# data[].attributes.body
After teaching for eight year, I will be stepping into the role of an Instructional Coach this school year. I will be responsible for helping teachers track data and implementing interventions to better serve each student. Since stepping into this role, I wanted to take a deeper look into the process of Response to Intervention (RTI) so I can better serve the teachers and students on my campus.

# data[].attributes.body
The interview was conducted with Mrs. Zesch, who formally served as a teacher, instructional coach, assistant principal, and most recently a principal at the elementary level in San Angelo ISD. Mrs. Zesch stressed the importance of monitoring students. At her campus, Mrs. Zesch required teachers to place students in Tier 2 upon immediately failing a grading period. Mrs. Zesch explained that if students are beginning to receive interventions, parents will be notified. If teachers and the RTI team do not see improvement with initial interventions, the team will come together and alter interventions. If no improvements are made and the student is at least a year behind, testing for special education will be considered. As with all issues that arise in schools, Mrs. Zesch did stress the importance to document everything. She stated to always keep in mind, "if it is not documented, it did not happen" (Zesch, personal communication, 2019). As a principal, it is important that Mrs. Zesch stayed current with all legal requirements that she must make sure students are receiving. She provided her teachers with constant communication that helped to keep all teachers focused on the progress of students. All staff also met on a regular basis every nine weeks to discuss all students who were on Tier 2 or 3 or if students needed to be added. Mrs. Zesch did say that to help her stay current on all legal matters, she would read articles, monitor the TEA website for yearly accommodations, and always contact the Region Center when she had questions regarding legal matters. Mrs. Zesch provided a wonderful perspective on how she monitors student growth through RTI and how she keeps parents informed when adding a student to Tier 2 or Tier 3.

# data[].attributes.body
In What is RTI and Why Should We Care  by Margaret Searle, the book outlines the basic qualities of RTI and examples as to what constitutes RTI and what does not. Chapter one in this book also explains what RTI looks like at the district level and the campus level, as well as, a description as to where RTI originated.

Searle, M. (2010). What is RTI and Why Should We Care? ASCD.  Retreieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109097/chapters/What-Is-RTI-and-Why-Should-We-Care%C2%A2.aspx

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We create practical, timely, affordable professional learning to help educators and instructional leaders provide students with a modern, equitable, and quality education.

# data[].attributes.body
Some Texas districts where violating policies regarding qualifying special education students. The high percentage of student qualifying for special education attracted the attention of the government which resulted in investigating the process. This article addresses how RTI works in relation to having a student tested for special education.

Samuels, C. (2018). Ed. dept. finds Texas suppressed enrollment of special education students. Education Week, 37 (17). Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2018/01/11/ed-dept-finds-texas-suppressed-enrollment-of.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Disability advocates hailed the U.S. Department of Education's finding that Texas for years put roadblocks in the path of children who potentially qualified for special education-a clear violation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

"It shows that they are willing to stand up when a state is clearly not doing what's right," said Robbi Cooper, a leader of the parent advocacy group Decoding Dyslexia Texas and the mother of a son with dyslexia. "Now let's just hope that we can get the policies right."

The Jan. 11 monitoring report from the office of special education services-the first to be issued under the leadership of U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos-outlines a series of IDEA violations by the state.

In conversations with Texas parents and educators, federal officials heard conflicting reports about how children with dyslexia should be screened and served. Children who struggled in school were shifted to response-to-intervention programs that were supposed to meet their needs, but, once there, some languished for years, the monitoring report said.

In other cases, the report said that districts sidestepped special education identification by providing services through Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Section 504 allows students to receive supports to access the general education curriculum, but it does not offer the same level of student rights and school responsibilities as the IDEA.

All of those problems were tied to a Texas policy, now banned, that subjected school districts to additional state scrutiny if their special education enrollment rose above 8.5 percent. The state education department called the figure just a benchmark for districts, but many school officials treated it as a cap. The 8.5 percent figure came to light in 2016 through a series of investigative pieces published in the Houston Chronicle.

In the wake of those news articles, the U.S. Department of Education embarked on a listening tour through Texas, solicited comments on its website, and interviewed Texas educators, culminating in the monitoring report.

To fix the problem, Texas must now find and test students who may have qualified for special education but were not evaluated; provide guidance to districts about their responsibilities under the IDEA; and create a district monitoring plan. The federal office of special education programs indicated it would work with the state, still recovering from Hurricane Harvey, on an mutually agreeable timeline.

