STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS IN AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF HOW PSSA GRADE LEVEL TEACHERS PERCEIVE THE IMPLEMENTATION YEAR OF AN ACADEMIC MTSS PROGRAM IN AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL A Doctoral Capstone Project Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies and Research Department of Education In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education Richard E. Lucas Pennsylvania Western University August 4, 2023 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS ©Copyright Richard E. Lucas All Rights Reserved August 2023 Pennsylvania Western University School of Graduate Studies and Research Department of Education i STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS iii Dedication This work is dedicated to my loving and supportive wife, Diane. She is my partner, best friend, and greatest supporter. Diane inspires me daily to be the best husband, father, educator, and person I can be. She motivates me to be the best educator I can be simply through her presence. Not everyone gets to meet their hero, but I get to share my life with mine. She is the greatest teacher that I have ever met and the dedicated educator that I strive to be each day. I would also like to share my dedication of this project with my sons, Hayden, Layne, and Reece. They are the best part of me, and daily it impresses me to see the amazing men they are becoming. Their unconditional love and support are the bedrock of my relationship with them. I am beyond blessed to have the opportunity to be their father. Finally, I would like include my parents, Mary Lucas and Michael Mackey, in my dedication of this completed project. I am thankful for all that you have invested in me as your son. Thank you for always being there to support me as I navigated the trying times of completing this process. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS iv Acknowledgments This research and the accompanying work associated with it would not have been possible without the support and encouragement that I received throughout this two-year process from Dr. Todd Keruskin. I am grateful for the time and efforts that Dr. Keruskin invested in me both as a student and as a professional educator. His support throughout the process was invaluable and is beyond appreciated. I have not only benefited from his support but also grown as a professional educator from the valuable time that I was able to spend learning from what I consider to be a model educator and the epitome of an instructional leader. In addition to Dr. Keruskin, I owe gratitude to the teachers at Windber Area Elementary School for their willingness to participate in this research study and their commitment to providing thoughtful and detailed responses throughout the research process. Their dedication to their students rarely knows boundaries, and they embraced this opportunity to support their students by committing themselves to the benefits an MTSS program makes available. This group of teachers is an excellent example of why Windber Area Elementary School is deserving of its reputation as one of the best elementary schools in the state of Pennsylvania. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS v Table of Contents Dedication .......................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................. iv List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix List of Figures .................................................................................................................... xi Abstract ............................................................................................................................. xii CHAPTER I. Introduction .................................................................................................. 1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 1 Capstone Focus ............................................................................................................... 4 Research Questions ......................................................................................................... 4 Expected Outcomes ........................................................................................................ 5 Fiscal Implications .......................................................................................................... 5 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 6 CHAPTER II. Review of Literature ................................................................................... 8 History of Special Education in Schools ........................................................................ 9 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act ........................................................................... 10 The Education for All Handicapped Children Act ....................................................... 11 Americans with Disabilities Act ................................................................................... 12 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ................................................................. 13 Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act ........................................... 16 Special Education Student and Parent Rights ............................................................... 17 Procedural Safeguards .................................................................................................. 18 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS vi Dispute Resolution ........................................................................................................ 19 Landmark Cases in Special Education That Support MTSS Programming ................. 20 Brown v. Board of Education ................................................................................... 20 Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley .......... 21 Irving Independent School District v. Amber Tatro ................................................. 22 Lester H. v. Gilhool .................................................................................................. 23 Oberti v. Board of Education .................................................................................... 24 Gaskin v. Pennsylvania Department of Education ................................................... 24 Educational Disability ................................................................................................... 25 School Psychology .................................................................................................... 26 Severe Discrepancy Model and Response to Intervention (RTI) ............................. 27 What are Multi-Tiered Systems of Support .................................................................. 28 The History of MTSS.................................................................................................... 30 Early Intervention Services ........................................................................................... 31 The Essential Components of MTSS ............................................................................ 31 Implementation of MTSS Schoolwide.......................................................................... 33 Effective Program Implementation ............................................................................... 34 MTSS Teams ................................................................................................................ 36 The Role Parents Play in Implementation .................................................................... 38 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 38 CHAPTER III. Methodology ............................................................................................ 40 Purpose.......................................................................................................................... 41 Setting and Participants................................................................................................. 43 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS vii Research Plan ................................................................................................................ 52 Validity ......................................................................................................................... 57 Summary ....................................................................................................................... 58 CHAPTER IV. Data Analysis and Results ....................................................................... 61 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................ 62 Survey Results .............................................................................................................. 68 Interview Results .......................................................................................................... 97 Results ............................................................................................................................. 112 Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 117 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 118 CHAPTER V. Conclusions and Recommendations ....................................................... 120 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 122 Research Question #1 ................................................................................................. 122 Research Question #2 ................................................................................................. 123 Research Question #3 ................................................................................................. 126 Limitations ...................................................................................................................... 127 Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 132 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 134 References ....................................................................................................................... 137 Appendix A. Informed Consent Form ............................................................................ 142 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS viii Appendix B. Institutional Review Board Approval ........................................................ 145 Appendix C. District Letter of Approval ........................................................................ 146 Appendix D. Teacher Survey .......................................................................................... 147 Appendix F. Data Collection Plan and Timeline ............................................................ 154 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS ix List of Tables Table 1. PSSA Percent Proficient Data at Windber Area Elementary School ……...........46 Table 2. Student Enrollment Details in Grades 3, 4, and 5……………………………….49 Table 3. Student Ethnicity Details in Grades 3, 4, and 5………………………………….50 Table 4. Research Study Invited Professional Educator Representation…………………51 Table 5. Ledger of Financial and Personnel Resources…………………………………..55 Table 6. Count of Teachers by Range of Years of Experience…………………………...68 Table 7. Attendance and Participation in MTSS Professional Development…………..…..70 Table 8. Count of Teachers by Grade Level(s) Taught…………………………………...71 Table 9. Count of Subject Area(s) Taught by the Teachers………………………………72 Table 10. Teacher Responses Expressing Level of Familiarity with MTSS……………...73 Table 11. Efforts to Address the Implementation of Learning Loss Supports……………75 Table 12. Professional Development Provided on MTSS in Advance of………………...76 Implementation Table 13. The Belief that the MTSS Implementation was Effective……………………..78 Table 14. The Most Effective Aspect of MTSS Implementation………………………..79 Table 15. The Least Effective Aspect of MTSS Implementation………………………...83 Table 16. Beliefs Regarding the Progress Level of Students Receiving MTSS…………..86 Supports Table 17. What Teachers Consider the Most Effective MTSS Instructional……………..87 Strategies Table 18. What Teachers Consider the Least Effective MTSS Instructional……………..90 Strategies STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS x Table 19. What Teachers Believe the Area Most Supported by Implementation………...93 Table 20. What Teachers Believe the Area 2nd Most Supported by Implementation……..94 Table 21. What Teachers Believe the Area Least Supported by Implementation………...96 Table 22. Teacher Responses to Interview Prompts……………………………………..97 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS xi List of Figures Figure 1. Geographic Map of Windber Area School District…………………….............44 Figure 2. Multi-year graphical representation of ELA scores……………………………47 Figure 3. Multi-year graphical representation of Math scores……………………………48 Figure 4. Line Graph of Count of Teachers by Range of Years of Experience…...............69 Figure 5. Line Graph of Teachers by Attendance and Participation in MTSS PD………..70 Figure 6. Line Graph of Count of Teachers by Grade Level(s) Taught…………..............71 Figure 7. Line Graph of Count of Subject Area(s) Taught by the Teachers………………73 Figure 8. Horizontal Bar Graph of Responses Expressing Familiarity with……………...74 MTSS Figure 9. Vertical Bar Graph Regarding the Efforts to Address Learning Loss .................75 Supports Figure 10. Vertical bar graph of Professional Development Prior to……………..............77 Implementation Figure 11. Line Graph Regarding the Effectiveness of Implementation…………………78 Figure 12. Vertical Bar Graph Regarding the Progress of Students Receiving…………..86 MTSS Figure 13. Line Graph Representing the Area Most Supported by the…………………...93 Implementation Figure 14. Line Graph Representing the Area 2nd Most Supported by the………………..95 Implementation Figure 15. Line Graph of the Area Least Supported by the Implementation……………..96 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS xii Abstract During the 2020-2021 school year, students within Windber Area Elementary School experienced a substantial decrease in student performance levels on the PSSA exams from their counterpart cohort in 2018-2019. The school district made the determination that the most effective manner of approaching combatting the learning loss experienced and having a positive impact on PSSA exam scores during the 2022-2023 school year was through the implementation of a Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) program at Windber Area Elementary School. The purpose of this qualitative research study is to provide conclusions and recommendations that could support future MTSS implementation planning. This qualitative research study was conducted to respond to three research questions seeking teacher perceptions of the implementation process, strengths and weaknesses during the implementation process, and the effectiveness of embedded instructional methods. Analysis through the action research process was utilized to identify teacher perceptions during the implementation process. Initial teacher perception of a program is critical to successfully implementing a program and achieving the goal of embedding the program’s strengths within the school’s instructional practices. Data were collected utilizing a consistent survey administered three times to teachers and teacher interviews. The data was analyzed and triangulated to provide the researcher with teacher perceptions as they evolved during the implementation. The results presented conclusions that align with the teacher perceptions being positive regarding the implementation of MTSS as well as the embedding of MTSS related instructional strategies into their classrooms. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 1 CHAPTER I Introduction Windber Area Elementary School has a long history of demonstrated academic success with recognition at the local, state, and national levels. The community that supports the school is ever focused on the students attending the school continuing to receive instruction that is rigorous and at a high level of academic expectation. The school has been subject to many of the same challenges that schools across the nation and the commonwealth have been following the COVID-19 pandemic and is focused on implementing programming to restore the school’s instructional program and student achievement to its historically expected levels. Background The researcher chose this problem to analyze through the action research process to identify PSSA grade-level teacher perceptions during the implementation year of an Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) program at an elementary school. Initial teacher perception of a support program is critical to the potential in achieving an embedded role within the school district’s instructional practices. This research study is designed to measure teacher perception of a newly implemented MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School during the 2022-2023 school year. The study’s primary driving goals are to identify how the program, its supporting professional development, and the instructional changes experienced by the teaching staff in grades three through five during the implementation year of the program. Grades three through five were chosen due to their relationship to high stakes testing through the Pennsylvania State System of Assessment (PSSA). PSSA is the state’s STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 2 standardized summative assessment method for measuring school accountability and achievement of established performance measures. The academic growth of students has become a significant area of focus within the modern field of educational practice. A focus on each student achieving established standards through their academic achievement is measured, analyzed, and evaluated to determine the greatest course of action for each student to maximize their learning potential. A partnership exists between academic achievement and academic need. Academic needs present themselves and drive efforts to meet students' unique learning styles. The Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) defines Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) as a standards-aligned, comprehensive school improvement framework for enhancing academic, behavioral, and social-emotional outcomes for all students (Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network [PaTTAN], n.d.). The COVID-19 pandemic and the impacts that resulted for students relative to their learning progression within the standards set forth for students have created a need greater than ever before for a proven framework for meeting the needs of students experiencing learning loss. MTSS has become a primary means for school districts all over the commonwealth and country to address learning loss and the needs of students in their classrooms. It provides a data-driven decision-making approach to identifying student needs, identifying tiered levels of support and intervention, and methods for measuring student progress toward increased academic achievement. This approach has its roots in special education programming and its specially designed instruction in support of achieving goals and objectives through the development of an individualized STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 3 educational plan (IEP). The relationship between MTSS and special education has grown into a deeper-tiered methodology that is tasked with supporting the needs of students while seeking to reduce over-identification of students while providing detailed, focused data to assist in special education referral and evaluation determinations. The students that attend Windber Area Elementary School have also experienced the learning loss impacts created by the COVID-19 pandemic. As the former Director of Special Education and School Enhancement and current Acting Superintendent of the school district, the researcher identifies their professional role as that of an instructional leader tasked with developing and providing programming that meets the unique needs of students. During the 2021-2022 school year, as student needs became increasingly evident, the Windber Area School District identified the development of a schoolwide MTSS program as its best approach to address those needs. The school district committed itself to participate in the necessary professional development, resource acquisition and planning necessary to seek full schoolwide implementation during the 2022-2023 school year. With the design and development stages of the program having been determined to be successful, implementation plans for a schoolwide MTSS program were enacted for the start of the 2022-2023 school year at Windber Area Elementary School. The implementation cycle began prior to the school year starting and was inclusive of a building-wide daily schedule modification to support the time needed to provide a coordinated approach to the provision of MTSS programming to meet their needs. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 4 Capstone Focus One of the most important aspects of a programmatic implementation cycle that is new to a school, its staff, students, and the community that it serves is the perception of those who are most closely affected by the program. Within the school environment teacher perceptions are the most critical to the successful implementation of programming. Fidelity, validity, and reliability within the implementation and delivery phases of a new program rest upon the commitment and buy-in that teachers demonstrate to the program and the outcomes it seeks to address. This research study is being conducted to measure teacher perceptions during the implementation year of an MTSS program. The research conducted and the resulting data are intended to provide valuable feedback that can potentially be applicable in future implementations of programming as well as the goal of long-term successful integration of the MTSS program into the district-wide academic intervention and student support programming. Research Questions This qualitative research study is designed to gather teacher perceptions regarding the implementation year of the MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School. The research conducted in support of this study will involve the periodic administration of surveys and interviews with teachers of students in grades three through five. The surveys administered and the interview prompts have been designed with guidance from the three research questions presented below: 1. How do the school’s teaching staff perceive the implementation of the school’s MTSS program to be supportive of student academic progress? STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 2. What do the teachers perceive to have been the most effective and ineffective aspects of the school’s MTSS implementation? 3. How do teachers perceive the effectiveness of embedded instructional intervention methods through the MTSS program? Expected Outcomes The perceptions of the staff tasked with implementing and administering an educational intervention and support program such as MTSS are critical to the overall success of the program beyond its initial year. This research study is proposed with the intent to collect data regarding staff perceptions that will be utilized to drive short and long-term decision-making regarding future programming implementation planning and evaluation. The research methodology within this study has expected outcomes of gaining deeper insight into the perceptions teachers have regarding the school district’s implementation process for the MTSS program for teachers in grades three through five, gaining an understanding of teacher perceptions regarding the effectiveness of the instructional intervention methods that are central to MTSS programming and teacher perception related to the MTSS program implementation’s effectiveness in supporting student academic achievement. Fiscal Implications The primary revenue sources for the resources budgeted within this project have been allocated to the Windber Area School District through federal funding sources. These federal funding sources include ESSER II, ARP-ESSER, and ESSER 7% Set Aside – Learning Loss. MTSS programming is a researched based approach to 5 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 6 addressing student support needs prior to or in lieu of referral for special education evaluation. The MTSS implementation program at Winder Area Elementary School is financially supported substantially, utilizing one-time federal funding. However, an additional function of these funding sources is to allow school districts to bolster their reserve funds to allow for the continuation of instructional initiatives such as MTSS that are crucial to overcoming the academic impacts that COVID-19 has imparted upon the school and its students. This project will encounter a multitude of indirect costs, much of which will be difficult to predict until the data from the teachers is collected. The primary indirect costs affiliated with the project that are predictable include the following items and the accompanying description regarding their role in the project. • Teacher Professional Development Time • Teacher Preparatory Time • School District Provided Technology Summary The impacts that the COVID-19 pandemic has had upon schools, teachers, and the students that attend them have been wide-spanning and will likely require many years to address in a manner that will return academic expectations for students to the levels prescribed through the Pennsylvania Standards Aligned System. Multi-Tiered Systems of Support is a researched based approach to addressing the academic and behavioral needs of students. Through its implementation of a schoolwide MTSS program during the 2022-2023 school year, the Windber Area Elementary School seeks to address the STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 7 learning loss impact that the pandemic has created, but also implement a research-based data-driven system supported by its teaching staff that meets the academic needs of all students through a tiered approach. A successful implementation process that is balanced with a deeper understanding of teacher perceptions of the program is likely to provide the data and feedback to support the continuation of the program at the elementary school and expansion into the secondary schools of the school district within the coming years. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 8 CHAPTER II Review of Literature During the 2021–2022 school year, the Windber Area School District decided that it needed to make intensive changes to the way it supported its at-risk and academically struggling students. The data used to support this claim included state assessment results that showed a progressive decline in achievement levels since the 2016–2017 school year. This decrease became more evident after the return to in-person learning after the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused the closure of public schools during the spring of 2020. The school district identified the multi-tiered system of support as its desired framework for providing this needed support system to its elementary school. The 2021– 2022 school year was dedicated to participating in the necessary professional development required to prepare for full implementation during the 2022–2023 school year. The school district used the federal funds provided to address learning loss through this framework. Many efforts and initiatives took place to initiate the process on time and with full support. This series of events drive this document. The Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) is a comprehensive school-wide framework for enhancing academic, behavioral, and social-emotional outcomes for all students (Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network [PaTTAN], n. d.). The MTSS model is often referred to as a combination of Response to Intervention (RTI) and Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS). MTSS is a multifaceted system of support that includes universal screening, progress monitoring, formative assessments, and educational decision-making, all of which are evidence-based practices tailored to student needs. To determine the needs of students, MTSS is reliant on datadriven decision-making based on individual student data points (Pierce & Mueller, 2018). STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 9 MTSS interventions in schools are characterized by the establishment of support teams that include teachers, administrators, support staff, parents, and students when appropriate. These teams are focused on identifying and implementing instructional strategies and interventions to meet unique student needs. The MTSS team is similar to the Individualized Educational Program (IEP) team, which exists in the field of special education and can frequently function in a similar manner as a student approaches a potential referral for a special education evaluation. The legislation and civil rights advocacy that have shaped special education programs and their intervention-based approach through the provision of an IEP provides the foundation for MTSS and other intervention-focused support systems for students. When seeking an understanding of MTSS and the rationale for its implementation in schools, it is best to begin by studying the history of special education and the legislation that shaped the framework for modern intervention services to meet student needs. History of Special Education in Schools Special education, as we know it today, has its roots in the civil rights movement in the United States during the 1960s and 1970s. Much of the anti-discrimination and equality-focused movements of the time provided a foundation for the advocacy of people with disabilities. Many of the strategies used by advocates for disabled students arose from the civil rights movement's efforts and struggles (Skiba et al., 2008). The progressive legal impacts of the civil rights movement resulted in legislation being developed and enacted at the federal level that would lead to the creation of environments that support inclusivity and encouragement for individuals with specialized needs. The legislation that contributed to this progressive movement began with an STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 10 emphasis on the rights and opportunities for all individuals with disabilities, progressing to an emphasis on the educational rights of students with disabilities and their parents. According to Bicehouse and Faieta (2017), "the current cornerstone of special education, which can be traced back to the 1960s, is to provide specialized instruction to meet the unique needs of each child with a disability." Prior to much of the progress that came with the legislative measures, individuals with disabilities were often segregated from the general educational setting. Society has been hesitant to accept people with disabilities, frequently forcing them into forms of isolation in schools, workplaces, and residential facilities (Bicehouse & Faieta, 2017). The struggle for acceptance and inclusion in classrooms has been a long and challenging one. The legislation that was enacted to support individuals and students with disabilities has progressively produced a society in which children and adults with disabilities have more rights than at any other time in history. The challenges of maintaining while advancing those rights remain a constant battle waged in political arenas across the country, from federal government bodies to local school boards (Bicehouse & Faieta, 2017). Every day, efforts are made to increase access to free and appropriate public education for students with disabilities in schools, with the goal of meeting their needs in the least restrictive environment (LRE). The legislation that established our current special education systems within public schools remains the foundation for meeting the educational needs of all children. