Tiers of Intervention in Responsiveness to Intervention

Abstract

Response to Intervention (RTI) models have attracted great attention as an alternative to traditional methods used for identifying students with learning disabilities. A major feature of this approach is the implementation of academic interventions in general education and measuring the student's response to those interventions. A common question that needs to be addressed is the number of stages or tiers of intervention necessary in the Response to Intervention model. This article reviews three studies of RTI that investigate the RTI tiers. Sharon Vaughn and Rollanda O'Connor report on studies using the Standard Protocol approach to RTI. David Tilly reports on using the Problem Solving Model as an RTI model. This article summarizes the results of these three investigations.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Common ground report. (2002). Nashville, TN : National Research Center on Learning Disabilities .

Deno, E. (1970). Special education as developmental capital. Exceptional Children, 37, 229-237.

Deno, S.L. (2002). Problem solving as “best practice.” In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV (Vol. 1, pp. 37—56). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.

Fuchs, D. , Fuchs, L.S. , & Compton, D.L. (2004). Identifying reading disabilities by responsiveness to instruction: Specifying measure and criteria. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27, 216—227.

Individuals with Disabilities Improvement Act. (2004).

Marston, D. , Muyskens, P. , Lau, M. , & Canter, A. (2002). Problem solving model for decision-making with high-incidence disabilities: The Minneapolis experience. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3), 187—200.

O'Connor, R. (2003, December). Tiers of intervention in kindergarten through third grade. Presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium , Kansas City, MO.

Reschly, D.J. , Hosp, J.L. , & Schmied, C.M. (2002). And miles to go…: State SLD requirements and authoritative recommendations. Nashville, TN: National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

Tilly, W.D. (2003, December). How many tiers are needed for successful prevention and early intervention? Heartland Area Education Agency's evolution from four to three tiers. Presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium , Kansas City, MO.

10.

Tilly, W.D. , Reschly, D.J. , & Grimes, J. (1999). Disability determination in problem-solving systems: Conceptual foundations and critical components. In D. Reschly , W. D. Tilly , & J. Grimes (Eds.), Special education in transition: Functional assessment and noncategorical programming (pp. 285—321). Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

11.

Vaughn, S. (2003, December). How many tiers are needed for response to intervention to achieve acceptable prevention outcomes. Presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

12.

Vaughn, S. , Linan-Thompson, S. , & Hick-man, P. (2003). Response to treatment as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional Children , 69(4), 391—409.