# data[].attributes.body
Annotated Bibliography

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Response to intervention has come a long way from its origins in special education law- but not without some bumps

In 2004, the reauthorized Individuals with Disabilities Education Act first introduced into federal policy the concept of "response to intervention."

Now, 12 years later, the educational framework has continued to expand its reach-while also experiencing some growing pains.

The IDEA mentions response to intervention only as a method for identifying children with learning disabilities. But RTI was quickly adopted as a model for overall school improvement, because of its focus on providing assistance quickly to struggling students, before any academic deficits have a chance to become entrenched.

Common features of a response-to-intervention model include: universal screening tools that allow teachers to accurately determine which students need extra help; evidence-based interventions intended to get those students back on track; multiple "tiers" of intensity, so that students who need more help get a higher degree of intervention; and progress monitoring, so that educators have the data on how well a student is responding to the extra help and can make changes if needed.

The same basic framework is used by many schools and districts to support children's behavioral and social-emotional needs and, in those cases, it's commonly called positive behavioral interventions and supports. Response to intervention and PBIS are both examples of "multitiered systems of supports," or MTSS, another term that is gaining widespread usage.

For proponents, multitiered models are far more than the sum of their parts. They say that addressing educational deficits in the general education classroom, without waiting for an official label, has helped teachers and administrators understand that they are collectively responsible for the entire student body, struggling learners and all.

And, when operating well, the method provides a road map for educators, rather than leaving teachers grasping at straws, supporters say.

"Conceptually, it is simple. If you're doing something that is not working, try something else," said Rebecca Zumeta Edmonds, the deputy director of the federally funded National Center on Intensive Intervention, which helps schools create programs for students with severe and persistent learning or behavioral needs.

But, just as with eating well and exercising for health, sometimes people fall short of doing what they know is best. That's where RTI comes in, to provide a framework to follow, she said.

RTI "provides a level of structure and accountability to make sure these things happen, in a real team-based way," Zumeta Edmonds said. "Without some commitment to doing that, schools are not structured to provide those opportunities."

But the promise of multitiered systems of supports like RTI has come up against some hard realities.

A 2015 federal study of RTI methods used for reading instruction shows that schools are struggling to implement RTI with precision. For example, schools in the study that claimed to be fully implementing RTI didn't distinguish well between core instruction and intervention. Many were giving interventions to students regardless of how well the child could read, diluting any possible benefits.

'Inherent Complexity'

Additionally, the "no labels" approach to helping students with academic or behavior difficulties has proved to be an awkward fit with special education law, which, despite the mention of RTI, is still built around identifying students with disabilities.

"It would be unfair of anyone to come down on the schools in how they're implementing RTI because of the inherent complexity of the reform," said Douglas Fuchs, a professor of special education at Vanderbilt University, who is in favor of the process but said he has misgivings about its rapid spread, often in the absence of adequate supports. A 2011 survey of school district leaders found that 94 percent reported being in some stage of RTI implementation.

"I know many school folks who have worked extremely hard to try to make this thing work. It is not working in a lot of places, not because it's not being taken seriously, but because it is inherently complex," Fuchs said. "It is a machine with many moving parts, and to get all of those parts moving in synchrony is a very tall order."

One example of that complexity can be seen in how schools conceptualize the function of a multitiered system of supports like RTI.

When response to intervention first got widespread attention, it was commonly conceptualized as a simple triangle. The base of the triangle was meant to represent all students, who are supposed to be getting good evidence-based instruction. That's often referred to as "Tier 1."

Moving up the triangle to the top was intended to show that fewer children should need more intensive instruction, generally referred to as "Tier 2." The very top of the triangle, or "Tier 3," was meant to represent children getting the most intensive services, or those who would need further evaluation for special education.

For many districts, that triangle has been discarded as too simplistic. They've devised their own conceptual renderings of the process.

