No abstract

Response to Intervention (RtI) is a framework schools can use to organize curriculum, instruction, and assessment so all students are screened on a regular basis and those who are at-risk for not meeting standards are provided with appropriate interventions (Batsche, Kavale, & Kovaleski, 2006). This paper explored the quantitative findings from a survey of RtI implementation in one New England state. The researchers used an online platform to design a Likert style survey with 34 closed item responses as well as five qualitative questions. The survey was administered to all principals in the state and had a response rate of 62.4%. Self-reports of “full” or “partial” implementation suggested that about 75% of schools were implementing RtI; however, the results also indicated a lack of consistency across districts. Study findings pointed to the need for additional research and clarity around fidelity of implementation with RtI, specifically with regard to what practices or procedures must be in place to qualify as “full implementation” of the RtI framework. The study offers a number of recommendations for policy and practice including the need for more research and educator training about the framework.

While the basic tenets of the RtI model are well-established in the literature, few studies have been conducted to describe its implementation in rural schools. We conducted a qualitative study in three rural schools that had been designated as pilot sites by our state department of education. A cross-case analysis of the data collected through interviews, observations, and document reviews indicated positive changes, including (a) increased use of databased decision-making, (b) increased collaboration among general and special educators, (c) development of a common knowledge base around RtI, (d) re-definition of principals' roles, and (e) promising trends on statewide tests of reading achievement.

A rationale is presented for the development of specialized personnel preparation programs to train secondary special educators as employment training specialists. A philosophical and theoretical base for this position is outlined, along with the roles and responsibilities these individuals will need to assume in their schools and communities. Finally, details are provided of a graduate-level program at the University of Vermont to train employment training specialists.Over the past 5 years, there has been an increased interest in preparing special educators to provide services to handicapped secondary-school students (Clark, 1984). This interest has evolved from a number of sources, including federal initiatives, legislation, demographics, and a concomitant lack of sufficient services following high school. For example, the Office of Special Education Programs in the U.S. Department of Education has instituted a number of initiatives in research, model demonstration, and personnel preparation directed at improving vocational and employment services for secondary students with handicaps. Similarly, Congress has passed legislation in special education and vocational education with requirements specifically designed to facilitate the transition from school to work. For example, PL 98-199, the 1984 amendments to the Education of the Handicapped Act, included provisions for funding model programs, research, and training to enhance special education at the secondary level. The Carl Perkins Vocational Education Act of 1984, PL 98-524, contained requirements for ensuring access to a full range of vocational programs for students with handicaps, as well as a specific mandate requiring that career guidance and counseling be provided to all handicapped students as they move from vocational education to community employment.Another phenomenon that has influenced the need for transition services is the increasingly large number of students with handicaps who are leaving the secondary school system. These numbers have increased over the last 10 years because of improvements in special education identification and intervention strategies that have provided opportunities for youth with handicaps to remain in school. However, the capacity for continued postsecondary services has not kept pace with the numbers of students requiring continued services following high school (Bellamy, 1985;

No abstract