In February, 2013, the Division of Early Childhood, the National Association for the Education of Young Children, and the National Head Start Association released a collaborative paper to provide clarification and assistance regarding the relationship of response to intervention (RTI) with the field of early childhood (EC). In addition to promoting a broader discussion of this topic, in this article, I provide a valuable resource for families, and general and special education early childhood teachers, administrators, and leaders in the field. The following key elements are discussed: context for RTI in K–12 and EC, features of RTI frameworks in EC, misunderstandings and misconceptions of RTI, and the future of RTI in EC programs.
AllenK. E.SchwartzI. S. (2001). The exceptional child: Inclusion in early childhood special education. Albany, NY: Delmar.
2.
Al OtaibaS. (2005). Response to early literacy instruction: Practical issues for early childhood personnel preparation. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 25, 201–209. doi:10.1080/1090102050250303
3.
BailetL. L.RepperK. K.PiastaS. B.MurphyS. P. (2009). Emergent literacy intervention for pre-kindergarteners at risk for reading failure. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 336–355.
4.
BatscheG.ElliottJ.GradenJ.GrimesJ.KovaleskiJ.PrasseD.. . . ReschleyD. (2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.
5.
BerkeleyS.BenderW. N.PeasterL. G.SaundersL. (2009). Implementation of response to intervention: A snapshot of progress. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 85–95.
6.
BrickerD.Pretti-FrontczakK.JohnsonJ. O.StrakaE. (2002). Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System for Infants and Children (AEP): Second edition administration guide. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
7.
BuysseV.Peisner-FeinbergE. (2010). Recognition & response: Response to intervention for pre-K. Young Exceptional Children, 13(4), 2–13.
8.
BuysseV.Peisner-FeinbergE.BurchinalM. (2012, March). Recognition & response: Developing and evaluating a model of RTI for pre-K. Poster session presented at the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, Washington, DC.
9.
BuzhardtJ.WalkerP.GreenwoodC. R.Heitzman-PowellL. (2012). Using technology to support progress monitoring and data-based intervention decision making in early childhood: Is there an app for that?Focus on Exceptional Children, 44(8), 1–18.
10.
CartaJ.GreenwoodC. R.WalkerD.BuzhardtJ. (2010). Individual growth and development indicators for young children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
11.
ChristensonS. L.SheridanS. M. (2001). School and families: Creating essential connections for learning. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
12.
ColemanM. R.BuysseV.NeitzelJ. (2006). Recognition and response: An early intervening system for young children at risk for learning disabilities (Full Report). Chapel Hill: FPG Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina.
13.
CoppleC.BredekampS. (Eds.). (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
14.
Council for Exceptional Children. (2007). Position on response to intervention (RTI). Arlington, VA: Author.
15.
Council for Exceptional Children. (2010). CEC’s ESEA reauthorization recommendations. Arlington, VA: Author.
16.
Council of Administrators of Special Education. (2011). CASE’s ESEA reauthorization recommendations. Warner Robins, GA: Author.
17.
DailyS.BurkhauserM.HalleT. (2010). A review of school readiness practices in the states: Early learning guidelines and assessments. Early Childhood Highlights, 1(3), 1–12.
18.
Division for Early Childhood. (2007). Promoting positive outcomes for children with disabilities: Recommendations for assessment, curriculum, and program evaluation. Missoula, MT: Author.
19.
DuhonG. J.MesmerE. M.AtkinsM. E.GregusonL. A.OlingerE. S. (2009). Quantifying intervention intensity: A systematic approach to evaluating student response to increasing intervention frequency. Journal of Behavioral Education, 18, 101–118. doi:10.1007/s10864-009-9086-5
20.
Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development. (1998). Research and development of individual growth and development indicators for children between birth and age eight (Technical Report No. 4). Minneapolis, MN: Center for Early Education and Development, University of Minnesota. Available from www.myigdis.com
21.
FoxL.CartaJ.StrainP. S.DunlapG.HemmeterM. L. (2010). Response to intervention and the pyramid model. Infants & Young Children, 23, 3–13. doi:10.1097IYC.08073e3181c816e2
22.