One of those districts is the 9,100-student Iron County district in Cedar City, Utah. The district's multitiered-system-of-supports diagram incorporates students with behavioral as well as academic challenges, gifted students, and English-language learners. The foundation is built on a complex interplay among problem-solving teams, "evidence-based instructional strategies," and "data-driven decisionmaking," among other elements.

Shannon Dulaney, the district superintendent, recognized that a multitiered model couldn't just be layered on top of what the district was already doing for students. When she became superintendent four years ago, she worked with the school board to create a once-a-week late start for middle and high schools, to set aside planning time for teachers and administrators.

That late start is in addition to an early-release day for elementary students. Also, principals at all school levels have been given power to adjust school schedules to create intervention time for students.

"Carving out time during the regular school day for every school team to meet has been a great positive, and it shows our teachers that we are committed to this process," Dulaney said. That and the intervention time "are the things that have moved us along the furthest."

Starting From the Core

In other areas, coaches who support districts that are putting multitiered systems in place are encouraging them to take a close look at their core instruction, rather than jumping to interventions.

Tigard-Tualatin, a district of 12,500 students in suburban Portland, Ore., once hosted dozens of education teams who wanted to see RTI in action. The state had contracted with the district to serve as a model for other school systems, and the district hosts Oregon Response to Instruction and Intervention, a 10-year-old state-funded technical assistance center.

David Putnam Jr., the director of Oregon Response to Instruction and Intervention, said the visits dropped off as people became more aware of what response to intervention is. And when state coaches work with districts, Putnam said they focus on shoring up a system's Tier 1 instruction, which is provided to all students.

"If you don't slow things down and force people to look at it that way, Tier 1 gets left behind," Putnam said. The focus on providing strong instruction for all students "involves changing your general education teachers' culture and perspective. If you don't get that culture change, you can really be spinning your wheels."

But the move by many districts to position response to intervention as a schoolwide improvement method has resulted in shifting to the back burner its use as a method of special education identification. RTI shows up in special education law because it was believed to be a more useful method for identifying children with specific learning disabilities. The theory was that children whose educational delays were only the result of poor instruction would be helped earlier so that they wouldn't need special education later on. The smaller group of children who didn't respond to interventions would be evaluated for disabilities.

But in 2011, the U.S. Department of Education sent a "Dear Colleague" letter to educators saying that RTI could not be used to delay or deny special education identification. And four years later, researchers who surveyed 31 state directors of special education found that states vary dramatically in how they handle special education identification within multitiered systems.

In many cases, the study found, states have no regulations or recommendations to districts on how long a student can stay on a tiered system before being evaluated further. Those decisions are left to the district, and they're not reported to the state. "In the states and the districts, they will say it's important to reduce the number of [special education] referrals. But what we're finding is that we don't know if it's working" because no one is systematically collecting the numbers, said Tina Hudson, an assistant professor of special education at East Tennessee State University and the study's lead author.

With all that response to intervention is asked to do, does it still remain a powerful model for schools to follow?

Yes, said W. David Tilly, a deputy director at the Iowa education department. Tilly was, and remains, one of the biggest supporters of response to intervention, going back to his days as an administrator at Heartland Area Education Agency, which supports 54 Iowa districts.

Studies "point out that the effectiveness of any evidence-based practice varies in relation to the fidelity in which it's implemented," Tilly said. "A takeaway from all of that [is that] when it's implemented well and with fidelity, we have really good data that this works well with lots of kids."

The challenge for the future, Tilly said, is to make sure that multitiered models work well with all the other reform efforts that schools must juggle.

Jose Castillo, who was trained as a school psychologist and is now an official with the Florida Problem Solving/Response to Intervention Project, says that response-to-intervention supporters need to do a better job at helping schools balance all those initiatives. His dream would be that the thinking behind response to intervention-using data to make decisions, bolstering general education while targeting interventions to students in need-would eventually become second nature for schools.

