This article discusses a qualitative case study examining one middle school’s response to intervention (RtI) efforts. Study participants included the principal, assistant principal, and members of the school’s leadership team. A description of the RtI consensus and infrastructure-building processes, consideration of the RtI facilitators, and a review of the accomplishments and barriers to implementation they encountered are provided.
AlfassiM. (1998). Reading for meaning: The efficacy of reciprocal teaching in fostering reading comprehension in high school students in remedial reading classes. American Educational Research Journal, 35, 309-331.
2.
BiancarosaG.SnowC. E. (2004). Reading next–A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
3.
BrownJ. L.MoffettC. A. (1999). The hero’s journey: How educators can transform schools and improve learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
4.
BuffumA.MattosM. (2009). Pyramid response to intervention: RTI, professional learning communities, and how to respond when kids don’t learn. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
5.
ChalfantJ. C.PyshM. V. (1989). Teacher assistance teams: Five descriptive studies on 96 teams. Remedial and Special Education, 10(4), 49-58.
6.
ChristT. J.HintzeJ. M. (2007). Psychometric considerations when evaluating response to intervention. In JimersonS. R.BurnsM. K.VanDerHeydenA. M. (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 93-105). New York, NY: Springer Science.
7.
Council for Exceptional Children Policy Manual. (2008). Section 4, part 3, pp. 1-10.
8.
CraigS.HullK.HaggartA. G.Perez-SellesM. (2000). Promoting cultural competence through teacher assistance teams. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(3), 6-12.
9.
DuFourR.DuFourR.EakerR. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
10.
DuFourR.MarzanoR. (2011). Leaders of learning: How district, school, and classroom leaders improve student achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
11.
DuffyH. (2007). Meeting the needs of significantly struggling learners in high school: A look at approaches to tiered intervention. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education, National High School Center.
12.
EdmondsM. S.VaughnS.WexlerJ.ReutebuchC.CableA.TackettK. K.SchnakenbergJ. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79, 262-300.
13.
EhriL. C.NunesS. R.StahlS. A.WillowsD. M. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 393-447.
14.
Faggella-LubyM.WardwellM. (2011). RTI in a middle school: Findings and practical implications of a tier 2 reading comprehension study. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34, 35-49.
15.
Florida Department of Education. (2008). Statewide Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI) Implementation Plan. Retrieved from http://www.fldoe.org/schools/rti.asp
16.
FoormanB.Al OtaibaS. (2009). Reading remediation: State of the art. In McCardleP.PughK. (Eds.), How children learn to read: Current issues and new directions in the integration of cognition, neurobiology, and genetics of reading and dyslexia research and practice (pp. 257-274). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
17.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93-99.
18.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.SteckerP. M. (2010). The “blurring” of special education in a new continuum of general education placements and services. Council for Exceptional Children, 76, 301-323.
19.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (2006). Implementing responsiveness-to-intervention to identify learning disabilities. Perspectives on Dyslexia, 32, 39-43.
20.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (2007). A model for implementing responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5), 14-20.
21.
FullanM. (2010). All systems go: The change imperative for whole system reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
22.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
23.
GloverT. A. (2010). Supporting all students: The promise of response to intervention. In GloverT. A.VaughnS. (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 143-186). New York, NY: Guilford.
24.
HargreavesA.GoodsonI. (2006). Educational change over time? The sustainability and non-sustainability of decades of secondary school change and continuity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42, 3-41.
25.
HellerR.GreenleafC. (2007). Literacy instruction in the content areas: Getting to the core of middle and high school improvement. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
26.
HordS. M. (1997). Professional learning communities: Communities of continuous inquiry and improvement. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. Retrieved from http://www.sedl.org/pubs/change34/
27.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. 108-466. Illinois State Response to Intervention Plan. (2008). Retrieved from http://www.isbe.state:il.us/pdf/rti_state_plan.pdf
28.
JohnsonE. S.SmithL. (2008). Implementation of response to intervention at middle school. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(3), 46-52.
29.
KamilM. L. (2003). Adolescents and literacy: Reading for the 21st century. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
30.
KatzenbachJ. R.KahnZ. (2010). Leading outside the lines: How to mobilize the (in) formal organization. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
31.
KingS.LemonsC. J.HillD. R. (2012). Response to intervention in secondary schools: Considerations for administrators. NASSP Bulletin, 96(1), 5-22.
