Can you incorporate a paper that I already started?

Outline

A. Introduction

1. Does Response to Intervention (RTI) continue to be the most effective way to

determine special education eligibility?

a. Why not?

B. Overview of Response to Intervention (RTI)

1. History

2. Use

3. Process

4. Benefits

C. Literature Review

1. Review of literature

D. Conclusion

1. How my topic supports change in special education.

E. References

Introduction

To lessen the number of students that were being placed in special education Response to Intervention became a part of IDEA. Since its inception Response to Intervention or RTI has been used to identify students with specific learning disabilities. Even though RTI was mandated by the government, how to implement RTI was left up to the states. Because of this RTI varies from state to state and this presents a problem for special education. IDEA says that states must find a new way to identify students that need special education services (Sullivan & Castro-Villareal, 2013). With that being said, does RTI continue to be the most effective way to determine special education eligibility? What role does special education leadership play in RTI?

In an article by Fuchs et al. (2010) about RTI, the author claims that there are two groups that hold different views about what RTI should look like. The two groups are the proponents of No Child Left Behind or NCLB and the proponents of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or IDEA. The IDEA group thinks that RTI should “promote both early intervention and more valid methods of disability identification” (Fuchs et al., 2010). The NCLB group thinks that RTI “stands for a reformed service delivery system that emphasizes early intervention and the unification of general education and special education, which in turns facilitates adoptions of challenging standards and accountability for all” (Fuchs et al., 2010).

So how does RTI impact the number of students placed in special education? One way is that teachers do not do the work so some children who should or would be identified are not identified early enough and other students are overidentified. Some districts and principals do not make sure that their teachers are providing the interventions, meet to discuss progress or change the interventions as needed. Special education leaders play an important role in the proper implementation of RTI. According to Santsosti et al. (2011), the role of the special education leader is key as a vehicle of change in the RTI implementation process.

Literature Review

Before RTI, students with specific learning disabilities or SLDs were identified by a substantial difference in IQ and accomplishment (Fletcher & Miciak, 2019). States had to follow the federal guidelines, but school districts were allowed to use whatever testing methods they chose. This led to disproportionality and questions of validity. With the signing of the reauthorization of the Individual with Disabilities Act or IDEA in December of 2000, President Bush signed into law RTI as well, a way to identify students with disabilities rather than the traditional IQ method (Hite & McGahey, 2015). Now states had to use RTI in addition to IQ for determining SLPs. According to the literature, RTI is a promising new way through which learning disabilities can be recognized (Carter-Smith, 2019). In a similar article Fuchs (2006) noted that RTI is a way to provide help early on for students in danger of failing.

For example, 6 weeks into the school year teacher notices student is struggling. Then the school wide benchmark is administered. Benchmark data indicates that the student is performing below grade level compared to grade level and district norms. Academic data continues to reflect that the student is struggling. Student is unsuccessful for the first nine weeks.

At the start of quarter 2 teacher administer a brief universal screener. Access basic skill that every learner should know. Why? To identify target skills for support. Example of a universal screener GRASP. Screener revels deficit. Review student’s permanent records for longitudinal data (previous standardized test scores and report cards). Initiate Tier 2 referral to the RTI Committee. Get the hearing and vision consent and passed. Parent notification Upon receiving passed hearing and vision, then you start progress monitoring. Target skill for progress monitoring is identified in the universal screener. Provide a researched based intervention and monitor the improvement or lack of the basic skills. Then assess the student at grade level. Then administer a grade level assessment for the target skill. Looking for improving. If the data indicates improvement continue intervention. If the data does not show improvement. Change the intervention and do another universal screener. Target a different skill and re-access with a grade level assessment. Grade level assessment indicates that students continues to struggle.

Request a meeting for RTI committee, refer the student to tier 3. Request a parent meeting, collect student background. Tier 3 changes how the intervention is administered, and progress monitoring is handled. Continues researched based intervention but the intervention is different then what the students get. Intensity increases. Once a week you administer a grade level assessment. Then instructional assessment once a month. Do a psychological referral, get consent to screen, do the psychological. Print intervention data and progress monitoring data (grade level and instructional from both tiers, report cards, work samples, school benchmarks). Continue to progress monitor and provide intervention during this phase). If a parent request is made start at Tier 3. The way that RTI work is that it promotes a more consistent way to determine who needs helps and uses the formative data that follows a child’s reaction to systematic, examination-centered interventions (Stahl, 2016).

Conclusion

RTI uses a tiered system to implement interventions. Interventions in Tier 1 is what all teachers should be doing in the general education classroom. It is in Tier 2 where students are put in smaller groups, pulled out of the classroom, or receive interventions by the special education teacher. If a student continues to perform poorly in the general education classroom then the student is moved to Tier 3 and a referral to special education is made. Although RTI is mandated by law, the implementation process varies from school system to school system. The point of RTI is to try to intervene first to determine which kids are really in need of special education services. General education teachers are supposed to become familiar with the strategies and interventions that will help to identify these students as early as possible. Special education leaders can help teachers to understand the importance of their role in RTI and help to properly implement RTI with fidelity.

References

Carter-Smith, K. (2019). Response to Intervention (RTI). Salem Press Encyclopedia.

Cooley, D. R. (2013). Special Education Leadership and the Implementation of Response to Intervention [ProQuest LLC]. In ProQuest LLC.

Fletcher, J.M, & Miciak, J. (2019). The identification of specific learning disabilities: a summary

of research on best practices. The University of Texas System/Texas Education Agency Retrieved from https://ec.ncpublicschools.gov/disability-resources/specific-learning-disabilities/sld-policy-addendum-and-resources/SLDManual_Final.pdf

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Stecker, P. M. (2010). The “blurring” of special education in a new Continuum of general education placements and services. Exceptional Children, 76(3), 301–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291007600304

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. (2006). Introduction to Response to Intervention: What, Why, and How Valid Is It? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93-99. Retrieved April 12, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/4151803

Hite, J. E., & McGahey, J. T. (2015). Implementation and Effectiveness of the Response to Intervention (RTI) Program. Georgia School Counselors Association Journal, 22, 28–40.

Sansosti, F. J., Goss, S., & Noltemeyer, A. (2011). Perspectives of special education directors on response to intervention in secondary schools. Contemporary School Psychology, 9-20.

Stahl, K. A. D. (2016). Response to Intervention. Reading Teacher, 69(6), 659–663. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1457

Sullivan, J., & Castro-Villareal, F. (2013). Special education, response to intervention and the

Socialization of youth. Theory into Practice, 52(3), 180-189. https:\\doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2013.804309

2