The focus of this chapter will be to present a basic overview of response to intervention. After reading this chapter, you should have abasic understanding of the following:

■ Overview of response to intervention (RTI)

■ Purpose of RTI

■ Importance of RTI

■ History of RTI

■ Core principles of RTI

■ Events that led to changes in learning disability identification in IDEA 2004

■ Rationale for replacing the discrepancy model with RTI

■ Major issues related to using the concept of ability–achievement discrepancy

■ The role RTI should play in identifying children with specific learning disabilities

■ Can RTI be used as the sole determinant for SLD classification?

■ In the big picture, how does RTI fit into the LD determination process?

■ Multitiered service delivery model

■ Continuum of intervention support for at-risk students

■ Focus of Tier I

■ Focus of Tier II

■ Focus of Tier III

■ Importance of parent involvement for successful RTI programs

■ Fidelity

■ The RTI process for teachers

■ What teachers need in terms of professional development and RTI

6.1 OVERVIEW OF RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

The response to intervention (RTI) process is a multitiered approach to providing services and interventions to struggling learners atincreasing levels of intensity. RTI can be used for making decisions about general, compensatory, and special education, creating a well-integrated and seamless system of instruction and intervention guided by child outcome data. RTI is an initiative that takes place in thegeneral education environment. RTI calls for early identification of learning and behavioral needs, close collaboration among teachers andspecial education personnel and parents, and a systemic commitment to locating and employing the necessary resources to ensure thatstudents make progress in the general education curriculum.

The National Research Center on Learning Disabilities (NRCLD, 2007) defines RTI as

an assessment and intervention process for systematically monitoring student progress and making decisions about the need forinstructional modifications or increasingly intensified services using progress monitoring data.

RTI is an integrated approach to service delivery that encompasses general, remedial, and special education through a multitiered servicedelivery model. It utilizes a problem-solving framework to identify and address academic and behavioral difficulties for all students usingscientific, research-based instruction. Essentially, RTI is the practice of (a) providing high-quality instruction/intervention matched to allstudents’ needs and (b) using learning rate over time and level of performance to (c) make important educational decisions to guideinstruction (National Association of State Directors of Special Education, 2005). RTI practices are proactive, incorporating both preventionand intervention, and are effective at all levels from early childhood through high school.

6.2 PURPOSE OF RTI

RTI is intended to reduce the incidence of “instructional casualties” by ensuring that students are provided high-quality instruction withfidelity. By using RTI, districts can provide interventions to students as soon as a need arises. This is very different, for example, from themethods associated with the aptitude achievement discrepancy models traditionally used for specific learning disability (SLD, alsoreferred to as LD) identification, which have been criticized as a “wait to fail” approach.

IDEA 2004 allows the use of a student’s “response to scientific, research-based intervention” (20 U.S.C. 1414 (B)(6)(A)) as part of anevaluation. Response to intervention (RTI) functions as an alternative for learning disability (LD) evaluations within the general evaluationrequirements of IDEA 2004. The statute continues to include requirements that apply to all disability categories, such as the use ofvalidated, nonbiased methods, and evaluation in all suspected areas of difficulty. IDEA 2004 adds a new eligibility concept that prohibitschildren from being found eligible for special education if they have not received instruction in reading that includes the five essentialcomponents of reading instruction identified by the Reading First Program. These requirements are those recognized by the NationalReading Panel: phonemic awareness, phonics, reading fluency (including oral reading skills), vocabulary development, and readingcomprehension strategies. RTI is included under this general umbrella. By using RTI, it is possible to identify students early, reduce referralbias, and test various theories for why a child is failing. It was included in the law specifically to offer an alternative to discrepancy models.

A key element of an RTI approach is the provision of early intervening services when students first experience academic difficulties, withthe goal of improving the achievement of all students, including those who may have LD. In addition to the preventive and remedial servicesthis approach may provide to at-risk students, it shows promise for contributing data useful for identifying LD. Thus, a student exhibiting(1) significantly low achievement and (2) insufficient RTI may be regarded as being at risk for LD and, in turn, as possibly in need of specialeducation and related services. The assumption behind this paradigm, which has been referred to as a dual discrepancy (Fuchs, Fuchs, &Speece, 2002), is that when provided with quality instruction and remedial services, a student without disabilities will make satisfactoryprogress. The concept behind RTI has always been the focus of the teaching/learning process and a basic component of accountability ingeneral education. In other words, does instruction (i.e., strategies, methods, interventions, or curriculum) lead to increased learning andappropriate progress? In the past few years, RTI has taken on a more specific connotation, especially in the Individuals with DisabilitiesEducation Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA, 2004), as an approach to remedial intervention that also generates data to inform instructionand identify students who may require special education and related services. Today, many educators, researchers, and other professionalsare exploring the usefulness of an RTI approach as an alternative that can provide (1) data for more effective and earlier identification ofstudents with LD and (2) a systematic way to ensure that students experiencing educational difficulties receive more timely and effectivesupport (Gresham, 2002; Learning Disabilities Roundtable, 2002, 2005; National Research Council, 2002; President’s Commission onExcellence in Special Education, 2002).

6.3 IMPORTANCE OF RTI

According to current early reading research, all except a very few children can become competent readers by the end of the third grade.RTI is a process that provides immediate intervention to struggling students at the first indication of failure to learn. Through systematicscreening of all students in the early grades, classroom teachers identify those who are not mastering critical reading skills and providedifferentiated intervention to small groups of students. Continuous progress monitoring of students’ responses to those interventionsallows teachers to identify students in need of additional intervention and to adjust instruction accordingly.

Response to intervention is about building better readers in the early grades and consists of multitiered reading instruction in the generaleducation classroom. In an RTI model, all students receive high-quality reading instruction and struggling readers receive additional andincreasingly more intense intervention. Early intervention and prevention of reading difficulties are fundamental to the process. However, ifa student’s learning history and classroom performance warrant, a multidisciplinary team may determine that the student has a disabilityand needs special education services to ensure continued and appropriate academic progress.

Three major developments concerning the education of students with learning problems have coalesced to establish RTI as a promisingapproach. First, longstanding concerns about the inadequacies of the ability–achievement discrepancy criterion—which was a componentof the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 for identifying LD—have accentuated the need to develop alternative mechanismsfor the identification of LD. At the LD Summit of August 2001, sponsored by the Office of Special Education Programs, RTI was thealternative proposed by several researchers (e.g., Gresham, 2002; Marston, 2001).

Second, special education has been used to serve struggling learners who do not have LD or other disabilities. An RTI approach has beensuggested as a way to reduce referrals to special education by providing well-designed instruction and intensified interventions in generaleducation, thereby distinguishing between students who perform poorly in school due to factors such as inadequate prior instruction fromstudents with LD who need more intensive and specialized instruction.

A third major reason for the increased interest in an RTI approach has been the abundance of recent research on reading difficulties, inparticular, the national network of research studies coordinated by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).A number of NICHD research studies have demonstrated that well-designed instructional programs or approaches result in significantimprovements for the majority of students with early reading.

History of RTI

RTI is not a new approach. It is recognizable under other names such as dynamic assessment, diagnostic teaching, and precision teaching.Those terms, however, have been applied to approaches used to maximize student progress through sensitive measurement of the effectsof instruction. RTI applies similar methods to draw conclusions and make LD classification decisions about students. The underlyingassumption is that using RTI will identify children whose intrinsic difficulties make them the most difficult to teach. Engaging a student in adynamic process like RTI provides an opportunity to assess various hypotheses about the causes of a child’s difficulties, such as motivationor constitutional factors like attention.

CORE PRINCIPLES OF RTI

In general, RTI is comprised of seven core principles that represent recommended RTI practices (Mellard, 2003). These principles representsystems that must be in place to ensure effective implementation of RTI systems and establish a framework to guide and define the practice.

1. Use all available resources to teach all students. RTI practices are built on the belief that all students can learn. RTI requires thateducators shift their focus from the student to the intervention. The initial evaluation no longer focuses on “what is wrong with thestudent”; instead, there is a shift to an examination of the curricular, instructional, and environmental variables that affect inadequatelearning progress. Once the correct set of intervention variables has been identified, schools must then provide the means and systemsfor delivering resources so that effective teaching and learning can occur. In doing so, schools must provide resources in a manner thatis directly proportional to students’ needs. This will require districts and schools to reconsider current resource allocation systems sothat financial and other support structures for RTI practices can be established and sustained.

2. Use scientific, research-based interventions/instruction. The critical element of RTI systems is the delivery of scientific research-based interventions with fidelity in general, remedial, and special education. This means that the curriculum and instructionalapproaches must have a high probability of success for the majority of students. By using research-based practices, schools efficientlyuse time and resources and protect students from ineffective instructional and evaluative practices. Because instructional practices varyin efficacy, ensuring that the practices and curriculum have demonstrated validity is an important consideration in the selection ofinterventions. In the absence of definitive research, schools should implement promising practices, monitor their effectiveness, andmodify implementation based on the results.

3. Monitor classroom performance. General education teachers play a vital role in designing and providing high-quality instruction.Furthermore, they are in the best position to assess students’ performance and progress against grade-level standards in the generaleducation curriculum. This principle emphasizes the importance of general education teachers in monitoring student progress ratherthan waiting to determine how students are learning in relation to their same-aged peers based on results of statewide or districtwideassessments.

4. Conduct universal screening/benchmarking. By conducting universal screening and giving benchmark tests in all core academicsubjects and behavior, school staff gain data on all students that indicate individual performance and progress compared to the peergroup’s performance and progress. These data form the basis for an initial examination of individual and group patterns on specificacademic skills (e.g., identifying letters of the alphabet or reading a list of high-frequency words) as well as behavior skills (e.g.,attendance, cooperation, tardiness, truancy, suspensions, and/or disciplinary actions). Universal screening is the least intensive level ofassessment completed within an RTI system and helps educators and parents identify students early who might be at risk . Sincescreening data may not be as reliable as other assessments, it is important to use multiple sources of evidence in reaching inferencesregarding students at risk.

5. Use a multitier model of service delivery. A RTI approach incorporates a tiered or multitiered service delivery model in which eachtier represents an increasingly intense level of services associated with increasing levels of learner needs. The system described in thischapter reflects a three-tiered design. All multitiered systems, regardless of the number of levels chosen, should yield the same practicaleffects and outcomes.

Tier I represents the largest group of students, approximately 80 to 90 percent, who are performing adequately within the corecurriculum. Tier II comprises a smaller group of students, typically 5 to 10 percent of the student population. These students will needstrategic interventions to raise their achievement to proficiency or above based on a lack of response to interventions at Tier I. Tier IIIcontains the fewest students, usually 1 to 5 percent. These students will need intensive interventions if their learning is to beappropriately supported (Tilly, 2003).

In an RTI system, all students receive instruction in the core curriculum supported by strategic and intensive interventions whenneeded. Therefore, all students, including those with disabilities, are found in Tiers I, II, or III. Important features, such as universalscreening, progress monitoring, fidelity of implementation, and problem solving, occur within each tier. The basic tiered model reflectsour knowledge that students in school have varying instructional needs. Thus, the nature of the academic or behavioral interventionchanges at each tier, becoming more rigorous as the student moves through the tiers.

