Rti Paper

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

Given the varying methods used to determine the presence of a specific learning disability, what conclusions might the team draw from the Response to Intervention description and the

The two options for identifying students with disabilities are RTI model and the IQ-Achievement discrepancy model. The RTI model is a multi-tiered approach to identifying students with disabilities. With this approach the amount of students who are identified as having a learning disability has decreased because of the support students receive at different tiers and it eliminates inadequate instruction as the reason for reading problems. Universal screening and high quality teaching is done for all students. Students who show that they need additional help receive tier 1 services where frequency and intensity increases. Students are monitored and receive research based instruction in the general education classroom. Some students may still struggle and have to receive more intensive and frequent service. Those students will receive supplemental support from an educational professional. Tier 3 services are provided to students who still struggle and need even more intensive service. Students may also qualify for special education services. The IQ-Achievement discrepancy model is used to determine if a disability is present. Standardized tests are used to eliminate low intellectual ablity as a determining cause for reading problems. With this model, a professional assess whether there is a discrepancy between a student’s scores on an iq test and scores obtained from areas

??? The Chaffey Joint Union High School (CJUHSD) uses RTI. Ms. DuVall did explain that all schools in the district are to use the RTI Model. She then disclosed the different interventions based on the Tiers and the RTI model is used for students who need support in the areas of learning and behavior. Ms. DuVall went into detail about the three tiers used. She stated that for Tier I, focuses on teacher intervention, such as students receiving a supportive learning environment, tutoring, and contacting the parent. In addition, Ms. DuVall defined Tier II as targeted intervention (school wide), thus students have access to tutoring programs, student tutors, AVID tutors, and college tutors, and site RTI Committee. Lastly, she explained Tier II as an intensive intervention which provides students with credit and grade recovery classes, intervention classes, counseling referral and groups, SST, 504, and Special Education

As in any research based program there are benefits and challenges. One of the biggest benefits of RTI is it has the ability to transform how we educate all students. When implementing Response to Intervention it helps to treat learning disabilities, identifies students with disabilities, classifies every student’s strengths and targets the specific disability. Perhaps the greatest benefit of an RTI approach is that it eliminates a “wait to fail” situation because students get help promptly within the general education setting. As soon as assessment data indicates a problem area for a student, interventions are put into place to address these concerns. One of the biggest challenges that are occurring is that RTI is still uneven; some districts use it and some do not and because of this it becomes a challenge. There is confusion as to what RTI is and whether schools are required to use. In addition, the evidence based and differentiated instruction is one of the issues in response to education. “Interventions that are research based but not feasible are not likely to be implemented with fidelity, which would undercut the validity of RTI decision making” (Kubiszyn & Borich, 2010,

Many children have physical, or pathological disabilities which cause them to have a below average performance in a usual classroom environment. The government of the United States of America, having recognized this, issued the Education of All Handicapped Children Act in 1975 in order to assist children afflicted with these disabilities (Berger, 2014). This lead to the creation of multiple special education programs for these children. Programs, such as LRE and RTI strategies have allowed many children to receive education they otherwise would not be able to receive.

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.

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

Students can be identified as having a learning disability by using a process based on their response to research-based interventions along with an IQ-achievement discrepancy. These scientific, research-based interventions, which are tiered approaches to school based service delivery, are generally known or called response-to-intervention (RtI) models. RtI models are early intervention approaches that involve children’s responses to evidence-based interventions which are implemented on three different levels of intensity. To achieve prevention goals, RTI schools are structured, arranged, staffed, and lead differently than traditional schools. Along with using a tiered approach, schools that use RtI models also use progress monitoring. They use a vital flow chart of students, within and across tiers of services, to maintain a positive response to intervention. School-wide RtI is characterized by multiple tiers of risk and support. Students within RtI schools are considered to be placed across three, sometimes four, tiers of risk ranging from no risk to very high level of risk. There is no right or wrong amount of tiers schools can use, but the majority of schools use a three tier system. The expectation of Tier 1 is that about 80% of students will be making expected progress in

This was 93.7% of the original group of 111. The follow-up measured intellectual level and academic skill, educational attainment, skilled employment, self-sufficiency, and social adjustment. These were all measured using a young-adult interview. Initially, the researchers compared the students who participated in pre-school experimental group with the control group of pre-school students. The study found that treated women had a higher IQ than non-treated women, though men’s IQ’s did not demonstrate significant change. Students with pre-school treatment earned higher scores on mathematics assessments, particularly in the area of calculation. There was also significant improvement noted in the area of letter-word identification, but not in passage comprehension. The study also found that children who received treatment in preschool earned grade equivalency scores of nearly 2 years higher in mathematics than those who were in the pre-school control

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

Following the United States’ government’s decision giving educations the ability to identify children as LD, most state departments of education adopted the severe discrepancy idea (Frankenberger & Franzaglio, 1991). At one time, the severe discrepancy model was identifying students as LD based on unexpected or unexplained failure to benefit from general classroom instruction (Werts, 2009). This model, focused on a severe discrepancy' between ability and achievement. It was the standard method used to determine how much impact the processing problem had on a student's actual achievement. With the adoption of this discrepancy model, many states defined the discrepancy in their own way (Fuchs et al., 2003). Identifying a student as LD was