"You would ultimately never hear the term 'RTI' or 'MTSS' ever again, because it would just be a way of thinking. It would just be a way of helping people get everything they can out of their students," he said.

Published in Print: December 14, 2016, as RTI's Rapid (R)Evolution

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Back to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
response to intervention 2.0: next generation series

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2004, the reauthorized Individuals with Disabilities Education Act first introduced into federal policy the concept of "response to intervention." Now, 12 years later, the educational framework has continued to expand its reach-while also experiencing some growing pains. The IDEA mentions response to intervention only as a method for identifying children with learning disabilities.

# data[].attributes.body
This source explains why one school was more successful in intervention implementation and the factors behind it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERIC - Why a Data-Based Decision-Making Intervention Works in Some Schools and Not in Others, Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 2017-Feb

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The use of data for adaptive, tailor-made education can be beneficial for students with learning difficulties. While evaluating the effects of a data-based decision-making (DBDM) intervention on student outcomes, considerable variation between intervention effects, ranging from high-intervention effects to small or even negative intervention effects, across schools was found.

# data[].attributes.body
Is this a more effective method of intervention for today's learners?

http://www.physiology.org/doi/10.1152/advan.00149.2016

# data[].attributes.body
Even with a heavy focus on IRIPs in place for Kindergarten through third grade, fourth graders still require interventions. These IRIPs may be carried over from their third grade experience, depending on the progress they have or have not made. This resource focuses on the importance of vocabulary as the first step for keeping fourth graders at level.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Educational Research Newsletter and Webinars

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Vocabulary instruction and comprehension take the back seat to phonics and fluency in early reading interventions. But, as children move into the "reading to learn" stage, typically between the 3rd and 4th grades, they need an average or above-average vocabulary for reading comprehension, which many do not develop because of the emphasis on phonics and fluency. In a recent issue of Learning Disabilities Practice, a group of Virginia researchers says this vocabulary shortfall may be the reason for the notorious 4th-grade slump may be.

"Vocabulary instruction rarely occurs in the early grades even though many children, especially those from impoverished backgrounds, enter their formal schooling with significant deficits in their vocabulary repertoires," they write.

Conversation starts vocabulary building

Conversation is the primary way young children's acquire vocabulary. Over time, however, conversations become less effective for developing new vocabulary, as mostly common words are used in conversation.

In the article, the researchers illustrate techniques for vocabulary instruction with very young children, some of which were used in their recent research study with 224 1st graders. The study found that at-risk students who received both Tier 1 general class instruction and Tier 2 small-group instruction in vocabulary outperformed those at-risk students who received only Tier 1.

To bridge the gap between research and practice, the researchers said they wanted to share their specific techniques for working with young children on increasing their vocabularies.

Many of the activities researchers used in their study centered on shared storybook reading. Shared storybook reading exposes children to rich language and vocabulary that is more sophisticated than everyday conversation.

But the researchers went beyond shared storybook reading by creating activities that allowed children to interact with the words because children learn vocabulary incrementally, progressing through various levels of knowledge, they write.

Below are descriptions of some of recommended activities :

Shared storybook reading activities
Example/non-example activity with pictures
The teacher shows students a series of pictures and asks them to give a "thumbs up" or a "thumbs down" depending on whether the picture is a correct or incorrect representation of a target word. After each picture, the teacher offers reinforcement and describes why the actions in the picture are a good or poor example of the word's meaning.
Example/nonexample activity with manipulative materials
A similar activity can be carried out using puppets or props instead of pictures. The teacher uses the puppet to demonstrate both examples and nonexamples of the vocabulary terms and asks students to give a "thumbs up" or "thumbs down."

For example, if the target word is "shore", the teacher can bring the puppet closer and further from the prop being used for shore and ask students if they think the puppet is near the shore or not by the shore. Students can then take turns using the puppets to act out scenes of word meanings.

Making connections with words

By using pictures of target words, the teacher can relate the object or activity to a personal memory. Students can then take turns using the target word to describe their own experiences related to the picture.

