Revisions to Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) proposed alternative models, such as Response to Intervention (RTI), as a preventive measure that supports students at risk. As teachers’ roles evolve in response to RTI, teacher preparation programs must adjust their focus and curriculum accordingly. A mixed-methods design was used to explore general education pre-service teachers’ concerns regarding the implementation of RTI based on the Concerns-Based Adoption Model. Results suggest pre-service teachers focused their concerns on feeling unprepared and not understanding how to effectively implement RTI. These implications may guide teacher preparation programs as they assess the readiness of their pre-service teachers to effectively implement RTI.
AlvarezH. (2007). The impact of teacher preparation on responses to student aggression in the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 1113-1126.
2.
BarrioB. L.LindoE. L.CombesB. H.HoveyK. (2014). Ten years of response to intervention: Implications for general education teacher preparation programs. Manuscript submitted for publication.
3.
BartellC. A. (2004). Cultivating high-quality teaching through induction and mentoring. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
4.
BerkeleyS.BenderW. N.PeasterL. G.SaundersL. (2009). Implementation of response to intervention: A snapshot of progress. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 85-95. doi:10.1177/0022219408326214
5.
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101. doi:10.1191/1478-088706qp063oa
6.
BrownleeJ.CarringtonS. (2000). Opportunities for authentic experience and reflection: A teacher programme designed to change attitudes towards disability for pre-service teachers. Support for Learning, 15, 99-105.
7.
BurnsM. K. (2007). RTI will fail, unless. Communiqué, 34(5), 38-42.
8.
CavendishW.EspinosaA. (2013). Teacher preparation for student diversity and disabilities: Changing roles in response to intervention models. Advances in Special Education, 25, 189-205.
9.
CharmazK. (2000). Constructivist and objective grounded theory. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509-535). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
10.
ClarkV. L. P.CreswellJ. W. (2008). The mixed methods reader. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
11.
CohenJ.CohenP.WestS. G.AikenL. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression and correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
ComptonD. L.GilbertJ. K.JenkinsJ. R.FuchsD.FuchsL. S.ChoE.. . .BoutonB. D. (2012). Accelerating chronically unresponsive children to Tier 3 instruction: What level of data is necessary to ensure selection accuracy?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 204-216.
13.
CondermanG.Johnston-RodriguezS. (2009). Beginning teachers’ views of their collaborative roles. Preventing School Failure, 53, 235-244.
14.
CookB. G. (2002). Inclusive attitudes, strengths, and weaknesses of pre-service general educators enrolled in a curriculum infusion teacher preparation program. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 25, 262-277.
15.
Darling-HammondL. (1994). Professional development schools: Schools for developing a profession. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
16.
DentonC. A. (2012). Response to intervention for reading difficulties in the primary grades: Some answers and lingering questions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 232-243.
17.
DentonC. A.VaughnS.FletcherJ. M. (2003). Bringing research-based practice in reading intervention to scale. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 201-211. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00075
18.
DunnK. E.RakesG. C. (2011). Teaching teachers: An investigation of beliefs in teacher education students. Learning Environment Research, 14, 39-58.
19.
FuchsD.ComptonD. L.FuchsL. S.DavisG. C. (2008). Making secondary intervention model: Findings from the first-grade longitudinal study at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21, 413-436.
20.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93-99.
21.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.ComptonD. L. (2004). Identifying reading disabilities by Responsive-ness-to-Instruction: Specifying measures and criteria. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27, 216-227.
22.
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.
23.
FuchsD.MockD.MorganP.YoungC. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 172-186.
24.
FuchsL. S.VaughnS. (2012). Responsiveness-to-intervention: A decade later. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 195-203.
25.
FullerF. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6, 207-226.
26.
GeorgeA. A.HallG. E.StiegelbauerS. M. (2006). Measuring implementation in schools: The Stages of Concern Questionnaire. Austin, TX: SEDL.
27.
GerberM. (2005). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 516-524.
28.
GerstenR.ComptonD.ConnorC. M.DiminoJ.SantoroL.Linan-ThompsonS.TillyW. D. (2008). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to intervention and multitier intervention for reading in the primary grades: A practice guide (NCEE 2009–4045). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences.
29.
GreeneJ. C.CaracelliV. J.GrahamW. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255-274.
30.
GreenfieldR.RinaldiC.ProctorC. P.CardarelliA. (2010). Teachers’ perceptions of a response to intervention (RTI) reform effort in an urban elementary school: A consensual qualitative analysis. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 21, 47-63. doi:10.1177/1044207310365499
31.
GunterP. L.JackS. L. (1994). Effects of challenging behaviors of students with EBD on teacher instructional behavior. Preventing School Failure, 38, 35-40.
32.
HaggerH.MalmbergL. E. (2011). Pre-service teachers’ goals and future-time extension, concerns, and well-being. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 598-608.
33.
HallG. E.HordS. M. (2006). Implementing change: Patterns, principles and potholes (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
34.
HallG. E.HordS. M. (2011). Implementing change, patterns, principles, and potholes (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
35.
HawkinsR. O.KroegerS. D.Musti-RaoS.BarnettD. W.WardJ. E. (2008). Preservice training in response to intervention: Learning by doing an interdisciplinary field experience. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 745-762.
36.