6. Make data-based decisions. Decisions within an RTI system are made by teams using problem solving and/or standard treatmentprotocol techniques. The purpose of these teams is to find the best instructional approach for a student with an academic or behavioralproblem. Problem solving and standard treatment protocol decision making provide a structure for using data to monitor studentlearning so that good decisions can be made at each tier with a high probability of success. When using the problem-solving methodteams answer four interrelated questions: (1) Is there a problem and what is it? (2) Why is it happening? (3) What are we going to doabout it? (4) Did our interventions work (NASDSE, 2005)? Problem-solving and standard treatment protocol techniques ensure thatdecisions about a student’s needs are driven by the student’s response to high-quality interventions.

7. Monitor progress frequently. To determine if the intervention is working for a student, the decision-making team must establish andimplement progress monitoring. Progress monitoring is the use of assessments that can be collected frequently and are sensitive tosmall changes in student behavior. Data collected through progress monitoring will inform the decision-making team whether changesin the instruction or goals are needed. Informed decisions about students’ needs require frequent data collection to provide reliablemeasures of progress. Various curriculum-based measurements (CBM) are useful tools for monitoring students’ progress.

6.4 RTI AND THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

The role of RTI in the assessment process is one that needs to be determined so that special educators can determine how RTI effectsmaking referrals for special education services. The Virginia Department of Education’s Office of Student Services (2009) answeredquestions concerning the role of RTI in the eligibility process for special education.

How is RTI used in the eligibility process?

RTI can be useful in the eligibility process in the following ways:

• By helping the eligibility group decide if more evaluation data is needed

• By documenting that the student was provided appropriate high-quality research-based instruction in general education settings, andthat the instruction was delivered by qualified personnel

• By providing data to the eligibility group as one part of the evaluation process used to determine if the student has a disability thatrequires special education and related services.

RTI practices that help identify unexpected lower learning levels and lower learning rates practices implemented with fidelity will helpschool teams monitor student progress to decide when there is a need for additional information about a child that can only be gatheredthrough comprehensive individual assessment obtained through the special education evaluation process.

WHEN USING RTI AS A COMPONENT OF ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION, DOES A PATTERN OF STRENGTHSAND WEAKNESSES HAVE TO BE ESTABLISHED?

Yes. Whether RTI is used, or any other permissible method of identifying a specific learning disability or other disability, a pattern ofstrengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both, must be established relative to age, grade level standards or intellectualdevelopment. This evidence/documentation must be considered as part of the evaluation as described in 34 CFR § 300.309.

Can eligibility for special education be determined solely by RTI?

No. RTI practices can assist eligibility groups in determining special education eligibility by providing useful information to the evaluationand eligibility process, as well as determining the educational needs of the child. The information obtained through RTI progress monitoringwill provide the eligibility group with documentation that the student’s lack of academic progress is not the result of inappropriateinstruction in reading or mathematics, or the result of limited English proficiency (34 CFR §§ 300.301 through 300.311).

Can a child be found eligible for special education services without using RTI?

Yes, as long as the eligibility team’s decision is compliant with state regulations that outline the individual disability identificationrequirements and procedures. However, as noted in the RTI guidance document, when a student is suspected of having a specific learningdisability, the data collected during the course of RTI is an assessment that is part of the evaluation leading to the eligibility determinationprocess.

Events That Led to Changes in LD Identification in IDEA 2004

Through decades of educational practice, it has become generally accepted that a “severe discrepancy” is in fact a learning disability and/ora proxy for a learning disability and its underlying processing disorders. It is now widely acknowledged that there is not a scientific basisfor the use of a measured IQ achievement discrepancy as either a defining characteristic of or a marker for LD. Though numerousauthorities (Fletcher et al., 2005; Lyon et al., 2001; Stanovich, 2005) have identified problems with discrepancy models, it has persisted asthe most widely used diagnostic concept. In the 1997 IDEA reauthorization process, the concern with discrepancy approaches reached ahead and the U.S. Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) committed to a vigorous program of examining and summarizingevidence around LD identification. That effort resulted in the Learning Disabilities Summit, as well as subsequent roundtable meetingsinvolving representatives of major professional organizations. While preparing for the 2004 IDEA reauthorization, OSEP conducted the2002 Learning Disabilities Roundtable to generate a series of consensus statements about the field of learning disabilities. With respect tothe use of discrepancy formulas, the members stated:

Roundtable participants agree there is no evidence that ability–achievement discrepancy formulas can be applied in a consistent andeducationally meaningful (i.e., reliable and valid) manner. They believe SLD eligibility should not be operationalized using ability–achievement discrepancy formulas.

Rationale for Replacing the Discrepancy Model with RTI

Response to intervention offers the promise of “building better readers” through the provision of differentiated instruction based on datafrom ongoing assessments for all students in the early grades. That is, all students receive scientifically research-based reading instructionand, most importantly, struggling readers receive additional instructional time and research-based reading interventions within thestructure and context of the general education classroom. In essence, RTI replaces the practice of “waiting to fail” with deliberate earlyintervention and prevention.

Major Issues Related to Using the Concept of Ability–Achievement Discrepancy

Issue 1:Discrepancy models fail to differentiate between children who have LD and those who have academic achievement problemsrelated to poor instruction, lack of experience, or other problems. It is generally agreed that the ability–achievement discrepancy modelwas influenced by research conducted by Rutter and Yule (1975; Reschly et al., 2003). This research found two groups of low-achievingreaders, one with discrepancies and one without. This finding formed the basis for the idea that a discrepancy was meaningful for bothclassification and treatment purposes. Later analyses of this research, and attempts to replicate it, have failed to produce support for the“two group” model for either purpose. In fact, it is now accepted that reading occurs in a normal distribution and that students withdyslexia or severe reading problems represent the lower end of that distribution (Fletcher et al., 2002).

Issue 2:Discrepancy models discriminate against students outside of “mainstream” culture and students who are in the upper and lowerranges of IQ. Due to psychometric problems, discrepancy approaches tend to under-identify children at the lower end of the IQ range andover-identify children at the upper end. This problem has been addressed by various formulas that correct for the regression to the meanthat occurs when two correlated measures are used. However, using regression formulas does not address issues such as language andcultural bias in IQ tests, nor does it improve the classification function of a discrepancy model (Steubing et al., 2002).

Issue 3:Discrepancy models do not effectively predict which students will benefit from or respond differentially to instruction. Theresearch around this issue has examined both progress and absolute outcomes for children with and without discrepancy, and has notsupported the notion the two groups will respond differentially to instruction (Stanovich, 2005). Poor readers with discrepancies andpoor readers without discrepancies perform similarly on skills considered to be important to the development of reading skills (Gresham,2002).

Issue 4:The use of discrepancy models requires children to fail for a substantial period of time—usually years—before they are farenough behind to exhibit a discrepancy. To show a discrepancy, two tests need to be administered—an IQ test, such as the WechslerIntelligence Scale for Children, and an achievement test, such as the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement. Because of limitations ofachievement and IQ testing, discrepancies often do not “appear” until late second, third, or even fourth grade. Educators and parents haveexperienced the frustration of knowing a child’s skills are not adequate and not typical of the child’s overall functioning and being told to“wait a year” to rerefer the child. While waiting for a discrepancy to appear, other persistent problems associated with school failuredevelop such as poor self-concept, compromised motivation, vocabulary deficits, and deficits associated with limited access to writtencontent.

The Consideration of RTI in the Process of Determining Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD)

RTI is being strongly considered as part of the SLD identification process because it has the potential to address areas of the SLD definitionand construct that are not adequately assessed with current approaches. If the features of RTI are implemented correctly

• There is some assurance that students are being exposed to high-quality instruction in the general education classroom by stipulatingthat schools use evidence-based instructional practices and routinely monitor the progress of all students.

• There is an emphasis on underachievement through its focus on discrepancy models that examine whether a student is failing torespond to instruction through both low overall achievement and inability to make adequate progress.

• They encourage access to early intervention because, with the regular monitoring of progress, at-risk students are identified early, andan infrastructure for the appropriate delivery of services already is established.

• They are designed to address many students with achievement problems, so the label of learning disability is applied only for thosestudents who fail to respond to multiple levels of intervention efforts.

• They are meant to be applied as multiple measures of child performance rather than to limit determination to a single point in time.

6.5 THE ROLE RTI SHOULD PLAY IN IDENTIFYING CHILDREN WITH SPECIFIC LEARNINGDISABILITIES

When considering adopting an RTI approach for identifying students with specific learning disabilities (SLD), school districts should keep inmind a number of provisions of IDEA 2004. Under IDEA 2004 schools districts may but are no longer required to consider whether astudent has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability. At the same time, IDEA 2004 gives school districts theflexibility to determine that a student has an SLD using RTI data. Proponents point out that identifying SLD through RTI shifts the emphasisof the evaluation process from documenting the student’s disability to the student’s instructional needs. RTI emphasizes this shift of focusthrough documentation of a student’s persistent failure to progress even after receiving intense and sound scientifically research-basedinterventions in the general education curriculum.

IDEA 2004 is silent about the exact criteria school districts may use in establishing SLDs. It is expected that when final federal regulationsare published, specific criteria will be established and states will be provided clarifying guidance regarding these procedures. Until that time,districts implementing RTI are strongly encouraged to use established approaches for using RTI data to identify SLDs. The followingprocedure is recommended:

After appropriate CBM probes have been applied, and after attempts have been made to implement at least two Tier III interventions withfidelity, a student should be considered nonresponsive when the student’s level of academic achievement has (a) been determined to besignificantly lower than that of his or her peers, and (b) the gap between the student’s achievement and that of his or her peers increases(or does not significantly decrease). Absent other information to explain the lack of achievement, students who are nonresponsive at TierIII should be suspected of having a disability.

Once a referral for special education is initiated the school district must determine whether an initial comprehensive evaluation is requiredto determine the presence of a disability. Unless mitigating information exists to explain why the student was nonresponsive at Tier III, aninitial evaluation, for which the school district must obtain written consent from a parent or guardian, will be completed. A comprehensiveevaluation may or may not require additional testing but should include a formal observation of the student by a team member unless arecent observation was completed by a team member prior to the evaluation. If the student’s evaluation team determines that the existingdata developed through the RTI process is sufficient to complete the evaluation report in all suspected areas of disability, additionalinformation does not need to be obtained. If the existing data do not establish the need for special education services, further assessmentmay be needed to rule out the possibility of a qualifying disability, including a disability in a category other than SLD.

The Use of RTI in the SLD Classification

Although RTI addresses some significant shortcomings in current approaches to SLD identification and other concerns about earlyidentification of students at risk for reading problems, RTI should be considered as merely one important element within the larger contextof the SLD determination process. Implementing RTI allows schools to have more confidence that they are providing appropriate learningexperiences to all students while identifying and targeting early those students who may be at risk for reading or math problems but whodo not necessarily have a learning disability. Although IDEA 2004 provides flexibility to local education agencies (LEAs) in determining SLDidentification procedures, the following recommendations by the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (2005) should helpguide the development of these procedures:

Decisions regarding eligibility for special education services must draw from information collected from a comprehensive individualevaluation using multiple methods including clinical judgment and other sources of relevant information. Students must be evaluated onan individual basis and assessed for intra-individual differences in the seven domains that comprise the definition of SLD in the law—listening, thinking, speaking, reading, writing, spelling, and mathematical calculation. Eligibility decisions must be made through aninterdisciplinary team, must be student-centered and informed by appropriate data, and must be based on student needs and strengths.

As schools begin to execute a process of decision making more clinical than statistical in nature, ensuring through regulations that this teamof qualified professionals represents all competencies necessary for accurate review of comprehensive assessment data will be critical.