For example, if the target is "scamper", the teacher could hold up a picture that illustrates the word and then say to the students: "This picture reminds me of a puppy in my neighborhood; he scampers in his yard all day." Students are then asked to provide their own personal examples

Developing sentences with target words is another way young students can use new vocabulary in an everyday context. The teacher reviews the definition of the word and also models it with puppets and props. While modeling, the teacher creates a sentence using the target word. Students then take turns choosing a puppet and developing their own sentences.

Assessment of the depth of vocabulary

Here are activities for assessing word knowledge at the 3 basic levels:

expressive level

contextual level

receptive level

Expressive level
Show students a set of 4 pictures, one of which illustrates a target word while the other 3 act as distracters. Ask students to point to the picture that illustrates a target word such as "blustery."

Contextual level
Ask students to respond to contextualized questions about target words. For example, if the target word is "slumbering", ask, "Where is a place that you would be slumbering?"

Receptive level
Have students define each target word and write a sentence with the word.

Interacting with words

"The intent of this article is to provide the means for teachers to translate specific vocabulary research into useful practice for their classrooms in a tiered instructional format," the researchers write.

"It is our hope that these simple, yet powerful methods for encouraging students to use and interact with new words in multiple ways will provide teachers with the impetus to go beyond traditional methods of vocabulary instruction to help children learn words at a deeper level."
"Implementing Intensive Vocabulary Instruction for Students At Risk for Reading Disability," by Paige Pullen et al., Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 2011, Volume 26, Number 3, pp. 145-157.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Vocabulary building activities can head off 4th-grade slump

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Vocabulary instruction and comprehension take the back seat to phonics and fluency in early reading interventions. But, as children move into the "reading to learn" stage, typically between the 3rd and 4th grades, they need an average or above-average vocabulary for reading comprehension, which many do not develop because of the emphasis on phonics and fluency.

# data[].attributes.body
This resource explains the importance of implementing RTI as soon as possible for all learners, rather than wait until students fall behind. It discusses RTI being used incorrectly in other ways, too. It explains that RTI is not a means for qualifying students to special education. The author also mentions that some schools are just going through the process to meet mandates. They go on to explain the correct ways to implement RTI.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Response to Intervention flourishes when educators implement the right practices for the right reasons.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Effective Ways to Implement Intervention

# data[].attributes.subject
The Effective Ways to Implement Intervention

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Commentary: Implementing Interventions: Building a Shared Understanding of Why - Grøver - 2016 - New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development - Wiley Online Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This commentary discusses how the articles that comprise this special issue conceptualize what is required for reading interventions to change instruction. Three challenges to successful implementation are addressed: identifying institutional barriers to change, identifying intervention components that are not commonly part of the teachers' repertoires and that will require attention and support, and building researcher-practitioner partnerships and a shared understanding of why an intervention would improve reading instruction.

# data[].attributes.body
This study focuses on schools correctly using RTI while also following schools that do not have a proper system in place.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Response to Intervention (RTI) is a multiple tiered system of instructional interventions that may also serve to identify children with Specific Learning Disabilities (particularly in reading and spelling)....

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the short-term and long-term benefits of RTI?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the short-term and long-term benefits of RTI?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERIC - A Meta-Analysis of the Long-Term Effects of Phonemic Awareness, Phonics, Fluency, and Reading Comprehension Interventions, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 2016

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Much is known about short-term--but very little about the long-term--effects of reading interventions. To rectify this, a detailed analysis of follow-up effects as a function of intervention, sample, and methodological variables was conducted. A total of 71 intervention-control groups were selected (N = 8,161 at posttest) from studies reporting posttest and follow-up data (M = 11.17 months) for previously established reading interventions.

