BatscheG. M.KavaleK.A.KovaleskiJ. F. (2006). Competing views: A dialogue on response to intervention. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(1), 6–19.
2.
DenoS. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219–232.
3.
FletcherJ. M. (2006). The need for response to instruction models of learning disabilities. Perspectives, 32(1), 12–15.
4.
FuchsD.MockD.MorganP.YoungC. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implication for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18(3), 157–171.
5.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (1998). Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 13, 204–219.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ComptonD. L. (2004). Monitoring early reading development in first grade: Word identification fluency versus nonsense word fluency. Exceptional Children, 71, 7–21.
8.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.HamlettC. L.WalzL.GermannG. (1993). Formative evaluation of academic progress: How much growth can we expect?. School Psychology Review, 22, 27–48.
9.
GoodR. H.IIIKaminskiR. A. (2003). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.). Longmont, CO: Sopris West. Also available at: http://dibels.uoregon.edu.
10.
MarstonD.MuyskensP.LauM.CanterA. (2003). Problem-solving model for decision making with high-incidence disabilities: The Minneapolis experience. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 187–200.
11.
SteckerP. M.FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (2005). Using curriculum-based measurement to improve student achievement: Review of research. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 795–819.
12.
TillyW. D. (2006). Diagnosing the learning enabled: The promise of response to intervention. Perspectives, 32(1), 20–24.
13.
VaughnS.ChardD. (2006). Three-tier intervention research studies: Description of two related projects. Perspectives, 32(1), 30–34.