One of the advantages of RTI is the timely identification of children who struggle with learning. RTI is not intended as a stand-aloneapproach to determining specific learning disabilities, but it can be a key component of a comprehensive approach to disabilitydetermination. In an RTI model, if a student does not respond to robust high-quality instruction and intervention that is progress monitoredover time, he or she may indeed be determined to have a learning disability. The benefit of RTI for these at-risk students is the wealth ofmeaningful instructional data provided for use in creating well-targeted individualized instructional programs and evidence-basedinstructional interventions. In addition RTI sets in place a student progress monitoring process that facilitates communication and promotesongoing meaningful dialogue between home and school.

1. Indication of the student’s skill level relative to peers or a criterion benchmark

2. Success or lack of success of particular interventions

3. Sense of the intensity of instructional supports that will be necessary for the student to achieve

Incorporating this information into SLD determination procedures has the potential to make important contributions to identifyingstudents with SLDs in schools. In addition to an RTI process that helps ensure appropriate learning experiences and early intervention,identification of SLD should include a student-centered, comprehensive evaluation that ensures students who have a learning disability areaccurately identified.

Although IDEA 2004 provides flexibility to LEAs in determining SLD identification procedures, the following recommendations by theNJCLD should help guide the development of these procedures (2005):

• Decisions regarding eligibility for special education services must draw on information collected from a comprehensive individualevaluation using multiple methods, including clinical judgment and other sources of relevant information.

• Students must be evaluated on an individual basis and assessed for intra-individual differences in the seven domains that comprise thedefinition of SLD in the law: listening, thinking, speaking, reading, writing, spelling, and mathematical calculation.

• Eligibility decisions must be made through an interdisciplinary team, must be student-centered and informed by appropriate data, andmust be based on student needs and strengths.

• As schools begin to execute a process of decision making that is more clinical than statistical in nature, ensuring through regulationsthat this team of review of comprehensive assessment data will be critical.

Processes for SLD identification have changed and will continue to do so. Within that context, remembering that RTI is but one resource foruse in the SLD determination process is important. More broadly speaking, RTI procedures have the distinction that when implementedwith fidelity, they can identify and intervene for students early in the educational process, thereby reducing academic failure amongstudents.

6.6 MULTITIERED SERVICE DELIVERY MODEL

An RTI approach incorporates a multitiered model of educational service delivery in which each tier represents increasingly intenseservices that are associated with increasing levels of learner needs. The various tier interventions are designed to provide a set ofcurricular/instructional processes aimed at improving student response to instruction and student outcomes.

Much discussion continues surrounding the issues of how many tiers constitute an adequate intervention (O’Connor, Tilly, Vaughn, &Marston, 2003). Most frequently, RTI is viewed as a three-tiered model, similar to those used for other service delivery practices, such aspositive behavioral support. Figure 17.1 depicts a three-tiered model as conceived in an RTI framework.

Like other models, RTI is meant to be applied on a schoolwide basis, in which the majority of students receive instruction in Tier I (thegeneral classroom), students who are at risk for reading and other learning disabilities are identified (such as through schoolwidescreening ) for more intense support in Tier II, and students who fail to respond to the interventions provided in Tier II may then beconsidered for specialized instruction in Tier III.

The application of RTI is typically understood within the context of a multi-tiered model or framework that delineates a continuum ofprograms and services for students with academic difficulties. Although no universally accepted model or approach currently exists, themany possible variations can be conceptualized as elaborations on or modifications of the following three-tiered model:

Tier I: High-quality instructional and behavioral supports are provided for all students in general education.

• School personnel conduct universal screening of literacy skills, academics, and behavior.

• Teachers implement a variety of research-supported teaching strategies and approaches.

• Ongoing curriculum-based assessment and continuous progress monitoring are used to guide high-quality instruction.

• Students receive differentiated instruction based on data from ongoing assessments.

Tier II: Students whose performance and rate of progress lag behind those of peers in their classroom, school, or district receivemore specialized prevention or remediation within general education.

• Curriculum-based measures are used to identify which students continue to need assistance and with what specific kinds of skills.

• Collaborative problem solving is used to design and implement instructional support for students that may consist of a standardprotocol or more individualized strategies and interventions.

• Identified students receive more intensive scientific, research-based instruction targeted to their individual needs.

• Student progress is monitored frequently to determine intervention effectiveness and needed modifications.

• Systematic assessment is conducted to determine the fidelity or integrity with which instruction and interventions are implemented.

• Parents are informed and included in the planning and monitoring of their child’s progress in Tier II specialized interventions.

• General education teachers receive support (e.g., training, consultation, direct services for students), as needed, from other qualifiededucators in implementing interventions and monitoring student progress.

Tier III: Comprehensive evaluation is conducted by a multidisciplinary team to determine eligibility for special education and relatedservices.

• Parents are informed of their due process rights and consent is obtained for the comprehensive evaluation needed to determinewhether the student has a disability and is eligible for special education and related services.

• Evaluation uses multiple sources of assessment data, which may include data from standardized and norm-referenced measures;observations made by parents, students, and teachers; and data collected in Tiers I and II.

• Intensive, systematic, specialized instruction is provided and additional RTI data are collected, as needed, in accordance with specialeducation time lines and other mandates.

• Procedural safeguards concerning evaluations and eligibility determinations apply, as required by IDEA 2004 mandates.

Standard protocol as used in describing Tier II refers to an approach in which students with similar difficulties (e.g., problems with readingfluency) are given a research-based intervention that has been standardized and shown to be effective for students with similar difficultiesand uses a standard protocol to ensure implementation integrity (Fuchs et al., 2003).

Variations on this basic framework may be illustrated by options often found within Tier II. For example, Tier II might consist of twohierarchical steps, or subtiers (e.g., a teacher first collaborates with a single colleague and then, if needed, problem solves with amultidisciplinary team, creating in effect a four-tiered model). Alternatively, more than one type of intervention might be provided withinTier II (e.g., both a standard protocol and individualized planning, based on the student’s apparent needs).

RTI is a critical component of a multitiered service delivery system. The goal of such a system is to ensure that quality instruction, goodteaching practices, differentiated instruction, and remedial opportunities are available in general education, and that special education is provided for students with disabilities who require more specialized services than can be provided in general education. The continuousmonitoring of the adequacy of student response to instruction is particularly relevant to an RTI approach as a means of determiningwhether a student should move from one tier to the next by documenting that existing instruction and support are not sufficient. Forexample, in moving from Tier II to Tier III, insufficient responsiveness to high-quality, scientific, research-based intervention may be causeto suspect that a student has a disability and should be referred for a special education evaluation. In addition, however, the right of aparent, state education agency, or a local education agency to initiate a request for an evaluation at any time is maintained in IDEA 2004.

Focus of Tier I

Tier I is designed to meet the needs of a majority of the school population and has three critical elements:

a. A research-based core curriculum

b. Short-cycle assessments for all students at least three times a year to determine their instructional needs

c. Sustained professional development to equip teachers with tools necessary for teaching content area effectively

In Tier I, the goal is to prevent failure and optimize learning by offering the most effective instruction possible to the greatest number ofstudents. Instruction takes place in a regular education setting and is, for the most part, whole-class (scientifically based) instruction thatproduces good results for most students. Based on data, classroom teachers monitor student progress and differentiate instruction forstudents who do not meet grade-level expectations.

Focus of Tier II

Tier II is for students who are falling behind same-age peers and need additional targeted interventions to meet grade-level expectations. InTier II, the goal is to accelerate learning for students who need more intensive support. The interventions typically take place in a regularsetting and may include instruction to small groups of students, targeted interventions, and frequent progress monitoring.

Focus of Tier III

Tier III is designed for students who still have considerable difficulty in mastering necessary academic and/or behavioral skills, even afterTier I and Tier II instruction and interventions. Tier III addresses students’ needs through intensive individualized services. In Tier III,students receive intensive and highly focused intentional research-based instruction, possibly over a long period of time. Tier III involvesstudents who did not respond to Tier II intervention. These students undergo a more formal diagnostic evaluation.

Importance of Parent Involvement for Successful RTI Programs

Involving parents at all phases is a key aspect of a successful RTI program. As members of the decision-making team, parents can provide acritical perspective on students, thus increasing the likelihood that RTI interventions will be effective. For this reason, schools must make aconcerted effort to involve parents as early as possible, beginning with instruction in the core curriculum. This can be done throughtraditional methods such as parent–teacher conferences, regularly scheduled meetings, or by other methods. This must be done bynotifying parents of student progress within the RTI system on a regular basis.

Districts and schools should provide parents with written information about its RTI program and be prepared to answer questions aboutRTI processes. The written information should explain how the system is different from a traditional education system and about the vitaland collaborative role that parents play within the RTI system. The more parents are involved as players, the greater the opportunity forsuccessful RTI outcomes.

Because RTI is a method of delivering the general education curriculum for all students, written consent is not required beforeadministering universal screenings, CBMs, and targeted assessments within a multitiered RTI system when these tools are used todetermine instructional needs. However, when a student fails to respond to interventions and the decision is made to evaluate a student forspecial education eligibility, written consent must be obtained in accordance with special education procedures. When developing screeningmeasures, districts should also consider the parallel measures that may be used for evaluation.

Failure to communicate and reach out to parents will lead to confusion, especially among parents who believe their children have a learningdisability. Schools may also want to provide other means for keeping parents engaged and informed:

• Involving them in state and local planning for RTI adoption

• Providing them written information on their right to refer their child at any time for special education evaluation as stipulated in IDEA2004

• Providing written material that outlines the criteria for determining eligibility under IDEA 2004 and the role of RTI data in making LDdeterminations

Taking measures to build strong, productive relationships with parents can only increase the likelihood that students will benefit greatlyfrom the RTI model. 6.7 Fidelity

Previous section

Next section

6.7 FIDELITY

Fidelity refers to the degree to which RTI components are implemented as designed, intended, and planned. Fidelity is achieved throughsufficient time allocation, adequate intervention intensity, qualified and trained staff, and sufficient materials and resources. Fidelity is vitalin universal screening, instructional delivery, and progress monitoring.

6.8 THE RTI PROCESS FOR TEACHERS

An RTI outcome vital to the effectiveness of a school system is that all teachers, both general and special educators, will feel an increasedaccountability for student learning as well as strengthened confidence in their own skills and knowledge related to teaching reading. Thegoal of all students learning to read will be a unifying force that includes all staff and all students. All teachers will see themselves as part ofa system that delivers high-quality instruction that continually assesses student progress and that provides extra help and extra time tomeet the needs of students.

If we are to close the achievement gap in schools, roles of school personnel will change. Collaboration among teachers will increase inorder to determine student needs, designate resources, and maximize student learning. Genuine access to and participation in the general curriculum for students with disabilities may require a shift in the way we think about and ultimately provide special education and relatedservices. Building better readers must become the collective responsibility of all teachers so that all students achieve.

Although RTI presents a promising way of addressing many issues associated with SLD identification, unanswered implementationquestions remain. We must ask how many issues relevant to SLD determination are due to the specific assessment components as well asthe limited fidelity with which those components were implemented (e.g., appropriate learning experiences, prereferral intervention,application of exclusion clause, and ability–achievement discrepancy). Further, we must consider how well states, districts, or schools couldimplement an assessment process that incorporates significant changes in staff roles and responsibilities (i.e., most dramatically for generaleducation staff) while lengthening the duration of disability determination assessment and possibly lengthening service time.