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities. Section 504 provides protection to STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 11 qualified individuals with disabilities. Individuals with disabilities who are qualified are those who have a physical or mental impairment that significantly limits one or more major life activities (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, 2006). While the law’s primary focus is on eliminating discrimination against individuals with disabilities in the work environment and thus establishing an equal opportunity for employment for disabled individuals. Students with disabilities are also entitled to the protections afforded by Section 504. Section 504 is defined by the United States Department of Education (USDE) and the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) as a set of regulations that require local school districts to provide a "free appropriate public education" (FAPE) to every qualified student with a disability who is within the school district's jurisdiction, regardless of the nature or severity of the student's disability. FAPE consists of the provision of regular or special education and related aids and services designed to meet the student's individual educational needs as adequately as the needs of non-disabled students are met (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, 2006). The Education for All Handicapped Children Act President Gerald Ford signed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94-142), also known as the EHA, into law on November 29, 1975. The law guarantees students with disabilities the right to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE). The EHA was created to support states and local school districts in protecting the educational rights of people with disabilities. Keogh (2007) emphasizes the significance of special education legislation and laws supporting the disabled in the context of political unrest and the civil rights movement. The passage of the EHA STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 12 resulted in significant advances in the field of disability rights. The law initiated significant progress in the implementation and provision of various specialized programs and services for early intervention and special education students. According to the United States Department of Education (n. d.), "since the passage of the EHA in 1975, the United States has progressed from excluding nearly 1.8 million children with disabilities from public schools prior to EHA implementation to providing more than 7.5 million children with disabilities with special education and related services designed to meet their needs in the 2020-21 school year." EHA was established with four primary goals in mind. The first goal is to ensure that all children with disabilities have access to a free and appropriate public education that is tailored to their specific needs through the provision of special education and related services. Second, the law ensured that the rights of disabled children and their parents were protected. The third goal was to assist states and local school districts in providing educational services that would support the provision of FAPE to their students. Finally, EHA provided the necessary guidance for conducting assessments and developing assurances about the efficacy of state and local educational agencies in educating students with disabilities (United States Department of Education, n. d.). Americans with Disabilities Act The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protected qualified individuals with disabilities from discrimination by federally funded programs, as well as the protected right to a free and appropriate public education for students with disabilities. Although the act guaranteed the basic civil rights of individuals with disabilities, it did not address many STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 13 other areas within society that were still in need of similar legislative efforts to create an inclusive society for all disabled individuals. On July 26, 1990, President George H.W. Bush signed into law the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA outlawed discrimination against citizens with disabilities in employment, transportation, public accommodations, and telecommunications. The ADA mandates that employers do not discriminate against qualified applicants with disabilities (Bicehouse & Faieta, 2017). The ADA expanded the civil rights afforded under prior legislation to include the private sector, not just federally funded organizations. Although access to schools and a free and appropriate public education were not the primary goals of enacting the ADA, its provisions apply to both public and private schools in terms of students with disabilities and ensuring their access to each. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (Public Law 94-142), commonly called IDEA (1990), was passed by Congress in 1990. IDEA (1990) resulted from the reauthorization and amending of EHA. The law’s primary mission is to ensure that all students with disabilities can receive a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) without discrimination by public agencies such as public-school districts. FAPE is the provision of special education and related services within a student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP) at public expense to students between the ages of 3 and 21 within an appropriate preschool, elementary, or secondary school that meets established standards by the state department of education. States and local school districts are eligible to receive federal funding if they have met the necessary measures of compliance STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 14 related to the procedures and regulations set forth within IDEA (Boyle & Weishaar, 2001). IDEA (1990) has a foundation of six guiding principles toward a free and appropriate public education. The six principles that IDEA substantiates include zero rejection or child finding, nondiscriminatory assessment, individualized education planning, the least restrictive environment, procedural due process, parent participation, and free and appropriate public education (Bateman et al., 2007). Zero Reject/Child Find requires that school districts are not permitted to exclude students due to their disabling condition(s) or the degree of resources necessary to meet individualized student needs. Under this principle, it is the responsibility of the school district to locate, evaluate, and provide appropriate educational programming and related services to children between 3 and 21 years of age. Child Find requires that all states establish procedures to locate unserved children and provide parents with information regarding programming and services available in support of their child. The nondiscriminatory assessment addresses the six general legal guidelines that govern the identification of students with disabilities and their eligibility for special education services. The six general guidelines established include an assessment without discrimination; a comprehensive assessment that uses a variety of sources; an assessment that identifies all of a child’s educational needs; assessments must be validated, reliable, and administered by certified, trained professionals; and students with disabilities and their parents must have their rights protected during the assessment process (Bateman et al., 2007). STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 15 The Individualized Educational Program (IEP) is the written plan developed to outline the services to be provided. The IEP is a formal document that is reviewed at least annually. The IEP is developed during an IEP team meeting, which is a collaborative meeting with numerous parties participating. The required participants in an IEP meeting include the parent(s), child (when appropriate), general education teacher, special education teacher, an LEA representative, a person that can interpret the instructional implications of the child’s evaluation or reevaluation, and other participants as invited by the parent(s) and the LEA. The student’s IEP includes various components such as the present level of performance, annual goals, short-term objectives, special education services to be provided, the extent to which a child will not participate in the general education curriculum, the anticipated dates of initiation, frequency, location, and duration of services, how the child’s progress will be measured and reported, a plan for transition services, and modifications to state and local assessments of student achievement. The principle of a "least restrictive environment" (LRE) is established with the intention of educating students with disabilities to the maximum extent possible alongside other children without disabilities. LRE also addresses the continuum of placements offered within the school district, access to nonacademic or extracurricular settings, and the annual placement determination for each student. Due process, as a principle under IDEA, is in place to protect children’s rights during periods of disagreement between the LEA and the parent(s) of the child. IDEA provides for two resources to resolve these types of disagreements in the form of STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 16 mediation and due process. If the disagreement cannot be resolved using these two methods, the judicial system can be used to resolve it. Parental participation is a vital principle of IDEA (1990), as it allows the parent to be active in the decision-making process throughout the development and monitoring of their child’s IEP. Parental rights are a critical aspect of IDEA. They are key to a collaborative process of decision-making for the student. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act In 2004, President George W. Bush signed into law the (Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act [IDEA], 2004). IDEA (2004) resulted in the reauthorization of IDEA (2004) and changes within mandates enacted under IDEA (2004). The concept of a universal design for learning heavily drove IDEA (2004). The policy has its foundation in the concept that "every curriculum should include alternatives to make learning accessible and appropriate for individuals with different backgrounds, learning styles, abilities, and disabilities in widely varied learning contexts" (Bicehouse & Faieta, 2017). In contrast to the exclusionary educational practices that previously separated those same students from their regular education peers, IDEA provides guidance to ensure that students with disabilities can receive their individualized educational program within the general education classroom to the greatest extent possible or in the least restrictive environment (LRE). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004) made numerous critical changes to previous legislation supporting the education of disabled children. These reforms are centered on parents' and students' rights, as well as the procedures that schools are permitted to use to facilitate special education services. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 17 Additionally, there are five components of IDEA (2004) that had a significant impact on the education of students with disabilities. The requirement for more inclusive practices and placements for special education students was the first component. This component increased instructional time in general education classrooms for students with disabilities above and beyond what was previously provided. The second component is a new methodology for providing evidence-based systems of instruction to all students in the general education classroom to prevent academic failure. (Bicehouse & Faieta, 2017) This methodology was given the title "response to intervention" (RTI). RTI is a tiered methodology of intervention that supports an increase in intensity as student need is determined to be greater than the current support systems can provide. RTI would later become the primary academic support system within MTSS and the primary strategy for maintaining special education or at-risk academic students in the general education classroom. The third component established criteria for establishing teaching credentials that were deemed sufficient to identify staff as highly qualified teachers. The fourth component is focused on the definition and provision of assistive and instructional technology. The fifth and final component of the law was the universal design that it introduced. Special Education Student and Parent Rights Parental involvement in a child's education and development has been consistently proven as a reliable indicator of cognitive development and associated academic achievement in the child by research in the fields of early intervention and STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 18 school-age education. Parental involvement in their child's education, particularly for those with needs that are unique or have a lower incidence than their peers, has been a consistent protective factor against negative future outcomes for children (Mandic et al., 2012). The emphasis on parental and student rights, which has now spread far beyond special education into all aspects of schools and educational programming, was initiated during the civil rights movement, which led to the movement for equality in special education and, finally, equity and equality across all educational programs. As we identify the relationships between special education and MTSS, it is imperative to keep in mind the significance of the mandates regarding parent and student rights in both, as well as the role that the establishment of procedural safeguards plays in the future of intervention in schools. Current educational philosophies concerning MTSS and intervention rely on partnerships with parents and students, as well as the guidance provided by the establishment of their mandated rights under IDEA (Madnic et al., 2012). Procedural Safeguards Procedural safeguards are grounded in the 5th and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution. Parents and students have their involvement in decisionmaking regarding educational programming protected under the procedural safeguards established in IDEA. The procedural safeguards ensure that the parent and student are provided meaningful opportunities to participate in the determinations and planning to represent the student's individualized education program, including placement decisionmaking where applicable (MacLaughlin, 2009). LEAs are required to provide parents and students with a minimum of one copy of the Procedural Safeguards document provided by the state bureau of special education STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 19 annually. Providing these safeguards in written form at specified times is legally required under IDEA (Madnic et al., 2012). The rights and responsibilities established under procedural safeguards are centered around the provision of due process rights to the parents of students. These due process rights provided for shared decision-making regarding a student’s educational program. The importance of parental involvement in the process of procedural safeguards is a critical component of IDEA (2004), as defined in its mandates. The parental safeguards protect parents' rights to participate in their child's identification, diagnosis, evaluation, services, and placement, as well as the IEP process (Madnic et al., 2012). They also establish the resolution process that may be enacted if an agreement between the parent and LEA cannot be accomplished. Dispute Resolution When an agreement cannot be reached between a parent and the LEA regarding the individualized education program for a student, a process is detailed that provides a map to the resolution of the dispute. This process is referred to as "dispute resolution." Dispute resolution utilizes numerous means to try to resolve the dispute before heading to the most intense means of resolution in the form of a due process hearing, which is binding. The means available prior to due process hearings include resolution meetings, both formal and informal, written settlement agreements, and non-binding mediation hearings. The goal of the dispute resolution process is to achieve common ground through an agreement that avoids the potential for an increased level of dispute between the parties (United States Department of Education, n.d.). STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 20 Landmark Cases in Special Education That Support MTSS Programming The current method of providing special education services in public schools results from decades of legal conclusions derived from legal proceedings most frequently focused on identifying and directing the individual educational needs of students with disabilities. These legal conclusions are highlighted by specific cases that are commonly identified as landmark cases in the establishment of the educational rights of students with disabilities as well as the regulations that guide the delivery of the individualized services included within each special education student’s Individualized Education Plan (IEP). The origins of intervention services and tiered support systems can be traced back to these pivotal events in establishing equitable and specialized free and appropriate public education based on guaranteeing fundamental civil rights to all. Brown v. Board of Education Brown v. Board of Education is widely regarded as one of the most influential and landmark decisions issued by the United States Supreme Court on human rights in public schools. The events that gave rise to this case began in 1951 in Topeka, Kansas, when a public school district refused to allow a parent to enroll their child in the school nearest to their home. The school district required the family to enroll their black student in a school that was further away due to their race. The two schools were racially segregated, with the closest school being a "white" school and the farther school being a "black" school. The student's parents, along with twelve other families, filed a federal class-action lawsuit against the Topeka Board of Education. The initial court ruling was against the families under the doctrine of "Separate but Equal," but the families did appeal the ruling to the United States Supreme Court. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 21 The court's decision, in this case, invalidated the "Separate but Equal" doctrine and made school segregation illegal. Even if the segregated schools were "separate but equal," the court ruled that laws mandating and enforcing racial segregation in public schools were unconstitutional (Brown v. Board of Education, n.d.). The court ruled that the doctrine violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution as it relates to the amendment's Equal Protection Clause. While this decision directly addressed racial segregation in public schools, it also laid the groundwork for future case law that would support equality in education for the disabled. With the doctrine of "separate but equal" now deemed unconstitutional, desegregation would become more than a racial issue; it would also serve as the foundation for future efforts to create inclusive public schools that educate all students. Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley The parents of a student with a hearing impairment, leaving the child with minimal residual hearing, filed a federal lawsuit after the school district administrators in which their child attended denied the provision of a qualified sign language interpreter through the provisions of the child’s Individualized Education Plan (IEP). The court ruled that, while the child advanced easily from grade to grade, she was not performing as well academically as she would have had she not been handicapped. The child was not receiving a "free and appropriate public education" because of this disparity, which the court defined as "an opportunity to achieve [her] full potential commensurate with the opportunity provided to other children" (Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley, n.d.). The ruling in the case establishes an expectation that STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 22 students will be provided with the resources, support, and interventions required to achieve their full potential. Irving Independent School District v. Amber Tatro The parents of an eight-year-old female student with spina bifida requested that their daughter's need for multi-day catheterization be included as a related service in the child's IEP. The child's ability to participate in and receive a free and appropriate public education was dependent on the provision of this related service. Since the procedure could be performed by a layperson with minimal training, it was thought to require something other than specialized medical training. Because they received federal funding, Irving Independent School District was required to provide the related services outlined in the child's IEP. As a result, the school district created an IEP for the student while failing to provide the related services outlined in the plan. The court ruled that the service is a related service and that it is required under the Education of the Handicapped Act, as well as Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act prohibits a person from being "excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under" any federally funded program (Irving Independent School District v. Amber Tatro, n.d.). Honig v. Doe Two California students with emotional disturbances were suspended from school while expulsion hearings were scheduled. Doe was initially suspended for five days. The school district notified the parent that they would recommend that Doe be expelled from school and that the suspension would be extended until the suspension proceedings could be resolved. The parent filed a suit under the "stay put" provision of the Education of the STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 23 Handicapped Act. Doe claimed that the indefinite suspension violated the student's rights and that an IEP review was required to determine whether the behavior was a manifestation of the student's disability, and thus suspension and/or removal from the current educational placement would be deemed illegally impermissible. The ruling of the US Supreme Court in this matter determined that a maximum suspension of 10 days would provide the school district officials an opportunity to take necessary measures to ensure that a plan is developed, and measures are taken to ensure that the child being suspended was still in receipt of a free and appropriate public education (Honig v. Doe, n.d.). Lester H. v. Gilhool Lester’s parents and the school district came to an agreement regarding his placement in a special education day facility to best meet his educational needs. Following his first year at the day facility, it was determined that the facility no longer could meet his needs as Lester’s behavior had become of increased concern. The school district placed Lester on homebound instruction for five hours per week the following school year. This led to the school district applying for additional day facilities, with six programs denying him admission before an out-of-state program admitted Lester approximately two and a half years after entering school. Lester’s parents sued in federal district court, alleging that Lester had been deprived of a free and appropriate education for the two and a half years in which he was enrolled in the day facilities. Following an appeal by the school district, the court ruled to grant Lester compensatory education for the two and a half years that the parent had sued for. This landmark case establishes that compensatory education can be awarded to a student in advance of their completion or STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 24 aging out of special education services at two years old. The court ruled that waiting until Lester is 21 years old to award the compensatory education could create hardship as needs that could be addressed under the planning afforded by the early determination would not be possible to address if they were waited upon (Lester H. v. Gilhool, n.d.). Oberti v. Board of Education Rafael Oberti was an eight-year-old child with a disability. The LEA that Rafael attended determined that due to his disruptive behaviors, he needed to be educated only in a self-contained special education class outside the school district. Rafael’s parents sought an inclusive placement that would provide for his special education and related services to be provided within the regular education setting. Rafael’s parents sued the LEA and won. The court determined that the LEA must consider all available aids and services appropriate for the student to remain in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). This determination established the initial framework for delivering FAPE, with LRE as the primary consideration relative to the student's placement (Oberti v. Board of Education, n. d.). Gaskin v. Pennsylvania Department of Education After eleven years of litigation and settlement negotiations, the Gaskin case was resolved. The defendants were accused of violating IDEA (2004) by failing to identify disabled students, develop individual educational programs or plans (IEP), and provide a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE) to the greatest extent reasonably possible. The agreement established a comprehensive set of requirements in Pennsylvania public schools to ensure that students with disabilities receive an education in the least restrictive environment possible. The requirements STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 25 established instituted a significant reform in terms of inclusive practices, which are now a standard in classrooms and provide alignment to MTSS programming (Gaskin v. Pennsylvania Department of Education, 2005) Educational Disability The processes and procedures established relative to educational disabilities rely heavily on assessment, observation, and collecting parent and teacher input. These processes and procedures are aligned with the rights established for parents and students under procedural safeguards (Keogh, 2007). IDEA (2004) established thirteen categories of disability. The thirteen categories of disabilities include autism, deaf-blindness, deafness, emotional disturbance, hearing impairment, learning disability, mental retardation, multiple disabilities, orthopedic impairment, other health impairments, speech and language impairment, traumatic brain injury, and visual impairment (United States Department of Education, n.d.). The thirteen disability categories established by IDEA (2004) are used to identify a student with a disability and the nature of that disability. A common misconception about identifying a disability and qualifying for special education services based on the disabling condition is that a student's individualized program is determined by their disability. This is an incorrect conceptualization in many ways. While disabilities that are physical in nature are generally aligned to specific physical supports, such as deafness or visual impairment, the purpose of an IEP is to develop a plan to provide individualized services unique to meeting the needs of a specific child. Disability categories that are not inherently physical limitations or disabling conditions can be met through any combination of specialized support services. This concept directly aligns with MTSS and STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 26 its provision of individualized services based on student needs and their tier of support. MTSS and special education are similar in these ways but also differ based on them. In their plans to support students, MTSS and special education both use service levels or tiers. MTSS is based on the provision of interventions within a three-tiered system, whereas special education uses three service levels to demonstrate the amount of time special education teachers provide special education services to special education students: itinerant (20% or less of the school day), supplemental (greater than 20% but less than 80% of the school day), and full-time (80% or greater of the school day) (United States Department of Education, n.d.). In addition, to support or intervention services, special education students are entitled to related services that support the student in meeting their full potential within their educational setting. The provision of related services, in conjunction with the special education services and supplementary aids and services outlined in the IEP, is designed to enable a student to advance appropriately toward attaining the annual goals, to be involved in and progress in the general education curriculum, to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities, and to be educated and participate with other disabled and nondisabled children (PaTTAN, 2022). School Psychology Under state and federal regulation, a student determined to be disabled under IDEA 2004 must have a comprehensive evaluation using multiple methods of assessment and data collection by a certified school psychologist. According to the American Psychological Association, school psychologists are prepared to intervene at the individual and system levels and develop, implement, and evaluate programs to promote STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 27 positive learning environments for children and youth from diverse backgrounds and ensure equal access to effective educational and psychological services that promote healthy development (American Psychological Association [APA], 2022). While school psychologists serve in numerous specialized capacities within school systems, their primary roles encompass special education and intervention services. School psychologists are well-versed in interpreting data and its use in making informed decisions about a student’s progress within their educational program. School psychologists are not only important team members in identifying student disabilities, but they can also be very helpful in supporting schoolwide intervention initiatives such as MTSS. School psychologists can play leadership roles in schools in the identification and dissemination of research-based practices that are supportive of the goal of providing intervention and individualized support systems within MTSS programs (Webb & Michalopoulou, 2021). Severe Discrepancy Model and Response to Intervention (RTI) IDEA (2004) established a new model, Response to Intervention (RTI), for determining eligibility for special education outside of the traditionally utilized severe discrepancy model. The severe discrepancy model has been the primary means for the identification of students who are identified as having a specific learning disability (SLD). The severe discrepancy model allows educators to determine if a student’s inadequate progress is commensurate with his or her cognition and whether the student is working to his or her potential (Armendariz & Jung, 2016). RtI is designed specifically for identifying students with a potential learning disability. According to Margaret J. MacLaughlin (2009), the primary goal of RtI is to STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 28 prevent students from being referred to special education because of insufficient instruction. Rather than focusing on the results of various standardized assessments administered in a closed environment, RTI utilizes an approach that involves students transitioning between three tiers of support. Each tier demonstrates an increased intensity in the level of instructional interventions that regular education teachers implement. The school psychologist can utilize the data collected during the RTI process to assist in making determinations regarding the potential identification of a specific learning disability. When implemented and operated effectively, RTI can provide a strong academic support system within a school's MTSS program while also assisting in limiting the potential for over-assessment of students who may be exhibiting an increased need for special education services in the regular classroom environment. What are Multi-Tiered Systems of Support There are numerous models that are considered representations of MTSS programming, but most models share several features, such as universal screening of all students, multiple tiers of intervention service delivery, a problem-solving method, and an integrated data collection and assessment system to inform decisions at each tier of service delivery (Leonard et al., 2019). The National Center on Educational Outcomes and the TIES Center MTSS is defined as "a model or approach to instruction that provides increasingly intensive and individualized levels of support for academics (e.g., response to intervention, or RTI), and for behavior (e.g., positive behavioral intervention supports, or PBIS)." Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) provides a definition of a "multi-tiered system of support" as "a comprehensive continuum of evidence-based systemic practices STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 29 to support a rapid response to student's needs, with regular observation to facilitate databased instructional decision-making" (Thurlow et al, 2022). MTSS is a framework for organizing and providing a tiered instructional model for all students that has the potential to meet all students' academic and behavioral needs. The most common framework for MTSS programs is a three-tiered model, which is often represented by a triangle that shows the various tiers of support and the decreasing number of students who receive support as the intensity of the support increases. Tier I is called the "universal approach" to intervention (Thurlow et al., 2022). The universal approach focuses on providing high-quality, evidence-based instruction to all students. Tier I supports are intended to assist approximately 80% of students (Charlton et al., 2018). Students are assessed using universal screeners in Tier 1 to determine if they need help with the curriculum and are at risk of potentially not learning within a regular classroom delivery model that is delivered to all students (MacLaughlin, 2009). Tier II denotes the use of small group instruction strategies and interventions within the general education classroom to support at-risk students who demonstrate a need for additional support or instructional assistance beyond that provided to all students. Tier II is intended for a more defined student population because it employs a more targeted approach to providing support and is intended for implementation with 10%–15% of students (Charlton et al., 2018). Tier 2 skill deficiencies are being addressed in specific skill areas; not all skills are being instructed. Student progress is measured in short periods of monitoring that are defined and established to provide timelines for students transitioning from Tier 2 to the other two tiers based on the data collected during the administration of the Tier 2 interventions (MacLaughlin, 2009). STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 30 Tier III is the most intensive tier of intervention in RtI, and it is intended to provide additional layers of instructional support through intervention to students who have yet to demonstrate progress after receiving Tier 2 interventions. Tier III is reserved for approximately 5% of students due to the intensive nature of the intervention required (Charlton et al., 2018). Depending on the LEA's methodology, the transition to Tier 3 may trigger a special education evaluation. Tier 3 is considered the final level of intervention in some LEAs before referring the student for a special education evaluation (MacLaughlin, 2009). The History of MTSS MTSS finds its historical roots in the prevention models utilized in the public health field (Leonard et al., 2019). Its four steps identify this model to achieving systemic change: defining the problem, identifying risk and protective factors, developing, and testing prevention strategies, and ensuring widespread adoption (Washington Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs [WCSAP], n.d.). The initial target audience for MTSS was regular education students who demonstrated at-risk potential academically or behaviorally and may require referral for special education evaluation. MTSS was initially intended as a schoolwide framework through inclusive intervention practices in the general education classroom that could meet the needs of all students who were not diagnosed with an educational disability (Thurlow, et al., 2022). The concept of inclusion in education has its roots in special education legislation and programming. Inclusive education is established under a shared vision of procedures and strategies for the benefit of all children (Smith & Larwin, 2021). With the concept of inclusive education changing over the past decade, an evolution as to STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 31 what inclusion represents has emerged. The effort to maintain special education students to the maximum degree appropriate in the regular education classroom has brought the concept of intervention into those same classrooms. This has resulted in MTSS programs becoming a method for potentially meeting the needs of all students through the general education curriculum within the regular education setting alongside same-age peers (Choi et al., 2019). Early Intervention Services As the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to be experienced in public schools, MTSS is becoming an increasingly important support system for primary-grade students who are entering school-age programming and may not have received early intervention support services in the manner that students did prior to the pandemic. This effect has increased the importance of MTSS services in the early grades, which traditionally focus on academic content exposure. These services are now being implemented on a consistent basis in schools as early as kindergarten (Leonard et al., 2019). While MTSS has not traditionally been directly associated with preschool-age children aged three and under, early intervention is a natural fit with the MTSS framework for intervention in many ways. An evidence-based curriculum, universal screening, intensive instruction and interventions, and data-driven decision-making underpin early childhood education (Choi et al., 2019). The Essential Components of MTSS Regardless of the subject area being supported, MTSS provides four essential components that provide a framework that is driven by evidence-based instruction and STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 32 supportive interventions that serve all students. The Center on Multi-Tiered Systems of Support at the American Institute for Research identifies four essential components of the MTSS framework. Those four essential components include screening, a multi-level prevention system, progress monitoring, and data-based decision-making. Screenings are conducted multiple times throughout the year and utilize a universal screener to provide consistent and reliable data to be utilized by the MTSS support team in their decision-making regarding interventions at each tier. Multi-Level Prevention Systems represent the tiers within the MTSS framework. The continuum of tiers requires integrated academic, social, emotional, behavioral, instructional, and intervention support. The supports being implemented to support students are expected to be evidence-based and provide direct alignment to the general education curriculum. Analysis and evaluation are critical components to any instructional program's validation and sustainability. MTSS utilizes a system of progress monitoring that shares similarities with that utilized in special education. Effective progress monitoring requires the use of valid and reliable methods for assessment and evaluation. These methods are utilized to determine the effectiveness and appropriateness of intervention and support. Data-based decision-making is the use of data to make informed decisions through analysis and problem-solving by a team focused on instruction, intervention, implementation, and disability identification (American Institutes for Research, Center on Multi-Tiered Systems of Supports, 2022). Pierce and Mueller (2018) also share the importance of these components in the implementation of an effective MTSS program, stating, "An MTSS model that is STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 33 designed to improve school efficiencies in instructional or intervention decision-making, data collection, and professional teaming can make an impact on educator practice and student performance." Implementation of MTSS Schoolwide Implementing an MTSS framework is essentially the development and induction of a coordinated plan using various forms of assessment to identify the unique needs of students (Pierce & Mueller, 2018). Over the past decade, MTSS has experienced widespread adoption in schools nationwide. The effort to find evidence-based support for students following the COVID-19 pandemic has only increased the desire to pursue MTSS as an option for schools to meet the needs of students who experienced learning loss due to the impacts that school closures and interruptions have had on instruction (Center on Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports, 2020). MTSS has provided the framework for intervention and support for students that many schools lacked, especially in rural communities that experience additional unique challenges. (Pierce & Mueller, 2018) There are common practices that are critical to effective MTSS implementation and that are consistently applied across successful models. These practices include the establishment of strong instructional leadership, the provision of high-quality core content instruction across the general education environment to all students, the utilization of universal screening methods paired with data-informed decision-making grounded in the data collected, and the provision of small group interventions that vary in intensity level specific to student instructional needs and their response to the core content instruction provided (Leonard et al., 2019). STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 34 Effective Program Implementation The goal of all program implementation should be an effective and efficient implementation that results in full buy-in from staff and students, resulting in the achievement of the program's expected outcomes. MTSS is also subject to these same expectations when implemented district-wide, school-wide, or at a specific grade level. Often, regardless of what level of implementation is the focus of the adoption of an MTSS framework, there can be an underestimation as to the depth of coordination and alignment required to produce optimal results for students. Additionally, the fidelity and full integration of MTSS programming and practices can often be overestimated following initial implementation and can potentially lead to adverse results. Implementation of an MTSS program at a shallow or surface level may result in limited or less than desired outcomes regarding student progress (Charlton et al., 2018). Effective MTSS implementation practices require support from the LEA as an organizational initiative to experience success. The actions required of an LEA to support an effective implementation process include the selection of evidence-based curricula for universal instruction and interventions, the support of well-trained interventionists, the provision of services and training for data-informed decision-making, and the necessary monitoring and support provided to measure the fidelity with which the program is being implemented (Choi et al., 2019). A crucial aspect of effective MTSS implementation is the professional development that establishes the foundation for the program's inception and the resources needed to maintain and sustain it. The professional development process includes technical assistance and training, as well as the time spent collaboratively by colleagues STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 35 to further develop and establish the program. Research has identified that teachers while developing their instructional skills and acquiring additional instructional strategy knowledge, require immediate strategies that can be applied to their instructional practices in the classroom with ease and efficiency (Mason et al., 2019). With effective professional development to support teachers during the implementation to practice transition, potential barriers to effective delivery will be less likely to have an impact and be invasive to achieving practical integration into the classroom. Establishing buy-in from staff is critical to effectively implementing programs such as MTSS in schools. There is research to support the claim that quality school leadership that is invested in the implementation of MTSS programming can accelerate the implementation process and increase measures of fidelity. According to the same study, school leadership is the backbone of MTSS (Choi et al., 2019). Administration promotes a deeper review of programming, which in turn results in identifying areas of need in professional development as well as the refinement and redirection of resources to best accommodate the ease of implementation for teachers. Teacher buy-in promotes the application of fidelity, reliability, and validity in new programming implementations such as MTSS and increases the likelihood of the program establishing itself within the operational framework of the instructional program. The initial stage of achieving buy-in is the provision of an informed, understandable, and actionable professional development plan that is inclusive of all stakeholders. Value is proportional to buy-in. Value is an intrinsic element of employee performance that can be fostered but requires understanding. That understanding is accomplished through active listening and collaborative processing through the establishment and incorporation of the STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 36 team into the implementation process and eventually into the process of maintaining programming and promoting progress (Sims et al., 2021). MTSS Teams An effective MTSS program is centered around a team-based approach that includes the involvement of all educational stakeholders. The stakeholder groups included in an effective MTSS team comprise, but need not be limited to, regular education teachers, special education professionals, administrators, education specialists, student support providers, parents, and the child when appropriate (Pierce & Mueller, 2018). MTSS teams should demonstrate a focus on collaboration and consultation to gather input, perspective, and strategy from all possible team members. This form of teamwork is often referred to as "interactive teaming." An interactive team focuses its efforts on sharing information and expertise to achieve a common goal or outcome (Pierce & Mueller, 2018). Teamwork is most effective when all stakeholders are actively engaged and focused on the same outcomes for students while understanding and establishing an MTSS program that is structured to provide the components necessary to achieve individual student progress toward success (Pierce & Mueller, 2018). MTSS teams are established in varying formats with differing roles in the implementation and provision of MTSS programming. Teams are established at a districtwide level, a school level, a grade level, a department level, and, at their core, as individual student support teams. Effective MTSS teams share consistent outcomes of meeting student needs through the provision of a strong general education curriculum that is driven to meet the needs of students, the delivery of high-quality instruction to all students, the provision of STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 37 supports that are aligned to student needs based on data, the monitoring of progress within the program, and the making of data-informed decisions that respond to the needs present. While the various types of MTSS teams share a consistent focus on the work they are tasked with, their roles and approaches to that work differ with respect to the population they serve. District-level teams are focused on developing an MTSS model that will establish the structure for the more defined approaches of the other teams. They also make sure to evaluate data to make informed decisions regarding the broader-based needs and available resources that can be allocated to support teams that work in a more direct manner. School-level teams are motivated to identify trends within their institutions and determine how the framework provided by the district-level team may be effectively incorporated into their model that caters to the needs of the entire school population. Grade-level or departmental teams identify needs and determine a course of action to support students in a specific grade level or department. They also focus on trends in their data that provide them with an opportunity to develop plans and processes that specifically address the outcomes and expectations set forth for a given grade level or department in a school and support the entire student population of that grade level or department. The most specifically detailed and intensive form of MTSS team support is achieved in the individual student support teams. Individual support teams focus their efforts intensively on a specific student in order to respond more quickly to their needs or progress. Regardless of the format of the MTSS team or the specific group that they are tasked with supporting, teams need to be interactive and work together to solve problems that are defined through universal screening, review, and analysis of student performance STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 38 based on data, and decision making that is data-informed and specific to the needs of their district, school, or students (Pierce & Mueller, 2018). The Role Parents Play in Implementation A critical component of the successful implementation of an MTSS program is the inclusion of parents in the process. There are several existing studies that support the correlation between family engagement within schools and academic improvements for students. The support that parents can provide in collaboration with school personnel can provide a framework for coordinated support systems with cross-environmental fidelity (Weingarten et al., 2020). the Center on Response to Intervention and the National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII) include family engagement as a component of their respective school-level fidelity of implementation rubrics, underscoring its essential role in the implementation of MTSS and intensive intervention in schools" (as cited in Weingarten et al., 2020). When it comes to sustainability, a family engagement that is integrated and collaborative with the school in the MTSS implementation and operation of the program may assist schools. Parental support and inclusive culture can provide a degree of systemic understanding and comprehension that will directly enhance student and parent participation (Weingarten et al., 2020). Conclusion The foundational elements of the multi-tiered system of support can be directly connected to the civil rights movement in education and the role that it has continued to play in the field of special education in schools. The concept of intervention and its impact on students, parents, teachers, and schools is truly immeasurable. It has led to STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 39 educational initiatives that have provided support and services in place to meet the unique needs of learners in the least restrictive environment. Multi-tiered support systems have grown from the progress achieved through these efforts and trials that have mapped the way for advancement in educational programming for students. MTSS has come to provide a system of support and interventions that are inclusive of strategies and programming that seek to meet the academic, behavioral, and social-emotional needs of students. While there are many approaches and philosophies for the implantation and sustainability of MTSS in schools, research supports three critical elements for a program to be effective: it must be studentneed focused, it must be evidence-based in all aspects of its approach, and it requires collaboration to achieve success on all levels. There are numerous approaches to developing an MTSS program that is inclusive of these three elements while aligned with the mission and vision of schools. With that in mind, the most crucial process within the provision of an effective and embedded MTSS program is its implementation. This study seeks to measure the success of the implementation of an academic MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School during its initial year. This initial year is likely to determine the success of the program and that success is reliant upon understanding the perceptions of teachers during this initial year of implementation. Their perceptions and desired buy-in will be a primary driver for the success of the program and as research demonstrates, the fidelity of programming can be aligned with teacher buy-in and the likelihood of the program becoming an effective method of meeting the needs of all students. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 40 CHAPTER III Methodology Meeting the unique leads of learners has been a challenge that educators have sought to address for nearly half a century since the first integration and inclusion practices were mandated. Students come to school with varying levels of ability and need that require varying models and modes of content and concept delivery. Maximizing student learning and creating a means for them to achieve their potential is important for success. However, as long as the challenge has been present varying philosophies and methodologies have been put into practice to support students and their unique needs. Understanding the journeys that and efforts of meeting unique student needs has its roots in the civil rights movements of the 1960s and the fight for the rights of the disabled in necessary to consider. In 2023, that fight continues as we see a new age of inclusivity in schools with the goal of educating every student within the least restrictive environment. This goal is supported through legal action that has occurred in courtrooms all over the country and resulted in schools being implored to take the necessary measures to meet the needs of these students. Students with disabilities were required to be educated in the regular education classroom to the maximum extent possible with data as the tool to be utilized for decision making for academic programming. Currently, the most prominent approach in schools nationwide in practice is the incorporation of the Multi-Tiered System of Supports or commonly referred to as MTSS. The Pennsylvania Department of Education defines MTSS as “a standards-aligned, comprehensive school improvement framework for enhancing academic, behavioral, and social-emotional outcomes for all students” (Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network [PaTTAN], n.d.). This approach to meeting student needs is a STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 41 schoolwide comprehensive method that requires intensive professional development for staff members, dedicated instructional time within the school day, and evidence-based assessments and instructional resources before implementation can even be achieved. Beyond each of these essential elements of the program, there is a need for the teachers that will be responsible for the daily delivery of the support within the MTSS system to be invested in its success for students to experience the desired outcomes for them. This qualitative research study was intended to identify the perceptions of how PSSA grade level teachers perceive the implementation year of an academic MTSS program in an elementary school. The elementary school chosen for this study was Windber Area Elementary School and included staff who teach third, fourth, and fifth grade. This chapter outlines the methodology used for this research study. The organization of this chapter includes the following topics: Purpose, Setting and Participants, Research Plan, Research Methods and Data Collection, Validity, and Summary. Purpose This problem was chosen for research and analysis through the action research process through the qualitative measurement of PSSA grade level teacher perceptions during the implementation year of a MTSS program at an elementary school. Initial teacher perceptions of student support programming such as MTSS are critical to potentially resulting in the programming achieving an embedded role within the school’s instructional practices. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 42 Student support programming such as MTSS has become a research-based series of instructional strategies aligned to meeting unique student needs in a fluid methodology. MTSS provides the opportunity for students to progress through varying tiers of intervention that are identifiable by the level of intensive support made available within each tier. Individualized programming has its roots in special education methodology and philosophy. MTSS has its roots in special education theory with a relationship that allows for the data and student progress collected within MTSS programming to be utilized in the special education referral and evaluation for eligibility processes. The collaborative nature of these two forms of student support programming provides for a potentially seamless transition for students exhibiting need exceeding that which can be met through MTSS programming into special education programming and evidence supported goals and objectives following identification as a student with an educational disability. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, schools across the nation have battled a loss in academic instructional time. The leadership team at Windber Area School District identified the benefits that MTSS offers. It was the position of the school district that the efforts to combat learning loss through the implementation of an MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School would have a positive impact on the school’s PSSA scores for the 2022-2023 school year. Within this study, the researcher sought to determine the perceptions of elementary teachers in grades three through five at Windber Area Elementary School during the implementation year of an academic MTSS program. The grade levels selected were chosen due to their association with state testing through the Pennsylvania State STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 43 School Assessment (PSSA), which begins in grade three. These were the most likely grades to have expedited implementation measures taken to maximize increasing student academic progress before the conclusion of the 2022-2023 school year due to the impending PSSA testing window in the Spring of 2023. The research questions which are being addressed within the data collection have been established by the researcher and received IRB approval as part of the researcher’s request for approval of the capstone project research application. The surveys administered and the interview prompts have been designed with guidance from the three research questions presented below: 1. How do the school’s teaching staff perceive the implementation of the school’s MTSS program to be supportive of student academic progress? 2. What do the teachers perceive as the most effective and ineffective aspects of the school’s MTSS implementation? 3. How do teachers perceive the effectiveness of embedded instructional intervention methods through the MTSS program? Each research question has been aligned with specific prompts or survey items to provide data collection that is supportive of analysis and the development of conclusive statements and recommendations by the researcher at the conclusion of the study. Setting and Participants The Windber Area School District is a small, rural, public school district located in South Central Pennsylvania. The school district’s geographic landscape is comprised of Windber Borough, Paint Borough, Paint Township, and Ogle Township within STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 44 Somerset County and Scalp Level Borough within Cambria County as represented in Figure 1. The school district covers approximately 57.6 square miles in size. Figure 1 Geographic Map of Windber Area School District Note. Purple highlighted area represents the area included within the Windber Area School District. Adapted from Map of Pennsylvania, by Mapquest (https://www.mapquest.com/us/pennsylvania/pennsylvania-282094739). In the public domain. The estimated population in 2019 for the area comprising the school district was 10,590 residents. This figure has reduced from 11,114 residents according to the 2010 United States census and 11,942 according to the 2000 United States census. (CityData.com, 2023) The area and those surrounding it continue to experience an increasing population loss as the economic impacts being felt in the area resulted in the median household income in Windber during 2019 being reported at $35,053. This is STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 45 significantly less than the median household income in the state of Pennsylvania of $63,463. Within the Windber Area School District community, the percentage of the total population in 2019 that was identified as meeting the requirement for the federal measure of poverty was 27%. An additional representation of the area’s economic impacts that are translated to the school district is identifiable in the 2019 cost of living index being 84.4 in contrast to the average for the United States of America, which was 100.0 during that same year (City-Data.com, 2023). The school district consists of three separate schools serving a specific series of grade levels. Windber Area Elementary School, the school which is the subject of this research report, is the sole elementary school within the Windber Area School District and encompasses grade levels Pre-Kindergarten 4, Kindergarten, First Grade, Second Grade, Third Grade, Fourth Grade, and Fifth Grade. Windber Area Elementary School had a total student enrollment of 694 students during the 2022-2023 school year. Students matriculate to the Windber Area Middle School as they enter sixth grade and attend middle school for grades six, seven, and eight. Following the eighth grade, students attend Windber Area High School to conclude their educational programming. Students in grades ten, eleven, and twelve are eligible to participate in career and technical education as the school is a member of the Greater Johnstown Career and Technology Center consortium. Windber Area Elementary School has a long history of academic successes most recognized in being identified as a National Blue Ribbon School by the United States Department of Education in 2012. However, over the course of the past ten years, the school has experienced a decline in its standardized assessment scores and a significant 46 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS change in its student population demographics. Each of these factors is at the heart of the determination by the Windber Area School District to make a commitment to the implementation of a schoolwide academic MTSS program beginning with a full school year of planning, preparation, professional development, and piloting of strategies during 2021-2022 in anticipation of schoolwide implementation occurring during the 2022-2023 school year. During the 2020-2021 school year, students within Windber Area Elementary School experienced a substantial decrease in student performance levels on the PSSA exams from their counterpart cohort in 2018-2019. The counterpart cohort was defined as the cohort of students in the prior school year who participated in the Pennsylvania State School Assessment (PSSA) administered at Windber Area Elementary School. Tables 1, Figures 2, and Figure 3 provide representations of the data utilized for comparison to demonstrate the occurrence of the decrease in student performance levels on the PSSA. Table 1. PSSA Percent Proficient Data at Windber ELA 2018-2019 ELA 2021-2022 % Difference Math 2018-2019 Math 2021-2022 % Difference 71.7% 58.0% (13.7%) 68.7% 45.2% (23.5%) Note. The PSSA is a mandatory series of summative assessments that are administered in the 3rd – 8th grades in the state of Pennsylvania. Adapted from the Future Ready PA Index, by the Pennsylvania Department of Education (https://futurereadypa.org). In the public domain. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 47 Figure 2 Multi-year graphical representation of ELA scores Note. The PSSA is a mandatory series of summative assessments that are administered in the 3rd – 8th grades in the state of Pennsylvania. Adapted from the Future Ready PA Index, by the Pennsylvania Department of Education (https://futurereadypa.org). In the public domain. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 48 Figure 3 Multi-year graphical representation of Math scores Note. The PSSA is a mandatory series of summative assessments that are administered in the 3rd – 8th grades in the state of Pennsylvania. Adapted from the Future Ready PA Index, by the Pennsylvania Department of Education (https://futurereadypa.org). In the public domain. Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) requires state departments of education to identify grade levels to administer summative state assessments in English Language Arts (ELA), Mathematics, and Science. The Pennsylvania Department of Education has identified two types of summative state assessments for administration annually, they are the Pennsylvania State School Assessment (PSSA) and Keystone Exams. The PSSA is administered to students in grades three through eight in ELA and Mathematics, as well as, in grades four and eight in the subject area of science. The Keystone Exams are designated for administration in secondary grade levels and thus are not relative to the 49 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS research being conducted in this study. Based on the grade levels assigned to Windber Area Elementary School, the PSSA-tested grade levels that are relative to this study are grades three, four, and five. The Windber Area School District designed an implementation plan for its MTSS program to focus on the areas of ELA and Mathematics. Science was not identified as a priority during the program’s development and was not supported with MTSS programming during the 2022-2023 implementation year. Thus, providing the researcher with the perceptions of the teachers of ELA and Mathematics in grades three, four, and five as the focus of this research study. Table 2 illustrates a breakdown of various demographic data for grades three, four, and five, which are the focus grade levels for this research study. Table 3 provides a breakdown of student enrollment by ethnicity in the same grades as Table 2. Table 2. Student Enrollment Details in Grades 3, 4, and 5 Grade Level Total In Grade Male Female Free Reduced Lunch Status Special Education 3 77 35 42 45 15 4 89 43 46 48 22 5 102 46 56 57 26 Total 268 124 144 150 63 Note. The United States Department of Agriculture establishes Free Reduced Lunch Status. Special Education status is determined through the evaluation process established under IDEA (2004). 50 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Table 3 Student Ethnicity Details in Grades 3, 4, and 5 Grade Level Asian Black or African American White Hispanic or Latino Mixed Race 3 1 (M 0) (F 1) 0 (M 0) (F 0) 74 (M 35) (F 39) 1 (M 0) (F 1) 1 (M 0) (F 1) 4 0 (M 0) (F 0) 0 (M 0) (F 0) 82 (M 38) (F 44) 3 (M 1) (F 2) 4 (M 4) (F 0) 5 1 (M 0) (F 1) 3 (M 1) (F 2) 92 (M 43) (F 49) 2 (M 1) (F 1) 4 (M 1) (F 3) Total 2 (M 0) (F 2) 3 (M 1) (F 2) 248 (M 116) (F 132) 6 (M 2) (F 3) 9 (M 5) (F 4) Note. Student ethnicity designations utilized in public schools in Pennsylvania are established by the Department of Labor and Industry through the Office of Diversity, Inclusion, and Civil Rights. https://www.doi.gov/pmb/eeo/directives/race-data. In the public domain. The Windber Area School District comprises 90 certified professional educators and eight certified administrators. Of these staff members, 15 certified professional educators were invited to participate in the research study due to their assignment to educate students within the grades included in the study. The eight certified administrators were not included due to the research study being focused on the perceptions of teachers in grades three through five. Table 4 represents those staff members without identifiable information and their current professional assignments. 51 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Table 4 Research Study Invited Professional Educator Representation Teacher Grade Level Assignment Teacher 1 Grades PK - 12 MTSS Coordinator Teacher 2 Grades 3 - 5 Special Education Teacher Teacher 3 Grade 3 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 4 Grade 3 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 5 Grade 3 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 6 Grade 3 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 7 Grade 4 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 8 Grade 4 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 9 Grade 4 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 10 Grade 4 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 11 Grade 4 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 12 Grade 5 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 13 Grade 5 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 14 Grade 5 Regular Education Teacher Teacher 15 Grade 5 Regular Education Teacher Each teacher included in this research study is either a Full-Time Professional Employee of the school district or a Long-Term Substitute hired for the 2022-2023 school year to provide instruction to students in which a professional vacancy currently exists. All employees selected for participation in the study have received the school district’s prescribed professional development in support of the implementation of the MTSS program. All teachers selected also are assigned to provide MTSS services during their school day. This assigned instructional time for the purpose of the delivery of MTSS services is identified within the programming of Windber Area Elementary School fiveday cycle schedule. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 52 Teachers provide MTSS services during instructional time designated as “Rambler Time”. During “Rambler Time” students are assigned to groups that are focused on the provision of Tier 1 services to 85 percent of students, while Tier 2 students, which constitute ten percent of the student population are grouped based on similar needs and provided support services aligned to meet their academic needs. Students that qualify for Tier 3 services are grouped into much smaller groups or as individuals for the purpose of intensive academic support services delivery. Tier 3 qualifying students represent the five percent of the student population demonstrating the greatest academic needs in relation to their grade-level peers. All students are identified for their current tier level through the analysis and evaluation of assessment results utilizing universal screeners which have been adopted by the school district. Students are screened using these universal screeners once per 45-day cycle and Tier qualification is redetermined based on the results of these screeners and the academic progress being made by students participating in Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions. Research Plan The researcher identified the importance of teacher perception of MTSS programming and the relationship it has to the way special education programming has progressed into a federally required system of individualized educational planning that incorporates unique strategies, specially designed instruction, and programming modifications to meet student needs. Literature on the topic of MTSS programming demonstrates a correlation in its identification as a successful programming option in support of students’ academic and behavioral needs and the successes that special STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 53 education programming has demonstrated in meeting students’ needs at their personal developmental level. While special education services in schools have a relationship to the civil rights movements of the 1960s and case law specific to individual special education delivery in public schools, special education programming is grounded in state and federal laws that support its requirement for all students to ensure the provision of free and appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment. MTSS programming shares these concepts in its programmatic delivery as it seeks to provide forms of interventions and supports that are designed to meet students at their instructional level and provide the necessary support to maintain their inclusion in the least restrictive environment. The research plan for this capstone study is centered around the collection of qualitative data from teachers in grades three through five, which are identified as the initial state summative assessment grade levels in the subject areas of ELA and Mathematics. ELA and Mathematics are the focused academic support subjects during the implementation year of the MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School. The qualitative data being sought by the researcher is meant to provide a comprehensive and time-lapsed representation of the teacher’s individual perceptions of the program and its implementation during the initial 2022-2023 school year at the school. The data being sought for collection and analysis by the researcher is intended to provide feedback as to the individual teacher’s perceptions of the effectiveness of the professional development provided to them prior to the onset of implementation, their perceptions of the success of the implementation process, and their perception of the effectiveness of various academic supports being provided through the schoolwide MTSS STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 54 program structure that they are actively engaged in. The researcher sought to achieve the collection of the data necessary to conduct the research proposed in this capstone project through the administration of a survey and interview script designed by the researcher that received IRB approval effective November 9, 2022, with an expiration date of November 8, 2023. The survey was administered to the teachers on three separate occasions with approximately one month between administrations. The items included in the survey remained consistent across all three administrations to provide the researcher with representations of potential changes in teacher perceptions as the implementation process continues to progress throughout the school year. The interviews were conducted via email at the request of the participants with each teacher being asked the same interview prompts without deviation. The researcher personally made the financial commitment of $276.00 to acquire an annual subscription with Survey Monkey. This commitment provided the researcher with a full year’s access to the surveys, interviews, and data collected to support the longterm analysis of data collected. The research study also had fiscal implications relative to personnel and materials costs that were committed to by the school district in anticipation of the implementation of the MTSS program. The commitment of these funds was determined to be necessary to implement an MTSS program that is in alignment with “best practices” as presented by the Pennsylvania Department of Education during the professional development and technical assistance which was provided to the school district. As represented in Table 5, the school district committed significant financial and personnel resources toward a successful and sustainable MTSS program through ARPESSER funds, the hiring of an MTSS Coordinator, and increased Professional 55 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Development in academic support-related instructional practices that extend beyond the core curriculum. Table 5 Ledger of Financial and Personnel Description Budget Leveled Literacy Materials $20,000.00 Reading and Literacy Focused Software $24,000.00 Diagnostic Reading Inventory Program $18,000.00 Diagnostic and Remediation Software License $54,000.00 Universal Screeners and MTSS Intervention Materials $71,054.00 MTSS Tiered Intervention Materials $18,400.00 School Psychologist Salary $66,500.00 MTSS Coordinator Salary $54,3000.00 Reading Intensive Intervention Curriculum and Supplies $12,963.00 Instructional Materials – Remediation/Learning Loss $40,000.00 Instructional Technology $10,000.00 Instructional Materials – Curriculum Revisions $10,000.00 Data Warehousing Software – with RTII Plan Function $45,000.00 MTSS Instructional Resources $20,000.00 Total $464,217.00 Research Methods and Data Collection The researcher administered the same survey (Appendix C) to third, fourth, and fifth-grade teachers via SurveyMonkey, at established intervals three times within the STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 56 implementation year of the MTSS program. The initial survey administered will serve as the baseline data collection method for the purposes of analysis of all data collected over the course of the research study. The subsequent surveys were intended to provide for analysis of change in perception by the research subjects over the course of time during the implementation year of the MTSS program. The surveys were designed to elicit responses that will provide qualitative data on teachers’ perceptions of the MTSS program implementation. The surveys also contain five items developed to collect demographic data to be aligned with the anonymous responses. The demographic data provided alignment to the qualitative responses to support trend analysis of the qualitative responses provided within the instrument. Qualtrics, a data collection tool, was utilized to warehouse and disaggregate the data collected for analysis and the development of conclusions. The surveys were administered electronically using the web-based data collection and analysis software program Survey Monkey. Interviews were administered in a multimodal methodology in one of three formats: in person, by email, or via phone. Data collected from surveys conducted were analyzed utilizing the data analysis tools provided by the Qualtrics software program. Demographic data collected within the survey instrument was aligned to the qualitative data gathered to provide trend analysis by years of experience of the teacher, professional development received, grade level teaching, and their familiarity with MTSS. The researcher conducted one-to-one interviews with the participants utilizing a series of interview questions (Appendix D) developed by the researcher to gather data with depth and clarity as it relates to the teachers’ perceptions of the MTSS program STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 57 implementation at an elementary school. Teacher interview responses were collected and analyzed using interview items developed to identify trends in response to develop conclusions in response to the research questions posed. The data collected within these two methodologies were utilized in a collaborative manner to provide a comprehensive analysis of the perceptions of the third, fourth, and fifth-grade teachers regarding the implementation of the MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School. The Data Collection Plan and Timeline were established in advance of the research study being conducted and are represented in Appendix E. Validity This research study was developed for the purpose of providing qualitative data to be that would provide the Windber Area School District the ability to analyze teacher perceptions regarding the initial implementation year of an academic MTSS program in its elementary school. The study focused on the PSSA tested grade levels of the third, fourth, and fifth grades. When designing a research study that is rooted in the collection and analysis of qualitative data that is perceptual in nature, it is critical that the research conducted, and the methodology utilized exhibit a high degree of validity. Ensuring that validity within the study is present and clearly represented increases the value of the data collected as it relates to utilization in the progression of the MTSS program in an effective manner beyond its implementation year. The credibility of the research methodology utilized in data collection was crucial to demonstrating high degrees of validity in the research process. The credibility of this study is supported by the repetitive process utilized in surveying teachers. The surveys administered were consistent across all three administrations with the same survey STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 58 utilized without deviation or revision for all three administrations. To increase this level of consistency in the delivery of the surveys Survey Monkey was utilized for the delivery of all three administrations. Utilizing consistent surveys as an instrument of data collection provided the research subjects with reliability and familiarity in how the data relative to their perceptions was being collected. The validity of the data collected in this research study is also supported by its transferability. This data can be generalized to any PSSA tested grade level that is within its initial year of MTSS programming implementation. The variance within this type of validity that must be considered and could be deemed as adverse to establishing validity would be the uniqueness of opinions or perceptions presented by each teacher. Each teacher has their own varying background and experiences that exhibit the potential to impact the responses they provide within the surveys. To counterbalance the concerns that are associated with each teacher’s personal and professional experiences, the study includes an interview with each teacher in addition to the surveys administered. The utilization of teacher interviews as a second method of data collection provides the opportunity to measure dependability and confirmability within the data collected. This is achieved through the triangulation of the survey data to the responses collected through the teachers’ responses to the interview prompts provided. Analysis of the data collected through the administration of the two methods of data collection was intended to provide this means of triangulation. Summary Schools continue to seek the best methodologies and instructional practices to support student academic growth and development in a personalized manner. MTSS STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 59 provides the opportunity to support a school’s efforts to achieve this. This research study is intended to provide qualitative data that will assist in the process of planning further implementation and expansion of the MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School into other grade levels and schools within the school district. Focusing on qualitative data and individual teacher perceptions is intended to provide information to be considered in future implementations based on the perceived strengths and weaknesses of the implementation process that occurred at Windber Area Elementary School during the 2022-2023 school year. Utilizing data in this fashion is intended to provide for a more fluid and teacher considerate approach to implementation. The researcher has identified the way this study can provide critical information relative to teacher perceptions of the program during its implementation year and took the steps necessary to gather the data and analyze it to establish answers to the research questions that have been posed to support this study. This chapter is intended to provide insight into the methodology that was identified as the most appropriate means for collecting and analyzing data in support of developing answers to the research questions guiding this study. Chapter II provided the researcher with the background and rationale as to the value of the pursuit of research on this topic and how MTSS has developed and progressed to the widely utilized methodology for the provision of tiered levels of individualized support for students widely being utilized in schools currently. This study will ultimately provide insight to the leadership within the school district as to how the implementation process of the MTSS program was perceived by teachers and ways to utilize that data to potentially improve the current program and STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 60 design future programming implementation plans. Chapter IV provides an analysis of the data collected within this methodology and the data collection that occurred in this study with conclusions and potential recommendations derived from this information. The analysis and recommendations provided in Chapter IV align the research questions that the study responds to with the data methods utilized and the data which has been collected during the capstone research process. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 61 CHAPTER IV Data Analysis and Results The researcher designed this project as a qualitative study of how PSSA gradelevel teachers perceive the implementation year of an academic MTSS program in an elementary school. The research was conducted at Windber Area Elementary School in Windber, PA, with teachers of students in the third, fourth, and fifth grade levels. This chapter will provide a detailed representation of the data collected and analyzed by the researcher in direct relationship to the research questions and the results derived from the data analysis. The data collection was conducted through the repetitious utilization of a researcher-developed and IRB-approved survey instrument during three established data collection timeframes. In addition, the researcher conducted individual teacher interviews with the subjects within the study utilizing a series of IRB-approved prompts developed by the researcher. The data collected from the surveys and consultations are intended to present trends relative to the group and individual teacher perceptions of the implementation year of an MTSS program. All participants participated voluntarily and were permitted to exit or enter the research study process at their discretion. The differing participation levels resulted in varying numbers of responders during each of the three administrations of the survey as well as the interviews. This research project is intended to provide data that will have great value in the planning and implementing of academic support programming in the form of an MTSSbased structure. The research project will give qualitative considerations relative to how teachers perceived the implementation process and how those perceptions may have changed or remained consistent throughout the implementation year of the program. The STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 62 survey and interview results will be presented in this chapter. The analysis of these results will provide trends and feedback, which will be detailed within the chapter. This chapter explains the data analysis process in detail, accompanied by a presentation and discussion of the results. This study chapter is organized into sections that include Data Analysis, Results, Discussion, and Summary. Data Analysis The researcher met with 14 teachers of students in grades three, four, and five on January 10, 2023, in the Windber Area Elementary School library to discuss the research project, its process, and their role within the project if they volunteered to participate. Each participant was given an Informed Consent Form (Appendix A.) for review and consideration. The teachers invited to participate in the research study included regular education, special education, and reading specialists. The researcher asked this diverse group of teachers to gather data representative of all teachers of students in the PSSA grade levels of the third, fourth, and fifth grades. All staff members were full-time Windber Area Elementary School teaching staff members. The Informed Consent Form provided to each participant included the purpose of the study, the data collection instruments to be administered, and the idea for using each device. Potential risks were detailed and presented to the participants along with information about the length of the study, information regarding each participant's obligation level as a voluntary participant, confidentiality, privacy of information, and the benefits for staff electing to participate in the study. All 14 teachers chose to acknowledge consent to participate in the research study and have the data collected from completing the surveys and interviews administered by the researcher by signing and STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 63 returning their Informed Consent Form to the researcher following the meeting on January 10, 2023. The anonymous surveys were designed to elicit responses that would provide qualitative data on each teacher's perceptions of the MTSS program implementation at the school. The surveys were identical across all three administrations. They consisted of five quantitative questions designed to collect demographic data and eleven qualitative data collection instruments to collect the teachers' perceptual data of implementing the MTSS program at the school during its initial year. The demographic data aligns with the qualitative responses to support trend analysis of the qualitative responses provided within the instrument. The quantitative demographic questions of the survey were the first five questions presented and inclusive of four multiple-choice items used to determine the experience level of the teacher responding, their participation level in professional development activities, the grade level(s) they currently teach, and the subject areas that they are currently teaching. The fifth question utilized a Likert Scale and collected data about the teacher's familiarity with the Multi-Tiered System of Supports. The qualitative questions in the survey intended to identify each teacher's perceptions and trends within the group as the implementation occurred. The qualitative questions within the survey began with question number six and included all the remaining questions through the survey's final question. These questions comprised six multiple-choice questions, four open-ended questions, and one question presented as an attitude scale. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 64 The researcher utilized SurveyMonkey online software to administer the surveys to the teachers. The survey was designed in its electronic format by the researcher within SurveyMonkey in three administration formats, baseline, follow-up, and final survey, to be administered at various timeframes throughout the research study. The baseline survey was administered via an email invitation with a hyperlink to the study. The baseline survey was issued on January 11, 2023. Eleven of the fourteen research subjects who completed the Informed Consent Forms completed the baseline survey. The follow-up survey was administered to all fourteen originally consenting teachers via a second email invitation, including a hyperlink to the follow-up survey on February 27, 2023. Twelve research subjects who provided informed consent completed the follow-up survey. This was an increase of one respondent over the baseline survey. The final survey was administered on March 28, 2023. The administration of the last survey resulted in nine teachers responding. This scenario represents a decrease in the participation of two teachers from the baseline survey through the final survey and a reduction of three respondents from the follow-up survey through the last survey administered. The researcher utilized the SurveyMonkey online software program to deliver the MTSS Teacher Interview prompts. The IRB-approved interview prompts were used on March 11, 2023, to create the electronic interview instrument to collect teacher responses to the prompts. The interview instrument was administered on March 13, 2023, via a hyperlink in an email to the teachers who had provided informed consent to participate in the study. Nine teachers elected to participate in the interview by submitting their responses electronically through SurveyMonkey. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 65 After collecting the final survey results, the researcher utilized various available options through SurveyMonkey to download the data collected from all three survey administrations and the administration of the MTSS Teacher Interviews. The researcher used Microsoft Excel software to prepare the data collected for analysis. The data collected from the non-open-ended items within the three survey administrations was entered into an Excel Workbook with each sheet inclusive of the data collected across all three surveys for each question. The data on each sheet within the Excel workbook was then placed into a table and three forms of graphical representation. Each was displayed utilizing a 2D horizontal bar graph, a 3D vertical bar graph, and a 2D line graph. The sheets within the workbook containing the responses to the open-ended questions were structured on each corresponding sheet to respond to the question presented in a hierarchical manner that demonstrated the answers collected in each administration of the three surveys. The researcher reviewed the data from each table and its accompanying graphs to identify how the responses represented trends within teacher perceptions of the program's implementation. The researcher utilized the Excel sheets containing the open-ended responses to analyze how the participating teachers changed their perceptions of the implementation process in their own words as the study progressed alongside the continuation of the implementation process. The data collected in the interviews were cataloged to include the unique response to each prompt. This methodology of cataloging the interview data resulted in the researcher analyzing the data through trend analysis of consistencies and outliers within the answers provided by the teachers. The researcher collected each interview response in the teacher's own words in an anonymous STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 66 methodology that retained the anonymity of the participants in the study by not requesting identifiable respondent information. Three research questions guide the research study the researcher posed to support the need to conduct the research contained in this capstone research project. The three research questions that the researcher has established include the following. 1. How do the school’s teaching staff perceive the implementation of the school’s MTSS program to be supportive of student academic progress? 2. What do the teachers perceive as the most effective and ineffective aspects of the school's MTSS implementation? 3. How do teachers perceive the effectiveness of embedded instructional intervention methods through the MTSS program? The researcher established a Data Collection Plan and Timeline (Appendix E) that provides a detailed alignment of each survey item and interview prompt to one of the three research questions. The Data Collection Plan and Timeline identify the specific research question to which each survey item or prompt is intended to collect data in correlation. The first research question posed within the study asks, "How do the school's teaching staff perceive the implementation of the school's MTSS program to be supportive of student academic progress?" This research question is supported by the collection of quantitative data collected through survey items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, as well as interview prompts 1 and 5. Qualitative data is contained in support of this research question via survey items 6, 7, and 8, as well as interview prompts 3 and 13. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 67 The second research question posed within the study asks, "What do the teachers perceive to have been the most effective and ineffective aspects of the school's MTSS implementation?" This research question is supported by the collection of quantitative data collected through survey items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, as well as interview prompt 1. Qualitative data is collected in support of this research question via survey items 9, 10, 12, and 13, as well as interview prompts 6, 7, 9, and 11. The third research question posed within the study asks, “How do teachers perceive the effectiveness of embedded instructional intervention methods through the MTSS program?" This research question is supported by the collection of quantitative data collected through survey items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, as well as interview prompt 1. Qualitative data is collected supporting this research question via survey items 11 and 14 and interview prompts 2, 4, 8, 10, and 12. All survey items were designed to collect data to elicit responses that present correlations and alignment between the quantitative and qualitative data collected within the surveys and interviews. The data correlations and alignments from the survey items' design and interview prompts are intended to support trend analysis. The interview prompts designed to collect qualitative data were used to triangulate data to provide additional depth and clarity to survey responses. The triangulation of this data provided the researcher with the necessary connections between quantitative and qualitative data to support the identification of trends while maintaining the level of anonymity proposed to the research study participants. The next section of this chapter will present the data collection results from the surveys administered and the interviews conducted. 68 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS The results from the individual survey items and interview prompts provided the researcher with the data necessary to complete an analysis. The information gained from this analysis provides the basis for future recommendations and conclusions, which will be the focus of chapter five of this research study. Survey Results Question #1 of the survey is a demographic question designed to identify each subject's experience as a teacher within the school. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 6 and provided in a line graph format in Figure 4. The data described in Table 6 and Figure 4 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. Table 6 Count of Teachers by Range of Years of Experience Years of Experience Baseline Followup Final 0-4 years 5 4 3 5-10 years 3 4 4 11-15 years 1 2 1 16-25 years 2 2 1 26-35 years 0 0 0 35+ years 0 0 0 Total 11 12 9 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “How long have you been a teacher at Windber Area Elementary School?” 69 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Figure 4 Line Graph of Count of Teachers by Range of Years of Experience 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0-4 years 5-10 years 11-15 years BASELINE 16-25 years FOLLOWUP 26-35 years 35+ years FINAL Note: The survey item reads as follows: “How long have you been a teacher at Windber Area Elementary School?” Question #2 of the survey is a demographic question designed to collect the attendance and participation of the respondents in MTSS professional development sessions during the implementation year. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 7 and provided in a line graph format in Figure 5. The data represented in Table 7 and Figure 5 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. 70 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Table 7 Attendance and Participation in MTSS Professional Development Participated Baseline Followup Final Yes 9 10 8 No 2 2 1 Total 11 12 9 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Did you attend and participate in the MTSS Professional Development sessions before the 2022-2023 school year?” Figure 5 Line Graph of Teachers by Attendance and Participation in MTSS PD 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Baseline Followup Yes Final No Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Did you attend and participate in the MTSS Professional Development sessions before the 2022-2023 school year?” Question #3 of the survey is a demographic question designed to identify the grade level(s) each respondent currently teaches at the school during the 2022-2023 school year. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 8 and 71 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS provided in a line graph format in Figure 6. The data represented in Table 8 and Figure 6 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. Table 8 Count of Teachers by Grade Level(s) Taught. Grade Level Baseline Followup Final Grade 3 4 6 5 Grade 4 4 5 2 Grade 5 5 4 4 Total 11 12 9 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Did you attend and participate in the MTSS Professional Development sessions before the 2022-2023 school year?” Figure 6 Line Graph of Count of Teachers by Grade Level(s) Taught. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Grade 3 Grade 4 Baseline Followup Grade 5 Final Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Did you attend and participate in the MTSS Professional Development sessions before the 2022-2023 school year?” 72 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Question #4 of the survey is a demographic question designed to collect data regarding which subject area(s) each respondent taught during the 2022-2023 school year at the school. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 9 and provided in a bar graph format in a line graph format in Figure 7. The data represented in Table 9 and Figure 7 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. Table 9 Count of Subject Area(s) Taught by the Teachers Subject Area Baseline Followup Final Mathematics 5 6 5 English Language Arts 7 6 3 Reading 2 4 2 Science 4 2 4 Total 18 18 14 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “What subject area(s) do you currently teach?” 73 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Figure 7 Line Graph of Count of Subject Area(s) Taught by the Teachers 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Mathematics English Language Arts Baseline Reading Followup Science Final Note: The survey item reads as follows: “What subject area(s) do you currently teach?” Question #5 of the survey is the first qualitative question presented in the survey and is designed to collect data regarding each respondent's perceived personal familiarity with the Multi-Tiered System of Supports. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 10 and provided in a bar graph format in Figure 8. The data represented in Table 10 and Figure 8 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. Table 10 Teacher Responses Expressing Level of Familiarity with MTSS. Level of Familiarity Baseline Followup Final No Knowledge of MTSS 0 0 0 Some Knowledge of MTSS 10 11 8 Strong Knowledge of MTSS 1 1 1 Total 11 12 9 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “What level of familiarity do you have with the Multi-Tiered System of Supports? 74 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Figure 8 Horizontal Bar Graph of Responses Expressing Level of Familiarity with MTSS. Strong Knowledge of MTSS Some Knowledge of MTSS No Knowledge of MTSS 0 2 Baseline 4 Followup 6 8 10 12 Final Note: The survey item reads as follows: “What level of familiarity do you have with the Multi-Tiered System of Supports?” Question #6 of the survey is a qualitative question designed to collect data regarding each respondent's perception, at the time of each survey administration, of the school district’s efforts to address the implementation of learning loss strategies such as MTSS at the school. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 10 and in a vertical line graph format in Figure 8. The data represented in Table 11 and Figure 8 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. 75 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Table 11 Efforts to Address the Implementation of Learning Loss Supports Teacher Opinion Level Baseline Followup Final Outstanding Job 2 1 1 Above Average 2 3 3 Average 5 6 4 Below Average 2 2 1 Poor 0 0 0 Total 11 12 9 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “What is your opinion of the school district's efforts to address the implementation of learning loss supports such as MTSS at Windber Area Elementary School?” Figure 9 Vertical Bar Graph Regarding the Efforts to Address Learning Loss Supports 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Outstanding Job Above Average Baseline Average Followup Below Average Final Note: The survey item reads as follows: “What is your opinion of the school district's efforts to address the implementation of learning loss supports such as MTSS at Windber Area Elementary School?” 76 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Question #7 of the survey is a qualitative question designed to collect data regarding each respondent's perception of the school district’s provision of what the respondent perceives to be ample professional development to staff in anticipation of the implementation of the MTSS program at the school. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 12 and provided in a vertical bar graph format in Figure 10. The data represented in Table 12 and Figure 10 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. Table 12 Professional Development Provided on MTSS in Advance of Implementation. Teacher Opinion Level Baseline Followup Final Strongly Agree 1 1 1 Agree 3 7 4 Disagree 5 1 2 Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 No Opinion 1 3 2 Total 11 12 9 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “I believe that the Windber Area School District has provided ample professional development for staff regarding MTSS in the Windber Area Elementary School in anticipation of the implementation of the program.” 77 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Figure 10 Vertical Bar Graph of Professional Development Provided Prior to Implementation. 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Strongly Agree Agree Baseline Disagree Followup Strongly Disagree Final Note: The survey item reads as follows: “I believe that the Windber Area School District has provided ample professional development for staff regarding MTSS in the Windber Area Elementary School in anticipation of the implementation of the program.” Question #8 of the survey is a qualitative question designed to collect data regarding each respondent's belief as to whether the MTSS implementation process at the school occurred effectively. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 13 and in line graph format in Figure 11. The data represented in Table 13 and Figure 11 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. 78 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Table 13 The Belief that the MTSS Implementation was Effective Teacher Belief Baseline Followup Final Yes 4 8 5 No 2 2 3 Not Enough Information 5 2 1 Total 11 12 9 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Do you believe that the MTSS implementation process at Windber Area Elementary School has been effective?” Figure 11 Line Graph Regarding the Effectiveness of Implementation 10 8 6 4 2 0 Yes No Baseline Followup Not Enough Information Final Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Do you believe that the MTSS implementation process at Windber Area Elementary School has been effective?” STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 79 Question #9 of the survey is an open-ended qualitative question designed to collect data in a short answer form regarding each respondent's opinion as to what they believe has been the most effective aspect of the implementation process of the program at the school. Question #9 was the first open-ended item presented to the respondents and requested that each teacher provide an opinion in their own words each time the survey was administered. The responses collected from this question are provided in Table 14. The data represented in Table 14 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. Table 14 The Most Effective Aspect of MTSS Implementation. Baseline Survey Responses As far as ELA, there are no more students currently being progressed monitored and worked with in areas that can benefit them. It is all being data-driven - not just who we think could benefit. I feel that putting reading supports and interventions in place such as Sonday, Heggerty, DIBELS, and LLI have all been beneficial to getting students the necessary help with phonemic awareness and the skills related to learning to read. I believe that intervention for specific needs of students at rambler time has been the most effective aspect. Student-centered learning and focusing on individual student needs Unable to respond to this item at this time Unable to respond to this item at this time I feel that there has not been enough time to see growth in most areas Utilizing multiple pieces of data to identify students who need intervention and using specific intervention programs with these students, not just teacher created resources Individualized Support The most effective aspect is that we are able to identify students who need a more intensive support. Student needs are finally being addresses and they are getting more services that are needed. More kiddos are receiving what they need. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Followup Survey Responses Identifying students in need. I do not have enough data to form an opinion. New intervention program and procedures Evaluating and providing intervention to those students who have gaps. The Intervention Programs for higher tiered students. I feel that our MTSS program has done well to support students in the lower grades in reading, and students in need of more phonics based and decoding skills. We are now able to meet not only students who need help filling in learning gaps related to ELA, but also reach some students to help fill in gaps related to math concepts. I believe that the implementation of Rambler Time has been the most effective aspect of the MTSS program. It allows for students to be given the extra support they need without missing crucial instruction. MTSS provides students' with multiple opportunities for SEL, behavioral supports, and improved school culture. I feel that the program means well and is very well-planned and organized. The most effective aspect that we are reviewing data very frequently to move students to the appropriate groups. one on one work with students who need 80 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 81 Final Survey Responses There has been a stronger focus on reading using DIBELS and Heggerty Phonics and Phonemic Awareness. I am not sure that enough data has been collected to see the results as of yet. Hegerty seems to be working very well for the younger students having different data to support student learning, interventions in place Working one-on-one with students Trying to reach more students with the services that they need in order to close the educational gap. Dibels, differentiated classroom instruction, positive behavioral supports I think that most effective aspects are the small groups created to focus on specific areas of weakness and adjusting groups frequently so that the individual needs are being met. Understanding of needs of the current students through DIBELS assessment and Rambler time Providing extra time for academic support in reading. Note: The survey item reads as follows: “In your opinion, what has been the most effective aspect of the school's implementation of the MTSS program?” STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Question #10 of the survey is an open-ended qualitative question designed to collect data in a short answer form regarding each respondent's opinion as to what they believe has been the most ineffective aspect of the implementation process of the program at the school. Question #10 requested that each teacher provide an opinion in their own words each time the survey was administered. The responses collected from this question are provided in Table 15. The data represented in Table 15 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. 82 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 83 Table 15 The Least Effective Aspect of MTSS Implementation. Baseline Survey Responses On the other end, I don't feel that we are doing enough for students in the upper grade levels that may be struggling with reading comprehension. We are focusing a lot of our MTSS interventions on learning to read. The upper grades are struggling with drawing comprehension from text and reading to learn. Additionally, we are definitely lacking in math interventions. Although I don't teach it, I know from conversations that students are struggling with grade level math because they don't have foundational number/operation skills. There are still students who are below grade level in math. It would be beneficial to implement more math interventions in the future. I feel that our above average students often fall through the cracks and are not getting the support to be challenged and grow as much as they could. Communication Providing more information and training on how to deal with tier 2 students. No supports beyond Tier 1 Have not seen implementation of tier 2 or 3 at this point, there are a lot of questions about what is happening with the students that are receiving intervention as they start to show growth, classroom teachers are not seeing the data from students who are receiving intervention outside of the classroom, so I am making decisions off of the data I have access to. Individualized Support The most ineffective aspect is servicing the students in the MTSS program. Misunderstanding of what it is and how it is to be utilized. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 84 Follow up Survey Responses Identifying students in need. I do not have enough data to form an opinion. New intervention program and procedures Evaluating and providing intervention to those students who have gaps. The Intervention Programs for higher tiered students. I feel that our MTSS program has done well to support students in the lower grades in reading, and students in need of more phonics based and decoding skills. We are now able to meet not only students who need help filling in learning gaps related to ELA, but also reach some students to help fill in gaps related to math concepts. I believe that the implementation of Rambler Time has been the most effective aspect of the MTSS program. It allows for students to be given the extra support they need without missing crucial instruction. MTSS provides students' with multiple opportunities for SEL, behavioral supports, and improved school culture. I feel that the program means well and is very well-planned and organized. The most effective aspect that we are reviewing data very frequently to move students to the appropriate groups. one on one work with students who need STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 85 Final Survey Responses Although Spring Math has been implemented, it was done only for the month or so. There is almost no help for students who are behind in math. Follow through with discipline of students n/a none Teacher understanding and implementation of needed services Nothing The most ineffective aspect is time and consistency. Follow-up/follow-through of providing information to classroom teachers No intervention for tier 2 and tier 3 behaviors. Note: The survey item reads as follows: “In your opinion, what has been the most ineffective aspect of the school's implementation of the MTSS program?” Question #11 of the survey is a qualitative question designed to collect data regarding each respondent's belief as to whether their students that are receiving MTSS support have demonstrated increased academic proficiency and whether they believe those same students are making progress toward grade level expectations. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 16 and provided in a vertical bar graph format in Figure 12. The data represented in Table 16 and Figure 12 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. 86 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Table 16 Beliefs Regarding the Progress Level of Students Receiving MTSS Supports Teacher Belief Baseline Followup Final Have Made Progress 1 0 2 Making Progress Toward Grade Level 5 9 4 Making Progress, but not Toward Grade Level 5 2 3 Not Making Progress 0 1 0 Total 11 12 9 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Do you believe that your students that are receiving MTSS supports have shown increased academic proficiency and are making progress toward grade-level expectations?” Figure 12 Vertical Bar Graph Regarding the Progress Level of Their Students Receiving MTSS 10 8 6 4 2 0 Have Made Progress Making Progress Toward Making Progress, but not Grade Level Toward Grade Level Baseline Followup Not Making Progress Final Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Do you believe that your students that are receiving MTSS supports have shown increased academic proficiency and are making progress toward grade-level expectations?” Question #12 of the survey is an open-ended qualitative question designed to collect data in a short answer form regarding each respondent's opinion as to what they STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 87 consider to be the most effective MTSS instructional strategies that they personally have implemented within their own classroom. The responses collected from this question are provided in Table 17. The data represented in Table 17 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. Table 17 What Teachers Consider to be The Most Effective MTSS Instructional Strategies Baseline Survey Responses With our Good Habits Great Readers series, all students are being exposed to grade level text and skills through Shared Reading. During center time and Guided Reading, students have differentiated activities based upon their individual reading levels and spelling abilities (Words Their Way). Students are benchmarked with the DRA2 and DIBELS reading assessment system mid-year and end of year. Students are also progress monitored between benchmarks. Reading groups are fluid and flexible. providing small group instruction during our scheduled intervention time I believe that using amplify to group children and teach based on needs was very effective. Monitoring student behaviors, referral forms, daily check-ins with students, targeted interventions, teaching social, emotional, and behavioral skills unable to respond clear expectations, redirection and open communication, and continued progress monitoring of students Unable to respond to this item at this time activities from Dibels that are working on skills needed for students who need intervention. I am also using these activities for other students who may need some extra support, but are not receiving an intervention. Working with students based on their performance level to achieve success. The most effective MTSS instructional strategy is collecting data on students who do not show growth if they need a higher tier of support. differentiated lessons in both small and whole group instruction. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 88 Follow up Survey Responses Although we just started using Spring Math, I believe that will be very beneficial to the students. Spring Math The small group work, focusing on skills that students lack. Altering of materials with changed accommodations; working at the student's instructional level and skill deficit needs DIBELS intervention during Rambler Time Students are benefiting from differentiated guided reading groups that are based on data driven decisions. Students are grouped on DRA and Lexile data. Additionally, students are getting necessary interventions from their Rambler Time groups based upon DIBEL data. Groups are fluid and can change due to progress monitoring and benchmarking. data-based decisions on students on learning content, school-wide team approach (all hands-on deck) I feel that amplify has been a great starting point for me to better determine specific skills that my students need to work on. It also offers a wide variety of activities that are extremely useful. Goal setting, observations, data evaluation in order to provide better supports, and feedback. Small group instruction differentiated to student needs and also planning Rambler time to be super meaningful for my students. Every regular education has a group that they are able to instruct. Data Driven Needs STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 89 Final Survey Responses I believe Spring Math would be effective if we implemented it according to Spring Math guidelines. Spring Math using data, strengthening the Tier 1 supports we have in place data driven needs differentiation of instruction based on multiple data sets differentiating classroom instruction and continuous progress monitoring I feel that most effective MTSS instructional strategy that I have implemented is making the students do more of the reading. Helping them sound out the words. Differentiation of same skill with varying texts, decodable readers to build foundational skills NA Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Please share below what you consider the most effective MTSS instructional strategies that you have implemented into your classroom instruction.” STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 90 Question #13 of the survey is an open-ended qualitative question designed to collect data in a short answer form regarding each respondent's opinion as to what they consider to be the least effective MTSS instructional strategies that they personally have implemented within their own classroom. The responses collected from this question are provided in Table 18. The data represented in Table 18 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. Table 18 What Teachers Consider to be The Least Effective MTSS Instructional Strategies Baseline Survey Responses I am not finding students in my 5th Grade Rambler Time group, which have been chosen using DIBELS data in the area of fluency, making progress. I have used the DIBELS system suggested activities, as well as some of my own. Some students develop oral reading habits over the years which are hard to break that affect their fluency and accuracy. However, when given comprehension, these students completely understand what they have read. They just have developed poor oral reading skills but understand the text. unable to respond at this time I do not feel any instructional strategy has been truly ineffective. Nothing no implementation beyond tier 1 for the identified students, if so, teachers are not aware of these if they are in place Next step after Tier 1 intervention I have not seen anything implemented beyond Tier 1. NA None Unable to respond to this item at this time. Some of the pull out that is implemented is very inconsistent, such as Rambler Time. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 91 Follow up Survey Responses Dibels with the 5th grade students has not seemed to help with the just below basic students I have worked with in my classroom. DIBELS N/A Behavior supports could be stronger NA I don't feel that the suggested intervention activities that I have been using for my Rambler Time groups from the DIBELS system are grade level appropriate. I understand that some of the students who scored lower in the Oral Reading Fluency category may need these skills, but I don't think it is doing enough for the bigger skill of comprehension. n/a Unable to respond to this item at this time Unable to respond to this item at this time sometimes not providing meaningful instruction or not being as prepared as needed The least effective strategy is that some groups are using DIBELS to instruct and other groups are using a different intervention systems. None STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 92 Final Survey Responses Dibels has not seemed to be effective at this level. It could be that students have not had enough exposure. Dibels time to collaborate about data with colleagues none inconsistency of providing MTTS strategies in small groups Nothing I feel that there is not actually any that are ineffective or one that is overall the least effective. All strategies seem to currently support at least a few learners. We know that all our students have different learning styles and needs and so all strategies have had a benefit on someone. Using conflicting data to determine student needs NA Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Please share below what you consider the least effective MTSS instructional strategies that you have implemented into your classroom instruction.” Question #14 of the survey is a qualitative question designed to collect data regarding each respondent's belief as to which of the six provided areas was most supported by the implementation of the school’s MTSS program. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 19 and delivered in a line graph format in Figure 13. The data represented in Table 19 and Figure 13 were collected during the survey's Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations. 93 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Table 19 What Teachers Believe to be the Area Most Supported by Implementation Most Supported Area Baseline Followup Final Addressing Learning Loss due to the impact of COVID-19 2 3 1 Addressing Individual Student Academic Deficiencies 4 4 5 Addressing School-Level Academic Needs 4 1 0 Addressing Grade-Level Academic Needs 1 1 0 Addressing Subject Area Academic Needs 0 2 2 Identifying Students for Special Education Evaluation 0 1 1 Total 11 12 9 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Please choose what you believe to be the area most supported by the implementation of the school's MTSS Program.” Figure 13 Line Graph Representing the Area Most Supported by Implementation 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Addressing Addressing Addressing Addressing Addressing Identifying Learning Loss dueIndividual Student School-Level Grade-Level Subject Area Students for to the impact of Academic Academic Needs Academic Needs Academic Needs Special Education COVID-19 Deficiencies Evaluation Baseline Followup Final Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Please choose what you believe to be the area most supported by the implementation of the school's MTSS Program.” 94 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Question #15 of the survey is a qualitative question designed to collect data regarding each respondent's belief as to which of the six provided areas was the second most supported by the implementation of the school’s MTSS program. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 20 and provided in a line graph format in Figure 14. The data represented in Table 20 and Figure 14 were collected during the Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations of the survey. Table 20 What Teachers Believe the Area 2nd Most Supported by Implementation Second Most Supported Area Baseline Followup Final Addressing Learning Loss due to the impact of COVID-19 5 2 4 Addressing Individual Student Academic Deficiencies 1 5 1 Addressing School-Level Academic Needs 1 1 1 Addressing Grade-Level Academic Needs 1 1 2 Addressing Subject Area Academic Needs 2 2 1 Identifying Students for Special Education Evaluation 1 1 0 Total 11 12 9 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Please choose what you believe to be the area second most supported by the implementation of the school's MTSS Program.” 