Implementing Response to Intervention (RTI) in Indian Schools as a Means for Promoting Education for All

Author(s):

Renata Ticha(presenting / submitting)Brian Abery(presenting)

Conference:

ECER 2017

Network:

03. Curriculum Innovation

Format:

Paper

Session Information

03 SES 09 A, Curriculum and Cross-cultural Efforts

Paper Session

Time:

2017-08-24

13:30-15:00

Room:

K4.16

Chair:

Wilmad Kuiper

Contribution

This presentation will report on the results a 3-year research partnership between the University of Minnesota (UMN) in the U.S. and Avinashilingam University (AU) in Tamil Nadu, India. The goal of the project was to adapt and implement the Response to Intervention (RTI) framework developed in the U.S. to the Indian context. The project was funded by the Obama-Singh 21st Century Knowledge Initiative. Results in English and Tamil reading for students in two low performing model elementary schools will be presented to demonstrate the impact of RTI in India. The tension between introducing a system’s intervention developed in the U.S. and its adaptation and application in the Indian context will be discussed.

The Response to Intervention (RTI) framework was originally developed in the U.S. as a school-wide initiative designed to facilitate systems’ change in addressing the achievement gap between students from different socio-economic and cultural backgrounds (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006). The RTI framework has all the necessary components to advance education as a Sustainable Development Goal (SDG), including increasing educational access & attainment, improving quality of education, and inspiring transformative learning in different education contexts (Didham & Ofei-Manu, 2013).

RTI is designed to provide a systematic process for schools to meet the needs of students who are struggling academically, but have yet to be formally diagnosed with disabilities. Implemented in such a fashion, it allows school personnel to determine which students are experiencing difficulty acquiring academic skills due to a poor fit between instruction and the child’s educational support needs vs. those who actually experience disability. As implemented in the U.S., RTI typically involves the coordinated work of a number of educational staff, including general education teachers, educational assistants, instructional specialists and in some cases special education support personnel. Multiple teachers at each grade level meet on an ongoing basis to analyze student’s response to instruction and problem-solve when academic growth is not occurring at expected rates. Although this approach has been shown to work well in resource rich settings, in many schools, additional supports to general education teachers are quit limited. These are often, however, those contexts in which RTI is needed most and likely to have the greatest impact.

This project has been modelled in part on an RTI demonstration project conducted in Minneapolis, U.S., with three RTI demonstration schools (Shapiro, Zigmond, Wallace, & Marston, 2011). It followed the basic principles of RTI, including assessment, tiered instruction, progress monitoring, and strengthening the core curriculum in reading (English and Tamil) and math. RTI in the model schools was implemented by research and project assistants trained by UMN faculty and staff under the supervision of AU faculty. The RTI approach had to be very systematically adapted to the Tamil Nadu public school system (government aided and corporation schools) to take into account limited resources and staffing.

The primary objective of this presentation is to explore ways in which the Response to Intervention (RTI) framework can be implemented in settings in which only limited resources are available. This project was the first of its kind in India. It introduced RTI as one of possible approaches to improving academic outcomes of struggling students in Indian public schools, thus addressing an important SDG to advance education for all. The presenters will address the project’s successes and challenges in the context of the study results.

Method

The project has adopted a longitudinal quasi-experimental design with two purposefully selected model (experimental) and four control elementary schools in Nadu India. The project schools were government aided and corporation schools that typically educate children from low socio-economic backgrounds. The first year of the project was utilized for planning and introducing the RTI framework to our Indian colleagues at AU and in local public schools, including a review of the local Simplified Activity Based Learning (SABL) curriculum, developing locally relevant formative assessments based on this curriculum and the principles of Curriculum Based Measurement (CBM; Deno, 1985), and creating small-group interventions for struggling learners. Once the planning phase was completed at the end of the first year, the newly developed materials were used to implement the different components of RTI, including data collection, small-group instruction, and data meetings. Data in all schools were collected three times a year across two years and used to make decisions about the performance and progress of the RTI project schools. In addition, baseline data were used to calculate local benchmarks/norms on the basis of which students were assigned to different tiers or groups of instruction. Students who performed at or above the 50th percentile were placed in Tier 1 (regular SABL curriculum with no additional supports), those performing below the 50th percentile were all placed in Tier 2 instruction in year 1 (with 45 minutes of small-group targeted instruction 3 x week), and in year 2, students who did not demonstrate any process from the Tier 2 group, were placed in Tier 3 instruction with even more intense academic supports. Students in the regular instruction were assessed three times a year, while students in Tier 2 instruction biweekly and students in Tier 3 every week. The progress monitoring data were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the more intensive small-group interventions. Project staff in India were trained by UMN faculty in all RTI procedures, including progress monitoring and small-group instruction. Educators in the project model schools worked closely with project staff during the whole process. To evaluate the project success, we conducted longitudinal analysis of student data in the model vs. control schools as well as by the tier of instruction they received. Descriptive analysis as well as a split-plot repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to detect significant differences.

Expected Outcomes

Overall, when comparing the progress of model vs. control schools, the project results were very positive and encouraging. Students demonstrated significant improvements in English and Tamil reading. Students in grades 3 and 4 also showed significant improvements in Tamil reading. Those who entered the RTI project the earliest (in 1st grade), demonstrated the most significant improvements in all subjects. Students in Tier 3 generally showed the steepest learning curve, even though they did not grow by as many words or digits. Students in Tiers 2 and 1 grew at approximately the same rate even though initial assessments showed Tier 2 students performing at much lower levels. In some cases, the academic skills of students in Tier 2 grew even faster than students in Tier 1. The results also show that the current core curriculum (SABL) has not been meeting the needs of a large percentage (more than 75%) of learners especially in English reading. RTI is a systems-level intervention that takes time (at least 1 -2 years) to implement well. It is only after a year or more of implementation when one should expect to see significant improvement in skills. We found that RTI was able to be successfully adapted and implemented in the Indian context provided that necessary supports were in place. Through the RTI project we were able to develop supplemental materials targeting basic academic skills, train local teachers in differentiated instruction, address the need to utilize special educators in the classroom, and to reduce student absenteeism by making instruction more accessible to all students. In conclusion, through our RTI project partnership we were able to reconcile the tension between the global pressure for fulfilling SDGs and meeting the needs of local schools in south India through an international collaboration.

References

Deno, S.L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232. Didham, R.J., & Ofei-Manu, P. (2013). Advancing Education as a Goal for Sustainable Development. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) Issue Briefs on SDGs, No. 2. Fuchs, D. & Fuchs, L. (2006). Introduction to Response to Intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93-99. Shapiro, E.S., Zigmond, N., Wallace, T., Marston, D. (eds.) (2011). Models for implementing Response to Intervention: Tools, outcomes, and implications. New York: The Guilford Press.

Author Information

Renata Ticha (presenting / submitting)

University of Minnesota, United States of America

Brian Abery (presenting)