Response To Intervention

Educators today struggle with student test scores, always trying to reach higher and higher benchmarks (Nolan & Stitzlein, 2011). When students do not show adequate growth the teachers are left to blame (Oliver, 2009). Since the inception of Response to Intervention (RTI) students and teachers have been able to maintain a constant progression by recognizing when students are struggling and providing the proper interventions through the tiered model.

Students who are not making adequate progress with good classroom instruction should have an opportunity for intensive small-group or individual intervention instruction prior to a referral to special education services, but that instruction must be responsive to each student’s current knowledge

The five big ideas are comprised of phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, comprehension, and vocabulary (Shippen, Miller, Patterson, Houchins, & Darch, 2014). Research suggests Intervention programs have assisted students through scaffold lesson that help to improve student scores through repetitive practice of encoding and decoding skil ls (NRP, 2000). Students will become more confident in their reading skills, taking risks and learning newer, more difficult words over shorter periods of time, thus building their reading levels and improving their skills and score s. In this research, I will examine the role of encoding and decoding strategies on improving student reading skills in addition to how encoding and decoding strategy information can be used to increase efficacy in special

“DBI [is] an evidence based, validated process that holds promise for redefining special education” (Lemons, Kearns, & Davidson, 2014, p. 20). DBI can be used to determine the area of instruction that is to be focused on to assist the student with improving their reading skills. Prior to implementing DBI there are several steps that you should consider such as “selecting and instructional platform, determining how to intensify the platform, making a progress monitoring plan, setting instructional goals, and making final preparations” (Lemons et.al., 2014, p. 22). Review of student scores will help to determine which instructional platform to use and through the process of monitoring students’ progress we will be able to make qualitative and quantitative adaptations to a student’s educational plan, “although there are relatively few progress monitoring options, Curriculum Based Measurement of oral reading (CBM-R) is one of the most well established” (Christ, Zopluoglu, Long, & Monaghen, 2012, p. 357). CBM-R is only one progress monitoring tool; there are others such as Formative Assessment Instrumentation and Procedures for Reading (FAIP- R), AIMSweb, and Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Learning skills (DIBELS). “Progress monitoring can be conceptualized as either interim benchmark/screening assessments when data are collected three to