating the comprehensive structures for implementation.   MTSS must not be viewed primarily as a special education or general education responsibility; rather it must be  embraced as an instructional responsibility of all adults in a building.   

Inadequate or Incomplete Data Systems:   





Departure from the principles and practices identified in the Kansas MTSS ICM will result in data that are less rigorous  for decision making, and potentially incompatible with the MTSS decision making process for student instruction. (see  the Kansas MTSS: ICM & briefs titled, “Required Practices for Implementation of MTSS Addressing Reading, Math, or  Behavior”)  Data review must allow for fluid grouping of students based on screening and student progress monitoring data  during intervention. Entry and exit criteria for interventions must be established and followed so that students can  receive intervention as rapidly as they are identified as needing support, and can be released from intervention  when the data indicate that intervention is no longer needed. 

 

Curricular Misconceptions:   

 



Effective instructional strategies are PART of a comprehensive curriculum, but do not replace the systemic  curricular protocol.  MTSS implementation, through the use of universal screening, creates a system in which all students are participants.  MTSS is not something that is DONE to students, nor is it the process for the determination of eligibility for  entitlement programs (e.g., Special Education, ESOL, etc.).  Rather it is a process by which students are identified as  needing support and matched with appropriate supports and thus provides data to inform entitlement evaluation  processes.  Meeting the needs of ALL students is the primary focus of an MTSS. MOST students should meet basic proficiency  with core instruction. When this is not the case, the core curriculum and fidelity to that curriculum in its  implementation should be examined rather than attempting to “fix” all of the learning deficits in Tiers 2 and 3. 

 

While the Kansas MTSS can and should be used as a broad framework for improving outcomes for students, the Kansas  Department of Education (KSDE) does not mandate its use. Schools are free to choose whether or not they undertake the  MTSS; however, if the choice is made to structure and implement this systems‐level change effort, fidelity to the  framework and protocols will result in much more robust outcomes for students. Districts that choose to prepare for  implementation of an MTSS are encouraged to access support from Kansas MTSS State Trainers and the TASN website,  who will offer webinars and regional training opportunities to assist your team in structuring, implementing, and refining  their Kansas MTSS framework. Keep in mind that this is a multi‐year process, requiring that ddistricts and buildings  engage in both structuring AND implementation in order to properly build the system and keep it running effectively and  efficiently.   

**All briefs referenced herein can be accessed at www.kansasmtss.org, then click on the “Resources” tab at the top of  the page.   

References  Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1987). Some still‐current dimensions of applied behavior analysis, Journal of Applied  Behavior Analysis, 20, 313‐327. 

  Kansas MTSS is funded by KSDE ECSETS through IDEA VI‐B Federal Funds  WWW.KANSASMTSS.ORG  Page 2 of 2