Another significant consideration is that current research literature provides scant scientific evidence on how RTI applies in curricularareas other than reading and beyond primary or elementary school-age children. In conjunction with the standards that have beendeveloped (NCSESA, 1996; NCTM, 2000), science-based research needs to be conducted using the RTI construct in the areas of science andmathematics. Utilizing an RTI framework across educational disciplines, as well as grade levels, is synergistic with the No Child Left BehindAct of 2001 and promotes the idea that schools have an obligation to ensure that all students participate in strong instructional programsthat support multifaceted learning.

What Teachers Need in Terms of Professional Development and RTI

Teachers of students with learning disabilities will need to acquire specialized knowledge to individualize instruction, to build skills, andrecommend modifications and accommodations needed for students with learning disabilities to be successful in the general curriculum.

Within the RTI framework, professional development will be needed to prepare these teachers in the following skills and knowledge(Division for Learning Disabilities of the Council for Exceptional Children, 2006):

• Understanding and ability to apply pedagogy related to cognition, learning theory, language development, behavior management, andapplied behavioral analysis

• Possession of a substantial base of knowledge about criteria for identifying scientific, research-based methodology and instructionalprograms useful for students with learning disabilities and individualization of instruction

• Proficiency in providing direct skill instruction in reading, writing, spelling, math, and listening and learning strategies

• Ability to adjust instruction and learning supports based on student progress, observation, and clinical judgment

• Ability to conduct comprehensive evaluations that include standardized assessment measures, informal assessment, and behavioralobservations

• Ability to translate evaluations into meaningful educational recommendations

• Guidance in explaining test results to help parents and teachers understand the student’s needs and the recommendations generatedduring the assessment process

• Strengthening of communication skills to function as collaborative partners and members of problem-solving teams

• Knowledgeability about the legal requirements of IDEA 2004, federal and state regulations, and the history of learning disabilities

Vocabulary

At risk: A term used for children who may, in the future, have problems with their development that may affect learning or development.

Core academic subjects: English; language arts; reading; mathematics; science; the arts, including music and visual arts; social studies,which includes civics, government, economics, history, and geography; and modern and classical languages.

Early intervening services: Refers to a broad application of scientifically based prevention and support services for students who are notidentified as needing special education programs or service but who need additional academic and behavioral support to succeed in thegeneral education classroom.

Fidelity: Refers to the intensity and accuracy with which instruction and intervention are implemented.

Intervention: Instructional strategies and curricular components used to enhance student learning.

National Research Center on Learning Disabilities (NRCLD): A joint project of researchers at Vanderbilt University and the University ofKansas with funding provided by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. NRCLD is part of a federal effortto find improved research-based ways of identifying students with learning disabilities.

Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP): The Office of Special Education Programs is a federal program of the U.S. Department ofEducation dedicated to improving results for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities ages birth through 21 by providingleadership and financial support to assist states and local districts.

Progress monitoring: A set of assessment procedures for determining the extent to which students are benefiting from classroominstruction.

Research-based (Activities, Practices, Instruction, Intervention, or Treatment): Interventions or treatment approaches that have beenscientifically demonstrated to be effective, regardless of the discipline that developed them.

Research-based interventions: Instructional strategies and curricular components used to enhance student learning. The effectiveness ofthese interventions is backed by experimental design studies that have been applied to a large study sample, show a direct correlationbetween the intervention and student progress, and have been reported in peer-reviewed journals.

Response to intervention: A system used at schools to screen, assess, identify, plan for, and provide interventions to any student at risk ofschool failure due to academic or behavior needs. It is an assessment and intervention process for systematically monitoring studentprogress and making decisions about the need for instructional modifications or increasingly intensified services using progress monitoringdata.

Schoolwide screening (also known as universal screening): An assessment characterized as a quick, low-cost, repeatable test of age-appropriate critical skills (e.g., identifying letters of the alphabet or reading a list of high-frequency words) or behaviors (e.g., tardiness ordiscipline reports). Measures are not too complicated and can be administered by someone with a minimal amount of training.

Specific learning disability (SLD): A categorical condition considered important for providing legal protections and entitlements. UnderIDEA 2004, SLD is defined as “a disorder of one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or using language,spoken or written, which disorder may manifest itself in [the] imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematicalcalculations. Such term includes such conditions as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, anddevelopmental aphasia. Such term does not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, ofmental retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.”

Tiered or multitiered service delivery model: Provides tiers of increasingly intense interventions directed at more specific deficits and atsmaller segments of the population.

7 THE CHILD STUDY TEAM AND PREREFERRAL STRATEGIES

Key Terms

Change of program

Classroom management techniques

Consolidation of program

Prereferral strategies

Progress report

Referral to Child Protective Services

Remedial reading or math services Screening

Team meeting with teachers

Vision test

Chapter Objectives

This chapter focuses on the child study team and the various prereferral procedures that school systems use. After reading this chapter,you should be able to do the following:

■ Understand the purpose of the child study team

■ Understand the role of RTI in the assessment process

■ Understand the purpose of prereferral strategies

■ Identify the prereferral strategies used most often in school systems

7.1 THE CHILD STUDY TEAM

Initially, teachers will provide the majority of students instruction in Tier I RTI strategies. These high-quality instructional and behavioralsupports are provided for all students in general education. Examples include:

• School personnel conduct universal screening of literacy skills, academics, and behavior.

• Teachers implement a variety of research-supported teaching strategies and approaches.

• Ongoing curriculum-based assessment and continuous progress monitoring are used to guide high-quality instruction.

• Students receive differentiated instruction based on data from ongoing assessments.

When progress monitoring and teacher observation show that Tier I RTI strategies are not working, they will move to Tier II RTI. Thesestudents whose performance and rate of progress lag behind those of peers in their classroom, school, or district may receive morespecialized prevention or remediation within general education. This includes:

• Curriculum-based measures are used to identify which students continue to need assistance and with what specific kinds of skills.

• Collaborative problem solving is used to design and implement instructional support for students that may consist of a standardprotocol or more individualized strategies and interventions.

• Identified students receive more intensive scientific, research-based instruction targeted to their individual needs.

• Student progress is monitored frequently to determine intervention effectiveness and needed modifications.

• Systematic assessment is conducted to determine the fidelity or integrity with which instruction and interventions are implemented.

• Parents are informed and included in the planning and monitoring of their child’s progress in Tier II specialized interventions.

At this point the teacher may also choose to find out more in-depth information on the child that may shed light on other factors that maybe contributing to the student’s lack of performance. This would normally result in a referral to the school’s Child Study Team. The ChildStudy Team is a school-based team, often known as the child study team (CST), school building-level committee (SBLC), pupil personnelteam (PPT), or prereferral team (PRT), depending on the state in which the student resides. Depending on the type of referral, this teammay be drawn from the following staff members:

• Child’s classroom teacher

• Principal

• School psychologist

• Special education teacher

• School nurse

• Social worker

• Speech/language clinician

• Guidance counselor (secondary level)

Many school districts recommend or require that, before a formal assessment of a student for possible placement in special educationoccurs, his or her teacher meet with this prereferral team to discuss the nature of the problem and what possible modifications toinstruction or the classroom might be made. These procedures are known as prereferral strategies. Prereferral strategies have arisen outof a number of research studies documenting faulty referral practices, such as the over-referral of students who come from backgroundsthat are culturally or linguistically different from the majority culture, those who are hard to teach, or those who are felt to have behavioralproblems.

This process recognizes that many variables affect learning; rather than first assuming that the difficulty lies within the student, theprereferral team and the teacher look specifically at what variables (e.g., classroom, teacher, student, or an interaction of these) might beaffecting this particular student. Examining student records and work samples and conducting interviews and observations are part of theteam’s efforts. These approaches to gathering data are intended to specify the problem more precisely and to document its severity.Modifications to the teacher’s approach, to the classroom, or to student activities may then be suggested, attempted, and documented. It isimportant for teachers to keep track of the specific modifications they attempt with a student who is having trouble learning or behaving,because these can provide valuable information to the school-based team if the student is referred for a comprehensive assessment.

Prior to doing an evaluation for possible classification and placement in special education, it is important to make sure that the school hasmade every effort to remediate the learning and/or behavioral problems through other means. The assessment process is a very significantand important piece in addressing such concerns but should never be the first step. Before full batteries of tests are administered, variouspreventive measures should be tried in efforts to remediate further difficulties. The rest of this chapter is devoted to discussing theprereferral procedures used most often in school systems.

The members of the CST (the prereferral team) usually meet on a regular basis, once or twice a week depending on the caseload. Normally,there is a chairperson on the CST to whom the entire faculty and staff can make referrals during the week prior to each meeting. Forexample, if the CST meets on Friday, a teacher can go to the chairperson on Tuesday and say: “I have been trying to work with Mary Bell bymaking some changes in my class. However, she does not seem to be responding, and I am becoming increasingly concerned about herdeterioration. I think I need help and would like to discuss her at the next team meeting.”

Such a statement would allow the teacher to come to the team meeting and help develop more formal and comprehensive prereferralstrategies that can then be attempted in the classroom. The next statement typifies a different need: “We have been working with LutherSantos for a while on prereferral strategies but they do not seem to be working. Therefore, I would like to meet with the CST again todiscuss Luther because he is still doing very poorly in my class and nothing we developed is working.” This type of statement wouldprobably require the team to consider screening Luther for a suspected disability because prereferral strategies have been attempted overa period of time and under a variety of conditions and have made no impact.

The chairperson then puts Mary Bell and Luther Santos on the list of students to discuss at the next CST meeting. He or she informs themembers of the CST in writing that both are on the CST agenda. It is each team member’s responsibility to bring any important and relevantdocumentation on Mary Bell and Luther Santos to the next CST meeting.

When the CST meets, team members discuss whatever agenda is put forth for that particular day. On some days, there may be very little todiscuss whereas on other days, the CST meeting may run for a few hours based on the number of students that need to be discussed.

Examples of Referral Forms to the CST

Many schools utilize a referral form procedure that teachers submit to indicate the possibility of a high-risk student. This is usually the firststep in the referral process. The form then goes to the child study team for discussion and future direction. The initial section of theseforms is usually the same, containing basic identifying information. The differences are usually in the body of the form. Figures 7.1 and 7. 2are two examples of how this form might be used for referral to the CST.

As shown in Figure 7.1, the classroom teacher has made several attempts to resolve Mary’s issues prior to a referral to the CST. When sherealized that her attempts were not working, she decided to take her concerns to the CST for a more formal analysis of Mary’s situation. Atthis point, the team, along with the classroom teacher, will develop prereferral strategies for Mary in an attempt to resolve her issues inhopes that a formal referral for a comprehensive assessment is not required.

The referral in Figure 7.2 was made after meetings with the CST established a prereferral intervention strategy plan. This plan had been inoperation for several weeks by the time the teacher made the referral.

FIGURE 7.1 Example of Referral Form to Child Study Team

FIGURE 7.2 Example of Referral Form to Child Study Team

In the case of Luther, the teacher and the CST have already attempted numerous prereferral strategies in an attempt to improve Luther’sclass behavior and performance. However, according to the teacher, nothing seems to be working. At this point, the CST might considerscreening Luther for a suspected disability. If team members find evidence of a suspected disability, they will make a formal referral for acomprehensive assessment with the parents’ permission.

The Child Study Team Meeting

Once a referral is made to the CST, personnel involved on the team will gather as much available information as possible prior to themeeting in order to better understand the child and his or her educational patterns. This information may come from a variety of sources,and the presentation of this information at the meeting is crucial in the determination of the most appropriate direction to proceed. Schoolsusually have a wealth of information about all of the students, distributed among a number of people and a number of records. Gatheringand reviewing this information after a referral, and prior to screening, could reduce the need for more formal testing and provide a verythorough picture of the child’s abilities and patterns.

Sources of Student Information

SCHOOL RECORDS.

School records can be a rich source of information about the student and his or her background. For instance, the number of times thestudent has changed schools may be of interest. Frequent school changes can be disruptive emotionally, as well as academically, and may bea factor in the problems that have resulted in the student’s being referred to the CST.

PRIOR ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT.

The student’s past history of grades is usually of interest to the CST. Is the student’s current performance in a particular subject typical ofthe student or is the problem being observed something new? Are patterns noticeable in the student’s grades? For example, many studentsbegin the year with poor grades and then show gradual improvement as they get back into the swing of school. For others, the reverse maybe true: During the early part of the year, when prior school material is being reviewed, they may do well, with declines in their gradescoming as new material is introduced. Also, transition points such as beginning the fourth grade or middle school may cause some studentsproblems; the nature and purpose of reading, for example, tends to change when students enter the fourth grade, because reading to learncontent becomes more central. Similarly, middle school requires students to assume more responsibility for long-term projects (Hoy andGregg, 1994). These shifts may bring about a noticeable decline in grades.

PRIOR TEST SCORES.

Test scores are also important to review. Comparing these scores to a student’s current classroom performance can indicate that thestudent’s difficulties are new ones, perhaps resulting from some environmental change that needs to be more fully investigated. Further, thecomparison may show that the student has always found a particular skill area to be problematic. “In this situation, the current problemsthe student is experiencing indicate that the classroom demands have reached a point that the student requires more support to besuccessful” (Hoy & Gregg, 1994, p. 37).

GROUP STANDARDIZED ACHIEVEMENT TEST RESULTS.

A great deal of information can be obtained from group achievement test results. Whereas individual tests should be administered whenevaluating a child’s suspected disability, group achievement results may reflect certain very important patterns. Most schools administergroup achievement tests annually or every few years. If these results are available on a student, you may want to explore the variousexisting patterns. It is helpful to have several years of results to analyze. Over time this type of pattern can be more reliable forinterpretation.

ATTENDANCE RECORDS.

Attendance records can provide the CST with a great deal of important information, especially if team members know what they are lookingfor. Many patterns are symptomatic of more serious concerns, and being able to recognize these patterns early can only facilitate therecognition of a potential high-risk student. When we look at a student’s attendance profile over the years, several things may stand out.For instance, a child’s pattern of absences might include consistent absences during a specific part of the year, as is the case with somestudents who have respiratory problems or allergies. In other cases, there may be a noticeable pattern of declining attendance that may belinked to a decline in motivation, an undiagnosed health problem or a change within the family. Specific points to keep in mind whenreviewing attendance records include the following:

1. The number of days absent in the student’s profile: Ordinarily, more than 10 days a year may need to be investigated for patterns. Ifa child is out more than 15 to 20 days, this could be indicative of a serious issue if a medical or some other logical reason did notsubstantiate the absences.

2. The patterns of days absent: Single days may indicate the presence of possible school avoidance, phobia, or dysfunctional or chaotichome environment.

PRIOR TEACHER REPORTS.

Comments written on report cards or in permanent record folders can provide the CST with a different perspective on the child under adifferent style of teaching. Successful years and positive comments may be clues to the child’s learning style and the conditions under whichhe or she responds best. Also, write-ups about conferences between previous teachers and parents can provide information important tounderstanding the child’s patterns and history.

GROUP IQ TEST INFORMATION.

This information is usually found in the permanent record folder. Many schools administer a group IQ type of test (e.g., Otis Lennon—7) ingrades 3, 6, and 9. It is important to be aware that the term school abilities index has replaced the term IQ or intelligence quotient on manygroup IQ tests.

PRIOR TEACHER REFERRALS.

The CST should investigate school records for prior referrals from teachers. There could have been a time when a teacher referred astudent but no action was taken due to time of year, parent resistance, delay in procedures, and so on. These referrals may still be on fileand may reveal useful information.

MEDICAL HISTORY IN THE SCHOOL NURSE’S OFFICE.

The CST should also investigate school medical records for indications of visual or hearing difficulties, prescribed medication that may havean effect on the child’s behavior (e.g., antihistamines), or medical conditions in need of attention or that could be contributing to the child’spresent difficulties.

STUDENT WORK.

Often, an initial part of the assessment process includes examining a student’s work, either by selecting work samples that can be analyzedto identify academic skills and deficits or by conducting a portfolio assessment, whereby folders of the student’s work are examined (see Chapter 3). When collecting work samples, the teacher selects work from the areas in which the student is experiencing difficulty andsystematically examines them. The teacher might identify such elements as how the student was directed to do the activity (e.g., orally, inwriting), how long it took the student to complete the activity, the pattern of errors (e.g., reversals when writing), and the pattern of correctanswers. Analyzing the student’s work in this way can yield valuable insight into the nature of his or her difficulties and suggest possiblesolutions.

7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE CHILD STUDY TEAM—PREREFERRAL STRATEGIES

After analyzing all of the information presented at the meeting, the CST has to make a decision: What does it recommend at this point? Ifthis is the first time a student is being reviewed by the team, then the CST is very likely to recommend prereferral strategies to the teacher.As previously mentioned, these are techniques and suggestions to attempt to resolve the child’s issues without the need for a morecomprehensive assessment. What are the benefits of prereferral intervention?

• Alternatives are reviewed and referrals made to other programs. Instructional assistance can be provided if needed.

• Collaboration with the teacher on Tier II RTI strategies takes place.

• Students who do not have a disability, but who need instructional support, will receive it in the regular program.

• Problem solving happens as a team facilitates professional growth in needed areas; staff development is formative and directly inresponse to teacher needs.

• Teachers in the regular program develop a network of peer support.

• Referrals to special education are more valid; that is, students are more likely to truly have a disability.

Prereferral Intervention Strategies

TEAM MEETING WITH TEACHERS.

A team meeting with teachers is a prereferral procedure whereby teachers who have previously worked with or have ideas about thisstudent come together to determine what strategies can be implemented for remediation. In this prereferral procedure, teachers shareinformation about a student to identify patterns of behavior reflective of some particular condition or disability. Sometimes, a groupmeeting with all of the child’s teachers can preclude the need for further involvement. One or several teachers may be using techniques thatcould benefit others also working with the child. By sharing information or observations, it is possible to identify patterns of behaviorreflective of some particular condition or disability. Once this pattern is identified, the student may be handled in a variety of ways withoutthe need for more serious intervention.

PARENT INTERVIEWS.

A parent interview as a prereferral procedure involves meeting with the parent(s) to discuss what motivates this child along with findingout any family information that may be contributing to the child’s behavior in the classroom (e.g., recent separation, death of a loved one).Meeting the parent(s) is always recommended for a child having difficulty in school. This initial meeting can be informal, with the purpose ofclarifying certain issues and gathering pertinent information that may help the child as well as the teacher in the classroom. If testing orserious intervention is required, then a more formal and in-depth parent meeting will take place.

MEDICAL EXAM.

The CST should try to rule out any possibility of a medical condition causing or contributing to the existing problems. If the teacher or anyother professional who works with the child feels that there is any possibility of such a condition, and the need for a complete medicalworkup is evident, then a recommendation for a medical exam should be made. Available records should be reviewed, and if they areinadequate in light of the presenting problems and symptoms, outside recommendations to the parents such as a neurological examinationor ophthalmological examination should be considered.

HEARING TEST.

A hearing test should be one of the first prereferral procedures recommended if one has not been administered to the student within thepast 6 months to 1 year. Be aware of inconsistencies in test patterns from year to year that might indicate a chronic pattern. Somesymptoms that might indicate the need for an updated audiological examination are when the child

• Turns head when listening

• Asks you to repeat frequently

• Consistently misinterprets what he or she hears

• Does not respond to auditory stimuli

• Slurs speech, speaks in a monotone voice, or articulates poorly

VISION TEST.

As with the hearing exam, this evaluation should be one of the first prereferral procedures recommended. Again, if a vision test has notbeen done within 6 months to a year, then request this immediately. Possible symptoms that may necessitate such an evaluation are whenthe child

• Turns head when looking at board or objects

• Squints excessively

• Rubs eyes frequently

• Holds books and materials close to the face or at unusual angles

• Suffers frequent headaches

• Avoids close work of any type

• Covers an eye when reading

• Consistently loses place when reading

CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES.

There are times when the real issue may not be the child but rather the teaching style of the classroom teacher—that is, having unrealisticexpectations, being critical, or being overly demanding. In such instances, help for the teacher can come in the form of classroommanagement techniques. Classroom management techniques are strategies developed to help handle various problems and conflictswithin a classroom. An administrator, psychologist, or any realistic and diplomatic team member who feels comfortable with this type ofsituation may offer these practical suggestions to the teacher. There are many classroom techniques and modifications that should be triedbefore taking more serious steps. These include the following:

• Display daily class schedule with times so that the student has a structured idea of the day ahead

• Change seating

• Seat the student with good role models

• Use peer tutors when appropriate

• Limit number of directions

• Simplify complex directions

• Give verbal as well as written directions

• Provide extra work time

• Shorten assignments

• Modify curriculum but change content only as a last resort

• Identify and address preferred learning styles

• Provide manipulative materials

• Provide examples of what is expected

• Use color coding of materials to foster organizational skills

• Develop a homework plan with parental support

• Develop a behavior modification plan if necessary

• Uses lots of positive reinforcement

• Use technology as an aid

HELP CLASSES.

Certain children may require only a temporary support system to get them through a difficult academic period. Some schools provide extra(nonspecial) education services, such as help classes that may be held during lunch or before or after school. These classes can clarifyacademic confusion that could lead to more serious problems if not addressed.

REMEDIAL READING OR MATH SERVICES.

Remedial reading or math services are academic programs within a school designed to help the student with reading or math by goingslower in the curriculum or placing him or her with a smaller number of students in the classroom for extra attention. These services canbe recommended when reading or math is the specific area of concern. Remedial reading and math classes are not special educationservices and can be instituted as a means of alleviating a child’s academic problems.

IN-SCHOOL COUNSELING.

In-school counseling is normally done by the school psychologist, social worker, or guidance counselor, and is designed to help the childdeal with the issues that are currently problematic for him or her. Sometimes, a child may experience a situational or adjustment disorder(a temporary emotional pattern that may occur at any time in a person’s life without a prior history of problems) resulting from separation,divorce, health issues, newness to school district, and so on. When this pattern occurs, it may temporarily interfere with the child’s ability toconcentrate, remember, or attend to tasks. Consequently, a drop in academic performance can occur. If such patterns occur, the schoolpsychologist may want to institute in-school counseling with the parent’s involvement and permission. This recommendation should beinstituted only to address issues that can be resolved in a relatively short period of time. More serious issues may have to be referred tooutside agencies or professionals for longer treatment.

PROGRESS REPORTS.

A progress report is a synopsis of the child’s work and behavior in the classroom sent home to the parents in order to keep them updatedon the child’s strengths and weaknesses over a period of time (e.g., every day, each week, biweekly, or once a month). Sometimes, a childwho has fallen behind academically will “hide” from the real issues by avoiding reality. Daily progress reports for a week or two at first andthen weekly reports may provide the child with the kinds of immediate gratification and positive feedback necessary to get back on track.They offer the child a greater sense of hope and control in getting back to a more normal academic pattern.

DISCIPLINARY ACTION.