HellstenL. M.PrytulaM. P.EbanksA.LaiH. (2009). Teacher induction: Exploring beginning teacher mentorship. Canadian Journal of Education, 32, 703-733.
37.
HiltonA. (2007). Response to intervention: Changing how we do business. Leadership, 36(4), 16-19.
HorsleyD. L.Loucks-HorsleyS. (1998). CBAM brings order to the tornado of change. Journal of Staff Development, 19, 17-20.
40.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446, 118 Stat. 2647 (2004) [Amending 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq.]
41.
KaplanJ. P. (2011). Massachusetts school psychologists’ concerns regarding the implementation of responsiveness-to-intervention: A concerns based adoption model approach (Doctoral dissertation). Northeastern University, Boston, MA.
42.
KavaleK. A.SpauldingL. S.BeamA. P. (2009). A time to define: Making the specific learning disability definition pre-scribe specific learning disability. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32, 39-48.
43.
LandonD. J. (2010). Impact of teachers’ concerns on response to intervention implementation (Doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri–Columbia.
44.
LePageP.CoureyS.FearnE. J.BensonV.CookE.HartmannL.NielsenS. (2010). Curriculum recommendations for inclusive teacher education. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 6, 19-45.
45.
LittleS.LittleA.PetersenC.FergusonS.BlairM.SelzlerC. (2014). Innovation in training school psychology students in RTI: University-school partnerships. Innovation, 2, 51-62.
46.
LitwinM. S. (1995). How to measure survey reliability and validity. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
47.
McCombes-TolisJ.Spear-SwerlingL. (2010). The preparation of preservice elementary educators in understanding and applying the terms, concepts, and practices associated with response to intervention in early reading contexts. Journal of School Leadership, 21, 360-389.
48.
McFarlandK. P. (1998). Promoting reflective practices in pre-service teacher education: An activity on stages of concern. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED423227)
49.
MendozaJ. L.MarkosV. H.GonterR. (1978). A new perspective on sequential testing procedures in canonical analysis: A Monte Carlo evaluation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 13(3), 371-382.
50.
MorganD. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
51.
MorganD. L. (1998). Planning focus groups. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
52.
NealD.SchanzenbachD. W. (2010). Left behind by design: Proficiency counts and test-based accountability. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92, 263-283.
53.
NimonK.HensonR. K.GatesM. S. (2010). Revisiting interpretation of canonical correla-tion analysis: A tutorial and demonstration of canonical commonality analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 702-724.
54.
No Child Left Behind of 2001, 20 U.S.C. 70 § 6301 et seq. (2002).
55.
O’ConnorR. (2007). Responsive to intervention and learning disabilities. New Times for DLD, 25, 1-2.
56.
PattonM. Q. (2000). Qualitative research. Chicago, IL: John Wiley.
57.
RademacherJ. A.WilhelmR. W.HildrethB. L.BridgesD. L.CowartM. F. (1998). A study of preservice teachers’ attitude toward mainstreaming. The Educational Forum, 62, 154-163.
58.
RobichauxR. R.GuarinoA. J. (2012). Enhancing pre-service teachers’ profession-alism through daily teaching reflections. Education Research International, 2012, 1-4. doi:10.1155/2012/452687
59.
RosenL.TaylorS.O’LearyS.SandersonW. (1990). A survey of classroom management practices. Journal of School Psychology, 28, 257-269.
60.
SandholtzJ. H. (2011). Pre-service teachers’ conceptions of effective and ineffective teaching practices. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38, 27-47.
61.
SherryA.HensonR. K. (2005). Conducting and interpreting canonical correlation analysis in personality research: A user-friendly primer. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84, 37-48.
62.
SmithL. F.CorkeryG.BuckleyJ.CalvertA. (2013). Changes in Secondary School Preservice Teachers’ Concerns About Teaching in New Zealand. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(1), 60-74.
63.
Spear-SwerlingL.CheesmanE. (2012). Teachers’ knowledge base for implementing response-to-intervention models in reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 25, 1691-1723. doi:10.1007/s11145-011-9338-3
64.
StevensJ. P. (2009). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
65.
StringerE. T. (2013). Action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
66.
StuartS.RinaldiC.Higgins-AverillO. (2011). Agents of change: Voice of teachers on response to intervention. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 7, 53-73.
67.
TeddlieC.TashakkoriA. (2009). Foundation of mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
68.
ThompsonB. (1991). A primer on the logic and use of canonical correlation analysis. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 24, 80-95.
69.
TilleryD. A.VarjasK.MeyersJ.CollinsA. S. (2010). General education teachers’ perceptions of behavior management and intervention strategies. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 86-102. doi:10.1177/1098300708330879
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The Digest of Education Statistics, 2011 (NCES 2012-001), Table 47. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012001.pdf
72.
VaughnS.WanzekJ.MurrayC. S.ScammaccaN.Linan-ThompsonS.WoodruffA. L. (2009). Response to early reading intervention examining higher and lower responders. Council for Exceptional Children, 75, 165-183.
73.
WatkinsL. L. (1999). Teacher development: The concerns and personal teacher efficacy of preservice and in-service teachers (Doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, 2000). Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(12-A), 2002–00794-007.
74.
ZirkelP. A. (2011). RTI confusion in the case law and the legal commentary. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 34, 242-247. doi:10.11-77/0731948711421760
