RTI is an approach to classroom instruction that helps identify at risk students in areas such as behavior, reading, mathematics, etc. Students are given a benchmark assessment several times each year to keep abreast of improvements in student achievement. A student who doesn’t respond to Tier 1 (regular classroom instruction), is moved to Tier II where individualized interventions are prescribed and implemented. Careful records are kept to document a student’s response to Tier II Interventions. The interventions may be complicated district prescribed programs, or simple informal assessments and curriculum based instructional strategies implemented by the teacher, true differentiated instruction.
RTI Response to Intervention
June 11th, 2010Ed Reform, Real Reform or More Rules?
June 8th, 2010This is a blog about the movement to national standards from state specific curriculum standards that were created in response to ed reform (No Child Left Behind) over ten years ago. Most states have come a long way, but there are some interesting trends emerging and teachers have questions and concerns. We’ll tell you a story about a school Principal and how she found herself out of a job through no fault of her own because of new “turnaround school” models in Massachusetts. This could happen anywhere, at least in states that are working to get race to the top funding from the federal government. We hope you will share your stories, and add your own ideas about where we are going with all this “accountability”.
The Principal, we’ll call her Jill, became instructional leader of a struggling school in 2008. She was placed there because she had a reputation for being a strong leader, the school had failed to meet AYP for 4 years in a row. Despite heroic efforts on her part, and with only one and a half years under her belt, the state stepped in and told the district it had only 3 choices about what to do at that school. One was close the school and open it again as a charter school, another was fire the entire staff, the third was replace the Principal and designate it a “turnaround school” with increased oversight by the district office and the state. The Superintendent in the district chose the third option, thinking it would be the least disruptive to staff and students. The Principal has been let go. Now she feels she is damaged goods and also feels as if she was thrown under the bus. It will be hard for her to find another job in this or any other district. Is this fair, are there other options that should have been explored, how can we support staff like this and provide opportunities for emerging leaders? Who would want to be a Principal under these circumstances? Please let us know how you feel.