Today I want to talk about Response to Intervention (RtI). In my experience working in the schools as part of my training, I have come to realize that, although many teachers already know quite a bit about RtI, there are some that do not. Therefore, I feel like it is important to take a few minutes and go through some key points about RtI to help give some background for future posts.
What is RtI?
RtI is a school-wide system with tiered supports to help students succeed. RtI uses a series of evidence-based approaches to provide high-quality instruction to students and came about, in part, as a result of the 2004 re-authorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA, 2004). Importantly, it is highly data-driven with regards to making decisions about the effectiveness of instructional approaches.
Prior to RtI, students who were struggling in class were often referred for a special education evaluation - which were traditionally based on the discrepancy model (i.e., a student's achievement score within the area of difficulty had to be significantly lower than their level of cognitive ability). There were many problems with this system (such as the fact that achievement and cognitive abilities are linked, so a discrepancy often would not be seen until the child has failed consistently over the course of years) and it also sort of created the notion that there were two categories: learning disabled children and non-learning disabled children. Students who were struggling but did not meet the cutoff criteria, then, were left without services and would often start to fall further and further behind until (potentially years later), their scores magically dropped far enough to qualify for additional services.
Enter RtI. This system is based on the idea that students are capable of learning and there are some students who simply need more help to grasp the content. RtI allows school psychologists and teachers to differentiate between students who need help and those with a true learning disability (as I will discuss more a little later). In a way, it is a system of prevention in that it offers additional assistance to struggling students (both general and special education) so that they can keep up with course content and not fall so far behind as to A) require qualification of special education and/or B) become so discouraged with school that they give up.
In short, RtI is a system that uses data-based decision making and evidence-based practices to provide high quality instruction to all students and interventions for those who need additional help.
The Tiered Structure of RtI
There is no single right way to do RtI. With the exception of the requirement to use evidence-based practices, there is a lot of freedom for interpreting what the system looks like. Typically, RtI is a three-tiered system, though there is even some debate on this (with some schools adding a fourth tier). Below I will present the tier-system that appeals most to me, which is taken from Brown-Chidsey and Steege (2010) and discuss briefly where the major differences in the system may lie from school-to-school. The RtI structure can be pictorially represented as:
(from Brown-Chidsey & Steege, 2010, pp. 5)
Tier I: Tier I includes instruction for all students. This involves teachers implementing evidence-based instructional practices in the classroom. In other words, Tier I is simply the teacher doing what he/she does best. Progress-monitoring for Tier I occurs at certain points throughout the year (typically 3 times: beginning, middle, and end), which includes a screening for all students to assess their skills in content areas. I will talk more about progress monitoring in the next post. Furthermore, as I am not a teacher, I feel like I am less qualified to talk about what instruction looks like at Tier I and will leave that up to the teachers and teacher training programs. It is believed that roughly 80% of students will make adequate progress at Tier I. For students who do not show adequate progress at Tier I (as evidenced through progress-monitoring results), they may be selected to move into Tier II.
Tier II: Tier II includes small group interventions. When a student fails to make adequate progress at Tier I, their skills in that area of content (in this case reading and/or writing) need to be assessed to figure out where to start. I will talk more about assessments when I talk about progress monitoring. From the assessment, students would be grouped together based on their area of difficulty and administered an intervention to address those deficits. These interventions should be led by qualified teachers, school psychology clinicians, or interventionists and occur in addition to general class/Tier I instruction (not instead of). This simply gives students more opportunities and more practice to master concepts. Progress-monitoring would occur more regularly than at Tier I, occurring roughly between every other week or once a month. Of the students in Tier II, it is expected that 75% of students will make adequate progress (15% of the overall school population). Those that do not show adequate growth at Tier II may be moved to Tier III.
Tier III: Tier III includes individualized interventions. This tends to be the most intensive tier and requires an accurate assessment of the student's academic strengths and weaknesses. An evidence-based intervention is then selected and tailored to the child's unique constellation of skills (targeting the weaknesses while building off the strengths) and a teacher, school psychologist, or interventionist works with the child one-on-one, often multiple times per week over the course of several weeks. Progress monitoring at Tier III typically occurs weekly or (in some cases) daily. If a student fails to respond at Tier III (and, therefore, has been unable to learn the information despite evidence-based and targeted methods), it may be indicative of a true learning disability and may thus require a comprehensive evaluation for special education services.
Tier III is often where different RtI systems differ. Some systems use Tier III to represent special education services. However, in the system proposed by Brown-Chidsey and Steege (2010), special education is not restricted to a single tier, but rather runs through all tiers. This makes sense, as students who require special education services differ widely from one another in the scope of the services required, with some special education students able to be successful at Tier I with some added support.
Ending Thoughts
Many schools have RtI programs in place. If a formal system is not in place, the teachers are hopefully, at the very least, using evidence-based teaching approaches. I was in a school that did not have a formal RtI system in place but rather used Title I services in order to provide interventions similar to Tier II. To those teachers who are reading this blog, consider the system that is in place at your school and the types of class-wide assessments you are asked to do throughout the year (e.g., DIBELS, mCLASS, Acuity, etc.). With luck, these results are used to make sure students' potential is maximized and their difficulties addressed.
I am aware that this information may have been a review for a lot of teachers. However, for those of whom it was not, I hope you found this information informative. It will be important background knowledge to have as I move forward and talk about more concepts related to reading and writing interventions. Coming soon, I will discuss progress-monitoring, assessment, and student selection for interventions. I will try to include links to resources you may find particularly helpful for these concepts.
Until next time!
Steven P. Malm
References:
Brown-Chidsey, R. & Steege, M. W. (2010). Response to Intervention: Principles and Strategies for Effective Practice, 2nd Edition. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment