A survey of special education teachers in one state was conducted to determine their perceptions on the performance of tasks in the Response to Intervention (RTI) process. We asked teachers to identify professionals who completed or were involved in these tasks at each tier. Participants were asked to check who (a) refers students, (b) assesses individual needs, (c) plans instruction, (d) selects curriculum, (e) delivers instruction, (f) collects data, (g) graphs data, (h) interprets the data, and (i) makes decisions to move students to another tier of instruction. Overall, special education teachers perceive that general education teachers are involved in the majority of tasks throughout the tiers. They perceive the general education teachers’ involvement as decreasing from Tier 1 to Tier 3. Special education teachers perceive themselves as increasing in involvement from Tier 1 through Tier 3.
BarnesA. C.HarlacherJ. E. (2008). Clearing the confusion: Response-to-intervention as a set of principles. Education & Treatment of Children, 31, 417-431.
2.
BatemanB. (1965). An educational view of a diagnostic approach to learning disorders. In HellmuthJ. (Ed.), Learning disorders: Vol. 1 (pp. 219-239). Seattle, WA: Special Child Publications.
3.
BenderW.ShoresC. (2007). Response to intervention: A practical guide for every teacher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
4.
BenedictA. E.ParkY.BrownellM. T.LauterbachA. A.KielyM. T. (2013).Using lesson study to align elementary literacy instruction within the RTI framework. Teaching Exceptional Children, 45(5), 22-30.
5.
BradleyR.DanielsonL.DoolittleJ. (2005). Response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 485-486.
6.
BryantD. P.BarreraM. (2009). Changing roles for educators within the framework of response to intervention. Intervention in School and Clinic, 45, 72-79.
7.
BurnsM. K.JacobS.WagnerA. R. (2008). Ethical and legal issues associated with using response-to-intervention to assess learning disabilities. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 263-279.
8.
CarneyK. J.StiefelG. S. (2008). Long-term results of a problem-solving approach to response to intervention: Discussion and implications. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 6(2), 61-75.
9.
Crepeau-HobsonF.SobelD. M. (2010). School psychologists and RTI: Analysis of training and professional development needs. School Psychology Forum, 4(4), 22-32.
10.
DillmanD. A.SmythJ. D.ChristianL. M. (2009). Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
11.
Division for Learning Disabilities Council for Exceptional Children. (2007). Thinking about response to intervention and learning disabilities: A teacher’s guide. Arlington, VA: Author.
12.
DulaneyS. K. (2013). Building systematic processes of facilitation, collaboration, and implementation: A middle school’s response-to-intervention journey. NASSP Bulletin, 97, 53-77.
13.
FuchsD.DeshlerD. D. (2007). What we need to know about the responsiveness to intervention (and shouldn’t be afraid to ask). Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 129-136.
14.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93-99.
15.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.ComptonD. L. (2004). Identifying reading disabilities by responsiveness to instruction: Specifying measures and criteria. Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 216-228.
16.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.SteckerP. M. (2010). The “blurring” of special education in a new continuum of general education placements and services. Exceptional Children, 76, 301-323.
17.
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.
18.
FuchsW. W.BergeronB. S. (2013). Viewpoints from the field: Impressions from teachers and administrators on the challenges and successes of RTI implementation in Illinois. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 41(2), 3-12.
19.
HollenbeckA. F. (2007). From IDEA to implementation: A discussion of foundational and future responsiveness-to intervention research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 137-146.
20.
HooverJ. J.PattonJ. R. (2008). The role of special educators in a multitiered instructional system. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43, 195-202.
21.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, P L. 108-446, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.
22.
KauffmanJ. M.HallahanD. P. (2005). Special education: What it is and why we need it. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
23.
KavaleK. A.SpauldingL. S. (2008). Is response to intervention good policy for specific learning disability?Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23, 169-179.
24.
KirkS. A. (1962). Educating exceptional children. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
25.
KirkS. A.BatemanB. (1962). Diagnosis and remediation of learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 29, 73-78.
26.
LenskiS. (2011-2012). What RTI means for content area teachers. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55, 276-282.
27.
LipkaO.SiegelL. (2010). The development of reading comprehension skills in children learning English as a second language. Reading & Writing, 25, 1873-1898.
28.
MellardD. F.ByrdS. E.JohnsonE.TollefsonJ. M.BoescheL. (2008). Foundations and research on identifying model responsiveness-to-intervention sites. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27, 243-256.
29.
MurawskiW. W.HughesC. E. (2009). Response to Intervention, collaboration, and co-teaching: A logical combination for successful systemic change. Preventing School Failure, 53, 267-277.
30.
OroscoM. J.KlingnerJ. (2012). One school’s implementation of RTI with English Language Learners: “Referring into RTI.”Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 269-288.
31.
ProctorB.PrevattF. (2003). Agreement among four models used for diagnosing learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 459-466.
32.
PyleA. (2011). Considering coherence: Teacher perceptions of the competing agendas of RTI and an existing special education model. Exceptionality Education International, 21, 66-81.
33.
ReevesS.BishopJ.FilceH. G. (2010). Response to intervention (RtI) and tier systems: Questions remain as educators make challenging decisions. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 76(4), 30-35.
34.
ReschlyD. J. (2005). LD identification: Primary intervention, secondary intervention, then what?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 510-515.
35.
ReschlyD. J.YsseldykeJ. E. (2002). Paradigm shift: The past is not the future. In ThomasA.GrimesJ. (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (4th ed., pp. 3-20). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
36.
ReynoldsC. R.ShaywitzS. E. (2009). Response to Intervention: Ready or not? Or, from wait to-fail to watch-them-fail. School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 130-145.
SantostiF. 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.
39.
SpeeceD. L.SchatschneiderC.SilvermanR.CaseL. P.CooperD. H.JacobsD. M. (2011). Identification of reading problems in first grade within a response-to-intervention framework. Elementary School Journal, 111, 585-607.
40.
TorgesenJ.AlexanderA.WagnerR.RashotteG.VoellerK.GonwayT. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33-58.
41.
VaughnS.Linan-ThompsonS.HickmanP. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69, 391-410.
42.
VellutinoF. R.ScanlonD. M.SipayE. R.SmallS.ChenR.PrattA.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.
43.
WertsM. G.LambertM. A.CarpenterE. S. (2009). What special education directors say about RTI. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32, 245-254.
44.
WienerR. M.SoodakL. C. (2008). Special education administrators’ perspectives on response to intervention. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 21, 39-45.
45.
WillsonV. L. (1987). Statistical and psychometric issues surrounding severe discrepancy. Learning Disabilities Research, 3(1), 24-28.
46.
ZigmondN. (1993). Learning disabilities from an educational perspective. In LyonG. R.GrayD. B.KavanaughJ. F.KrasnegorN. A. (Eds.), Better understanding learning disabilities: New views from research and their implications for education and public policies (pp. 251-272). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
47.
ZirkelP. A.ThomasL. B. (2010). State laws for RTI: An updated snapshot. Teaching Exceptional Children, 42(3), 56-63.