# data[].attributes.body
This resource directly relates to my school's current practice of RTI. They explain the most effective ways to implement RTI for student success.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERIC - A Blueprint for Effectively Using RTI Intervention Block Time, Intervention in School and Clinic, 2014-Sep

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many schools have adopted schoolwide intervention blocks as a component of response-to-intervention (RTI) implementation to ensure that students who need intervention are receiving it. However, virtually no peer-reviewed guidance exists for helping teachers manage this time effectively. This article presents a blueprint for organizing intervention block time so that all students benefit.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Response to Intervention (RTI) is a multi-tier approach to the early identification and support of students with learning and behavior needs. The RTI process begins with high-quality instruction and universal screening of all children in the general education classroom. Struggling learners are provided with interventions at increasing levels of intensity to accelerate their rate of learning. These services may be provided by a variety of personnel, including general education teachers, special educators, and specialists. Progress is closely monitored to assess both the learning rate and level of performance of individual students. Educational decisions about the intensity and duration of interventions are based on individual student response to instruction. RTI is designed for use when making decisions in both general education and special education, creating a well-integrated system of instruction and intervention guided by child outcome data.

For RTI implementation to work well, the following essential components must be implemented with fidelity and in a rigorous manner:

High-quality, scientifically based classroom instruction. All students receive high-quality, research-based instruction in the general education classroom.

Ongoing student assessment. Universal screening and progress monitoring provide information about a student's learning rate and level of achievement, both individually and in comparison with the peer group. These data are then used when determining which students need closer monitoring or intervention. Throughout the RTI process, student progress is monitored frequently to examine student achievement and gauge the effectiveness of the curriculum. Decisions made regarding students' instructional needs are based on multiple data points taken in context over time.

Tiered instruction. A multi-tier approach is used to efficiently differentiate instruction for all students. The model incorporates increasing intensities of instruction offering specific, research-based interventions matched to student needs.

Parent involvement. Schools implementing RTI provide parents information about their child's progress, the instruction and interventions used, the staff who are delivering the instruction, and the academic or behavioral goals for their child.

Each of these essential components is addressed in the "Include Essential Components" section of this Web site.

Though there is no single, thoroughly researched and widely practiced "model" of the RTI process, it is generally defined as a three-tier (or three-step) model of school supports that uses research-based academic and/or behavioral interventions. The Three-Tier Model is described below.

Tier 1: High-Quality Classroom Instruction, Screening, and Group Interventions

Within Tier 1, all students receive high-quality, scientifically based instruction provided by qualified personnel to ensure that their difficulties are not due to inadequate instruction. All students are screened on a periodic basis to establish an academic and behavioral baseline and to identify struggling learners who need additional support. Students identified as being "at risk" through universal screenings and/or results on state- or districtwide tests receive supplemental instruction during the school day in the regular classroom. The length of time for this step can vary, but it generally should not exceed 8 weeks. During that time, student progress is closely monitored using a validated screening system such as curriculum-based measurement. At the end of this period, students showing significant progress are generally returned to the regular classroom program. Students not showing adequate progress are moved to Tier 2.

The online drug ordering system provides for checking the availability of a prescription, this is done so that teenagers cannot buy cheap generic Viagra and abuse the dosage of the drug.

Tier 2: Targeted Interventions

Students not making adequate progress in the regular classroom in Tier 1 are provided with increasingly intensive instruction matched to their needs on the basis of levels of performance and rates of progress. Intensity varies across group size, frequency and duration of intervention, and level of training of the professionals providing instruction or intervention. These services and interventions are provided in small-group settings in addition to instruction in the general curriculum. In the early grades (kindergarten through 3rd grade), interventions are usually in the areas of reading and math. A longer period of time may be required for this tier, but it should generally not exceed a grading period. Students who continue to show too little progress at this level of intervention are then considered for more intensive interventions as part of Tier 3.

Tier 3: Intensive Interventions and Comprehensive Evaluation

At this level, students receive individualized, intensive interventions that target the students' skill deficits. Students who do not achieve the desired level of progress in response to these targeted interventions are then referred for a comprehensive evaluation and considered for eligibility for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004). The data collected during Tiers 1, 2, and 3 are included and used to make the eligibility decision.

