This introduction to the special series provides an overview of the promise, and the ongoing challenges, related to Response to Intervention (RTI) as a means of both prevention and identification of reading disabilities. We conclude by describing the articles in this special series and considering their implications for future research.
Al OtaibaS.FuchsD. (2002). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 300–316.
2.
BlachmanB. A. (1994). What we have learned from longitudinal studies of phonological processing and reading, and some unanswered questions: A response to Torgesen, Wagner, and Rashotte. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 287–291.
3.
BradleyR.DanielsonL.HallahanD. P. (Eds.). (2002). Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
BrownA. L.PalincsarA. S.PurcellL. (1986). Poor readers: Teach, don’t label. In NeisserU. (Ed.), The school achievement of minority children: New perspectives (pp. 105–143). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
BurnsM. K.AppletonJ. J.StehouwerJ. D. (2005). Meta-analytic review of Responsiveness-to-Intervention research: Examining field-based and research-implemented models. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23, 381–394.
6.
CunninghamA. E.StanovichK. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 33, 934–945. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.6.934
7.
FletcherJ.FrancisD.ShaywitzS.LyonG.FoormanB.StuebingK.. (1998). Intelligent testing and the discrepancy model for children with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 186–203.
8.
FletcherJ. M.LyonG. R.FuchsL. S.BarnesM. A. (2007). Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention. New York, NY: Guilford.
9.
FuchsD.MockD.MorganP. L.YoungC. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-Intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 157–171.
10.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (1998). Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 204–219.
11.
GerstenR.ComptonD.ConnorC. M.DiminoJ.SantoroL.Linan-ThompsonS.TillyW. D. (2009). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to Intervention and multi-tier intervention for reading in the primary grades. A practice guide (NCEE 2009-4045). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides/
12.
GreulichL.Al OtaibaS.SchatschneiderC.WanzekJ.OrtizM.WagnerR. K. (2014) Understanding Inadequate Response to First-Grade Multi-Tier Intervention: Nomothetic and Ideographic Perspectives. Learning Disability Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0731948714526999
13.
HillD. R.KingS. A.LemonsC. J.PartanenJ. N. (2012). Fidelity of implementation and instructional alignment in Response to Intervention research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27, 116–124. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2012.00357.x
14.
HospJ. L.ReschlyD. J. (2004). Disproportionate representation of minority students in special education: Academic, economic, and demographic predictors. Exceptional Children, 70, 185–200.
15.
Individuals With Disabilities Act of 2004, Public Law 108-446, 118 Stat. 2647 (2004).
16.
JimersonS. R.BurnsM. K.VanDerHeydenA. M. (2007). Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (1st ed.). New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-49053-3
17.
LamE. A.McMasterK. L. (2014). Predictors of Responsiveness to Early Literacy Intervention: A 10-Year Update. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37, 133–146.
18.
LyonG. R. (1995). Toward a definition of dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 45, 3–27.
19.
MacMillanD. L.ReschlyD. J. (1998). Overrepresentation of minority students: The case for greater specificity of the variables examined. The Journal of Special Education, 32, 15–24.
20.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (Reports of the subgroups, NIH Pub. No. 00–4754). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved from http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/upload/report
21.
NelsonJ. R.BennerG. J.GonzalezJ. (2003). Learner characteristics that influence the treatment effectiveness of early literacy interventions: A meta-analytic review. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 255–267. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00080
22.
SolisM.MiciakJ.VaughnS.FletcherJ. M. (2014). Why Intensive Interventions Matter: Longitudinal Studies of Adolescents With Reading Disabilities and Poor Reading Comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0731948714528806
23.
SpencerM.WagnerR. K.SchatschneiderC.QuinnJ. M.LopezD.PetscherY. (2014). Incorporating RTI in a Hybrid Model of Reading Disability. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37, 160–170.
24.
TorgesenJ. K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(1), 55–64.
25.
TosteJ. R.ComptonD. L.FuchsD.FuchsL. S.GilbertJ. K.ChoE.BarqueroL. A.BoutenB. D. (2014). Understanding Unresponsiveness to Tier 2 Reading Intervention: Exploring the Classification and Profiles of Adequate and Inadequate Responders in First Grade. Learning Disability Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177_0731948713518336.pdf
26.
VaughnS.MoodyS. W.SchummJ. S. (1998). Broken promises: Reading instruction in the resource room. Exceptional Children, 64, 211–225.
27.
VellutinoF. R.ScanlonD. M.SipayE. R.SmallS. G.PrattA.ChenR.DencklaM. B. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult to remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601–638.
28.
WanzekJ.VaughnS. (2007). Research-based implications from extensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 36, 541–561.
29.
WanzekJ.RobertsG.Al OtaibaS.KentS. C. (2014). The Relationship of Print Reading in Tier 1 Instruction and Reading Achievement for Kindergarten Students at Risk of Reading Difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37, 147–159.
30.
WigfieldA.GuthrieJ. T. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 420–432.
31.
ZirkelP. A.ThomasL. B. (2010). State laws and guidelines for implementing RTI. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(1), 60–73.
