Application of a Three-Tiered Response To Intervention Model for Instructional Planning, Decision Making, and the Identification of Children in Need of Services

Abstract

An alternative to the IQ-achievement discrepancy model for identifying students with learning disabilities is the response to intervention (RTI) model. There is a growing literature base in support of the RTI model, and within the reauthorization of IDEA there is an allowance for an RTI approach whereby RTI "may" be used by school psychologists when evaluating students for special education. The research base on RTI is expanding but there has been little empirical work directed toward understanding RTI as it is implemented by school-based practitioners. The current study examined a simple three-phase RTI model. Universal screening in mathematics was used in Phase I in conjunction with a brief skill/performance deficit assessment to identify students in need of instructional intervention. In Phase II, a classwide intervention was implemented to evaluate the extent to which poor academic performance was a function of lack of instruction. Phase III provided intensive intervention to five students who did not respond adequately to the classwide intervention. Only one student did not respond adequately to individual intervention.Response to intervention (RTI) evolved out of the Heller, Holtzman, and Messick (1982) critique of the IQ-achievement discrepancy (IAD) model and has since been conceptualized by Fuchs (1995) and later Fuchs and Fuchs (1998) and more recently summarized by Vaughn and Fuchs (2003). Identifying students in need of special services through an RTI model will require a paradigm shift. Rather than using standardized tests in an attempt to identify what is specifically wrong within a student, an RTI approach will require schools to examine contextual issues (quality of instruction) and more importantly shift focus from identifying students with a deficit to identifying students at risk. In an RTI model, many students may be identified as at risk but only those who subsequently fail to respond adequately to empirically based interventions qualify for special education services. Rather than relying on static test-based measures or a student's response to single interventions, RTI decision making is based upon direct assessments of students' response to varying levels of intervention intensity. As intervention intensity increases, there are

The response in response to intervention: Evaluating the utility of assessing maintenance of intervention effects

“…If a student's progressmonitoring data suggest that he or she responds to intervention, the student is called a "responder," and if data suggest the child does not respond then he or she is a "nonresponder," and may be considered further for special education eligibility. Given the possible negative consequences of placing a student in special education who should not be placed there (U.S. Department of Education, 2001) and the critical function that progress-monitoring data plays in an RTI model (Ardoin, Witt, Connell, & Koenig, 2005), it is essential that reliable, valid, and sensitive progressmonitoring measures are used.…”

Application of a Three-Tiered Instruction Model for Japanese Second-Grade Students to Improve Accuracy and Fluency of Multiplication Facts

“…e third tier is designed to provide intensive instruction that is usually conducted individually and with more frequent progress monitoring to identify an intervention method that will accelerate the learning of individual students. Previous researches demonstrated the e ectiveness of the tiered instruction to improve mathematics skills (e.g., Ardoin, Witt, Connell, & Koenig, 2005;VanDerHeyden, 2010). For example, Ardoin et al (2005) applied a three-tiered RtI model to elementary school mathematics (subtraction) instruction.…”

“…Previous researches demonstrated the e ectiveness of the tiered instruction to improve mathematics skills (e.g., Ardoin, Witt, Connell, & Koenig, 2005;VanDerHeyden, 2010). For example, Ardoin et al (2005) applied a three-tiered RtI model to elementary school mathematics (subtraction) instruction. During Tier 1, they conducted class-wide screening in mathematics using curriculum-based measurement probes and identi ed students in need of math intervention.…”

“…Four students whose performance remained low following Tier 2 participated in the Tier 3 instruction. During Tier 3, Ardoin et al (2005) applied peer tutoring alone or peer tutoring and CCC to improve subtraction performance. With the exception of one student, Tier 3 instruction increased the students' uency in subtraction.…”

How educators perceive the process and implementation of a multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) : a case study

“…Several researchers have found multi-tier programs to be effective (Ardoin, Witt, Connell, & Koenig, 2005;Fuchs & Fuchs, 2007;Glover & DiPerna, 2007). Program evaluations have been conducted to investigate student outcomes in school districts that have implemented a multitier service delivery model.…”