Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Response to intervention in the classroom
Response to intervention in the classroom
Response to intervention research
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Response to intervention in the classroom
Response to Intervention-Does it work or not? Response to Intervention (RTI)-Does it work or not? I am interested in knowing if this process works in a positive or negative way for students who are struggling with academics. I am going to discuss some of the research behind Response to Intervention, and how it affects student’s achievement. We want to know if regular education and special education students who get the appropriate interventions with RTI, show academic growth or if they are diagnosed for special education services. Federal Regulations specify “states must permit the use of a process based on the child’s response to scientific research-based intervention.” Students should receive appropriate and adequate instruction in regular education classrooms. Response to Intervention should not replace the need for a comprehensive evaluation. Teachers need to progress monitor “at risk” students to see if the interventions are working. A student who is in a regular education class, and not meeting academic needs, may not be a special education student. However, the student may have some deficits in academics, but using the response to intervention strategies may help these students to be able to meet academic requirements. There should be alternate ways to identify individuals with learning disabilities. Response to Intervention is the most promising method of alternate identification. Success will depend on whether it is appropriately implemented by highly trained professionals. In the past, IQ achievement test were the only way a student with a learning disability would be identified. However, a number of wrong students were identified, and students had to fail before receiving needed special education services. A number... ... middle of paper ... ...ecial education teachers and regular education teachers would be able to work closely together to help the students who are struggling. References Deno, S.L. (1986). Curriculum-based measurement. The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children 52 (3) 219-232. Fuchs, L. S. & Shinn, M. R. (1989). Writing CBM-IEP objectives. In M.R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based Measurement: Assessing special children. (pp. 130-152). New York: Guilford Press. Gresham, F.M. (2002). Responsiveness to intervention: An Alternative Approach to the identification of learning disabilities. In R. Bradley, L. Danielson, & D. P. Hallahan (Eds). Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice. (p. 467-519). Wedl, Robert J. (2005). Response to Intervention: An Alternative to Traditional Eligibility Criteria for Students with Disabilities. Educational/evolving. 1-24.
The study required that participants must be given IQ tests, and also that they be observed in a classroom setting while interventions were put in place. Thus the adminsitratiors were able to draw results both from IQ scores and actual classroom preformance.
That is, the IEP must document the student’s historical accomplishments and how their disability impacts their progress of the general curriculum. There should be annual goals, both academic and functional, that focus on what the student can reasonably accomplish. There should also be benchmarks that measure progress and communication processes that inform parents and other parties of the student’s progress. The IEP must identify which special education services will be used, such as supplementary aids and communication devices. The IEP must estimate how much of every school day will be spent separate from nondisabled
Edyburn, D. L. (2009). RTI and UDL interventions. The Journal of Special Education Technology, 24(2), 46–47.
Response to Intervention (RtI) is a framework based off the problem solving method that integrates assessment, and targeted instruction, within a multi-tiered intervention system. Implementation of RtI in schools is crucial to identify which students need additional intervention that will help increase their literacy skills, and prevent them from falling behind. RtI is based off multi-leveled tiers that are each categorized by the intensity of the intervention that is being used. The RtI framework is also used as a valued tool in monitoring and improving student behavior in the classroom through a model known as Positive Behavioral Intervention Support (PBIS).
What are the benefits of implementing early intervention and RTI’s for children with early signs of a learning disability? This is a serious topic because of the increase over the years of children with learning disabilities. Instead of just placing students in special education programs educators must assess and evaluate students. As well as try early intervention programs and responsiveness to intervention known as RTI to try to delay the disability or stop the disability from forming and progressing. I have gathered articles that show the implementing of early intervention programs and RTI models to enhance children that show signs of an early learning disability. The articles all show how these programs can help students progress in academics as well as behavior areas in the classroom.
In this case, teachers must employ other resources and feet collaboration from colleagues. This is where the RTI process comes into place. Messmer and Messmer, (2008) explained that the response to intervention serves as a vehicle to identify and serve students with learning difficulties. On the other hand, several steps should be followed to implement correctly RTI. In my opinion, my school possesses a fair understanding of the RTI process and manages the implementation of a consistent approach that positively affects the student.
In conclusion, it seems as though all the positives of the response to intervention program outweigh any negatives about it. The RTI program is extremely helpful in identifying any student that is having academic difficulties at an early age. Whether these students should be considered in the special education program or not can also be determined by using the RTI program. There is no reason to allow students to fail before any intervention is even considered. Anything that is beneficial in helping students succeed in their academic achievements should be viewed as a
Ormsbee, C. (2001). "Ending Discrimination in Special Education/Achieving Educational Equity (Book Review)." Intervention in School & Clinic; Sep2001, Vol. 37 Issue 1, p48.
This article is about “the difficulties of meeting the needs of twice-exceptional (2e) students, including students who are gifted with learning disabilities (LD)” (Yssel, 2014, p. 42). The problem with identifying students like this, is that they either mask their disability with their giftedness or vice versa. This masking effect “may cause both exceptionalities to appear less extreme; a student may fail to meet gifted criteria because the disability affects testing performance, or the student is performing at grade level and thus does not qualify for services under LD. In the past schools throughout the United States used the discrepancy model to identify students with LD” (Yssel, 2014, p. 44). “One major argument against the discrepancy model was that it makes early identification of a learning disability difficult” (Taylor, 2009, p 109). The twice exceptional students’ “needs were not evident until upper elementary or even middle school, at which point their frustration and LD might have permanently affected their motivation and ability to make appropriate progress in the curriculum with the reauthorization of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act in 2004, some states have since mandated use of the Response to intervention model. RTI replaces the wait-to-fail component of the discrepancy model with early intervention. The RTI model is divided into three tiers, in the first tier there is, observations and a Universal screening (which) identifies students who are academically at risk; during this screening, however, is when teachers and other professionals should consider whether they might be missing students who are gifted with LD.” (Yssel, 2014, p. 44).Ali, Mark and Lacy are three students that have a learning disa...
Finding reliable sources of information for learning disabilities is difficult. The subject is broad and many of the individuals offering information on the subject are doctors or professionals within the field of education. Similarly to the medical field, the opinions and research findings of the educational field very greatly between the researchers and what those researchers are attempting to discover or reveal.
Downing, J. E., & Peckham-Hardin, K. D. (2007). Inclusive Education: What Makes It a Good Education for Students with Moderate to Severe Disabilities?. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities (RPSD), 32(1), 16-30.
Soukup, J. H., Wehmeyer, M. L., Bashinski, S. M., & Bovaird, J. A. (2007). Classroom variables and access to the general curriculum for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 74(1), 101-120.
Differences in how a student’s brain works, receives and processes information, is the cause a learning disabilities in students. Students with learning disabilities are frequently misdiagnosed as being lazy, troublesome, non-caring, or unintelligent. Students with learning disabilities, however, typically have average intelligence. The only difference is that the students with learning disabilities brains gain and process information differently, than their non disabled peers. Students diagnosed with learning disabilities can be high achieving students, and taught strategies to overcome the learning disability. With effective ...
Pierangelo, R. A., & Giuliani, G. A. (2013). Assessment in special education: A practical approach. (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
specific learning disabilities in the United States of America. The Journal of International Association of Special Education, 10(1), 21-26.