ResponsivenessToIntervention: A New Method of Identifying Students with Disabilities

1
Responsiveness-To-Intervention A New Method of
Identifying Students with Disabilities
Douglas Fuchs, Lynn Fuchs, Donald Compton and
Joan Bryant Peabody College, Vanderbilt
University and National Research Center on
Learning Disabilities www.nrcld.org
2
Criticisms of Current Learning Disabilities
Definition

• Too many children are inappropriately identified
• Many children are classified as LD without
  participating in effective reading instruction in
  the regular classroom
• Too costly

3
Criticisms of IQ-Achievement Discrepancy

• IQ tests do not necessarily measure intelligence
• IQ and academic achievement are not independent
  of each other
• In the case of word reading skill deficits,
  IQ-achievement discrepant poor readers are more
  alike than different from IQ-achievement
  consistent poor readers
• Children must fail before they can be identified
  with a learning disability

4
OSEP LD Initiative

• Workgroup
• Commissioned papers
• LD Summit
• Researcher Roundtable
• Finding Common Ground Roundtable
• Funding the National Research Center on Learning
  Disabilities (NRCLD)
• Work with RRCs

5
Researcher Roundtable

• Response To Intervention
• There should be alternate ways to identify
  individuals with SLD in addition to achievement
  testing, history, and observations of the child.
  Response to quality intervention is the most
  promising method of alternate identification and
  can both promote effective practices in schools
  and help to close the gap between identification
  and treatment. Any effort to scale up response
  to intervention should be based on problem
  solving models that use progress monitoring to
  gauge the intensity of intervention in relation
  to the students response to intervention.
  Problem solving models have been shown to be
  effective in public school settings and in
  research.

6
What is the Responsiveness To Intervention
Approach to Identification?

• Many (all?) children in a class, school, or
  district are tested by one-point-in-time test
  administration or by repeated measurement in a
  circumscribed period.
• At-risk students are identified for
  intervention on the basis of their performance
  level or growth rate or both.
• Intervention is implemented and students are
  tested following, or throughout, the intervention
  period.
• Those who do not respond (treatment resisters)
  are identified as requiring
• - Multi-disciplinary team evaluation for
  possible disability certification and special
  education placement, OR
• - More intensive intervention(s).

7
Tertiary Prevention Specialized
Individualized Systems for Students with
Intensive Needs
CONTINUUM OF SCHOOL-WIDE SUPPORT
5
Secondary Prevention Specialized Group Systems
for Students with At-Risk Behavior
15
Primary Prevention School-/Classroom- Wide
Systems for All Students, Staff, Settings
80 of Students
8
Advantages of Responsiveness-To-Intervention
Approach

• Provides assistance to needy children in timely
  fashion. It is NOT a wait-to-fail model.
• Helps ensure that the students poor academic
  performance is not due to poor instruction.
• Assessment data are collected to inform the
  teacher and improve instruction. Assessments and
  interventions are closely linked.
• In some responsiveness-to-intervention models
  (e.g., Heartland, IA Minneapolis, MN Horry Co.,
  SC), nonresponders are not given labels, which
  are presumed to stigmatize and to represent
  disability categories (e.g., LD, BD, MR) that
  have little instructional validity.

9
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities

• Research
• State of states
• Identification methods
• Technical Assistance
• RRC Work
• www.nrcld.org

10
A Work in ProgressOperationalizing the Standard
Treatment Protocol Approach To Responsiveness-To-I
ntervention
11
Four Step Process

• Step 1 Screening (Responsibility General
  Education and Special Education)
• Step 2a Implementing General Education (Tier 1
  Responsibility General Education)
• Step 2b Monitoring Responsiveness to General
  Education (Responsibility General Education and
  Special Education)

12
Four Step Process (continued)

• Step 3a Implementing a Supplementary, Diagnostic
  Instructional Trial (Tier 2 (Responsibility
  General Education and Special Education)
• Step 3b Monitoring Responsiveness to a
  Supplementary, Diagnostic Instructional Trial
  (Tier 2 Responsibility General Education and
  Special Education)
• Step 4 Designation of Disability, Classification
  of Disability, and Special Education Placement
  (Responsibility Special Education)

13
What does this look like?Case Studies
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
Frequently Asked Questions

• Will this process delay identification?
• Does each child have to go through RTI or can a
  child have a traditional assessment?
• What will be required for professional
  development?
• Who is responsibility for the various activities
  required to implement RTI as a method of LD
  identification?

18
Frequently Asked Questions (continued)

• How long will the Step 4 evaluation be and what
  professional is likely to give the Step 4
  assessment?
• What proportion of students is likely to be
  identified as at risk (for Tier 1 monitoring) and
  for the Tier 2 diagnostic trial?
• Are there schools currently implementing RTI as a
  method of LD identification and, if so, how can I
  find learn more about their methods?

19
Questions
20
Special-ed-like instruction MacMaster/Fuchs

• Immediate corrective feedback
• Mastery of content before moving on
• More time on difficult activities
• More opportunities to respond
• Fewer transitions
• Setting goals and self monitoring
• Special relationship with tutor

21
(No Transcript)