Four-Step Problem-Solving Process

Step #1:

Problem Identification

What do we want students to know and be able to do?

This is done by comparing the expected level of performance with how students are currently performing. We can identify the problem by asking ourselves: What do we want students to know and be able to do? From this we can generate a goal statement for our students.

Example of Problem Statement: Students are reading 40 words correct per minute, which is far below the 6th grade reading fluency expectations.

Example Goal Statement: The students will increase their oral reading fluency, measured by words correct per minute, by 2 words per week over 20 weeks.

Setting SMART Goals

Step #2:

Problem Analysis

Why is the problem occurring?

This is done by identifying possible reasons why the students are not meeting the grade-level expectations. At this step we ask ourselves why we think the problem is occurring. We review our data to determine where there are skill deficits and to identify instructional, curriculum, environmental, and/or learner barriers.

Example Problem Analysis: Oral reading fluency is below expectation because... the students lack sufficient phonics knowledge.

Example Prediction Statement: If direct and explicit instruction of phonics strategies occurs, then the students reading fluency will improve.

What is a "hypothesis?"

A hypothesis should be:

Research-based

Alterable

Measurable

Leads to intervention

Step #3: Instructional/ Intervention Design

What are we going to do?

At this step, we develop and implement a plan based on evidence-based strategies to address reasons why students are not meeting expectations. We state clearly what we are going to do, for how long, and how we are going to measure it.

Example Intervention:

Name: Direct Explicit Instruction in Phonics

Who? Reading Endorsed Teacher

What? Small group (one teacher to three students, or 1:3) direct explicit instruction in the area of phonics.

When? 4 times per week for 20 minutes (20 weeks)

Where? General Education Classroom

How will it be measured? DIBELS Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF) probes 1 time per week

Step #4: Response to Intervention /Instruction

Is it working?

Now it is time to review the effectiveness of the intervention. Review graphically represented progress monitoring data. Determine whether the student response to intervention was positive, questionable, or poor. (See below for example graphs).

Positive Response

The graph below represents the number of words read correctly per minute. The yellow line represents the aim line (i.e. where we want to see the student go). The green line represents the student's current trendline (i.e. where the student is currently performing and expected to continue performing given current intervention(s)). Based on this graph, the student's performance has exceeded the AIM line and predicts that the student will be performing well above the expected end of year goal of 120 WCPM. Thus, the result is determined to be positive.

Questionable

The graph below represents the number of words read correctly per minute. The yellow line represents the AIM line (i.e. where we want to see the student go). The red line represents the student's current trendline (i.e. where the student is currently performing and expected to continue performing given current intervention(s)). Based on this graph, the student's performance has hovered over the AIM line. Student performance began slightly above the AIM line but is now slightly below the AIM line. It is unclear as to whether this student will meet expectations at the end of the intervention or if they will not. Thus, the result is determined to be questionable.

Poor Response

The graph below represents the number of words read correctly per minute. The yellow line represents the AIM line (i.e. where we want the student to go). The red line represents the student's current trendline (i.e. where the student is currently performing and expected to continue performing given current intervention(s)). Based on this graph, the student's performance is not expected to meet or cross the AIM line. Thus, the result is determined to be poor.

Next Steps:

Effective / Positive Response

Continue Intervention as Written
Fade or Decrease the Intensity of Interventions
Change the Goal (e.g. increase the wcpm expectation / set a new goal) and Continue Progress Monitoring

Not Effective / Poor or Questionable Response

Evaluate Fidelity of Intervention: Ask, was the intervention being implemented as intended?
If not, Implement intervention with Fidelity
If so, Increase Intensity of Intervention
Re-evaluate Problem-ID and Analysis (E.g. Was the Hypothesis correct? Were we targeting the wrong skill set?)
Refer to Administrative Review Team (ART)
Refer to the Clarifying Questions Resource Document for additional guidance

Resources:

Castillo, J., Justice, K., Whitfield, C. (2021) Using Tier 1 Problem Solving to Improve Outcomes for Students with Disabilities [Power point slides 11, 17, 18, 19, 26], Administrative Management Conference (AMM)

Page updated

Report abuse