Texas Officials Promise Action

State officials, who originally denied that the 8.5 percent benchmark had prevented any students from getting services, took a different tack, when the letter from the federal government was released.

Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, directed the Texas Education Agency to create a corrective action plan within seven days.

"The past dereliction of duty on the part of many school districts to serve our students, and the failure of TEA to hold districts accountable, are worthy of criticism," Abbott said in a statement. "TEA must take steps now to significantly increase the oversight provided to ensure our special education students are receiving the services they deserve." In 2017, Abbott signed a law that would bar the state education agency from placing a cap or creating a benchmark on special education enrollment.

Mike Morath, the state education commissioner, said in a statement: "I share Gov. Abbott's urgency to quickly address the issues identified in this federal monitoring report. More importantly, I share the governor's commitment to doing what's right for special education students in our public schools."

Morath noted that his department has already increased the number of staff members who provide technical assistance and training to school districts.

"The corrective action plan called for by the governor will outline the specific steps TEA will take to address all the identified issues. Parent and special education advocacy group representatives will play an ongoing integral role in helping shape this plan, as well as all efforts of the agency in the years ahead," Morath said.

The Houston Chronicle series said that the state created the 8.5 percent benchmark in 2004. That year, about 12 percent of the state's students were enrolled in special education. Nationally, the percentage stood at about 14 percent.

Over the years, the special education enrollment in the state steadily dropped. Nationally, special education enrollment dipped a bit as well, but not at the same rate as in Texas. By 2014, special education students made 8.5 percent of the state's overall school enrollment, while nationally it was 13.5 percent.

Violations of Federal Law

The articles in the Chronicle captured stories of children whose disabilities would automatically qualify them for special education services in other states. For example, a child with Down syndrome was initially denied special education services because he could read on grade level. Another child, who was born prematurely and was legally blind, was denied services because she could hold written materials close enough to her face to read.

During its listening tour and interviews with school officials, the federal special education office captured other stories of special education denials.

Federal officials were told, for example, that the state's "Dyslexia Handbook" said that children with difficulty reading must present an additional disabling condition before they could even be evaluated for special education services. This is a violation of the IDEA, which does not require a child to be suspected of multiple disabilities before a screening takes place.

Texas' use of response to intervention was also called out in the monitoring report. RTI is an instructional framework that focuses on addressing problems early with students who show signs of academic weakness. Among its components are screening for academic trouble spots and targeted, research-based "interventions" of increasing intensity, based on a student's needs. The increasingly intensive interventions are generally known as "tiers."

Many state educators said they thought a child had to go through every tier of an RTI process before they could be screened. In fact, the Education Department told states in 2011 that RTI can't be used to delay or deny a special education evaluation. Teachers also said they weren't clear about how much progress children should be making to move out of RTI.

Dustin Rynders, the education director at Disability Rights Texas, discovered the special education enrollment target several years ago, when parents started complaining to his organization about the fact that they could not get services for their children.

"What I find most important is for the state to be reminded that you cannot ignore this population," Rynders said in an interview. The findings "have elevated a conversation around students with disabilities that I don't think we've ever had in our state."

Published in Print: January 11, 2018, as Ed. Dept. Finds Texas Suppressed Spec. Ed. Enrollment

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Back to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ed. Dept. Finds Texas Suppressed Enrollment of Special Education Students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Disability advocates hailed the U.S. Department of Education's finding that Texas for years put roadblocks in the path of children who potentially qualified for special education-a clear violation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

# data[].attributes.body
In this article, school districts report the varied requirements from districts have regarding the amount a time should be receiving support through RTI before being referred for a special education evaluation. The article continues to explain how without specific guidelines as to the length of interventions and types of interventions students are receiving, many students are failing through the gaps identifying students disabilities.

Samuels, C. (2017). RTI may fall short in flagging certain students. Education Week, 36 (21). Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2017/02/15/rti-may-fall-short-in-flagging-certain.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
RTI May Fall Short in Flagging Certain Students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As a method of organizing efforts to help students who are struggling academically, response to intervention has seen widespread adoption. But as an improved method of identifying students with learning disabilities, RTI shows far less clear benefits, researchers are finding.