It should be noted that at any point in an RTI process, IDEA 2004 allows parents to request a formal evaluation to determine eligibility for special education. An RTI process cannot be used to deny or delay a formal evaluation for special education.

In addition to variations in the tiers used to deliver RTI services, schools use different approaches in implementation, such as problem-solving, functional assessment, standard protocol, and hybrid approaches. Although there are many formats for how a school might implement RTI to best serve the needs of its students, in every case RTI can be a school-wide framework for efficiently allocating resources to improve student outcomes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn more about how Response to Intervention (RTI) helps students succeed.

# data[].attributes.body
A new third grade Michigan reading bill was signed into law by Governor Rick Snyder in October of 2017. This bill will require third grade students to be retained if they are below-level in reading and if they do not pass the state test, only once. This is a significant change that affects educators in all grade levels. This bill was put into place as a result of poor performance on state tests. This site explains how elementary support teachers and other support staff will work with these students five times per week in reading skills each student is lacking.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A long-debated third grade reading bill became law when Gov. Rick Snyder signed it in October, but some provisions won't kick in quickly, including the controversial retention mandate.

When retention of third graders does become a requirement, several exemptions will allow certain below-grade level readers to avoid repeating the third grade.

Even so, given that only half of Michigan third-grade students performed at the proficient or advanced levels on last spring's M-STEP test, many worry about large numbers of children being held back from advancing to fourth grade-especially in high-poverty and urban areas where proficiency rates were lower than elsewhere.

Another worry educators have expressed-that children might be retained in third grade multiple times until they are able to pass the state test-were addressed in the law's final form. Students would not repeat third grade more than once.

After lawmakers last spring passed competing bills related to third-grade reading, a measure emerged from closed-door negotiations in conference committee in September to pass the House and Senate the next day.

One "r" word remained in the final measure that many educational experts didn't want to mix with the traditional three "R's"-retention. The new rules do require students who test a year or more behind grade level on the state's annual reading test to repeat third grade.

But there are several exemptions to the retention requirement, along with one major loophole, all explained in the accompanying table.

Another important fact to keep in mind: the 2019-20 school year will be the first year that third graders must be retained based on sub-par reading scores. The provisions of the new law that start next school year involve providing extra services to struggling kindergarteners through third graders.

Beginning next year, K-3 students must be tested three times a year, and students with reading deficiencies must be given an Individual Reading Plan (IRP). Districts with struggling readers also will be required to provide teachers with additional professional development during school time and literacy coaches who will train, model, and offer feedback on best practices in teaching reading.

Services for children also will include increased small group and one-on-one intervention time and "read at home plans" to promote parental involvement. Districts will be encouraged to provide summer reading camps using teachers rated as highly effective.

When the third grade reading bill was first introduced three years ago, it would have mandated retention of all students who did not test at third-grade proficiency level in reading with no exceptions, no remediation, and no teacher training included. Intensive lobbying by MEA and other interested groups resulted in significant improvements-although even with those improvements, MEA opposed the final bill.

MEA will continue to lobby for changes in provisions of this new law that are not compatible with best practices in teaching early elementary students. The new legislative session beginning in January will provide time to change the first implemented provisions of the law (2017-18) and there will be more than two years to modify the retention provisions before they begin.

Although MEA opposed the bill in its final form, our lobbyists will continue to work for full funding of schools and mandated programs. Early next year, training sessions will be offered to MEA members wanting a more detailed explanation of the new law's mandates.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Learn What's in the New Third Grade Reading Law

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A long-debated third grade reading bill became law when Gov. Rick Snyder signed it in October, but some provisions won't kick in quickly, including the controversial retention mandate. When retention of third graders does become a requirement, several exemptions will allow certain below-grade level readers to avoid repeating the third grade.