32.
KovaleskiJ. F. (2007). Response to intervention: Considerations for research and systems change. School Psychology Review, 36, 638-646.
33.
KovaleskiJ. F.BlackL. (2010). Multi-tier service delivery: Current status and future directions. In GloverT. A.VaughnS. (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 23-56). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
34.
LambertL. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
35.
Lawrence-BrownD. (2004). Differentiated instruction: Inclusive strategies for standards-based learning that benefit the whole class. American Secondary Education, 32(3), 34-62.
36.
LeslieL.CaldwellJ. (2001). Qualitative Reading Inventory-3. New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
37.
MarshallC.RossmanG. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38.
McCardleP.ChhabraV. (2004). The voice of evidence in reading research. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
39.
McCookJ. E. (2006). The RtI guide: Developing and implementing a model in your schools. Arlington, VA: LRP.
40.
MellardD. F.JohnsonE. (2008). RtI: A practitioner’s guide to implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
41.
MerriamS. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
42.
National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Author.
43.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Health and Human Services.
44.
No Child Left Behind Act. (2001). Public Law 107-15.
45.
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. (2002, November5). 20 U.S.C. 9501 et seq., the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Title I of Public Law 107-279.
46.
O’DohertyA.OvandoM. N. (2009). Drivers of success: One district’s process for closing achievement gaps in a post-no child left behind context. Journal of School Leadership, 19, 6-32.
47.
PerelesD. A.OmdalS.BaldwinL. (2009). Response to intervention and twice exceptional learners: A promising fit. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 40-51.
48.
PowersK. (2001). Problem solving student support teams. The California School Psychologist, 6, 19–30.
49.
ReedD.VaughnS. (2010). Reading interventions for older students. In GloverT. A.VaughnS. (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 143-186). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
50.
RaynerK.FoormanB. R.PerfettiC. A.PesetskyD.SeidenbergM. S. (2001). How psychological science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2(2), 31-73.
SansostiF. J.NoltemeyerA.GossS. (2010). Principals’ perceptions of the importance and availability of response to intervention practices within high school settings. School Psychology Review, 39, 286-295.
54.
SharrattL.FullanM. (2009). Realization: The change imperative for deepening district-wide reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
55.
SnowC. E.BurnsM.S.GriffinP. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
56.
StraussA. L.CorbinJ. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
57.
StraussA. L.CorbinJ. M. (1998). Description, conceptual ordering, and theorizing. In StraussA. L.CorbinJ. M. (Eds.), Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed., pp. 15-25). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
58.
SubbanP. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7, 935-947.
59.
SugaiG.HornerR.FixsenD.BlaseK. (2010). Developing systems-level capacity for RTI implementation: Current efforts and future directions. In GloverT. A.VaughnS. (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 143-186). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
60.
TillyW. D.(2006). Response to intervention: An overview. What is it? Why do it? Is it worth it?The Special Edge, 19(2), 1-5.
61.
TomlinsonC. A. (1999). Mapping a route toward differentiated instruction. Educational Leadership, 57, 12-16.
62.
TomlinsonC. A.KalbfleischM. I. (1998, November). Teach me, teach my brain: A call for differentiated classrooms. Educational Leadership, 56(3), 52-55.
63.
TorgesenJ. K. (2007). Catch them before they fall: Early identification and intervention to prevent reading failure for young children. Paper presented to educators and parents in Durango, CO.
64.
U.S. Department of Education. (2001). No Child Left Behind. Washington, DC: Author.
65.
VaughnS.FletcherJ. M. (2010). Thoughts on rethinking RTI with secondary students. School Psychology Review, 39, 296-299.
66.
VaughnS.FuchsL. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 137-146.
67.
VaughnS.WanzekJ.FletcherJ. M. (2007). Multiple tiers of intervention: A framework for prevention and identification of students with reading/learning disabilities. In TaylorB. M.YsseldykeJ. (Eds.), Educational interventions for struggling readers (pp. 173-196). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
68.
WienerR. M.SoodakL. C. (2008). Special education administrators’ perspectives on response to intervention. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 21, 39-45.
69.
YovanoffP.DuesberyL.AlonzoJ.TindalG. (2005). Grade-level invariance of a theoretical causal structure predicting reading comprehension with vocabulary and oral reading fluency. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24, 4-12.