# data[].attributes.headline
#6 - Education of Individuals with Disabilities 

# data[].attributes.subject
#6 - Education of Individuals with Disabilities 

# data[].attributes.body
(20 U.S.C. 33 § 1414)

Statutory Law

The United States Code of Education of Individuals with Disabilities establishes the assistance needed for student with disabilities, as well as, the eligibility for the individualized education programs.

http://uscode.house.gov/browse/prelim@title20/chapter33/subchapter2&edition=prelim

# data[].attributes.body
(34 C.F.R. § 300.111)

Administrative Law

The Code of Federal Regulations has established the section Child Find. Within this section, states are required to have policies in effect to identify students with disabilities and identify services needed for that student.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=c54438bf1bb673f0b29ac4870f0455db&mc=true&node=se34.2.300_1111&rgn=div8

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) annual edition is the codification of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the departments and agencies of the Federal Government produced by the Office of the Federal Register (OFR) and the Government Publishing Office.

# data[].attributes.headline
#8 - Right to Information Concerning Special Education and Education of Students with Learning Difficulties 

# data[].attributes.subject
#8 - Right to Information Concerning Special Education and Education of Students with Learning Difficulties 

# data[].attributes.body
(TEC § 26.0081)

Statutory Law

TEC § 26.0081 states that parents must be notified each year that students are receiving additional intervention strategies to support learning difficulties.

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/ED/htm/ED.26.htm

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
EDUCATION CODE CHAPTER 26. PARENTAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
EDUCATION CODE TITLE 2. PUBLIC EDUCATION SUBTITLE E. STUDENTS AND PARENTS CHAPTER 26. PARENTAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES Sec. 26.001. PURPOSE. (a) Parents are partners with educators, administrators, and school district boards of trustees in their children's education. Parents shall be encouraged to actively participate in creating and implementing educational programs for their children.

# data[].attributes.headline
#9 - Full Individual and Initial Evaluation 

# data[].attributes.subject
#9 - Full Individual and Initial Evaluation 

# data[].attributes.body
(2 TAC § 89.1011 (a))

Adminsitrative Law

2 TAC § 89.1011 established that prior to testing to qualify a student for special education services, prior intervention should be considered and implemented.

http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/rules/tac/chapter089/ch089aa.html#89.1011

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Education rules concerning special education services

# data[].attributes.body
SAISD has established the local policy for Equal Education Opportunities. The district has outlined the policy for referring students to special education programs. With RTI being the road to intervene before a student is referred to special education, this policy establishes the foundation for steps to consider after interventions.

San Angelo ISD. (2016). Equal education opportunities. Retrieved from https://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1139?filename=FB(LOCAL).pdf

# data[].attributes.body
ELCC 2.1: Candidates understand and can sustain a school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning through collaboration, trust, and a personalized learning environment with high expectations for students

ELCC 2.1 establishes the high expectations students will face within their schools. Through this standard, the RTI team will monitor student progress, establish best practices in the classrooms, and provide personalized approaches to learning to help students better succeed.

# data[].attributes.body
The Center for Response to Intervention is a beneficial resource that allows the viewer to review the four essential components within RTI. This website also provides detailed information as to how to effectively serve students using each of the four components. Resources are provided throughout the website to better serve the teachers and administrators.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Since 2007, the MTSS Center has been a national leader in supporting states, districts, and schools across the country in implementing an MTSS framework that integrates data and instruction within a multi-level prevention system to maximize student achievement and support students' social, emotional, and behavior needs from a strengths-based perspective.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Home | Center on Multi-Tiered Systems of Support

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Since 2007, the MTSS Center has been a national leader in supporting states, districts, and schools across the country in implementing an MTSS framework that integrates data and instruction within a multi-level prevention system to maximize student achievement and support students' social, emotional, and behavior needs from a strengths-based perspective.

# data[].attributes.body
All students are in Response to Intervention. Tier 2 and Tier 3 students receive additional interventions to close the learning gaps.

Generally, RTI interventions are implemented before students are tested for a learning disability. After multiple interventions and still no progress, a student is usually referred for special education testing.

Tier 2 interventions are generally implemented for a grading period before moving to Tier 3.

A child does not need to work through the tiers in order to be tested for special education. If a parent makes a request for a student to be evaluated, the district can conduct testing to determine if a student has a learning disability.

Educators must carry out interventions with fidelity. If interventions are not carried out with fidelity, students are not being provided with the services they are needing to be successful.

From this legal guide that establishes the policies RTI covers, it is beneficial in establishing the best interventions for the students. Teachers must be aware when a student is struggling so they are legally able to provide the services the student needs. If a student does qualify for special education, they will legally receive all the accommodations set forth in their ARD. If a student does not qualify for special education, they will remain in Tier 3 and receive extra support under RTI policies.