Response To Intervention In Special Education

Response to Intervention (RtI) came about initially in answer to the over-identification of struggling students as special education students. It was developed starting in the late 1970s by numerous researchers seeking a method of identifying learning disabilities that avoids the problems of the discrepancy model. Many educators were concerned that too many students were being identified as having a learning disability, not because they actually had one, “but because they had not been successful in a general education program” (Prasse, 2010). Many were also concerned that students with a true learning disability were not receiving the help they needed quickly enough. Before RtI, the accepted

This paper focuses on the Response to Intervention. As educators we are hearing RTI more frequently in the school districts than ever before. Many educators and state officials agree that all teachers should know and get to know the benefits and importance of RTI. The most crucial aspect to know is the RTI takes place into the regular childhood classroom; this is not something that just special education teachers need to know. This paper explains the purpose and a brief history of RTI. The paper offers ways that it is beneficial for school districts to implement this research based program. However, as in many systems there are always challenges, the paper briefly discusses some of the challenges that educators

This three-tier RTI system is wonderful at the early stages of education because it allows teachers to identify at-risk students and move them through the intervention process. However, in the later stages, it is often too late to evaluate students for learning disabilities as these should have been recognized early on in a child’s education. It should be noted that students at this stage do still need interventions, but in a different format.

Over the last decade, school administrators began implementing the RTI program at a rapid pace. This implementation was inspired by President Bush’s reauthorization of IDEA, which identified RTI as a viable way to qualify students for special education (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2007, p. 14). Fuchs and Fuchs (2007) defined RTI as a three tiered system of education. There has been research completed to show RTI was a reliable systems, but it is an open ended systems. The designers of the RTI program have left several of the specifics for individual administers to determine for their districts. While the open framework granted administrators leeway to alter the program, this also leads to questions about

Response to Intervention (RTI) is an in school service program designed to guarantee that all students are getting a high quality education. Before students are referred for special education services, it is essential that they receive effective teaching designed to meet their own learning requirements. All students in public schools are required to be included in the RTI program.

In writing this paper the author will provide her research information about on three terms UDL RTI, and what is MTSS? And expand on answering these seven questions: What role do you think the special education teacher plays in these models? What role do you think the general education teacher plays in these models? What are some of the different ways a school can structure all three of these models? What are some of the best practices or methodologies that should be applied to an RTI model? What are some of the difficulties that schools might encounter when they begin an RTI model? ‘What is your vision for the future of UDL MTSS and RTI? Lastly, how is a referral for special education different for a student who was involved in the RTI model, versus a school without this model?

RtI works at its best when personal from across the school, including administrators, general education teachers, special education teachers, supplemental specialists, music and gym teachers, and counselors all collaborate to support the framework, because each staff member shares equal responsibility for the success and failure of all students (Shapiro 2011). RtI needs the full support of all staff members, because it does not show immediate results and could take between 3-5 years to see its positive impact. RtI gives schools the chance to correct literacy issues, and fix the problem early, before students’ progress forward where they pay for it long into their future.

What are the benefits of implementing early intervention and RTI’s for children with early signs of a learning disability? This is a serious topic because of the increase over the years of children with learning disabilities. Instead of just placing students in special education programs educators must assess and evaluate students. As well as try early intervention programs and responsiveness to intervention known as RTI to try to delay the disability or stop the disability from forming and progressing. I have gathered articles that show the implementing of early intervention programs and RTI models to enhance children that show signs of an early learning disability. The articles all show how these programs can help students progress in

Our three tiered RTI process is designed to identify whether general education techniques and supports are sufficient or if a student might require special education services. Having exhausted all three tiers, the Special Education Coordinator will convene a Child Study Team (CST) comprised of a classroom teacher, a learning support teacher, and the Principal to review past attempts at meeting the student’s needs and determine whether to recommend the student to the appropriate Committee on Special Education (CSE) for evaluation. We recognize that the school cannot make a determination and will work closely with the CSE to provide all necessary information to support its evaluation and IEP (Individualized Education Plan) development processes.

Response to Intervention first came about to help answer the question about the over-identification of students who are struggling in the classroom compared those who are in need of Special Education. It started with Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA – 97) which took the general education and special education and made them more of a single system that can work together. Then in 2004, IDEA was re-evaluated and renamed to Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA). This law still stressed the importance of bringing general education and special education together as one but added that relying on the testing of a child’s I.Q as a required action for the identification of a

Currently the way disabilities are diagnosed has changed from the previous years. According to Colarusso et al., (2013) general education teachers play a large part in recognizing learning disabilities in the regular classroom. With the implementation of Response to Intervention (RTI) there are a more people involved in the decision making process. The team consist of a Data Team. This team analyzes data from benchmark tests given throughout the year. My school gives three benchmark tests a year, in math and reading. As soon as a student falls below a certain percentage they are tagged for intervention, more than the classroom teacher gives. There is a three tier system, tier one starts in the general education classroom and as more intervention

When a school decides to implement RTI at their site all of the school staff becomes involved. The school psychologist is part of team and assists in developing a plan, designing the program they school will use, training, provides assessments, and can assist in aiding both 2nd and 3rd tier students. It is also the job of the school psychologist to aid in determining if students qualify for special education services. The general education teacher is also a member of the team and assists in making the decisions on how they will run the RTI program at their school. Most importantly though the general education teacher will give the assessment to their students to place students in their tiers and identify any students who will require

The stakeholders associated with the RTI model the administration and the special education personnel, special psychologists, interventionist, administrators, other personnel implementing procedures (Harlacher, Walker, & Sanford, 2010 p. 12). In the informal interview is from a rural area in the southern part of a mid-southern state. The school is a high school, students range from fifteen to seventeen years of age, retrospectively. The classroom consists of two paraeducators with some college education and a Special Education teacher with a master’s degree in Moderate to Severe Disabilities. The name of the program is just a Special Education classroom. Most students are diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder, severe intellectual disabilities,

Based on statements by Salvia et al. (2017), although RTI/MSS are new approaches, there is increasing evidence that RTI and MSS are more effective than the standard way of refer-test-serve model for students with disabilities. Interventions were more successful even with at-risk students, referrals to special education are reduced, less students were identified with learning disabilities, and studies show that there are improvements in reading and math assessment scores in areas that use the RTI/MSS Model. On the other end of the spectrum, there are questions raised in regard to RTI/MSS implementation integrity within some school systems. There are speculative reports that indicate that there are many questionable practices being held under

Throughout time education and specifically special education has evolved. Laws have changed, acts have been passed, but most importantly research has been conducted on how students with exceptionalities learn best. Through the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) and Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) “require that schools use programs, curricula, and practices based on scientifically-based research to the extent practicable” (“Evidence-Based…”, 2011). Educational interventions should be strongly supported by evidence of well-conducted research studies (“Evidence-Based…”, 2011). Some of the criteria includes: using a sound research design, research is based on high quality data analysis, and other researchers are involved to review the results (“Evidence-Based…”, 2011). Research-based practices can be matched to a student’s individual needs and skills in the classroom starting during the IEP process (“Evidence-Based…”, 2011).