RTI - The Library Role
March 15th, 2006 by Christopher HarrisI have been talking about Response to Intervention (RTI) and how libraries fit in to the RTI model. In this post, we get to the real-deal of a question:
What can libraries do?
There is a slide that seems to make its way, unedited except for having the PowerPoint theme applied, into just about every presentation I have seen about RTI. It is attributed to MacKenzie (2000), but I wasn’t able to quickly find a definitive source (I think it is from Joy MacKenzie at one of the Intermediate Units in PA). The slide lists some statistics about children learning to read; for about 5% learning to read is effortless and for an additional 20-30% learning to read is no problem after some basic instruction. For another 20-30%, though, “reading is one of the most difficult tasks that they will have to master” (1, 2). My thought is that if learning to read is going to be so traumatic, then at least libraries can be the light at the end of the tunnel to provide the students with desirable reading materials in a variety of levels and formats. Which is a rather long winded way of remembering that libraries teach students to love to read and provide books as a reward for learning how to read.
Libraries fit into RTI in a number of other ways as well. This is, after all, a three-tiered model for changing the approach to regular education that addresses all students using different levels of interventions. For 100% of the students, RTI involves typical instruction with an additional focus on scientifically research based models and more small group interactions. A great way to meet those small group needs is with a flexibly scheduled library that has a variety of work areas, as proposed in my previous articles on the digitally re-shifted school library. The instruction for every student must also be standards based and scientifically research based. Again, as previously discussed, librarians can support this within the role of curriculum and pedagogy consultant teachers. We know the breadth and depth of the curriculum, and are experts in using a variety of instructional models.
If students are not responding to the instruction provided under the first tier, they are then addressed with additional interventions. The second tier of interventions, provided to about 20% of students, focuses on additional instructional time in smaller group settings. This may include tutoring or academic intervention services, computer based instructional systems, and referral to an instructional support team/child study team. Here is where things start to get a bit worrisome. This second tier does involve rather a lot of staff time. And remember, this is regular education, not special education staffing. A nagging fear in the back of my mind is that some schools may “find” the extra staffing to support RTI by cutting back in “non-instructional” programs like oh…say…libraries. If you have read this far into the post, you either realize this is a load of bull or you are being forced to read evey word that springs forth from my nimble little fingers (hi, mom!). Still, wouldn’t it be a good idea to be proactive in responding to Response to Intervention? By shifting the role of a curriculum/pedagogy consultant teacher - which we do anyway when we provide resources and work to plan collaboratively with teachers - to support RTI by providing support for scientifically research based instructional models, we are ensuring that libraries are a vital part of the model.
In this smaller second tier, libraries can also be a foundation for before/after school tutoring programs and other small group instruction. Libraries can also provide support for the new materials that support this model. I know libraries are different from “book rooms” filled with leveled readers, but we can also maintain our relevance by supporting those leveled reading collections. When leveled readers are cataloged into an automation system, they can be checked out to the student via a barcode and then tracked. RTI is very heavily into collecting data to support the response (or lack therein) to an intervention. Imagine a specially designed catalog interface that lets students “check out” the books they are reading; they all love to play with the barcode scanners…heck, I love to play with the barcode scanner! What if we took it a step further and got all kinds of Web 20 with this? What if the student could then rate the book with a level of success they felt they had reading it? What if we involved them in tagging the book with some keywords or if we let them choose to “adopt” the book onto their own bookshelf? Just imagine the output from this: we know what they are reading during each attempted intervention, we know what level of book they were reading, we know how they felt about the level of the book (their self-confidence as a reader), and we can see what kinds of books they like by glancing at their bookshelves. That’s all Library Powered right there!!!
Not to short-change library support for the third tier, but this will be quick. The 5% of students in this group are being carefully monitored through interventions, and are usually receiving special education services. Based on my experiences, I have seen that librarians do an exceptional job of working with students with special needs, and can only believe that they would continue to provide the same high level of quality support. This is the level that we know and are familiar with. The real deal is in how we can support the first two tiers of the RTI model.
March 21st, 2006 at 2:09 pm
“provide the students with desirable reading materials in a variety of levels and formats. Which is a rather long winded way of remembering that libraries teach students to love to read and provide books as a reward for learning how to read.”
Oh that it were so easy! I’m a librarian who raised a child with learning problems. They learn very early to HATE reading because there is absolutely no pay off for them, like music or art or socializing or recess. Children with reading comp problems don’t avoid reading because of the wrong level or format. It’s just no fun.
March 27th, 2006 at 12:04 pm
Norma, thanks for the insight into this. I know, and the RTI model supports, that there are those for whom reading will never be a “loved” activity. I love playing computer games, but my wife pretty much hates them. She tells me she just doesn’t understand what I see in them and how I can spend hours playing the same game. But then, she actually likes gardening and yard work - something I attempt to stay as far away from as possible. For me, it’s just not fun.
I still think that an important role for librarians in this model is to be the light at the end of the tunnel for struggling readers. We need to provide easier non-fiction, graphic novels, sports books…but also horse books, and hi/lo relationship based books. Is there a percentage for whom reading will never be a comfortable, enojoyable activity? Yes. But I would hate to give up on them without trying to find some way a library can continue to support them as lifelong learners and information users - for instance, audiobooks. At the same time, I think there is probably a larger percentage that learn to read after an intense struggle. They become skilled readers, but it took a lot of effort. Our job, then, is to provide the reward for their hard work!