I never considered that Response to Intervention (RtI) programs would not be as effective in secondary schools as elementary schools--I've taught college level students, primary and elementary students, but never secondary. Bronzo begins this article with a very interesting point: "secondary students who struggle to make meaning from the complex prose they are confronted with daily aren't nessisarily remedial readers;" we must consider the much more sophisticated and complex texts they are expected to navigate (2009 p. 278). Beyond this point, however, many of the difficulties he denotes (time constraints, physical space and multiple teachers needing proper training and time to collaborate) are often present in elementary schools as well--in fact, many are present in my district.
I teach in a very unique school district. Monroe county is comprised of a chain of islands--Floridians are more familiar with the term "keys"--that are relatively low in population, but very spread out. It may surprise some people to hear that they are often very remote. And yet, due to our population size, we have one child psychologist to handle all the prospective IEP, 504, etc... plan students currently in RtT for all of the lower keys, which spans a fifty mile radius with thousands of children--and he may be responsible for the upper keys as well, but I don't know that for sure.
I have no idea what the statistics are elsewhere, but here this causes major backlogs when the RtI team deems further steps are necessary. While this makes the RtI program that much more important--so these children continue to receive help while they wait (sometimes for an entire school year, and into the beginning of the next)--it often feels like bailing water with a strainer. To add one more complication, services here are very limited, so if the RtI team decides a child needs something unavailable in the area, it is the school's responsibility to create the program--unless the family is willing to travel 106+ miles to Miami, in which case, the district would still need to accommodate financially. I am proud of our charter school; we don't shy away from these challenges, but we are well-funded, earning grants each year. We also have slightly longer school days Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, so that every Wednesday can be a noon dismissal for students; the rest of the day is set aside for necessary PD which is why we have such an effective RtI program, and teachers who know how to differentiate (including specialists). But what happens to schools that are not as well funded? Do they avoid making recommendations they can't afford? How do these schools educate their teachers? Bronzo's points are very good ones, but he needs to realize that they are not unique to secondary schools.
Allington's podcast about his published work "No Quick Fix" discusses the problems that occur when schools attempt to implement RtI programs while struggling with the issues Bronzo noted. Allington asserts that many of these schools approach RtI with a set of canned programs for each tier and "the idea that you can buy a packaged program off the shelf and its going to meet the needs of this diverse range of children," is problematic to say the least. What I found most troubling about Allignton's podcast was when he discussed the accompanying label of "treatment resistors" given to children who do not benefit from these programs. As he points out, students have a wide range of needs, many of which will not be met by five prepared programs.
As Fisher and Frey note in chapter four, there are many different supplemental interventions, and they need to increase in intensity. They also need to be tailored to individual (tier 3) or small group (tier 1/2) needs, and, just as important, the core, supplemental and intensive efforts must be aligned. Fisher and Frey agree with Allington, it is vital that educators use assessment data to tailor the instruction to the student as well as plan supplemental and intensive instruction: 1) Feed Up: clarify the goal, 2) Feed Back: respond to student work and finally, Feed Forward: modify instruction.
This is possible. Since joining Sigsbee's faculty, I have taught second grade. Every single day I found time to teach a whole group mini lesson and three guided reading groups as well as a mirrored program in writing; math and science were also differentiated. This coming year I will teach fifth grade ELA which is comprised of fifty students, many of whom are in RtI, and I am already using the data available on them to plan instruction. But, again, I am very lucky--I had a support teacher in my classroom full-time, and trained in RtI, and most of our support teachers are either teachers who, for whatever reason, are not looking for a full-time teaching job, or are pre-service teachers. And many of the things that Allington deems necessary--collaboration between all the RtI students teachers, small group or individual lessons, proper training etc... are provided for in my school.
Some teachers may read this, and think Good for you, but that's not how it works at my school, and I realize that this is not how it works at many schools, but this consider this: Sigsbee Charter school is a K-8 public school with the same funding as the rest of the district, the difference is we have our own school board, and thus may appropriate those funds differently; the rest of our funding comes from grants that any school may apply for. This type of teaching is possible--we have only been a charter for five years, and it hasn't been easy. All of our teachers work over the summer, developing curriculum, writing grants, or tutoring remedial students. All of our teachers come in early and stay late (as do the administration and other staff), and many teachers who are not willing to put forth this kind of effort have moved on to other places--as I read back over this post, I realize, it's not luck, its a ton of hard work, by dedicated people, who are driven... and seeing a child succeed because of this makes it all worth it.
