Elementary teacher’s knowledge of response to intervention implementation: a preliminary factor analysis

Abstract

In the U.S., many states have adopted Response to Intervention or Multi-tiered Systems of Supports to provide early intervention. However, there is considerable variability in how states and schools implement RTI. Teachers are responsible for using student data from RTI to inform instructional decisions for students with or at risk for dyslexia, so it is necessary to understand the knowledge they have about the structure of RTI in their individual schools. This study reviews the results of an exploratory factor analysis of a survey aimed at measuring teachers' knowledge about RTI implementation and their understanding of RTI implementation within their school. The 52item survey was administered online to 139 general and special education teachers. The three final factors from this factor analytic work were: (1) Teacher Knowledge about Tier 1 Implementation;(2) Teacher Knowledge about Leadership and School Systems, and (3) Teacher Knowledge about Data-Based Decision Making. Factor determinacy scores demonstrated that the survey had high internal consistency. On average, teachers' survey scores were higher on the first two factors, and slightly lower on the third factor. Implications of the findings for teachers of students with learning disabilities, including dyslexia, and directions for future research were discussed.

A Snapshot of RTI Implementation a Decade Later: New Picture, Same Story

“…Bineham and colleagues (2014) surveyed 619 general and special education administrators nationally and found a notable discrepancy between knowing about RTI and knowing how to implement the tiered framework. Al Otaiba and colleagues (2019) surveyed 139 general and special education teachers to understand their knowledge of Tier 1 and preparedness to make data-based decisions. They found teachers reported greater levels of understanding than preparedness to implement.…”

Factors Related to Data-Based Decision-Making: Examining Experience, Professional Development, and the Mediating Effect of Confidence on Teacher Graph Literacy

“…Despite the legal mandates and supporting research behind DBDM, many teachers feel that they have inadequate knowledge to accurately read and interpret data (Al Otaiba et al, 2019; Schildkamp et al, 2014). Teachers, administrators, and other educational stakeholders report a general lack of knowledge about DBDM broadly, as well as important subskills within the DBDM framework (e.g., types of data, which tests to use, and how to link data to instruction; Coburn & Turner, 2011).…”

“…Albeit small, Castillo et al (2016b) found a negative and statistically significant relation between experience and knowledge. Because of the contradictory evidence, with some supporting for a positive relation between experience and knowledge, some supporting for no relation, and even one study demonstrating a negative relation, there is a need to further examine the link between teacher experience and knowledge (Al Otaiba et al, 2019; Ruble et al, 2018).…”

“…As the review of the literature demonstrates, the research surrounding DBDM, including knowledge, confidence, PD, and graph literacy, is unclear and even contradictory. Although data collection systems and the call for their use has existed for decades, the widespread use in a tiered system of education has a relatively short history and more research is needed (Al Otaiba et al, 2019; Barnes et al, 2019). This is especially true, considering that RTI is still not fully adopted or legally mandated and the fidelity with which it is implemented, including DBDM, is inadequate in many school systems (D.…”

“…RTI has increasingly been implemented nationwide, and many states are legally requiring RTI, especially in the treatment of at-risk students and identification of students for special education (Al Otaiba et al, 2019). Despite its expanding footprint in education, states and schools show inconsistent adoption and, in some cases, RTI implementation with poor fidelity (Bergstrom, 2008; Castillo et al, 2015; D.…”