I would describe Response to Intervention as a systematic, deliberate and data-driven process for tailoring a child’s education to his or her unique needs and abilities. The goal is to help each student achieve grade-level expectations with the understanding that different children will need different degrees and types of support to get there. Response to Intervention (hereafter referred to as RTI) creates a clear and objective framework for determining these needs through the use of standardized data. Thus a teacher is not relying on subjective classroom observations or personal opinions of a student’s ability. It is “no excuses” approach to ensure that every student’s educational needs are met, regardless of background, economic status, home language, or any other factor.
Response to Intervention is characterized by early identification of students that are at risk for learning issues and reaching them through targeted instruction, or interventions. The intention of these interventions is to give students the additional support they need to meet grade-level expectations. RTI was initially used as a tool for special education and early reading instruction. Currently the use of RTI has expanded to all subjects and grade levels(Samuels,2011).
History of RTI
RTI gained leverage nationally when the Reading First program, a component of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, recommended its use and when the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Act mandated that states must allow districts to use RTI as one method for identifying students with disabilities. Since then, its prevalence has grown exponentially. In a 2010 survey, 61% of district administrators either had already implemented RtI in their districts or were in the process of implementing it (Samuels,2011).
How RTI Works
According to the book Teaching Reading to Students Who Are at Risk or Have Disabilities (Bursuck & Damer, 2011), RTI is a type of multi-tiered system with the additional step that it can be used to identify students with learning disabilities. In a multi-tiered system, regular research-based assessments are given to all students, and those that seemed to be struggling were placed into more intensive tiers of instruction. Tier I is the general classroom curriculum, ideally taught to all students, Tier 2 provides more small group support of the curriculum, and Tier 3 often consists of an intensive, alternative program given in small group, usually by a special education teacher (Bursuck & Damer, 2011).
Effective Tier I instruction should be sufficient for about 80% of students. An additional 15% or more will need focused support in Tier 2 to be successful. These students will receive the universal instruction in Tier I, but will need extra small group review and practice of the concepts and skills in order to truly master them. The remaining 5% will have needs beyond what Tier 2 intervention can meet. They will often need an alternative program that is explicit and systematic. Some of these students may have pervasive reading disabilities and should receive special education services. Students with learning disabilities may be included in Tier 3 interventions or become a separate Tier 4 group, depending on the model (Bursuck & Damer, 2011).
Works Cited
Bursuck, W.D., & Damer, M. (2011). Teaching Reading to Students Who Are at Risk or Have Disabilities. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Samuels, C.A. (2011). Monitoring Progress: Response to Intervention’s Promise and Pitfalls. Education Week, 30(22), s2-s5. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org.
Image taken from http://www.sterncenter.org/resources/rti
No comments:
Post a Comment