This recommendation is usually made when the child in question needs a structured boundary set involving inappropriate behavior. If achild demonstrates a pattern of inappropriate behavior, disciplinary action is usually used in conjunction with other recommendationsbecause such patterned behavior may be symptomatic of a more serious problem. The appropriate disciplinary actions necessary shouldbe discussed with the school psychologist, and how it should be implemented must be carefully considered before it begins.

CHANGE OF PROGRAM.

A change of program involves examining the child’s program and making adjustments to his or her schedule based on the presentingproblem. This recommendation usually occurs when a student has been placed in a course that is not suited to his or her ability or needs. Ifa student is failing in an advanced class, then the student’s program should be changed to include more modified classes.

CONSOLIDATION OF PROGRAM.

There are times when reducing a student’s course load is necessary. Consolidation of a program involves taking the student’s programand modifying it so that the workload is decreased. If a child is “drowning in school,” then that child’s available energy level may beextremely limited. In such cases, you may find that he or she is failing many courses. Temporarily consolidating or condensing the programallows for the possibility of salvaging some courses, because the student’s available energy will not have to be spread so thin.

REFERRAL TO CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES.

Child Protective Services is a state agency designed to investigate cases of possible neglect and abuse of children. A referral to ChildProtective Services (CPS) is mandated for all educators if there is a suspicion of abuse or neglect. The school official or staff does not havea choice as to referral if such a suspicion is present. Referrals to this service may result from physical, sexual, or emotional abuse and/oreducational, environmental, or medical neglect.

INFORMAL ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUES.

As discussed in Chapter 3, other prereferral intervention strategies may be used in the form of various methods of informal assessment.

SCREENING.

If the CST feels the prereferral strategies are not working after a realistic period of time, team members may recommend a screening for asuspected disability. The source of this suspicion may emanate from the team, a staff member, or the parent. Keep in mind that the teamdoes not have to diagnose a specific disability, but only suspect one in order to begin the referral for a more comprehensive assessment toa multidisciplinary team. This team (see Chapter 8) will administer a comprehensive evaluation conducted by several professionals todecrease the possibility of subjective and discriminatory assessment.

Informal Screening Tools. Informal screening tools may include a variety of tests and procedures that can be sensitive enough to allow teammembers to determine the presence of a suspected disability. Other than the very obvious cases involving attempted suicide, neglect, abuse,and so on, which must be dealt with immediately, a child with a suspected disability is defined as a child who exhibits one or more of thefollowing symptoms for more than 6 months:

• Serious inconsistencies in intellectual, emotional, academic, or social performance

• Inconsistency between ability and achievement and/or ability and classroom performance

• Impairment in one or more life functions, that is, socialization, academic performance, or adaptive behavior

To accomplish this screening, team members utilize

• Abbreviated intelligence tests

• Selected subtests or screening versions of individual achievement tests

• Informal reading inventories

• Checklists

• Observation scales

• Rating scales

• Prereferral data already discussed

If the screening determines the possibility of a suspected disability, then the CST must make a more formal referral to the district’smultidisciplinary team for a comprehensive assessment. This process is discussed in Chapter 8.

CONCLUSION

Although all of these suggestions need not be tried before an evaluation is attempted, parents may be more willing to sign a release forevaluation if they see that other channels have been used and proven unsuccessful. The goal of prereferral procedures is to make sure thatall avenues have been explored before the time is invested in doing a comprehensive assessment on a child. If a few modifications can bemade to a child’s school day that can alleviate the problem at hand, this will benefit all involved.

Vocabulary

Change of program: Examining the child’s program and making schedule adjustments based on the presenting problem.

Classroom management techniques: Strategies created to help handle various problems and conflicts within a classroom.

Consolidation of a program: Taking the student’s program and modifying it so that the workload is decreased.

Disciplinary action: A prereferral procedure whereby a child is placed in a structured boundary set because of inappropriate behavior.

Hearing test: A prereferral procedure used to determine whether an auditory problem is causing or contributing to a student’s problems.

Help classes: Classes that provide a student with extra help in a given subject outside of the normal school day.

In-school counseling: Counseling, normally by the psychologist or social worker, designed to help the child deal with the issues that arecurrently problematic for him or her.

Medical exam: A prereferral procedure used to determine whether a medical condition is causing or contributing to a student’s problems.

Parent interview: Meeting with the parent to discuss what motivates this child along with finding out any family information that may becontributing to the child’s behavior in the classroom (e.g., recent separation, death of a loved one).

Prereferral strategies: Many school systems recommend or require that, before an individualized evaluation of a student is conducted forpossible placement in special education, the teacher meet with an assistance team to discuss the nature of the problem and what possiblemodifications to instruction or the classroom might be made. These procedures are known as prereferral strategies.

Progress report: A synopsis of the child’s work and behavior in the classroom sent home to the parents to keep them updated on thechild’s strengths and weaknesses over a period of time.

Referral to Child Protective Services: A state agency designed to investigate cases of possible neglect and abuse of children.

Remedial reading or math services: Academic programs within a school designed to help students with math or reading by going slowerin the curriculum or placing them with a smaller number of students in the classroom for extra attention.

Screening: A prereferral strategy to determine whether a comprehensive assessment for special education is warranted.

Team meeting with teachers: A prereferral procedure whereby teachers who have worked with or who have ideas about the studentcome together to determine what helpful strategies can be implemented.

Vision test: A prereferral procedure used to determine whether a visual problem is causing or contributing to a student’s probl

8 THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM AND PARENTAL PARTICIPATION IN THE ASSESSMENTPROCESS

Key Terms

Academic history

Audiologist

Behavioral consultant

Classroom teacher

Developmental history

Educational diagnostician

Family history

Formal referral

Guidance counselor

Identifying data and family information

Occupational therapist

Parent intake

Parents (on the MDT)

Physical therapist

School nurse

School psychologist

School social worker

Social history

Special education teacher

Speech/language clinician

Chapter Objectives

This chapter focuses on the multidisciplinary team (MDT) and parental participation in the assessment process. After reading thischapter, you should be able to understand the following:

■ Multidisciplinary team (MDT)

■ Purpose of the MDT

■ Membership of the MDT

■ Formal referral for a suspected disability

■ Contents of a referral to the MDT

■ Initial referral to the MDT from the school staff

■ Initial referral to the MDT from a parent/guardian

■ Assessment plans, consent for evaluation

■ Assessment options of the MDT

■ Parental participation in the assessment process

■ How to conduct parent intakes and interviews

■ Parent intakes

■ Confidentiality

8.1 PURPOSE OF THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM

As a result of the IDEA 2004 regulations, schools are moving toward a more global approach for the identification of students withsuspected disabilities through the development of a district-based team. This team may be referred to as the multidisciplinary team (MDT),multifactor team (MFT), or school-based support team (SBST), depending on the state in which the student resides. Throughout this text,we refer to this team as the multidisciplinary team. This team usually comes into operation when the local school-based team (child studyteam) has conducted a screening and suspects a disability. Once that is determined, then the MDT takes over. This team is mandated by IDEA2004 so that the child and parents are guaranteed that any comprehensive evaluation be conducted by different professionals to decreasethe possibility of subjective and discriminatory assessment.

The role of the MDT is to work as a single unit in determining the possible cause, contributing behavioral factors, educational status,prognosis (outcome), and recommendations for a student with a suspected disability. The MDT’s major objective is to bring together manydisciplines and professional perspectives to help work on a case so that a single person is not required to determine and assimilate all ofthe factors that affect a particular child. The MDT is responsible for gathering all the necessary information on a child in order to determinethe most effective and practical direction for his or her education. In many states, the MDT’s findings are then reviewed by anothercommittee (sometimes referred to as the eligibility committee, IEP committee, or committee on special education). Its role is to determinewhether the findings of the MDT fall within the guidelines for classification of the student as having an exceptionality and requiring specialeducation services (more on the process of eligibility in Chapter 18). In accomplishing this task, the team members employ several types ofassessments and collect data from many sources.

To further comply with IDEA 2004, each local agency must ensure that

a. Assessment materials and other evaluation materials are selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial orcultural basis.

b. Assessment materials are provided and administered in the language and form most likely to yield accurate information on what thechild knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally, unless it is not feasible to so provide or administer.

c. Tests and other assessment materials have been validated for the specific purpose for which they are used.

d. Tests and other assessment materials are administered by trained personnel in conformance with the instructions provided by theproducer of the tests and other assessment materials, except that individually administered tests of intellectual or emotional functioningshall be administered by a credentialed school psychologist.

e. Tests and other assessment materials are selected and administered to best ensure that a test administered to a pupil with impairedsensory, manual, or speaking skills produces test results that accurately reflect the pupil’s aptitude, achievement level, or any otherfactors the test purports to measure and not the pupil’s impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills, unless those skills are the factorsthe test purports to measure.

f. No single procedure is used as the sole criterion for determining an appropriate educational program for an individual with exceptionalneeds.

g. The pupil is assessed in all areas related to the suspected disability including, where appropriate, health and development, vision,including low vision, hearing, motor abilities, language function, general ability, academic performance, self-help, orientation andmobility skills, career and vocational abilities and interests, and social and emotional status. A developmental history is obtained, whenappropriate. For pupils with residual vision, a low vision assessment shall be provided.

h. Persons knowledgeable of that disability shall conduct the assessment of a pupil, including the assessment of a pupil with a suspectedlow incidence disability. For instance, if the screening reveals a suspected learning disability then a learning disabilities specialistbecomes part of the team. If the child is suspected of having a hearing impairment then an audiologist becomes a member of the team.Special attention shall be given to the unique educational needs, including, but not limited to, skills and the need for specialized services,materials, and equipment (IDEA 2004, sec. 614 et seq.).

8.2 MEMBERSHIP OF THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM

Although specific state regulations may differ on the membership of the MDT, the members are usually drawn from individuals andprofessionals within the school and community. Depending on the school in which you work, your role may be different from that ofanother professional with the same title in a different school (i.e., your roles and responsibilities as an educational evaluator in one schoolmay be different from those of an evaluator in another school). Listed here are the general roles and responsibilities of members of amultidisciplinary team:

School psychologist: The role of the school psychologist on the MDT usually involves the administration of individual intelligence tests,projective tests, personality inventories, and the observation of the student in a variety of settings.

School nurse: The role of the school nurse is to review all medical records, screen for vision and hearing, consult with outside physicians,and make referrals to outside physicians, if necessary.

Classroom teacher: The classroom teacher’s role is to work with the local school-based child study team to implement prereferralstrategies, and plan and implement, along with the special education team, classroom strategies that create an appropriate workingenvironment for the student.

School social worker: The social worker’s role on the MDT is to gather and provide information concerning the family system. This maybe accomplished through interviews, observations, conferences, and so forth.

Special education teacher: The roles of the special education teacher include consulting with parents and classroom teachers aboutprereferral recommendations, administering educational and perceptual tests, observing the student in a variety of settings, screeningstudents with suspected disabilities, writing IEPs, including goals and objectives with the team (based on assessed needs), andrecommending intervention strategies to teachers and parents.

Educational diagnostician : This professional administers a series of evaluations including norm-referenced and criterion-referencedtests, observes the student in a variety of settings, and makes educational recommendations that get applied to the IEP as goals andobjectives.

Physical therapist : The physical therapist is called on to evaluate a child who may be experiencing problems in gross motor functioning,living and self-help skills, and vocational skills necessary for the student to be able to function in certain settings. This professional may beused to screen, evaluate, provide direct services, or consult with the teacher, parent, or school.

