Rti Case – Response to Intervention in the Middle and Upper Grades
Response to Intervention (RTI) in the Middle and Grades
Cabrini College
Response to Intervention in the Middle and Upper Grades
The 2004 reauthorization by Congress of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) began the national movement away from identifying learning disabled students through a discrepancy model and toward a more comprehensive means of identifying a disability known as Response to Intervention (RTI). Much research has been collected on the usefulness of the RTI model in helping to identify students in need of special education verses students in need of a boost in skills during the early elementary years, thereby allowing students to be given the precise level of intervention needed without wasting resources or unnecessarily labeling students. As schools work to gather information and best understand how to implement the RTI model with integrity many are left with unanswered questions as to how to incorporate RTI for the middle and upper grades.
Little research exists on the effectiveness of the Response to Intervention model at the middle or high school levels. The research that does exist is often conflicting. Also sparse, are research-based recommendations for the training and preparation needed for successful implementation of the program in the upper grades. This paper will examine the literature for evidence of the effectiveness of the RTI model in the upper grades. More specifically, research pertaining to effective reading interventions and classroom techniques that enhance the successful implementation of RTI beyond the elementary grades will help answer the question: Is RTI a sustainable model in the upper grades?
Traditional identification of reading disabilities at all grade levels included the use of intelligence test results compared to achievement in search of an IQ-achievement discrepancy. Newly mandated RTI is replacing the discrepancy model due to extensive research supporting it as a better alternative. Often cited research (Fuchs, 1994; Fuchs & Fuchs, 2000), found that children who are provided a reasonable instructional environment yet exhibit a level and rate of performance below that of their peers (dual discrepancy) may be identified as at-risk for academic problems and in need of intervention. Dually discrepant (DD) children who do not respond to general education interventions may require special education.
In looking further into instruction and intervention, Case, Speece, & Molloy, (2003), found similar findings. Their modified