SigNetwork is proud to feature IDAHO

Special Message from SIG/SPDG Coordinator Russ Hammond

Greetings to everyone from the Gem State. Undoubtedly, the staff in your state, as in Idaho, is feeling overwhelmed by all of the changes associated with IDEA and the State Performance Plan . There is so much for our state systems to integrate into practice in a short amount of time: response to intervention (RTI), highly qualified teachers, scientifically research-based interventions, post school outcomes, the development of new baseline measures for the APR indicators, and on and on.

As we grapple with integrating new terms and activities into our daily practice, it is clear that professional development will be a significant part of the equation of informing all of our external (parents, LEA, IHE) and internal (SEA) partners concerning new directions and rigorous targets of success.

"Partnering for Success" is Idaho's current State Improvement Grant. We are appreciative of this resource which allows Idaho to promote better post school outcomes through the following goals:

An adequate supply of highly qualified personnel;
Educational teams that provide effective interventions; and
Effective secondary transition services and supports

Each goal is supported by the creation of learning communities and other resources on the Idaho Training Clearinghouse site at http://www.idahotc.com

The mission of RBM
In this article we are featuring the Results-Based Model (RBM), which is Idaho's RTI. For Idaho, it had it’s beginnings in 1997 and has expanded to over 150 schools across the State.

In an effort to improve results for all students, the Idaho educational system will implement a proactive, dynamic, problem-solving process that is responsive to individual student needs.†

The Results Based Model (RBM) is a process for meeting students’ needs. It is intervention and results focused---expending resources, energies, and skills of collaborative teams upon problem-solving solutions that work for students. RBM is proactive and preventative---it attempts to catch student concerns early. It places primary emphasis upon what we do for all children and what benefits result from our efforts.††

Schools that have implemented this approach with fidelity have reduced referrals to special education significantly and have demonstrated marked improvement in reading gains for grades K-3. These results have been limited to elementary school sites.

Currently a stakeholder group is developing a plan and time table for statewide implementation of this RTI model.

The coordinator position for this initiative is vacant. Idaho plans to recruit for this vacancy in the spring. Currently, Kindel Mason, Special Education Regional Consultant at Idaho State University, is doing a great job of fulfilling this role. To contact Kindel, email him at masokind@isu.edu or call him at (208) 736-4263.

Idaho Outcome Data
Effect on Placements:
Between the fall of 02-03 and the fall of 04-05 the overall enrollment of public school students has increased by 3% from 248,660 to 256,004.

During the same time the enrollment statewide in special education has fallen by 1% from 29,064 to 28,808. In the districts that have at least one RBM site there has been a 3% decrease in special education placements.

Effect on Reading Skills:
Idaho has been using the Idaho Reading Indicator (IRI) to screen the reading skills of K-3 students statewide for the past six years. During the 2002-2003 school year, Gary Nunn, Ph.D. Chair of the School Psychology program at Idaho State University, conducted a study to measure the impact that intervention plans had on students' progress in reading at RBM sites compared to non RBM sites using the IRI results. He found that students on intervention plans demonstrated significantly better progress in developing reading skills than students not on intervention plans.

Learn about Program Evaluation of Results-Based Model Year for 2002-2003 by Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D.

To learn more about the Results-Based Model go to the RBM Learning Community at: http://www.idahotc.com/rbmelc/elc06/pages/page1.asp

Inspiring stories

1. Kathy Baker, Principal
At Ponderosa Elementary (Post Falls), we had a first grade student who did not officially qualify for speech services even though his speech was impacting his reading and writing.  Through an Intervention Plan, a third grade teacher and one of her "speech graduate" students worked with the first grader after receiving training and materials from the speech therapist.  The child progressed from 0% to 80% on his needed speech skill over the course of an 18 week intervention, which took place daily for 5 minutes. His reading and writing skills progressed in direct proportion to his speech progress each week.  He is currently in the second grade and reading and writing at grade level.

2. Earnie Lewis, Principal
West Canyon Elementary (Vallivue) went through RBM training during the 04-05 school year.  To learn the steps of the system, we chose a girl who had come to us the previous year in mid-3rd grade.  At that time, she was diagnosed as a "select-mute". She is a Hispanic child.  By the end of the 3rd grade, she had begun to whisper to her teacher and to a few friends.  Last year, in fourth grade, she began to speak softly more frequently in class.  Now that she was more verbal, we were able to test her skills and she was sorely behind her grade level peers. Typically she would have been tested for special education, but we chose to run her case through the RBM referral process, ICEL/RIOT & I-Plan.  During this process, we discovered from her parents that she was the only English speaking child in their home. The parents were using her to teach them English.  She was not quiet at home, but at school she was only speaking when she knew English well enough. Her “select mutism” was more about her inability to teach English than anything else.  After obtaining her parents agreement to let us address her own learning and to postpone teaching them, she began to take off.  The process was very thorough in helping us see this girl in ways we would have not known to address otherwise. RBM has allowed our school the opportunity to work with many individual students that have not qualified for Special Education services.  These students have made incredible progress due to the team work, I-Plan, and resources provided by the RBM training.

3. Sandra Schultz, Principal
The RBM process has improved student success at Seven Oaks (Meridian).  As an example, one second grader couldn't decode, read slowly, and had difficulty with comprehension all last year.  Last spring he was put on an I-Plan and had intensive interventions at school with specific things for his parents to work on.  At our update meeting this week, we found that he is reading at grade level.  The swift efforts of the entire team helped him close the gap.  It has also provided many opportunities for my staff members to work in a very collaborative manner.  We have grade level coaches working with each team to assist with referrals, progress monitoring, etc.  Each team member plays a critical role on our RBM team.  We work very well together.  It's very satisfying to me as the building administrator.  Additionally, the line between regular education and special education has blurred.  We're all working together to improve student success. Finally, our parents are actively engaged throughout the process.  They have some important information and experiences to share.  Furthermore, they are routinely part of our intervention implementation. In conclusion, the response to intervention is a meaningful approach to addressing a child's academic or behavioral need.  I am very supportive of the RBM process at our school.

4. Christine F. Silzly, Principal
Groveland Elementary School (Blackfoot)
We have found that as a team we share responsibilities and extend a helping hand to those students needing one-on-one help for a 9-18 week period. Each case manager is assigned a student that they will work with for a certain period of time doing reading or math probes, assisting them with their homework, or just counseling them on a regular basis so they know that someone is interested in them. Data is collected and charted on a student and any changes needed are made. As a team we have found this to be helpful to the teacher as well. There has been about a 3% reduction in the placement of students in special education in our school.