I teach in a very unique school district. Monroe county is comprised of a chain of islands--Floridians are more familiar with the term "keys"--that are relatively low in population, but very spread out. It may surprise some people to hear that they are often very remote. And yet, due to our population size, we have one child psychologist to handle all the prospective IEP, 504, etc... plan students currently in RtT for all of the lower keys, which spans a fifty mile radius with thousands of children--and he may be responsible for the upper keys as well, but I don't know that for sure.
I have no idea what the statistics are elsewhere, but here this causes major backlogs when the RtI team deems further steps are necessary. While this makes the RtI program that much more important--so these children continue to receive help while they wait (sometimes for an entire school year, and into the beginning of the next)--it often feels like bailing water with a strainer. To add one more complication, services here are very limited, so if the RtI team decides a child needs something unavailable in the area, it is the school's responsibility to create the program--unless the family is willing to travel 106+ miles to Miami, in which case, the district would still need to accommodate financially. I am proud of our charter school; we don't shy away from these challenges, but we are well-funded, earning grants each year. We also have slightly longer school days Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, so that every Wednesday can be a noon dismissal for students; the rest of the day is set aside for necessary PD which is why we have such an effective RtI program, and teachers who know how to differentiate (including specialists). But what happens to schools that are not as well funded? Do they avoid making recommendations they can't afford? How do these schools educate their teachers? Bronzo's points are very good ones, but he needs to realize that they are not unique to secondary schools.
Allington's podcast about his published work "No Quick Fix" discusses the problems that occur when schools attempt to implement RtI programs while struggling with the issues Bronzo noted. Allington asserts that many of these schools approach RtI with a set of canned programs for each tier and "the idea that you can buy a packaged program off the shelf and its going to meet the needs of this diverse range of children," is problematic to say the least. What I found most troubling about Allignton's podcast was when he discussed the accompanying label of "treatment resistors" given to children who do not benefit from these programs. As he points out, students have a wide range of needs, many of which will not be met by five prepared programs.
As Fisher and Frey note in chapter four, there are many different supplemental interventions, and they need to increase in intensity. They also need to be tailored to individual (tier 3) or small group (tier 1/2) needs, and, just as important, the core, supplemental and intensive efforts must be aligned. Fisher and Frey agree with Allington, it is vital that educators use assessment data to tailor the instruction to the student as well as plan supplemental and intensive instruction: 1) Feed Up: clarify the goal, 2) Feed Back: respond to student work and finally, Feed Forward: modify instruction.
This is possible. Since joining Sigsbee's faculty, I have taught second grade. Every single day I found time to teach a whole group mini lesson and three guided reading groups as well as a mirrored program in writing; math and science were also differentiated. This coming year I will teach fifth grade ELA which is comprised of fifty students, many of whom are in RtI, and I am already using the data available on them to plan instruction. But, again, I am very lucky--I had a support teacher in my classroom full-time, and trained in RtI, and most of our support teachers are either teachers who, for whatever reason, are not looking for a full-time teaching job, or are pre-service teachers. And many of the things that Allington deems necessary--collaboration between all the RtI students teachers, small group or individual lessons, proper training etc... are provided for in my school.
Some teachers may read this, and think Good for you, but that's not how it works at my school, and I realize that this is not how it works at many schools, but this consider this: Sigsbee Charter school is a K-8 public school with the same funding as the rest of the district, the difference is we have our own school board, and thus may appropriate those funds differently; the rest of our funding comes from grants that any school may apply for. This type of teaching is possible--we have only been a charter for five years, and it hasn't been easy. All of our teachers work over the summer, developing curriculum, writing grants, or tutoring remedial students. All of our teachers come in early and stay late (as do the administration and other staff), and many teachers who are not willing to put forth this kind of effort have moved on to other places--as I read back over this post, I realize, it's not luck, its a ton of hard work, by dedicated people, who are driven... and seeing a child succeed because of this makes it all worth it.