Summary of Teacher Pilot Test

Summary of Pilot Results RtI Teacher Survey.docx

Evaluation of Response to Intervention Practices for Elementary School Reading (School and Staff Practices)

Summary of Teacher Pilot Test

OMB: 1850-0889

Document [docx]
Download: docx | pdf

Summary of Pilot Results

RtI Teacher Survey



In general, the four teachers who reviewed the teacher survey felt that the survey was clear and readable. Some wanted more information about how the data might be used in the analysis (something that could be explained in the instructions introducing the survey) but this wasn’t universal among the teachers. The issues that teachers identified as needing greater clarification included:

  • The description of the different tier levels

  • General terms that might need further definition (e.g., electronic student data system)

  • Several items that might be improved by adding additional response categories

The teachers’ detailed comments/questions and recommendations are listed below.


Exhibit 1: RtI Teacher Survey

Item

Number

Nr

Of

Respondents


School Staff Questions


Response


B2

2

The description of Tier 2 and 3 interventions is not clear. Also not clear what assessment measures determine the tier level

Added additional terms that teachers may be familiar with: Level 2 and Level 3

Definition of reading instruction


1

Hard to answer because some of her students don’t get phonics instruction. It depends on what the reading levels are per grade level

No change

C6 & C7

1

Teacher doesn’t have students with IEP leave class;

Added response option to C6 that no students in class have IEPs with reading goals, with skip to C8

C7a,b

2

Display is a little confusing. Also there are kids that are in the process of being identified (referred for evaluation). It is hard to know if they should be included.

Added clarification that students in the referral process should not be included

C8

4

Some confusion about whether “same reading curriculum” means using materials from same publisher or using multiple curriculum materials shared by all.

Added clarifying terms-and removed phrase “curriculum materials”

C11a

2

Some confusion on the definition of “small group”

Provide definition of “small group”

Gave example of small group as 6-8 children

D2


Too many answer options

Removed answer option

5 to 8 times a year

D12

4

“Electronic student data system” is not clear.

D12—added examples


E4

2

There may be teachers on staff who are not serving in a support capacity in this item

No change


2


File Typeapplication/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
File Modified0000-00-00
File Created2021-01-31

© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy