Response to Intervention: Early Identification of Students with Learning Disabilities

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1, 170 - 182, 15.07.2015

Orhan Cakiroglu

https://doi.org/10.20489/intjecse.10399

Öz

The number of students with learning disabilities (LD) has grown substantially in the last three decades. These students account for more than half of the special education programs. As with the growing number, there is a great debate on the identification procedures of students with LD during early years. One of the models to early identify students with disabilities is Response to Intervention (RtI). The purpose of this article is to describe RtI on the identification of students with learning disabilities (LD) in the early years of childhood. First, a brief overview of RtI is provided, including the most popular models. Next, utilization of RtI in the identification of LD is described. Then, an overview of approaches that RtI is used to maximize achievement for a wide range of students is provided. Finally, future research directions in the area of special education within a model of RtI are discussed. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Response to intervention; learning disabilities; early identification; reading

Kaynakça

• Aaron, P. G. (1997). The impending demise of the discrepancy formula. Review of Educational Research, 67, 461-502.
• Barnes, A. C., & Harlacher, J. E. (2008). Clearing the confusion: RTI as a set of principles. Education and Treatment of Children, 31, 417-431.
• Batsche, G. M., Elliot, J., Graden, J., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J., Prasse, D., et al. (2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.
• Blanchett, W. J. (2006). Disproportionate representation of African American students in special education: Acknowledging in the role of White privilege and racism. Educational Researcher, 35, 24-28.
• Bradley, R., Danielson, L., & Doolittle, J. (2007). Responsiveness to intervention: 1997 to 2007. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5), 8-12.
• Brown-Chidsey, R., & Steege, M. W. (2005). Solution focused psycho-educational reports. In, R. Brown-Chidsey (Ed.), Assessment for intervention: A problem solving approach (pp. 267-290). New York: Guilford.
• Calhoon, M. B. (2005). Effects of a peer-mediated phonological skill and reading comprehension program on reading skill acquisition for middle school students with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 424-433.
• Case, L. P., Speece, D. L., & Molloy, D. E. (2003). The validity of a response-to- instruction paradigm to identify reading disabilities: A longitudinal analysis of individual differences and contextual factors. School Psychology Review, 32, 557- 582.
• Chambers, J.G., Shkolnik, J., & Perez, M. (2003). Special education expenditure report: Total expenditures for students with disabilities, 1999-2000: Spending variation by disability. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research.
• Fairbanks, S., Sugai, G., Guardino, D., & Lathrop, M. (2007). Response to intervention: Examining classroom behavior support in second grade. Exceptional Children, 73, 288–310.
• Feiker, H. A. (2007). From IDEA to implementation: A discussion of foundational and future responsiveness to intervention. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 137-146.
• Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P.L., & Young, C.L. (2003). Responsiveness-to- intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 157-171.
• Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 92-99.
• Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs D. (2007). A model for implementing responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(1), 14-23.
• Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Prentice, K. (2004). Responsiveness to mathematical problem-solving instruction: Comparing students at risk of mathematics disability with and without risk of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 293-306.
• Gettinger, M., & Stoiber, K. (2007). Applying a response-to-intervention model for early literacy development in low-income children. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 27, 198-213.
• Glover, T. A., & DiPerna, J. C. (2007). Service delivery for response to intervention: Core components and directions for future research. School Psychology Review, 36, 526-540.
• Gresham, F. M. (2005). Response to intervention: An alternative means of identifying students as emotionally disturbed. Education and Treatment of Children, 28, 328- 344.
• Gresham, F. M., MacMillan, D. L., Beebe-Frankenberger, M. E., & Bocian, K. M. (2000). Treatment integrity in learning disabilities intervention research: Do we really know how treatments are implemented? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 198-205.
• Haager, D. (2007). Promises and cautions in using response to intervention with English language learners. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 213-218.
• Hawken, L. S., Vincent, C. G., & Schumann, J. (2008). Response to intervention for social behavior. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 16, 213-225.
• Healy, K., Vanderwood, M. L., & Edelston, D. (2005). Early literacy interventions for English language learners: Support for an RTI model. California School Psychologist. 10, 55-63.
• Johnson, E. S., Mellard, D. F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M. (2006). Response to intervention: How to do it. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.
• Justice, L. (2006). Evidence-based practice, response to intervention, and the prevention of reading difficulties. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 37, 284-297. IDEA Amendments of 1997, 20 U. S. G. § 1401 (26).
• Kavale, K. A., & Spaulding, L. S. (2008). Is response to intervention good policy for specific learning disability? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23, 169- 179.
• Klingner, J. K., & Edwards, P. (2006). Cultural considerations with response to intervention models. Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 108-117.
• Kratochwill, T. R., Volpiansky, P., Clements, M., & Ball, C. (2007). Professional development in implementing and sustaining multi-tier prevention models: Implications for response to intervention. School Psychology Review, 36, 618-631.
• Linan-Thompson, S., Cirino, P. T., & Vaughn, S. (2007). Determining English language learner’s response to intervention: Questions and some answers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 185-195.
• Linan-Thompson, S., Vaughn, S., Prater, K., & Cirino, P. T. (2006). The response to intervention of English language learners at risk for reading problems. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 390-398.
• Mellard, D.F., & Johnson, E. (2008). A Practitioner’s guide to implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
• Ortiz, A. A. (1997). Learning disabilities occurring concomitantly with linguistic differences. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 321-332.
• Pierangelo, R., & Giuliani, G. (2008). Frequently asked questions about response to intervention. A step by step guide for educators. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2002). On babies and bathwater: Addressing the problems of identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 155-168.
• Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360- 407.
• U.S. Department of Education. (2005). Twenty-seventh annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2005. Retrieved December 03, 2008, from the U.S. Department of Education web site: http://www.ed.gov/ about/reports/annual/osep/2005/parts-b-c/index.html
• ,Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. S. (2005). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 137-146.
• Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Small, S., & Fanuele, D. P. (2006). Response to intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between children with and without reading disabilities: Evidence for the role of kindergarten and first-grade interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 157-169.
• Wagner, M., Cameto, R., & Newman, L. (2003). Youth with disabilities: A changing population. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
• Walker, H. M., Colvin, G., & Ramsey, E. (1995). Antisocial behavior in school: Strategies and best practices. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
• Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2008). Response to varying amounts of time in reading intervention for students with low response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 126-142.