Behavioral consultant : A behavioral consultant works closely with the team in providing direct services or consultation on issuesinvolving behavioral and classroom management techniques and programs.

Speech/language clinician: This professional is involved in screening for speech and language developmental problems, provides a fullevaluation on a suspected language disability, provides direct services, and consults with staff and parents.

Audiologist : This professional is called on to evaluate a student’s hearing for possible impairments and, as a result of the findings, mayrefer the student for medical consultation or treatment. The audiologist may also assist in helping students and parents obtain equipment(i.e., hearing aids) that may affect the child’s ability to function in school.

Occupational therapist : The occupational therapist is called on to evaluate a child who may be experiencing problems in fine motorskills and living and self-help skills. This professional may be used to screen; evaluate; provide direct services; consult with the teacher,parent, or school; and assist in obtaining the appropriate assistive technology or equipment for the student.

Guidance counselor : This individual may be involved in providing aptitude test information, providing counseling services, working withthe team on consolidating, changing, or developing a student’s class schedule, and assisting the child study team in developing prereferralstrategies.

Parents : The parent plays an extremely important role on the MDT in providing input for the IEP, working closely with members of theteam, and carrying out, assisting, or initiating academic or management programs within the child’s home (parents’ roles will bediscussed in more detail later in this chapter).

8.3 FORMAL REFERRAL FOR A SUSPECTED DISABILITY

Once the CST determines that a suspected disability may exist, a formal referral is made to the multidisciplinary team. A formal referral isnothing more than a form starting the special education process. A referral for evaluation and possible special education services isinitiated by a written request. However, you should understand that people other than the CST have the right under due process to initiate aformal referral for a child with a suspected disability. Depending on state regulations, these could include

• The child’s parent, advocate, person in parental relationship, or legal guardian

• A classroom teacher

• Any professional staff member of the public or private school district

• A judicial officer—a representative of the court

• A student on his or her own behalf if he or she is 18 years of age or older or an emancipated minor (a person under the age of 18 whohas been given certain adult rights by the court)

• The chief school officer of the state or his or her designee responsible for the welfare, education, or health of children

The Contents of a Referral to the MDT

This signed formal referral is usually sent to the MDT so that the team can begin the process of formal assessment. At the same time, thereferral is sent to the chairperson of the eligibility committee (discussed in Chapter 19) indicating that a child with a suspected disability willbe reviewed by the committee in the near future. This referral should be in written form and dated. This makes it official and gives a startdate because time lines are involved. A referral from the CST should include a great deal of information to assist the MDT in its assessment.Further documentation as to why a possible disability exists, descriptions of attempts to remediate the child’s behaviors (prereferralstrategies), or performance prior to the referral should all be included. All of these are important, especially the attempts that have beenmade prior to the referral. Remember, the district should try to keep the child in the mainstream, and the documentation it provides at thisstep in the process should ensure that it has done everything possible before beginning the referral process (prereferral options previouslydiscussed in Chapter 7).

Referrals from the CST for a formal assessment are forwarded to the MDT. If the referral is not from the parents, the district must informthe parents in writing immediately that their child has been referred for assessment of a suspected disability. The referral states that thechild may have a disability that adversely affects educational performance. An important point to remember is that a referral to the MDTdoes not necessarily mean that the child has a disability. It signals that the child is having learning and/or behavioral difficulties, and thatthere is a concern that the problem may be due to a disability.

Initial Referral to the MDT from the School Staff

As previously stated, once the CST has determined that a disability may exist, the team must alert the chairperson of the MDT that a childwith a suspected disability is being referred for review. This, in all actuality, begins the special education process. At this time, the team mayfill out a form like the one in Figure 8.1.

Initial Referral to the MDT from a Parent/Guardian

An initial referral to the MDT from the school staff alerts the chairperson of the MDT that the local school has made every attempt toresolve the student’s difficulties prior to the formal referral. The form also informs the chairperson that the parental rights have beenfollowed. In other cases, a student’s parent or guardian may initiate a referral to the MDT for suspicion of a disability under specialeducation laws or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. A fully completed referral form and any relevant information is sent to theappropriate special education administrator. Usually, on the receipt of the parent’s referral, the chairperson of the MDT will send to theparent/guardian an assessment plan (discussed next) and the parent’s due process rights statement. The building principal is also notifiedof the referral. When the possibility of a suspected disability of a child is brought to the school’s attention by the parent, then the formpresented in Figure 8.2 is filled out and forwarded.

FIGURE 8.1 Initial Referral to the MDT from the School Staff

FIGURE 8.2 Initial Referral to the MDT from a Parent/Guardian

Important Point: If a release for testing (assessment plan) is not secured at a separate meeting, the chairperson of the MDT will mail oneto the parent along with the letter indicating that a referral has been made. However, no formal evaluations may begin until the districthas received signed permission from the parent or guardian.

Previous section

Next section

8.4 ASSESSMENT PLANS—CONSENT FOR EVALUATION

Prior to any assessment, the MDT must secure an agreement by the parent to allow the members of the team to evaluate the child. Thisrelease is part of the assessment plan and should have the following characteristics:

• Use language easily understood by the general public.

• Be provided in the primary language of the parent or other mode of communication used by the parent, unless to do so is clearly notfeasible.

• Explain the types of assessments to be conducted.

• State that no individualized education program (IEP) will result from the assessment without the consent of the parent.

• State that no assessment shall be conducted unless the written consent of the parent is obtained prior to the assessment. The parentshall have at least 15 days (may vary from state to state) from the receipt of the proposed assessment plan to arrive at a decision.Assessment may begin immediately upon receipt of the consent.

• Note in the copy of the notice of parent rights the right to record electronically the proceedings of the eligibility committee meetings.

• Provide that the assessment shall be conducted by persons competent to perform the assessment, as determined by the school district,county office, or special education local plan area.

• Provide that any psychological assessment of pupils must be conducted by a qualified school psychologist.

• Provide that any health assessment of pupils shall be conducted only by a credentialed school nurse or physician who is trained andprepared to assess cultural and ethnic factors appropriate to the pupil being assessed.

8.5 ASSESSMENT OPTIONS OF THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM

Only when the parents have been informed of their rights, a release has been obtained, and the assessment plan has been signed canassessment begin. The MDT has several evaluation options from which to choose. The MDT most often assesses a child with a suspecteddisability using the evaluations discussed in the following sections.

Academic Achievement Evaluation

An academic achievement evaluation (see Chapter 9) is frequently recommended when a child’s academic skill levels (reading, writing,math, and spelling) are unknown or inconsistent. The evaluation will determine strengths and weaknesses in the child’s academicperformance.

THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVES OF AN ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT EVALUATION

• Help determine the child’s stronger and weaker academic skill areas. The evaluation may give useful information when making practicalrecommendations to teachers about academic expectations, areas in need of remediation, and how to best present information to assistthe child’s ability to learn.

• Help the teacher gear the materials to the learning capacity of the individual child. A child reading 2 years below grade level mayrequire modified textbooks or greater explanations prior to a lesson.

• Develop a learning profile that can help the classroom teacher understand the best way to present information to the child andtherefore increase the child’s chances of success.

• Help determine whether the child’s academic skills are suitable for a regular class or so severe that a more restrictive educationalsetting is required—that is, an educational setting or situation best suited to the present needs of the student other than a full-timeregular class placement (resource room, self-contained class, special school, etc.).

• Use an achievement battery that covers enough skill areas to make an adequate diagnosis of academic strengths and weaknesses.

SOME SYMPTOMS THAT MIGHT SUGGEST THE RECOMMENDATION FOR SUCH AN EVALUATION

• Consistently low test scores on group achievement tests

• Indications of delayed processing when faced with academic skills

• Labored handwriting after grade 3

• Poor word recall

• Poor decoding (word attack) skills

• Discrepancy between achievement and ability

• Consistently low achievement despite remediation

In most cases of a suspected disability, the academic achievement evaluation is always a part of the formal evaluation.

Intellectual and Psychological Evaluation

Intellectual and psychological evaluations are appropriate when the child’s intellectual ability is unknown or when there is a question abouthis or her inability to learn (see Chapter 9 and Chapter 10). It is useful when the CST suspects a potential learning, emotional, or intellectualproblem. The psychological evaluation can rule out or rule in emotionality as a primary cause of a child’s problem. Ruling this factor out isnecessary before a diagnosis of learning disabled (LD) can be made.

OBJECTIVES OF A PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION

• Determine the child’s present overall levels of intellectual ability

• Determine the child’s present verbal intellectual ability

• Determine the child’s non-language intellectual ability

• Explore indications of greater potential

• Find possible patterns involving learning style—that is, verbal comprehension, concentration, and the like

• Ascertain possible influences of tension and anxiety on testing results

• Determine the child’s intellectual ability to deal with present grade-level academic demands

• Explore the influence of intellectual ability as a contributing factor to a child’s past and present school difficulties—that is, limitedintellectual ability found in retardation

SOME SYMPTOMS THAT MIGHT SIGNAL THE NEED FOR SUCH AN EVALUATION

• High levels of tension and anxiety exhibited in behavior

• Aggressive behavior

• Lack of motivation or indications of low energy levels

• Patterns of denial

• Oppositional behavior

• Despondency

• Inconsistent academic performance, ranging from very low to very high

• History of inappropriate judgment

• Lack of impulse control

• Extreme and consistent attention-seeking behavior

• Pattern of provocative behavior

As with the academic assessment, the psychological evaluation is a normal part of a referral for a suspected disability.

Perceptual Evaluation

A perceptual evaluation (see Chapter 12) is suggested when the team suspects discrepancies in the child’s ability to receive and processinformation. This assessment may focus on a number of perceptual areas including:

• Auditory modality: The delivery of information through sound

• Visual modality: The delivery of information through sight

• Tactile modality: The delivery of information through touch

• Kinesthetic modality: The delivery of information through movement

• Reception: The initial receiving of information

• Perception: The initial organization of information

• Association or organization: Relating new information to other information and giving meaning to the information received

• Memory: The storage or retrieval process that facilitates the associational process to give meaning to information or help in relatingnew concepts to other information that might have already been learned

• Expression: The output of information through vocal, motor, or written responses

THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVES OF THE PERCEPTUAL ASSESSMENT

• Help determine the child’s stronger and weaker modality for learning. Some children are visual learners, some are auditory, and somelearn well through any form of input. However, if a child is a strong visual learner in a class in which the teacher relies on auditorylectures, then it is possible that his or her ability to process information may be hampered. The evaluation may give useful informationfor making practical recommendations to teachers about how to best present information to assist the child’s ability to learn.

• Help determine a child’s stronger and weaker process areas. A child having problems in memory and expression will very quickly fallbehind the rest of his or her class. The longer these processing difficulties continue, the greater the chance for development ofsecondary emotional problems (emotional problems resulting from continued frustration with the ability to learn).

• Develop a learning profile that can help the classroom teacher understand the best way to present information to the child, therebyincreasing the child’s chances of success.

• Help determine whether the child’s learning process deficits are suitable for a regular class or so severe that a more restrictiveeducational setting is required—that is, an educational setting or situation best suited to the present needs of the student other than afull-time regular class placement (resource room, self-contained class, special school).

Oral Language Evaluation

This recommendation (see Chapter 13) usually occurs when the child is experiencing significant delays in speech or language development,problems in articulation, or problems in receptive or expressive language.

SOME SYMPTOMS THAT MIGHT WARRANT SUCH AN EVALUATION

• Difficulty pronouncing words through grade 3

• Immature or delayed speech patterns

• Difficulty labeling thoughts or objects

• Difficulty putting thoughts into words

Occupational Therapy Evaluation

This evaluation (see Chapter 15) may be considered by the team when the child is exhibiting problems involving fine motor upper-bodyfunctions. Examples of these would include abnormal movement patterns, sensory problems (sensitive to sound, visual changes, etc.),hardship with daily living activities, organizational problems, attention span difficulties, equipment analysis, and interpersonal problems.

Physical Therapy Evaluation

When the child is exhibiting problems with lower body and gross motor areas, physical therapy evaluation (see Chapter 15) may beconsidered. Examples of these might be range of motion difficulties; architectural barrier problems; problems in posture, gait, andendurance; and joint abnormalities.

8.6 PARENTAL PARTICIPATION IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

Once the CST has made a formal referral for assessment to the MDT for a child with a suspected disability, the parents need to be called into provide pertinent background information that will assist in the assessment process. The participation of the parents is crucial to thisprocess.

Although designing, conducting, interpreting, and paying for the assessment are the school system’s responsibilities, parents have animportant part to play before, during, and after the evaluation. There is a range of ways that parents may involve themselves in theassessment of their child. The extent of their involvement, however, is a personal decision and will vary from family to family.

Waterman (1994) lists parental options, responsibilities, and expectations prior to an assessment for a suspected disability:

• Parents may initiate the assessment process by requesting that the school system evaluate their child for the presence of a disability andthe need for special education.

• Parents must be notified by the school, and give their consent, before any initial evaluation of the child may be conducted.

• Parents may wish to talk with the professional responsible for conducting the evaluation to find out what the evaluation will involve.

• Parents may find it very useful to become informed about assessment issues in general and any specific issues relevant to their child(e.g., assessment of minority children, use of specific tests or assessment techniques with a specific disability).

• Parents should advocate for a comprehensive evaluation of their child—one that investigates all skill areas apparently affected by thesuspected disability and that uses multiple means of collecting information (e.g., observations, interviews, alternative approaches).

• Parents may suggest specific questions to the MDT they would like to see addressed through the assessment.

• Parents should inform the MDT of any accommodations the child will need (e.g., removing time limits from tests, conductinginterviews/testing in the child’s native language, adapting testing environment to child’s specific physical and other needs).

• Parents should inform the MDT if they themselves need an interpreter or other accommodations during any of their discussions withthe school.

• Parents may prepare their child for the assessment process, explaining what will happen and, where necessary, reducing the child’sanxiety. It may help the child to know that he or she will not be receiving a “grade” on the tests.

• Parents need to share with the MDT their insights into the child’s background (developmental, medical, and academic) and past andpresent school performance.

• Parents may wish to share with the MDT any prior school records, reports, tests, or evaluation information available on their child.

• Parents may need to share information about cultural differences that can illuminate the MDT’s understanding of the student.

• Parents need to make every effort to attend interviews the MDT may set up with them and provide information about their child.

How to Conduct Parent Intakes and Interviews

There may be times when a member of the MDT is called on to do a parent intake , a gathering of pertinent information from a parent. Athorough parent intake is a crucial part of the assessment process. The parents can offer information on a child that is not seen by teachersor other staff members and may have profound effects on the outcome of the assessment. This may involve interviewing the parent toobtain a complete Family history . In some cases, this part of the assessment process may be difficult to obtain because of a number ofvariables—parents’ work restrictions, inability to obtain child care for younger siblings, resistance, or apathy.

In many schools, the psychologist or social worker will normally meet with the parents to collect this information. However, it is importantthat all members of the MDT understand the process in case anyone is asked to do the interview. When the interview is arranged, there areseveral things to recognize and consider before a parent meeting.

WHEN CONDUCTING A PARENT INTAKE, YOU SHOULD TRY TO DO THE FOLLOWING:

• Help the parent(s) feel comfortable and at ease by setting up a receptive environment.

• If possible, hold meetings in a pleasant setting, around a table rather than behind a desk. An effort to ease tension should be made, suchas offering simple refreshments or encouraging parents to take brief notes so they feel more in control of your information.

• Never view parents as adversaries even if they are angry or hostile. Any anger or hostility that the parents may exhibit could be adefense because they may not be aware of what the evaluator will be asking or because they may have experienced negative schoolmeetings over the years. Because this may be an opportunity for parents to “vent,” evaluators should listen and strive to understandtheir concerns without being defensive.

• Inform parents every step of the way as to the purpose of meetings and the steps involved in the assessment process. Parents need tobe reassured that no recommendation will be made or implemented without their input and permission.

• Inform parents of the types, names, and purposes of the evaluation instruments chosen by the MDT. Parents need to be reassured thatthe evaluation is looking for a way to help the child.

Reassure parents about the confidentiality of information gathered about their child. They should know which individuals on the team willbe seeing the information and the purpose for their review of the facts. Evaluators should also make every effort to make parents feel freeto call with any questions or concerns they may have.

Goals of a Parent Intake

A parent intake should be done with sensitivity and diplomacy. Keep in mind that although some questions may not be of concern to mostparents, they may be perceived as intrusive by others. The questions should be specific enough to help in the diagnosis of the problem, butnot so specific as to place the parent in a vulnerable and defensive position. There are four main areas usually covered in a parent intake:

1. Identifying data and family information : Confirmation of names, addresses, phone numbers, and dates of birth; siblings’ names,ages, and dates of birth; parents’ occupations; other adults residing within the home; marital status of parents; and so on.

2. Developmental history : Length of delivery; type of delivery; complications if any; approximate ages of critical stages, that is, walkingand talking; hospital stays; illnesses other than normal ones; sleeping habits; eating habits; high fevers; last eye exam; last hearing exam;falls or injuries; traumatic experiences; medications; and any prior developmental testing.

3. Academic history : Number of schools attended, types of schools attended, adjustment to kindergarten, best school year, worst schoolyear, best subject, worst subject, prior teacher reports, prior teacher comments, and homework behavior.

4. Social history: The child’s groups or organizations; social behavior in a group situation; hobbies, areas of interest, circle of friends,sports activities. Shown in Figure 8.3 is an example of a parent intake completed by the school social worker. Here, the intake was donewith the mother of the child, Mrs. Bali Shah.

FIGURE 8.3 Example of a Parent Intake Form

8.7 CONFIDENTIALITY

Information about the child collected through assessment automatically becomes a part of a child’s school records. The school districtshould establish policies regarding confidentiality of information contained in the school record, such as informing the parent and the child(above age 18) of their right to privacy, who has access to the information, and their right to challenge those records should they beinaccurate, misleading, or otherwise inappropriate. To communicate this information to the parent, handouts describing the district’s policyon confidentiality of school records are usually given out on the day of the parent intake.

Because professionals conducting the evaluation are involved in collecting confidential information about a child’s health status andeducational development, it is very important that verbal as well as written accounts of the child’s performance be held in the strictestconfidence. Personnel involved in the evaluation should treat their own impressions and concerns about the children they see in aconfidential manner and should refrain from talking about children and their performance with people not directly involved withconducting the evaluation. If parents ask how their child is doing during the evaluation, explain that the screening results are meaningfulonly after all the testing has been completed and their child’s performance in all areas is recorded. You should also inform them at this timethat they are entitled to receive a complete typed report from the evaluation personnel. The person in charge of evaluation may choose todesignate certain persons responsible for answering specific questions about the evaluation instruments, children’s responses, and reports.

Conclusion

The MDT plays a critical role in the assessment of a child with a suspected disability. An effective MDT works as an interdisciplinary team tomake many of the most important decisions for a child and his or her possible future in special education. By working as a professionalteam, the members of the MDT have the opportunity to help numerous children. An efficient MDT gathers much data and takes significanttime to analyze each child’s potential problems. In the end, its recommendations may be the most important ones for children who are inneed of services.

It is very important to remember that referring a child for a suspected disability could have tremendous impact on his or her life. Becausethis is a formal referral for special education, it has legal implications, and therefore, it is extremely important that the MDT follow allprocedures, complete all necessary forms, and make sure that it complies with the specific time limits required by the state in which thechild resides.

Parents have many rights during the assessment process. Regardless of race, creed, color, socioeconomic status, and so on, all parents areafforded the same legal rights and protections under federal law. The differences arise in the parents’ exercising of their rights. Someparents will be heavily involved in their child’s assessment for a suspected disability, whereas others will show little, if any, interest—onlysigning the release form and never participating or attending any optional sessions for them. Parents need to be aware of their rights. As aspecial educator, there are many ways to make parents comfortable when you meet with them. Remember, most parents are scared andconfused about the entire process. Normally, all they want is for their child to be evaluated so that success, both in and out of school,becomes a future possibility.

Once written consent of the parent or legal guardian is given for assessment, the MDT moves to the evaluation phase of the assessmentprocess. The next several chapters address the various evaluation instruments available to the MDT in the formal evaluation of a child witha suspected disability.

Vocabulary

Academic history: A section of the parent intake form that asks about number of schools attended, types of schools attended, adjustmentto kindergarten, best school years, worst school year, best subject, worst subject, prior teacher reports, prior teacher comments, andhomework behavior.

Audiologist: This professional will be called on to evaluate a student’s hearing for possible impairments, and as a result of the findings, mayrefer the student for medical consultation or treatment. The audiologist may also assist in helping students and parents obtain equipment—that is, hearing aids that may improve the child’s ability to function in school.

Behavioral consultant: A behavioral consultant works closely with the team in providing direct services or consultation on issuesinvolving behavioral and classroom management techniques and programs.

Classroom teacher: The member of the MDT who works with the CST to implement prereferral strategies and plans and implements anyclassroom techniques to help the student.

Developmental history: A section of the parent intake form that asks about length of delivery, type of delivery, complications if any,approximate ages of critical stages (i.e., walking, talking), hospital stays, illnesses other than normal last eye exam, last hearing exam, falls orinjuries, traumatic experiences, medications, and any prior testing.

Educational diagnostician: Administers a series of evaluations including norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests, observes thestudent in a variety of settings, and makes educational recommendations that get applied to the IEP as goals and objectives.

Family history: A description of the family life situation over time.

Formal referral: Once the CST determines that a suspected disability may exist, a formal referral is made. It is nothing more than a formstarting the special education process.

Guidance counselor: This individual may be involved in providing aptitude test information; providing counseling services; working withthe team on consolidating, changing, or developing a student’s class schedule; and assisting the child study team in developing prereferralstrategies.

Identifying data and family information: A section of the parent intake form that asks about confirmation of names, addresses, phonenumbers, dates of birth; siblings’ names, ages, and dates of birth; parents’ occupations; other adults residing within the home; maritalstatus of parents.

Occupational therapist: The occupational therapist is called on to evaluate a child who may be experiencing problems in fine motor skillsand living and self-help skills. This professional may be used to screen; evaluate; provide direct services; consult with the teacher, parent, orschool; and assist in obtaining the appropriate assistive technology or equipment for the student.

Parent intake: A gathering of pertinent information from a parent.

Parents (on the MDT): The parent plays an extremely important role on the MDT in providing input for the IEP, working closely with othermembers of the team, and carrying out, assisting, or initiating academic or management programs within the child’s home.

Physical therapist: The physical therapist is called on to evaluate a child who may be experiencing problems in gross motor functioning,living and self-help skills, and vocational skills necessary for the student to be able to function in certain settings. This professional may beused to screen, evaluate, provide direct services, or consult with the teacher, parent, or school.

School nurse: The member of the MDT who reviews all medical records, screens for vision and hearing, and handles other medicalconcerns.