95 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Figure 14 Line Graph Representing the Area 2nd Most Supported by the Implementation 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Addressing Learning Loss due to the impact of COVID-19 Addressing Individual Student Academic Deficiencies Addressing School-Level Academic Needs Baseline Addressing Grade-Level Academic Needs Followup Addressing Subject Area Academic Needs Identifying Students for Special Education Evaluation Final Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Please choose what you believe to be the area second most supported by the implementation of the school's MTSS Program.” Question #16 of the survey is a qualitative question designed to collect data regarding each respondent's belief as to which of the six provided areas was the least supported area by the implementation of the school’s MTSS program. The responses collected from this question are represented in Table 21 and provided in a line graph format in Figure 15. The data represented in Table 21 and Figure 15 were collected during the Baseline, Followup, and Final administrations of the survey. 96 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Table 21 What Teachers Believe the Area Least Supported by the Implementation Least Supported Area Baseline Followup Final Addressing Learning Loss due to the impact of COVID-19 1 0 0 Addressing Individual Student Academic Deficiencies 1 0 1 Addressing School-Level Academic Needs 1 0 2 Addressing Grade-Level Academic Needs 2 4 0 Addressing Subject Area Academic Needs 3 5 0 Identifying Students for Special Education Evaluation 3 3 6 Total 11 12 9 Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Please choose what you believe to be the area least supported by the implementation of the school's MTSS Program.” Figure 15 Line Graph of the Area Least Supported by the Implementation 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Addressing Addressing Addressing Addressing Addressing Identifying Learning Loss dueIndividual Student School-Level Grade-Level Subject Area Students for to the impact of Academic Academic Needs Academic Needs Academic Needs Special Education COVID-19 Deficiencies Evaluation Baseline Followup Final Note: The survey item reads as follows: “Please choose what you believe to be the area least supported by the implementation of the school's MTSS Program.” STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 97 Interview Results The researcher conducted nine interviews with teachers that provided consent via an email link through the SurveyMonkey online software program. Table 22 represents the interviewee's responses to the interview prompts supplied in their own words. All results collected from teacher interviews have been realigned within the table to present the interviewee and their response to each of the sixteen interview prompts they responded to. Table 22 Teacher Responses to Interview Prompts Prompt #1 - How many years of teaching experience do you have? Interviewee #1 8 Interviewee #2 2 Interviewee #3 No response recorded Interviewee #4 1 Interviewee #5 21 Interviewee #6 9 Interviewee #7 9 Interviewee #8 33 Interviewee #9 17 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Prompt #2: What grade level(s) do you currently teach? Interviewee #1 5th Interviewee #2 3rd Interviewee #3 5th Interviewee #4 3rd Interviewee #5 No response recorded Interviewee #6 3rd Interviewee #7 Hearing K-12, Reading Resource (1-4) Interviewee #8 5th Interviewee #9 4th Prompt #3: What subject area(s) do you currently teach? Interviewee #1 Math and Science Interviewee #2 Math and Science Interviewee #3 ELA and Social Studies Interviewee #4 ELA and Social Studies Interviewee #5 Interviewee #6 Math and Science Interviewee #7 ELA Interviewee #8 Math Interviewee #9 Math and Science 98 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Prompt #4 - Which of the following instructional roles do you currently fill? Interviewee #1 Regular Education Classroom Teacher Interviewee #2 Regular Education Classroom Teacher Interviewee #3 Regular Education Classroom Teacher Interviewee #4 Regular Education Classroom Teacher Interviewee #5 Regular Education Classroom Teacher Interviewee #6 Regular Education Classroom Teacher Interviewee #7 Specialized Instruction Support Teacher Interviewee #8 Regular Education Classroom Teacher Interviewee #9 Regular Education Classroom Teacher 99 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 100 Prompt #5: Prior to the implementation of the Windber Area Elementary School MTSS program, what was your perception of tiered academic support programs? Interviewee #1 They are beneficial in helping students who need additional support to grow. Interviewee #2 I had no information about MTSS until my time began here. Interviewee #3 I felt that MTSS supports were something that our school desperately need of. As the years have passed, we see more of a discrepancy in academic abilities and behaviors within our student body. Procedures and strategies were needed for the students not meeting grade-level expectations in various areas. Interviewee #4 Tiered academic support programs are enforced to help all students meet their academic and behavioral goals and successes. Interviewee #5 Classroom Teacher was the first step of intervention with differentiation in the classroom; Title I and Special Ed. was the next intervention step for students who were continuing to struggle. Interviewee #6 I believed it sounded great, but I was curious about how it all worked. Interviewee #7 I was knowledgeable of areas of need for various students at different levels. The classroom compiles Tier 1 with differentiation. Tier 2 includes working with the classroom teacher and or with another teacher. Tier 3 should be the most intensive time, but in the past, Tier 2 was utilized with our Title 1 staff. Essentially Tier 3 did not exist. Interviewee #8 I had limited knowledge of MTSS. Interviewee #9 I knew the basic academic programs used in Tier 1 (our curriculums) but did not understand any other academic support programs used in Tier 2 or Tier 3. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 101 Prompt #6: Please share your perceptions relative to the implementation of the school's MTSS program to be supportive of student academic progress. Interviewee #1 Students are participating in programs, but they do need to seem to be making much growth. Often there are no substitutes available, so the teachers who are to be working with students are often pulled to cover other teachers. There are also a lot of programs that regular education teachers are using, but there is not enough time to effectively use all of the programs in addition to all of the grade-level curriculum that needs to be taught. Interviewee #2 MTSS provides students with one-on-one instruction to benefit them based on data. Interviewee #3 I thought that the MTSS program was going to be data-driven. Every child would be screened in the core subjects of reading and math. Interventions and groupings would then be based on the data. Groups would be fluid and flexible as dictated by the data. Teacher input would also be considered. Interviewee #4 Implementing MTSS allows teachers to better meet the needs of all students and support student academic progress. Interviewee #5 In some areas, I see that the intervention is supporting the student's academics. In other ways, the students have missed so many basic skills that a lot of "catch-up" is needed. Interviewee #6 I believe we are off to a great start for the first year of implementation. We are already seeing growth. Interviewee #7 Through the MTSS process, students receive support based on need. We have utilized the Tiered process to determine students who need more support and those who need less support. We have implemented Rambler time for students to work with another classroom teacher on a few missing skills. I feel that this has been a help in looking at students' deficits. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Interviewee #8 102 I feel that it has the potential to be beneficial but that it has not been implemented long enough to gather data. Interviewee #9 We are now using more data to track and support each student's needs. Prompt #7: Based upon your current experiences and your knowledge of the implementation of Windber Area Elementary School's MTSS program, do you perceive the program to be supportive of student academic progress? Interviewee #1 The Dibels program may work well for primary grades. However, the intermediate grades are not seeing much progress with it. Spring Math just started, so it is hard to say whether progress will occur. The PBIS program does not seem to help much with the behavioral progress of troublesome students. Interviewee #2 yes Interviewee #3 I believe it has been supportive in reading but focused more on students learning to/having difficulties with the fundamentals of reading. The upper-graders struggling with oral reading fluency and decoding/phonics skills are getting assistance with DIBELS interventions and Sonday. I don't feel that reading comprehension is getting enough support. Additionally, although students are making growth individually, they are not making strides toward grade-level standards and achievement. Interviewee #4 Yes Interviewee #5 In certain areas, with certain students. Interviewee #6 Yes, it is great that we continue to progress, monitor, and benchmark. This allows us to change groups and support the student's areas of weakness, not just put them in a group and let them in the group, even if they have progressed and no longer need that support. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Interviewee #7 103 The system is working to support student academic progress and is helping teachers identify areas of need for individual students. Interviewee #8 I feel there are supports for reading, but they are lacking in math. Interviewee #9 Yes, we are supporting students more now than in previous years. Prompt #8: How effective do you feel implementing the MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School occurred? Interviewee #1 I feel that the district sees the need for support and is trying to help, but there is a lot of support in many areas that are needed. We are trying to implement too many programs too quickly and adding more to the teachers' and students' plates without taking anything away. The students and teachers are overwhelmed, so it is not helping as much as it should. Interviewee #2 very effective Interviewee #3 I feel that, overall, the implementation has been effective. It still has some things that need to be worked out. As stated above, we aren't using anything that focuses much on reading comprehension. Additionally, nothing was established for math interventions until recently with Spring Math. Interviewee #4 I believe the implementation of MTSS at Windber Area Elementary School is effective. Interviewee #5 For the most part, it went very well. Interviewee #6 Just like anything new, it is a learning process that is going well and helping our students. Interviewee #7 I feel that it has been fairly successful and effective. At times, there are hurdles to overcome due to the high volume of student needs with implementing a new system. Interviewee #8 I do not feel there is enough data to assess this yet. Interviewee #9 I see the positive effects of the MTSS program through working with students and reading the data we are collecting. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 104 Prompt #9: What are the most effective aspects of the MTSS implementation process at Windber Area Elementary School? Interviewee #1 Data analysis has helped to identify students who need additional support. Interviewee #2 one-on-one work with students based on data to support their needs. Interviewee #3 I believe that the most effective aspects have been the implementation of assessments like DIBELS and Sonday, which also provide intervention activities and strategies to use with the students. It is helping our lower readers who are missing some of their basic decoding and phonics skills to develop to read. Rambler Time groups have also been beneficial in giving time in the day to provide interventions to students. Interviewee #4 I believe this targeted support helps students not only with their academic progress but also behaviorally and social-emotionally. The continuous data collection process is also very effective in keeping track of student goals. Interviewee #5 Intervention Time added to the schedule and having all Gen. Ed. teachers part of the intervention. Interviewee #6 The most effective aspect is that we continue to look at our students. Ensure we are giving them what they need and ensuring data back it. Interviewee #7 I believe the Tiered intervention support has been the most effective part of the MTSS implementation. The tiers have allowed more students to work individually with a teacher/support teacher to have maximum reading support. We also work with SpringMath in grades 3-5 to determine math needs. SpringMath will be an important step for MTSS usage in math. Interviewee #8 Our Title I reading is well-established and benefits students who need extra reading support. Interviewee #9 more data, small group instruction, scheduled intervention time STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 105 Prompt #10: What are the least effective aspects of the MTSS implementation process at Windber Area Elementary School? Interviewee #1 Dibels in the upper-grade levels. Interviewee #2 none Interviewee #3 Again, I feel we are lacking in something for reading comprehension interventions, and math (Spring Math) should've been implemented sooner. Also, we see our Rambler Time groups three days a week due to Wellness and having to teach our Library encore. With the substitute shortage and other Encore teachers getting pulled to cover classes, sometimes it is less than three days per week. Lastly, the students pulled from our rooms during Rambler Time will get individualized interventions based on their levels; however, they miss grade-level activities simultaneously. Interviewee #4 None Interviewee #5 Not knowing what to do with the data to support the students. Interviewee #6 Even though we know that monitoring is super important, sometimes, it seems like we are constantly testing them in a small amount of time. Interviewee #7 The least effective aspect of MTSS now is the feedback and communication between the MTSS team and the general education teachers. More information and communication must occur between the team/team leads and those who work with the students daily. Interviewee #8 The support for students who struggle with math is just starting, even though it is clear nationwide that this has been a real area of decline. Interviewee #9 None at this time. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Prompt #11: Do you believe that the embedded instructional intervention methods are effective in supporting student academic progress? Interviewee #1 I have not seen much growth in the programs I have worked on with the students. Interviewee #2 yes Interviewee #3 Yes, I believe they have been beneficial in seeing the growth of individual student's academic progress. However, for some students, they won't be seeing interventions that are near their grade level benchmark expectations. Interviewee #4 Yes Interviewee #5 some Interviewee #6 Yes Interviewee #7 This is classroom-based and depends upon the students in need and the teacher who is utilizing the intervention. The Sonday System intervention program is very effective in supporting student academic progress. I believe the DIBELS activities are also helpful in providing intervention with various methods. Interviewee #8 I believe they are, but I am unsure if the data shows this. Interviewee #9 Yes - I am seeing student progress 106 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 107 Prompt #12: What do you perceive to be the most effective embedded instructional interventions that have been implemented through the school's MTSS program? Interviewee #1 I believe Spring Math will be the most beneficial intervention for the students I work with. Interviewee #2 support to students who need Interviewee #3 Using data collection and analysis to create student groups and intervention plans has been important. The usage of DIBELS intervention and Sonday has been beneficial. LLI has also been effective for the younger grades. Interviewee #4 Dibels, progress monitoring, Title1 reading groups Interviewee #5 We have only been using the instructional intervention from Diebels, which focuses on a lot instead of the student's highest needs. Interviewee #6 I perceive that the small groups are focused on that specific group's needs. Not just a broad intervention. Also, it is great to have other teachers work with the groups. Interviewee #7 I believe the most effective embedded instructional intervention would be utilizing the DIBELS system to locate and identify areas of need for students, specifically in grades K-3. I also believe implementing Heggerty in grades K-2 has been crucial for our MTSS program's success. Interviewee #8 Using Rambler Time to meet the needs of additional students not being serviced by Title I has been most beneficial. Interviewee #9 Amplify lessons geared toward student reading deficits, SpringMath STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 108 Prompt #13: What do you perceive to be the most likely reason or reasons for the effective embedded instructional intervention methods that you just identified? Interviewee #1 Spring math is a daily program that is quick, straight forward. The materials provided and easy to follow. You do not have to search through materials to find the interventions. The structure of it every day becomes automatic, and it starts with the basic skills many 5th graders are missing for math. Interviewee #2 to help students who may need extra support Interviewee #3 Miss Caton has been a great resource for MTSS. She goes through all of the data and creates our Rambler Time groups. The teachers then take the groups and data and select the intervention activities. Interviewee #4 These instructional interventions have allowed me to see where my students are struggling and provide support that will benefit them. Interviewee #5 there are right at our fingertips Interviewee #6 I perceive that it is just that one teacher may say something a little differently or present it differently. Giving the students a fresh look at the content. Interviewee #7 I believe professional development and teacher support contribute to the perceived effectiveness of instructional intervention methods. Teachers need continued support to ensure they feel valued and are working with their students most effectively. Interviewee #8 More students are receiving targeted instruction based on screening. Interviewee #9 the training was provided, and time was given to become familiar with new interventions STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 109 Prompt #14: What do you perceive to be the ineffective embedded instructional interventions that have been implemented through the school's MTSS program? Interviewee #1 Dibels in 4th and 5th grade. Students I have worked with did not seem to progress with the program. Interviewee #2 none Interviewee #3 I don't feel any have been ineffective, but I don't think we have been using Spring Math long enough to gauge its effectiveness. Interviewee #4 None Interviewee #5 too many areas noted Interviewee #6 It is too early in the process to feel that anything is currently ineffective. Interviewee #7 Having students remain in the same intervention groups for too long can be ineffective. It would be best practice to have progress monitoring occur when the student has met a skill proficiency rather than being told when to complete progress monitoring. Students must often be monitored for growth to determine if the intervention is effective. It would be better to familiarize staff with the idea of progress monitoring at a higher level so that they can determine when this needs to occur and have a running review period for how students are performing. Interviewee #8 While DIBELS is especially beneficial for grades K through 3, I am unsure if it is the most useful intervention for grades 4 and 5. It doesn't seem to align with our goals for PSSA readiness and increased comprehension. Interviewee #9 None at this time. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 110 Prompt #15: What do you perceive to be the most likely reason or reasons for the ineffective embedded instructional intervention methods that you just identified? Interviewee #1 Dibels tracks the number of words read per minute, but this does not show if the students understand what they are reading. It also does not reflect what we do in the classroom and for PSSA. In the classroom and during PSSA, students are not assessed on how quickly they can read. Interviewee #2 none Interviewee #3 As stated above, we haven't been using the math intervention "Spring Math" long enough. Interviewee #4 Each of the instructional interventions I have seen has been very effective. Interviewee #5 Just becoming familiar with the program Interviewee #6 N/A Interviewee #7 Lack of knowledge in that specific area or lack of practice would likely be the reason for ineffective instructional interventions. Interviewee #8 It does not match our goals for PSSA prep and reading comprehension. Interviewee #9 None at this time. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 111 Prompt #16: How do you believe implementing the MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School could have been more efficient or effective? Interviewee #1 Focus on 1 or 2 programs per year, assess their progress, and make any necessary changes before adding more interventions. Interviewee #2 effective Interviewee #3 I believe we needed a math intervention from the beginning of the year. Additionally, I still think we need something that helps students with reading in more than just the aspects of learning to read but more comprehension focused. Lastly, I feel that there needs to be additional data analysis and support for students who have not shown growth according to DIBELS and Sonday scores. Interviewee #4 By implementing it sooner. Interviewee #5 just realizing it will take time to see the results Interviewee #6 I believe that starting it from day one. We were a little into the school year before we got started. I think that next year it will be even more efficient and effective. Interviewee #7 Implementation could have been more effective or efficient had there been continued conversation about implementation and the process after the tiered interventions were attempted. It currently is not leading to special education based on age, but the MTSS team does not give any solutions for what to do next for students who are struggling with making progress. Interviewee #8 Use a different intervention for upper grades. Interviewee #9 I feel things are moving in the right direction. A lot of what we are implementing will take time to see long-term progress (especially with the students who are beginning at the primary levels) and time for everyone to become familiar and feel comfortable with the new interventions. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 112 Results The results gathered during the data collection and analysis processes have provided various representations of the changing perceptions of the teachers involved in the study over time. The teachers provided valuable feedback regarding their opinions and beliefs. The strength of the data collected will provide the researcher with the necessary reinforcing and supportive data that will allow the researcher to design a series of conclusions and detailed series of considerations that will provide themselves useful in future programmatic implementation planning. Within this section of the study, the researcher will provide a descriptive presentation as to the interpretation of the data for each individual survey question provided during the research study. The first survey item was focused on gathering quantitative data relative to the tenure of the research study participant as an employee at Windber Area Elementary School. The results from the administration of this survey item demonstrate a variance in which of the fourteen consenting participants participated in each survey administration. As previously detailed, each survey had a change in the number of participants. This resulted in inconsistencies in the demographic data collected by this survey item. The results from this item were critical in the triangulation and trend analysis conducted because they provided the researcher with insight into teacher experience levels, grade level(s) taught, and subject areas taught relative to the specific administration of the survey. The researcher utilized the results of survey item two to identify data trends relative to the number of respondents that participated in the MTSS professional development session held prior to the 2022-2023 school year. The variance in the results acquired through the administration of this item provided the researcher with data that STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 113 was triangulated to seek to align qualitative responses over the three administrations of the survey with professional development attendance and participation. The results collected from survey item three provided the researcher with a collection of quantitative data that was triangulated to identify correlations, where possible, as to the grade level(s) taught by the research subjects and the qualitative results received in each administration relative to the other quantitative results collected. The results from survey item four did not provide the clarity that the researcher was seeking as the varying number of teachers that identified as teaching specific subject areas provides a limited amount of ability for triangulation. The researcher proposes that it is possible that some teachers may have responded with differing subject areas taught across the three administrations of the surveys. This potential for variation in an individual teacher’s response between survey administration decreased the validity and value of the data collected through this item. Survey item number five provided results that demonstrated that the teachers participating in the research project did not feel that their familiarity level changed throughout the implementation period of the MTSS program. While participation in the survey changed across the three administrations, the data collected demonstrated consistency in response when analyzed. Survey item number six provided the researcher with the first series of qualitative results. The results of this item provide for a consistent series of opinions being represented, with teachers moving toward a more positive opinion of the school district’s efforts throughout the MTSS implementation period. Data analysis of this item presents a potential trend toward increased positive perceptions as the implementation period STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 114 progressed. This item was useful for the researcher to triangulate with further items measuring the teachers’ opinions. The results collected from survey item seven were qualitative measurements of teacher opinions of the amount of professional development which was provided prior to the implementation of the school’s MTSS program. Analysis of the data collected presents an upward trend toward the teachers’ opinions becoming more positive in nature as the surveys were administered throughout the implementation timeframe. The results collected from item number eight of the survey were focused on identifying the teachers’ perception of the effectiveness of the process of implementation of the MTSS program. Analysis of the data represented by the results from this survey item represents a progression toward teachers perceiving that the MTSS implementation process was effective when the second and third surveys were administered. The results collected from survey item nine provided the teachers’ opinions as to what the most effective aspect of the school’s implementation was over each of the three survey administrations. Analysis of the teachers’ responses to this survey item provided the researcher with a qualitative view of their opinions as to the most effective aspects of the program. As time proceeded during the implementation process and through the three surveys being administered, teachers found consistencies that could be triangulated to align with specific grade levels and subject areas. This information provided the researcher with information to assist in identifying where strength areas may be represented within specific grade levels and subject areas. The results collected from survey item ten provided teachers’ opinions as to what the most ineffective aspect of the school’s implementation was over each of the three STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 115 survey administrations. Analysis of the teachers’ responses to this survey item provided the researcher with a qualitative view of their opinions as to the most ineffective aspects of the program. This information also provided the researcher with information to assist the researcher in identifying where weakness areas are present within the implementation process utilized by the school district. The results collected through the administration of survey item eleven provided a qualitative data set representing a progression of teacher perceptions that students receiving MTSS academic support demonstrated increased academic proficiency and progress toward grade-level expectations. This data can be triangulated with the teacher's perceptions of the strengths of the implementation to represent the areas in which teachers identified success being present for students. Survey items twelve and thirteen have a connected relationship being tasked with measuring varying opinion levels of the teachers as it relates to the MTSS instructional strategies that the teachers implemented into their classroom instruction. Teachers provided what they considered to be the most effective strategy in response to item number twelve while providing what they considered to be the least effective strategy in response to item number thirteen. The data collected through the administration of items twelve and thirteen provided a qualitative data set demonstrating how the teacher’s perceptions of the effectiveness of instructional strategies changed or modified over the course of the study. This data provided the researcher with perspective as to how staff perceptions of areas within the implementation of the MTSS program and the MTSS program itself adjusted as the staff became more familiar, received additional STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 116 professional development, and had the opportunity to put their learning into practice in their classrooms with their students. The results collected through the administration of item fourteen provided a representation of which of the six provided areas the teachers believe the MTSS program implementation best-provided support. The areas provided were chosen by the researcher and focused on areas identified as the core need areas in accordance with research utilized to support the rationale for the distribution and planning associated with learning loss programming requirements under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, which addressed the academic needs of students following the school closures that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic in March of 2020. Item number fifteen mirrored the prompt for item number fourteen but instead asked for the area that the teacher believes to be the second most supported. The results of this item provided the researcher with an extended representation of the areas in which the implementation of the MTSS program is successfully supporting student areas of need. The results collected through the administration of item sixteen, the final item included in the survey, requested the opposing information from that collected through items fourteen and fifteen. The results collected from this item provided the researcher with insight into the areas that the teachers participating in the study felt were least supported by the implementation of the MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School. The area with the highest number of responses related to the evaluation of students for special education services. While this may be perceived as a negative by some, under the stated purposes of MTSS programming, this is the overall goal of a STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 117 program exhibiting success. Triangulating these results with the other information collected could support a potential conclusion that students receiving MTSS support in the classroom as experiencing increased success in the regular education classroom and are, thus, in turn, less in need of special education services. The nine interviews which were successfully conducted provided a deeper insight to the researcher into why staff perceived the implementation process of the MTSS program in the manner that they did. Most respondents provided an answer inclusive of detail to each prompt presented to them. The identification of the instructional position held by the interviewee allowed for further trend analysis and triangulation of data to identify consistencies between the data collected through the survey instrument and the interview responses being that both prompted the respondent to answer what they teach in some capacity. The information contained in this chapter provided through data analysis and triangulation of the results will be utilized to support the development of chapter five of the research project. The researcher will derive conclusions and recommendations to respond to the research questions posed in this study using the information in this chapter and provide them in the coming fifth chapter of the study. Discussion Based upon the research questions posed by the researcher relative to the problem presented, the results of data collection, data analysis, and triangulation of the data provided, the teachers who participated in the research study have identified the MTSS program to be providing positive outcomes for students during its implementation year. The teachers that participated ranged in grade levels taught and represented a diverse educational background relative to the subject areas taught and their experience levels. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 118 The diversity among the teachers who participated provided a broad perspective on the successes and potential weaknesses of implementing the academic MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School. The researcher was able to develop trends for analysis as well as identifiable characteristics in the quantitative and qualitative responses received that provide for triangulation of the data that gives the researcher means for disaggregating the data to identify means for developing conclusions as to how the teachers' perceptions of the MTSS program's implementation was affected over time. Summary Analysis of the data collected during the study provided the researcher with representations of the changing perceptions of the teachers as the implementation period continued over the course of the school year. This data will be useful to individuals responsible for planning MTSS and other programming implementations at the school level. It provides qualitative measurements that may present itself useful in predictive preparation and planning efforts for school administrators and other professionals responsible for strategic and operational planning relative to initiating new programming in a school setting. The data collected by the researcher for this project will be made available to the Principal of Windber Area Elementary School upon request. The original intention of the research project was to embed the data and conclusions from this capstone research project into future implementation cycles for programming within the Windber Area School District. The researcher transitioned to a nearby school district after the data collection process and has modified the intended purpose for the information collected in STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 119 this research process which the researcher plans to utilize in future programmatic implementation planning within their new school district. The fifth and final chapter in the capstone research project is centered around the use of the data analysis and results presented in chapter four to provide conclusions and recommendations. The chapter will result in the researcher connecting the results to the research questions posed in the research study. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 120 CHAPTER V Conclusions and Recommendations Chapter V is designed to provide the connections necessary between the research questions posed by the researcher within this Doctoral Capstone Research Project and the data collected through the three surveys administered and the interviews conducted. The researcher used multiple methodologies to develop these instruments to collect limited quantities of quantitative and significantly more qualitative data. Both forms of data were critical to developing responses to the three research questions posed to establish the need for the study to be conducted. The conclusions which will be presented in this chapter are derived from the data which was collected and its analysis which was performed by the researcher and chronicled in Chapter IV. This chapter will consider what conclusions can be drawn by the researcher specific to each research question posed. The chapter will also provide insight into the limitations experienced throughout the research process. While limitations are expected within all research conducted, some unique limitations were encountered during this study that presented challenges that became evident during the data analysis portion of the overall process. The researcher considered the limitations experienced while determining the relationship between the data analysis and the conclusions derived. These considerations were critical in the establishment of the recommendations that the researcher created in response to the research questions. The recommendations detailed within this chapter are intended for consideration by the researcher, the school where the study was conducted, and others who review this study and its findings in the future. This provides means for future MTSS and potentially other programming implementation methods within schools to receive guidance from this STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 121 study to prepare for how teacher perceptions can play a critical component in such processes. The research questions, data analysis, and conclusions generated from this capstone research study are supported with great significance by the literature review conducted in Chapter II. The literature analyzed in this research study provided the necessary structural framework to support the rationale for conducting the study. In Chapter II, the researcher provided an in-depth representation of the role academic interventions and supports played in educational programming, including the relationship that MTSS programming shares with special education. That relationship includes the philosophy and pedagogy utilized to support students that demonstrate need in the least restrictive environment. It also includes the impacts that legislation and case law play in the correlation between MTSS and current educational programming trends. Windber Area Elementary School is a relatively minor school compared to the enrollment of most elementary schools in Pennsylvania. Still, it demonstrates characteristics within its student body, teaching staff, and prior school-level academic accomplishments easily relatable to schools of varying sizes and in differing community environments. This chapter will provide a concise series of recommendations regarding the impacts of staff perceptions of MTSS implementations in an elementary school and how those impacts require consideration within future planning for other developmental levels and other school districts. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 122 Conclusions The researcher designed three distinct questions to guide this study and support the rationale for conducting it. Within this section of Chapter V, the researcher will present each of the three questions and the conclusions drawn during the research process in response to each question. Research Question #1 The first question presented by the researcher asked, “How do the school’s teaching staff perceive the implementation of the school’s MTSS program to be supportive of student academic progress?” This question was supported by numerous quantitative and qualitative questions on the survey (Appendix C) administered and the interview prompts (Appendix D) provided to the teachers. The detailed association of these items was defined in the Data Collection Plan and Timeline (Appendix E) established by the researcher. Throughout the data collection process, the teachers that participated demonstrated trends within their survey responses that were supportive of the school's MTSS program showing support for students making academic progress through both the defined MTSS programming that was associated with “Rambler Time”. “Rambler Time” is the defined time which was set aside within the daily schedule to group students by academic need and deliver intervention. This time also, placed focus upon data-driven decision making. The data collected, and its analysis provided representations of the staff seeing the professional development that was conducted being a significant factor in the success of the implementation of the MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 123 When reviewing the data collected, the researcher has concluded that the importance of well-planned and ample professional development played a significant role in the teachers being of a favorable opinion of the program’s implementation and its ability to support the academic needs of the students participating in it. The focus on professional development and allocated time were significant preparation areas in the pre-implementation planning stages. In return, that planning was identified as impactful in the program’s successful implementation. Research Question #2 The second of the three questions presented by the researcher was, “What do the teachers perceive to have been the most effective and ineffective aspects of the school’s MTSS implementation?” This question was supported by numerous quantitative and qualitative questions on the survey (Appendix C) administered and the interview prompts (Appendix D) provided to the teachers. The detailed association of these items was defined in the Data Collection Plan and Timeline (Appendix E) established by the researcher. The data collected supporting research question number two often shared the same survey items and interview prompts that were active in supporting research question number one. Research question two drilled down further into the teacher’s perceptions of the MTSS implementation process to identify the most effective and most ineffective aspects of the school’s implementation. The responses provided consistencies in what the teachers identified as the most compelling aspects of the process. There was consistency in their answers in the areas of data-driven decision-making being a critical component of the success, as well as the targeted instructional practices that could be applied to meet STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 124 student needs based upon that data. This was consistent and directly supported the responses provided to the conclusions established by the researcher to research question number one. The researcher identified that the teachers responded heavily in favor of the implementation process's structural framework. They responded consistently with affirmation that the data they now had access to support their efforts to provide quality instruction and interventions to students. This is a critical component of MTSS philosophy as the key element of effective MTSS programming is providing high-quality Tier One instruction in the regular classroom. It became evident in teacher responses that this level of high-quality education is available to all students providing the opportunity to identify new targeted instructional skill areas to address with commonality in student groupings exhibiting that need. The teachers affirmed this by expressing how they experienced more significant opportunities to meet more profound student needs in small groups and through one-on-one intervention. The teachers needed to identify a consistent trend relating to what they identified as ineffective. A consistent series of responses was provided by a specific teacher, whom the researcher could triangulate the data to identify, consistently responded on a particular area that they felt to be ineffective. That teacher expressed numerous times that they thought the MTSS programming being implemented needed to address the uppergrade level of the study. Grade five was not experiencing the same academic progress that the earlier grade levels were experiencing. The researcher identified this statement as related to concerns expressed in the study relative to the academic skill gaps between STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 125 students have been more expansive in the upper-grade levels than they were in the lowergrade levels at the time of the study. The researcher reached multiple conclusions about the information collected supporting this research question. The researcher concluded that the teachers perceive MTSS programming established earlier in the student’s educational program to be more effective than when implemented in a school-wide approach, with some students having significant skill gaps from their peers. The researcher found this to be a very logical conclusion and a factor to be heavily considered when designing recommendations based on the established findings through this study. In contrast to the areas identified as least effective within the implementation process, the researcher concluded that the data-driven decision-making structure established throughout the implementation of the MTSS program was not only effective but also the highlight of the program's implementation period. Selecting a data-driven culture can take much work to accomplish in schools. Many varying forms of roadblocks are often encountered when attempting to drive a data-driven process for planning student academic programs. Most of these roadblocks are centered on the teacher and not as much on the students. The expectation is that teachers will all be comfortable and knowledgeable about data analysis in a data-driven school culture. However, this is only sometimes the case when evaluating teacher skills levels and comfort in data-driven decision-making. Based on the data collected in this research study, the researcher concluded that teacher confidence and data analysis skills can be fostered and grow with the appropriate levels of preparation and professional development. A supportive framework designed to allow teachers to support one another and learn from one another STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 126 in an ongoing fashion is necessary. This sense of collegiality and peer-to-peer support is evident throughout the implementation process at Windber Area Elementary School. The teachers expressed the importance this had to them as professionals. The researcher concluded that the gains experienced in this capacity could be expanded upon with more significant benefits possible in the future. Research Question #3 The third and final question presented by the researcher asked, “How do teachers perceive the effectiveness of embedded instructional intervention methods through the MTSS program?” This question was supported by numerous quantitative and qualitative questions on the survey (Appendix C) administered and the interview prompts (Appendix D) provided to the teachers. The detailed association of these items was defined in the Data Collection Plan and Timeline (Appendix E) established by the researcher. Throughout the research process, the third research question became the deeper inquiry as to how the perceptions of the teachers most affected the implementation process and the means for measuring its success. The data collected throughout the research process represented a transition within the teachers' perceptions regarding the value of embedding the strategies being utilized, as part of MTSS programming, within their regular classroom instruction. The teachers provided feedback throughout the research process that they were experiencing increased academic performance amongst the students in their classes by incorporating the strategies to all students as appropriate— the teachers’ perceptions significantly modified over the implementation period. The teachers began to identify that one of the most effective elements of implementing the MTSS program was the opportunity to embed the strategies they were developing and STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 127 practicing within the MTSS program allocated time into their regular instructional practices. The researcher concluded that the teachers who participated in the study began to have their perceptions of the program more aligned with the philosophical tenets of MTSS programming and the importance of tier one in achieving student academic success. Tier one is critical to school-wide academic progress and achievement. It is the tier that most widely affects the school's overall performance. The successful impacts of this in a school can also directly correlate to the design and development of school culture. A culture designed to provide highly effective classroom instruction to all students will likely drive a positive school culture focused on high levels of achievement driving what teachers and students expect of themselves and each other. A positive academic school culture with shared values and expectations can drive school achievement and teachers to perceive their work environment as positive and rewarding. Limitations In every research study, limitations will become present within the design of the research plan as well as within the execution of the initially proposed design or methodology that is intended to answer the research questions. In some instances, these limitations may be something that the researcher is aware of in advance of beginning the process of conducting their research. In other instances, the limitations experienced within the study present themselves once the study is underway. A limitation that was present at the time of inception of the research study that the researcher was fully aware of was the inclusion of one long-term substitute teacher in the population of the teachers agreeing to participate in the study. Including this individual presented a limitation in their professional experience level. The individual had less than STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 128 one year of experience in the classroom and thus needed to be expanded in their scope of response as it relates to many items that requested a comparative reaction. The teacher’s limited experience limited the validity of many of the individual's responses. While the study was intended to be anonymous, triangulation of the demographic data, known characteristics of the long-term substitute, and the responses provided, which often offered minimal context in them, made it possible to identify which responses to the survey items and interview prompts where from this individual. This reduced the level of anonymity initially intended for the study and thus resulted in additional staff data triangulation becoming possible. Fewer anonymous responders increased the likelihood that the researcher could identify the responder by ruling out other participants. A secondary limitation in the study was the varying number of participants that responded to each survey and the interview prompts. Fourteen teachers signed the informed consent forms provided by the researcher, and all fourteen teachers were included in the administrations of the surveys. Various participants responded to each survey across all three survey administrations, baseline, follow-up, and final administrations. The baseline survey administration resulted in twelve participants responding and completing the survey in full. The follow-up administration was conducted by nine teachers from the original group of fourteen participants. This was a twenty-five percent reduction in participants providing data on the follow-up survey. This reduction in response increased the likelihood of data triangulation to identify respondents potentially. It also created a scenario in which orphaned data was present within the study. Three original respondents provided data that now had no follow-up data to align with. This decrease in data collected could potentially invalidate aspects of STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 129 the data collection, as the primary emphasis of many of the survey items was to measure perceptions over time in a qualitative format. Orphaned data makes it challenging to identify trends and conduct analysis of them, being that they are void of the progressive representation of response adjustment due to perceptual changes by the teacher since a follow-up reply is not present for three teachers. Additionally, orphaned data which occurred between the second and third administrations of the survey could reduce the validity of the conclusions that the researcher derived from the data because three series of baseline responses did not have a follow-up series of data. The third and final limitation related to the administration of the surveys is due to the increased participation level achieved on the final survey from the participation and response level of the follow-up survey administration. This limitation creates potential concerns relative to the research study as it establishes an incongruence of data collected. Nine of the respondents provided the full three survey administrations worth of responses, which is what was sought by the researcher as the ideal means of participation. The three respondents that did not participate in the follow-up survey reduced the amount of reliable data by not having a progression of perceptions like the other nine respondents. The increased response level did provide enough data to conclude the baseline and final survey administrations but left the orphaned data from the follow-up data without the level of reliability that the researcher sought to accomplish. A third limitation area experienced during the study was the result of the researcher changing employers during the final months of data collection and the conclusion of the teacher interviews. The researcher had been granted high levels of STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 130 access by the Windber Area Elementary School Principal to the staff participating and thus was able to submit the surveys through the school district email network. The initial level of access that the researcher had to the participants made conducting the interviews very convenient for both the researcher and the teachers. With the researcher employed in the same school district as the teachers participating in the study, the researcher could accommodate the teachers’ schedules when conducting the interviews. In April 2023, the researcher changed employers and no longer worked within the Windber Area School District. This resulted in modifying how the remaining interviews had to be conducted. The researcher no longer had direct access to the teachers who had not completed the interview process. The researcher was forced to utilize an alternate format approved for administering the interview prompts to the teachers by sending the prompts via SurveyMonkey and thus receiving their responses electronically instead of an in-person interview. While the interview prompts did not modify in content or delivery when the researcher employed this method, the researcher did find that the responses received via the electronic interview format were abbreviated from those collected during the inperson interviews. The researcher concluded that it is likely that the changes in the depth of response were due to the informality of the in-person interviews versus the stagnant formality that came with the modified electronic delivery of the interview prompts. The in-person interviews often included a conversation not directly related to the interview prompts, as the teachers were familiar with the researcher and often broke off into comfortable communication with him. This likely increased the level of comfort for the respondent and thus allowed for a more in-depth series of responses. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 131 The final limitation the researcher identified within this study was relative to the study's intent. The researcher established the study to measure teachers' perceptions of MTSS implementation in grade levels three, four, and five. This was an intentional decision made by the researcher as those grade levels are associated with summative testing in the form of the PSSA state assessments. The limitation imposed by this research study involved the lack of inclusion of the following grade levels; Kindergarten, first, and second grades. These four grade levels also experienced MTSS programming implementation during this timeframe but were not chosen to participate in the research study. This limited the study as the qualitative data collected included only some teachers participating in the MTSS implementation process at Windber Area Elementary School. By limiting the study, the researcher could not achieve a comprehensive measure of the overall perceptions of the teaching staff. Instead, the researcher collected data from a localized group of teachers, and thus the research was limited to the perceptions of only twelve teachers and only some of the teaching staff responsible for or participating in the implementation process. Even with these limitations present, the researcher was able to analyze the data collected and make what was deemed to be sufficiently data-supported conclusions and recommendations that will provide the opportunity for the findings in the research study to have value in future planning and implementation practices for the researcher, the participating school, and others who seek to utilize the information contained in this research study to assist in their own MTSS implementation or personal research on this or a similar topic. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 132 Recommendations The researcher has identified numerous recommendations for schools, administrators, and teachers seeking to implement an MTSS program in their schools while considering the importance of teacher perception in the process of achieving it. The researcher must remain open-minded to all potential factors that can directly or indirectly affect the recommendations presented to represent valid and reliable recommendations based on the findings conducted during this research study. These factors can have negative implications as quickly as positive impacts. The recommendations being presented are representative and influenced by the researcher’s own experiences and bias, as well as the fact that the research study was conducted in a single school with a maximum of twelve participants in each stage of the data collection process. The researcher has addressed the possible inherent bias throughout the study by completing a comprehensive review of the literature that provides research-based information to support the conclusions that have been derived throughout the study. It is recommended that any school leadership team seeking to implement an MTSS program completes an extensive level of preparatory research and study relative to MTSS philosophy, observe and study successful and effective implementation experiences that have occurred in other schools similar in nature, and establish a successful pre-implementation plan inclusive of professional development planning and building teacher comprehension and understanding as it relates to the importance of MTSS programming in the current instructional environment. MTSS programming implementation can significantly impact the delivery of the general education curriculum. Within MTSS philosophy, the general education curriculum in the regular classroom constitutes how 85% of students will get their STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 133 academic learning needs met. MTSS provides a methodology and approach that focuses on delivering unique support strategies to the degree possible in that environment and thus affects all students, not just those requiring increased levels of direct support. It allows students to practice embedded instructional strategies in collaborative learning opportunities by utilizing and sharing the methods they are exposed to in their regular education classroom environment. It is recommended that any school seeking to implement an MTSS program do a complete review of their general education curriculum and its alignment to state standards, school goals, and additional programming that will experience a shared relationship with the newly implemented MTSS program. This can be initiated under the school’s established curriculum review cycle and proceed into integrated conceptualization, allowing for a broader rollout and thus reducing the emphasis on the MTSS program implementation and instead packaging the two together. Most curriculum review cycles involve teacher participation and feedback. Therefore, teacher perceptions of implementing the MTSS program can be considered and factored in while the process is still in development. Thus, it should theoretically result in greater buy-in or more positive perceptions since the teachers themselves are invested from inception. A second recommendation that the researcher provides based on the results of the research study is for any school, administration, or team of teachers seeking to pursue the implementation of an MTSS program to place significant emphasis on the design and delivery of professional development to the staff in preparation to implement the MTSS program. The researcher has identified that within the study, professional development and planning were critical to its success in the teachers' perceptions. The teachers began STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 134 the study with favorable opinions of the professional development that they received, and that positive perception continued to grow in later surveys. The teachers expressed the value the professional development provided had to them and how they were unfamiliar with much of MTSS programming but, over time, became much more comfortable and knowledgeable regarding it. The researcher recommends that extensive planning and focused professional development delivery be at the forefront of any MTSS implementation cycle. The strength of teacher preparation and comprehension relative to the purpose and importance of programming can result in a more expedient and accepted implementation process. In turn, student academic progress becomes the focus earlier in the process, and thus, the results are perceivable sooner. The final recommendation that the researcher has generated for future research and implementations is for the continued collection of qualitative data centered on the perceptions of the staff. Staff perceptions of programming can provide powerful feedback on the program's effectiveness and provide context as to how the staff is receiving and growing within the program’s development. The researcher recommends that the school leadership gather data and review it with the teachers twice during a school year. Sharing the information with the teachers could generate precious dialogue within the staff and within the teams tasked with planning the ongoing strategies related to such programming. Summary At the heart of all successful schools is an effective general education curriculum that best meets the needs of its students. The delivery of this curriculum leads to increased levels of success for students and a foundation by which students can grow as learners. However, all students are unique in learning style and rate of acquiring and STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 135 retaining information. These differences drive specialized academic programming intended to meet the unique needs of diverse learners. MTSS has become a staple program for achieving this in the current educational environment. MTSS provides a focused and structured approach to meeting students' needs through a tiered program. Its success in schools has been chronicled, and it receives much support as a solution to meet student needs. MTSS is similar to other academic and support programming in its need to garner the support of the teachers who deliver it and embed it into their instructional practices to succeed. Teacher support begins with the perceptions they develop over time as they are immersed in the programming. The more effective teacher commitment can be achieved through positive perceptions of MTSS programming, the greater likelihood of its successful implementation. Windber Area Elementary School continues to seek to implement its MTSS programming comprehensively, expanding into behavioral MTSS programming during the 2023-2024 school year alongside further refinement of how the program is delivered at all grade levels. In addition, the 2023-2024 school year is scheduled to be the implementation year for academic MTSS programming at Windber Area Middle School. The students entering that school in the sixth grade during the upcoming school year will have experience with MTSS programming and how it is delivered. Thus, the focus of the implementation process can be placed primarily on the teachers' professional development and the program's growth as the teachers develop their perceptions during its implementation and expansion into a new school within the Windber Area School District. The continued emphasis on quality implementation of MTSS programming STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 136 within the school district’s other schools will benefit the students, staff, and leadership as it tries to meet its students' unique needs in an ever-changing educational environment. