Sustaining a Multitiered System of Supports for English Learners in Rural Community Elementary Schools

Abstract

A 5-year model demonstration project designed to improve literacy instruction and special education referrals for English learners (ELs) in grades K–3 in three rural community elementary schools was completed with specific attention to sustainability 1 year after implementation. The model, which was developed and implemented through a university–school district collaborative partnership, incorporated sustainability as a critical component. Findings show that the sustainability component (a) embedded into project development, (b) periodically revisited during project implementation, and (c) personalized by participating schools developing their own sustainability plans proved to be a successful approach to maintaining select literacy best practices and improved referrals of ELs. A minimum of 80% of classroom teacher participants reported 1 year after project implementation that key aspects of the project continued to be beneficial or very beneficial for delivering their classroom instruction to ELs. Each of the five multitiered system of supports (MTSS) for EL model components was somewhat addressed, with several being mostly addressed 1 year after implementation in all three elementary schools. Also, the culturally and linguistically responsive referral was maintained. Project sustainability findings are shared and discussed along with recommendations for educators to apply in their MTSS models in rural elementary schools with high populations of ELs with and without disabilities.

Beyond Traditional Response to Intervention: Helping Rural Educators Understand English Learners’ Needs

“…Teams must reframe their implementation of RTI for ELs into a process that includes (a) comparing the EL's performance to that of true peers, (b) exploring cultural, linguistic, socioemotional, and educational factors that affect EL's performance; (c) selecting interventions that address the EL's unique needs and have been found to work with similar students; and (d) establishing a progress-monitoring system that accurately measures progress on the targeted skill (Dougherty Stahl, 2016). Hoover et al (2019) collaborated with rural schools in implementing a multitiered level of supports for ELs which involved five components, including (a) multilevel instruction, (b) research-based instruction, (c) culturally and linguistically relevant instruction in Tiers 1 and 2, (d) multiple forms of assessment, and (d) ecological decision making. During their work with rural teachers and RTI teams, Hoover et al (2019) emphasized the need to consider the effect of the learning and living environment on ELs' learning when interpreting data; also, they reported evidence of long-term sustainability of multiple aspects of the suggested components of the implementation of RTI with ELs after substantial, explicit training.…”

“…Hoover et al (2019) collaborated with rural schools in implementing a multitiered level of supports for ELs which involved five components, including (a) multilevel instruction, (b) research-based instruction, (c) culturally and linguistically relevant instruction in Tiers 1 and 2, (d) multiple forms of assessment, and (d) ecological decision making. During their work with rural teachers and RTI teams, Hoover et al (2019) emphasized the need to consider the effect of the learning and living environment on ELs' learning when interpreting data; also, they reported evidence of long-term sustainability of multiple aspects of the suggested components of the implementation of RTI with ELs after substantial, explicit training. In addition, Hoover and Erickson (2015) have emphasized the need for RTI teams in rural schools to consider the EL's language development and performance relative to true peers, as well as the quality of English instruction that the EL had received.…”

Meeting the Language Needs of Emergent Multilingual Students at Risk for Learning Disabilities through Multitiered Systems of Support

“…But a further potential difficulty comes into play if students’ culture, background, and language are not considered in their learning and instruction (Ortiz et al., 2021). Indeed, significant variability exists across the EM student population in this regard, and a failure to consider students’ backgrounds, culture, and needs can have dramatic ramifications for student outcomes, including academic achievement and language development—and the long‐term consequences of those outcomes (e.g., Francis et al., 2018; Hoover et al., 2020; Richards‐Tutor et al., 2016). To ensure students’ success, an alternative approach, focusing on students’ assets, is needed.…”

Small Town Transition Services Model: Postsecondary Planning for Students With Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…Problems with school-to-work transitions may be intensified by the features of rural communities. It has been documented that schools in rural areas encounter several educational challenges that can negatively affect the transition experience of students (Embree et al, 2018;Evans-Thompson et al, 2016;Francis et al, 2020;Hoover et al, 2020;Test & Fowler, 2018). Some of these challenges include limited financial resources for activities and programs, an absence of community supports, lack of public transportation, and fewer employment opportunities (Embree et al, 2018;Evans-Thompson et al, 2016;Francis et al, 2020;Hoover et al, 2020;Test & Fowler, 2018).…”

“…It has been documented that schools in rural areas encounter several educational challenges that can negatively affect the transition experience of students (Embree et al, 2018;Evans-Thompson et al, 2016;Francis et al, 2020;Hoover et al, 2020;Test & Fowler, 2018). Some of these challenges include limited financial resources for activities and programs, an absence of community supports, lack of public transportation, and fewer employment opportunities (Embree et al, 2018;Evans-Thompson et al, 2016;Francis et al, 2020;Hoover et al, 2020;Test & Fowler, 2018). Fortunately, data indicate that the impact of these barriers can be mediated with post-secondary planning (Burgess & Cimera, 2014;Collier et al, 2016;Evans-Thompson et al, 2016;Francis et al, 2020;Mazzotti et al, 2016;Morningstar et al, 2010;Shogren & Wittenburg, 2020;Test & Fowler, 2018).…”