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 137 References American Institutes for Research – Center on Multi-Tiered System of Supports. (2022). Essential components. https://mtss4success.org/essential-components Armendariz, G., & Jung, A. (2016). Response to intervention vs. severe discrepancy model: Identification of students with specific learning disabilities. The Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship, 5(1), 1–18. Bateman, D. F., Bright, K.L., O’Shea, D.J., O’Shea, L.J., Algozzine, B. (2007). The Special Education Program: Administrator’s Handbook. Pearson Education, Inc. Bicehouse, V., & Faieta, J. (2017). IDEA at age forty: Weathering common core standards and data-driven decision making. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 10(1), 33–44. Boyle, J. R., & Weishaar, M. (2001). Special Education Law with Cases. Allyn & Bacon. Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483. (1954). https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/brown_v_board_of_education_(1954) Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, State Implementation and Scaling up of Evidence-Based Practices Center, National Integrated Multi-Tiered Systems of Support Research Network, National Center on Improving Literacy, & Lead for Literacy Center. (2022, October). Supporting schools during and after crisis: A guide to supporting states, districts, schools, educators, and students through a multi-tiered systems of support framework. The University of Oregon. www.pbis.org STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 138 Charlton, C. T., Sabey, C. V., Dawson, M. R., Pyle, D., Lund, E. M., & Ross, S. W. (2018). Critical incidents in the scale-up of state multitiered systems of supports. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 20(4), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300718770804 Choi, J. H., McCart, A. B., & Sailor, W. (2020). Achievement of students with IEPS and associated relationships with an inclusive MTSS framework. The Journal of Special Education, 54(3), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466919897408 Choi, J. H., McCart, A. B., Hicks, T. A., & Sailor, W. (2019). An analysis of mediating effects of school leadership on MTSS implementation. The Journal of Special Education, 53(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.117/0022466918804815 Gaskin v. Pennsylvania, 389 F. Supp. 2d 628. (2005). https://casetext.com/case/gaskin-vpennsylvania-1 Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305. (1988). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/305/ Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/statute-chapter-33/subchapter-i/1400 Keogh, B. K. (2007). Celebrating PL 94-142: The education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975. Issues in Teacher Education, 16(2), 65–69. Leonard, K. M., Coyne, M. D., Oldham, A. C., Burns, D., & Gillis, M. B. (2019). Implementing MTSS in beginning reading: Tools and systems to support schools and teachers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 34(2), 110–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12192 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 139 Mandic, C. M., Rudd, R., Hehir, T., & Acevedo-Garcia, D. (2012). Readability of special education procedural safeguards. The Journal of Special Education, 45(4), 195– 203. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466910362774 Mason, E. N., Benz, S. A., Lembke, E. S., Burns, M. K., & Powell, S. R. (2019). From professional development to implementation: A district’s experience implementing mathematics tiered systems of support. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 34(4), 207–214. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12206 MacLaughlin, M. J. (2009). What every principal needs to know about special education, Second Edition. Corwin Press. Oberti v. Board of Education, 805 F. Supp. 1392. (1992). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/305 Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network. (n.d.). Multi-tiered system of supports. https://www.pattan.net/Multi-Tiered-System-of-Support/MULTITIERED-SYSTEM-OF-SUPPORTS Pierce, C. D., & Mueller, T. G. (2018). Easy as A-B-C: Data-based guidelines for implementing a multitiered system of supports into rural schools. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 37(3), 183–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/876870518777850 Sims, S., Fletcher-Wood, H., O’Mara-Eves, A., Cottingham, S., Stansfield, C., Van Herwegen, J., & Anders, J. (2021). What are the characteristics of teacher professional development that increase pupil achievement? A systemic review and meta-analysis. Education Endowment Foundation. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/evidencereviews/teacher-professional-development-characteristics STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 140 Skiba, R. J., Simmons, A. B., Ritter, S., Gibb, A. C., Rausch, M. K., Cuadrado, J., & Chung, C. G. (2008). Achieving equity in special education: History, status, and current challenges. Exceptional Children, 74(3), 264–288. Smith, E., & Larwin, K. H. (2021). Will they be welcomed in? The impact of K-12 teachers’ and principals’ perceptions of inclusion of students with disabilities. Journal of Organizational & Educational Leadership, 6(3), article 1. Thurlow, M.L., Ghere, G., Lazanas, S.S., & Liu, K. K. (2022). MTSS for All: Including students with the most significant cognitive disabilities. National Center on Educational Outcomes & TIES Center. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Civil Rights. (2006). Your rights under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. United States Department of Education, (n.d.). A history of the Individuals with Disabilities Act. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/IDEA-History Washington Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs. (n. d.). Public health model. https://www.wcsap.org/prevention/concepts/public-health-model Webb, A. F., & Michalopoulou, L. E. (2021). School psychologists as agents of change: Implementing MTSS in a rural school district. Psychology in the Schools, 58(8), 1642–1654. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22521 Weingarten, Z., Edmonds, R. Z., & Arden, S. (2020). Better together: Using MTSS as a structure for building school-family partnerships. Teaching Exceptional Children, 53(2), 122–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059920937733 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS APPENDICES 141 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 142 Appendix A Informed Consent Form (Participant Informed Consent Form) Title of Research Study: Staff Perceptions of MTSS Implementation in an Elementary School: A Qualitative Study of How PSSA Grade Level Teachers Perceive the Implementation Year of an Academic MTSS Program in an Elementary School Principal Researcher: Richard E. Lucas Department: Education – Administration and Leadership Phone: 814-243-0376 Email: LUC4361@pennwest.edu Faculty Advisor: Dr. Todd Keruskin Phone: 412-896-2310 Email: kersukin@pennwest.edu Dear Potential Research Study Participant, Being a professional staff member responsible for academic instruction of students within grade levels three through five, you are invited to participate, with no obligation, in a research study regarding teacher perception of the implementation process of the Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) program during the 2022-2023 school year at Windber Area Elementary School. By participating in this study, you will provide the researcher with qualitative data that is intended for analysis to determine teacher perception as to the effectiveness of the implementation of the MTSS program and support conclusions and recommendations to be developed by the researcher regarding the MTSS implementation process to the school district’s leadership team(s). What will I be asked to do if I take part in this study? If you agree to participate in this study, you will be asked to: (1) complete an electronic survey three times during the research period. Purpose: Gather qualitative data regarding teacher perceptions regarding the MTSS program’s implementation process and the effectiveness of the program at three periods throughout the implementation year of 2022-2023. (2) participate in one interview via your preferred method (in-person, email, or phone) Purpose: Gather qualitative data regarding teacher perceptions regarding the MTSS program’s implementation process and the effectiveness of the program. How long will the study last? The study is projected to last approximately 9 months, which includes an electronic survey to be administered three times during the research process and an interview with STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 143 each participating teacher during the Spring of 2023. Each of the three administrations of the electronic survey are projected to take 7-10 minutes in duration. The individual participating teacher interview is projected to last 15-30 minutes in duration dependent upon the interviewee’s preferred method of interview (in-person, email, or phone). What happens if I don’t want to participate? Your participation in this study is voluntary with no obligation in place to participate. Each teacher invited to participate may make the personal decision as to whether they want to participate in the study or decline. There is no penalty that will be imposed if a teacher chooses not to participate in this research study. Your participation in this study will not be associated with or affect in any fashion your annual professional evaluation and rating for the 2022-2023 school year or any future professional evaluations or ratings. Can I quit the study before it ends? Participants may withdraw from the study at any point in time by communicating their desire to no longer participate with the researcher. There will be no penalty should you choose to withdraw. There will be no inquiry relative to the rationale for the participants decision to no longer participate in the research study. What are the potential risks? There is minimal to no risk involved with this study. All participant data will remain anonymous with demographic data collected to be solely utilized to identify any qualitative data trends relating to years of teaching experience, grade level(s) taught, and primary instructional role of the participant. Participants will not be asked any questions perceived as being of a sensitive nature by the researcher. There is always the unforeseen potential for the survey and/or interview questions to result in a participant feeling uncomfortable with responding. Participants are not required to answer any questions or respond any survey items that they wish not to respond to. What are the benefits of participation? Participation in the study will benefit in the evaluation of the implementation process and teacher perceptions of that process for the MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School. The data collected and analyzed will result in the development of conclusions and recommendations by the researcher. Will my responses be kept confidential and private? All participant data will remain anonymous with demographic data collected to be solely utilized to identify any qualitative data trends relating to years of teaching experience, grade level(s) taught, and primary instructional role of the participant. Data will be stored on a secure server via cloud-based services with password protection in place and/or stored in a secure locked filing cabinet. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 144 CONTACT INFORMATION Should a participant have any questions or concerns regarding their participation in this study at any time, please contact Richard E. Lucas at LUC4361@pennwest.edu or 814243-0376. INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD(IRB) APPROVAL This action research project received approval by the Penn West University Institutional Review Board, effective November 9, 2022, and expiring November 8, 2023. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE I have reviewed this Informed Consent Form and acknowledge my understanding and comprehension that my participation in this research study is voluntary in nature and can be terminated at any time without inquiry by the researcher. I acknowledge that by submitting the survey provided without the return of this Informed Consent Form to the Principal Researcher it is considered that acknowledgment of consent to participate has been provided by the volunteer. I also acknowledge that the data collected through the surveys administered to me and the interview that I participate in will be utilized in the final research presentation to accompany this study. By signing below, I acknowledge my consent to the aforementioned statements. Participant Signature: ________________________________ Date: ________________ Researcher Signature: ________________________________ Date: _______________ STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 145 Appendix B Institutional Review Board Approval Institutional Review Board 250 University Avenue California, PA 15419 instreviewboard@calu.edu Melissa Sovak, Ph.D. Dear Richard, Please consider this email as official notification that your proposal titled “Staff Perceptions of MTSS Implementations in an Elementary School: A Qualitative Study of How PSSA Grade Level Teachers Perceive the Implementation Year of an Academic MTSS Program in an Elementary School” (Proposal #PW22-030) has been approved by the Pennsylvania Western University Institutional Review Board as submitted. The effective date of approval is 11/09/2022 and the expiration date is 11/08/2023. These dates must appear on the consent form. Please note that Federal Policy requires that you notify the IRB promptly regarding any of the following: (1) Any additions or changes in procedures you might wish for your study (additions or changes must be approved by the IRB before they are implemented) (2) Any events that affect the safety or well-being of subjects (3) Any modifications of your study or other responses that are necessitated by any events reported in (2). (4) To continue your research beyond the approval expiration date of 11/08/2023, you must file additional information to be considered for continuing review. Please contact instreviewboard@calu.edu Please notify the Board when data collection is complete. Regards, Melissa Sovak, PhD. Chair, Institutional Review Board STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 146 Appendix C District Letter of Approval July 17, 2022 Richard E. Lucas 1286 Solomon Run Road Johnstown, PA 15904 Dear Richard E. Lucas I am pleased to write a letter in support of your doctoral capstone project entitled, “Staff Perceptions of MTSS Implementation in an Elementary School: A Qualitative Study of How PSSA Grade Level Teachers Perceive the Implementation Year of an Academic MTSS Program in an Elementary School.” The proposed research has significant value in providing the Windber Area School District with conclusions and recommendations regarding teacher perceptions of the school district’s implementation of a Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) at Windber Area Elementary School. I have reviewed the project proposal and understand the following related to participation: Teachers that currently teach students within the third, fourth, and fifth grade levels will complete an anonymous online survey on three separate occasions during the study. The teachers that participate in the survey will also be asked to voluntarily participate in a one-to-one interview with yourself as the interviewer. All teacher participation will be voluntary and the teachers participating can choose to withdraw from the study at any time. Prior to the start of the research process, teachers will be asked to complete a consent form that will demonstrate their understanding of the process and willingness to participate at a voluntary level. All data collected will be kept confidential and kept secure using a password protected online software program to administer the survey to the teachers. Interview data will remain anonymous within the capstone study final product but will be aligned to demographic data collected during the process for the purpose of identifying grade level and subject level trends. Potential concerns are very limited based upon the anonymity of the process and the secure nature of the data collection methods. Please accept this letter as my formal consent and support of the district’s participation in the proposed research project. Sincerely, Tim Tokarsky President Windber Area School District Board of Directors STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 147 Appendix D Teacher Survey Windber Area School District Survey (Staff Survey: Evaluating the successes and challenges of MTSS Implementation) Thank you for taking the time to complete this valuable survey for the Windber Area School District. The input you provide will be utilized by the school district in determining the perception of the school’s implementation of the MTSS programming during the 2022-2023 school year. Directions: Please complete each survey question presented to the best of your ability. Do not leave any items blank or unanswered. It is imperative that the school district receive feedback via your responses to all items. Once you have completed this survey, you need only click on the Submit button following the final survey item and your survey responses will be provided to the school district in an electronic format. 1. How long have you been a teacher at Windber Area Elementary School? 0 – 4 years 5 - 10 years 11 - 15 years 16 – 25 years 26 – 35 years 35+ years 2. Did you attend and participate in the MTSS professional development sessions prior to the 2022-2023 school year? YES NO 148 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 3. What grade level(s) do you currently teach? Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 4. What subject area(s) do you currently teach? Mathematics English Language Arts Reading Science 5. What level of familiarity do you have with the Multi-Tiered System of Supports? No knowledge of MTSS Some knowledge of MTSS Strong knowledge of MTSS 6. What is your opinion of the school district’s efforts to address the implementation of learning loss supports such as MTSS at Windber Area Elementary School? The School District has done an outstanding job addressing student academic learning loss by implementing an MTSS program. The School District has done an above-average job addressing student academic learning loss by implementing an MTSS program. The School District has done an average job addressing student academic learning loss by implementing an MTSS program. The School District has done a below-average job addressing student academic learning loss by implementing an MTSS program. The School District has done a poor job addressing student academic learning loss by implementing an MTSS program. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 149 7. I believe that the Windber Area School District has provided ample professional development for staff regarding MTSS in the Windber Area Elementary School in anticipation of implementation of the program. 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = No Opinion 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree 8. Do you believe that the MTSS implementation process at Windber Area Elementary School has been effective? Yes No Not enough information to develop an opinion 9. In your opinion, what has been the most effective aspect of the school’s implementation of the MTSS program? 10. In your opinion, what has been the most ineffective aspect of the school’s implementation of the MTSS program? STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 150 11. Do you believe that your students that are receiving MTSS supports have shown increased academic proficiency and are making progress toward grade level expectations? I believe that my students who are participating in MTSS have made academic progress bringing them in alignment with grade level expectations. I believe that my students who are participating in MTSS are making progress that will likely over time bring them into alignment with grade level expectations. I believe that my students who are participating in MTSS are making progress, but do not demonstrate progress academically that will result in meeting grade level expectations. I believe that my students who are participating in MTSS are not making progress academically. 12. Please share below what you consider the most effective MTSS instructional strategies that you have implemented into your classroom instruction. 13. Please share below what you consider the least effective MTSS instructional Strategies that you have implemented into your classroom instruction. STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 151 14. Please choose what you believe to be the area most supported by the implementation of the school’s MTSS program. ______ Addressing Learning Loss due to the impact of COVID-19 ______ Addressing Individual Student Academic Deficiencies ______ Addressing School Level Academic Needs ______ Addressing Grade Level Academic Needs ______ Addressing Subject Area Academic Needs ______ Identifying Students for Evaluation for Potential Qualification for Special Ed Please choose what you believe to be the area second most supported by the implementation of the school’s MTSS program. ______ Addressing Learning Loss due to the impact of COVID-19 ______ Addressing Individual Student Academic Deficiencies ______ Addressing School Level Academic Needs ______ Addressing Grade Level Academic Needs ______ Addressing Subject Area Academic Needs ______ Identifying Students for Evaluation for Potential Qualification for Special Ed Please choose what you believe to be the area least supported by the implementation of the school’s MTSS program. ______ Addressing Learning Loss due to the impact of COVID-19 ______ Addressing Individual Student Academic Deficiencies ______ Addressing School Level Academic Needs ______ Addressing Grade Level Academic Needs ______ Addressing Subject Area Academic Needs ______ Identifying Students for Evaluation for Potential Qualification for Special Ed STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 152 Appendix E Teacher MTSS Interview Prompts 1. Please provide the following demographic information: • How many years of teaching experience do you have? • What grade level(s) do you currently teach? • What subject area(s) do you currently teach? Which of the following instructional roles do you currently fill? Regular Education Classroom Teacher Special Education Classroom Teacher Specialized Instructional Support Teacher 2. Prior to the implementation of the Windber Area Elementary School MTSS program, what was your perception of tiered academic support programs? 3. Please share your perceptions relative to the implementation of the school’s MTSS program to be supportive of student academic progress. 4. Based upon your current experiences and your knowledge of the implementation of Windber Area Elementary School’s MTSS program do you perceive the program to be supportive of student academic progress? 5. How effective do you feel the implementation of the MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School occurred? 6. What do you believe to be the most effective aspects of the MTSS implementation process at Windber Area Elementary School? 7. What do you believe to be the least effective aspects of the MTSS implementation process at Windber Area Elementary School? 8. Do you believe that the embedded instructional intervention methods are effective in STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 153 supporting student academic progress? 9. What do you perceive to be the most effective embedded instructional interventions that have been implemented through the school’s MTSS program? 10. What do you perceive to be the most likely reason or reasons for the effective embedded instructional intervention methods that you just identified? 11. What do you perceive to be the ineffective embedded instructional interventions that have been implemented through the school’s MTSS program? 12. What do you perceive to be the most likely reason or reasons for the ineffective embedded instructional intervention methods that you just identified? 13. How do you believe that the implementation of the MTSS program at Windber Area Elementary School could have been more efficient or effective? STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 154 Appendix F Data Collection Plan and Timeline RESEARCH QUESTION(S) How do the school’s teaching staff perceive the implementation of the school’s MTSS program to be supportive of student academic progress? TYPES OF DATA TO DATA SOURCES COLLECT (Detailed explanation of the types (i.e., of data you will collect) qualitative, quantitative) Inquiry Data: Survey Responses Five survey items collect quantitative demographic data to support the alignment of qualitative data to support trend analysis between the two forms of data. Survey Items Supporting this research question: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 TIMELINE FOR COLLECTING DATA Baseline Survey: January 2023 Second Survey: February 2023 Final Survey: March 2023 Quantitative Inquiry Data: Teacher Interview Responses Interview prompts collect quantitative demographic data to support the alignment of qualitative data to support trend analysis between the two forms of data. Qualitative Interview Prompt: 1 and 5 Inquiry Data: Survey Responses Survey items are developed to elicit responses that will provide qualitative data to be aligned with quantitative data collected within the survey to support trend analysis between the two forms of data. Survey Items Supporting this research question: 6, 7, and 8 March 2023 Baseline Survey: January 2023 Second Survey: February 2023 Final Survey: March 2023 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS Inquiry Data: Teacher Interview Responses Researcher designed interview items have been developed to identify trends through triangulation utilizing data collected within the baseline and second surveys. Triangulation of the data collected during the interviews is to be utilized to gather data that will provide additional depth and clarity to survey responses. Interview Prompt: 3 and 13 Inquiry Data: Survey Responses Survey items are developed to elicit responses that will provide qualitative data to be aligned with quantitative data collected within the survey to support trend analysis between the two forms of data. What do the teachers perceive to have been the most effective and ineffective aspects of the school’s MTSS implementation? Five survey items collect quantitative demographic data to support the alignment of qualitative data to support trend analysis between the two forms of data. Quantitative 155 March 2023 Baseline Survey: January 2023 Second Survey: February 2023 Final Survey: March 2023 Survey Items Supporting this research question: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 Inquiry Data: Teacher Interview Responses\ Interview prompts collect quantitative demographic data to support the alignment of qualitative data to support trend analysis between the two forms of data. Interview Prompt: 1 March 2023 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 156 Baseline Inquiry Data: Survey Responses Survey: January Survey items are developed to elicit 2023 responses that will provide qualitative data to be aligned with Second Survey: quantitative data collected within February 2023 the survey to support trend analysis between the two forms of data. Final Survey: March 2023 Survey Items Supporting this research question: 9, 10, 12, and 13 Qualitative Inquiry Data: Teacher Interview Responses Researcher designed interview items have been developed to identify trends through triangulation utilizing data collected within the baseline and second surveys. Triangulation of the data collected during the interviews is to be utilized to gather data that will provide additional depth and clarity to survey responses. March 2023 Interview Prompt: 6, 7, 9 and 11 How do teachers perceive the effectiveness of embedded instructional intervention methods through the MTSS program? Inquiry Data: Survey Responses Five survey items collect quantitative demographic data to support the alignment of qualitative data to support trend analysis between the two forms of data. Quantitative Survey Items Supporting this research question: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 Inquiry Data: Teacher Interview Responses Interview prompts collect quantitative demographic data to support the alignment of qualitative Baseline Survey: January 2023 Second Survey: February 2023 Final Survey: March 2023 March 2023 STAFF PERCEPTIONS OF MTSS IMPLEMENTATIONS 157 data to support trend analysis between the two forms of data. Interview Prompt: 1 Inquiry Data: Survey Responses Survey items are developed to elicit responses that will provide qualitative data to be aligned with quantitative data collected within the survey to support trend analysis between the two forms of data. Baseline Survey: January 2023 Second Survey: February 2023 Final Survey: March 2023 Survey Items Supporting this research question: 11 and 14 Qualitative Inquiry Data: Teacher Interview Responses Researcher designed interview items have been developed to identify trends through triangulation utilizing data collected within the baseline and second surveys. Triangulation of the data collected during the interviews is to be utilized to gather data that will provide additional depth and clarity to survey responses. Interview Prompt: 2, 4, 8, 10 and 12 March 2023