FoxL.DunlapG.HemmeterM. L.JosephG. E.StrainP. S. (2003). The teaching pyramid: A model for supporting social competence and preventing challenging behavior in young children. Young Children, 58(4), 48–52.
23.
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.
24.
FuchsL.BuysseV.ColemanM. R. (2007, May). Promising approaches to early intervening in the primary grades and pre-K: Response to intervention (RTI) and recognition and response (R & R). Paper presented at the FPG FirstSchool Symposium, Early School Success: Equity and Access for Diverse Learners, Chapel Hill, NC.
25.
FuchsL. S.ComptonD. L.FuchsD.PaulsenK.BryantJ. D.HamlettC. L. (2005). The prevention, identification, and cognitive determinants of math difficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 493–513.
26.
GerstenR.BeckmannS.ClarkeB.FoegenA.MarshL.StarJ. R.WitzelB. (2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools (NCEE 2009-4060). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
27.
GerstenR.ChardD. J.JayanthiM.BakerS. K.MorphyP.FlojoJ. (2008). Mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities or difficulty learning mathematics: A synthesis of the intervention research. Portsmouth, NH: Center for Instruction, RMC Research Corporation.
28.
GerstenR.ComptonD.ConnorC. M.DiminoJ.SantoroL.Linan-ThompsonS.TillyW. D. (2008). 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.
29.
GloverT. A.VaughnS. (2010). The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
30.
GranerP.Faggella-LubyM. N.FritschmanN. S. (2005). An overview of responsiveness to intervention: What practitioners ought to know. Topics in Language, 25, 93–105.
31.
GreenwoodC. R.BradfieldT.KaminskiR.LinasM. W.CartaJ. J.NylanderD. (2011). The response to intervention (RTI) approach in early childhood. Focus on Exceptional Children, 43(9), 1–22.
32.
Grisham-BrownJ. L.HemmeterM. L.Pretti-FrontczakK. (2005). Blended practices for teaching young children in inclusive settings. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
33.
Grisham-BrownJ. L.Pretti-FrontczakK. (Eds.). (2011). Assessing young children in inclusive settings: The blended practices approach. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
34.
Grisham-BrownJ.Pretti-FrontczakK. (2013). A curriculum framework for supporting young children served in blended programs. In BuysseV.Peisner-FeinbergE. (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention (RtI) in early childhood (pp. 223-235). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes Publishing.
35.
HemmeterM. L.OstroskyM.FoxL. (2006). Social and emotional foundations for early learning: A conceptual model for intervention. School Psychology Review, 35, 583–601.
36.
HeromanC.BurtsD.BerkeK.BickartT. (2010). Teaching Strategies GOLD® objectives for development & learning. Washington, DC: Teaching Strategies.
37.
HojnoskiR. L.MissallK. N. (2007). Monitoring preschoolers’ language and early literacy growth and development. Young Exceptional Children, 10, 17–27.
38.
HollenbeckA. F. (2007). From IDEA to implementation: A discussion of foundational and future responsiveness-to-intervention research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 137–146.
39.
HornE.PetersonC.FoxL. (Eds.). (2007). Linking curriculum to child and family outcomes (Young Exceptional Children Monograph Series No. 9). Missoula, MT: Division for Early Childhood.
40.
HozellaP. (2007). Early intervening services and response to intervention (Module 6). Building the legacy: IDEA 2004 training curriculum. Washington, DC: National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities. Retrieved from www.nichcy.org/laws/idea/legacy/module6
41.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446 § 300.115 (2004).
42.
JacksonS.Pretti-FrontczakK.Harjusola-WebbS.Grisham-BrownJ.RomaniJ. (2009). Response to intervention: Implications for early childhood professionals. Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 424–434.
43.
JimersonS. R.BurnsM. K.VanDerHeydenA. M. (Eds.). (2007). Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention. New York, NY: Springer.
44.
KoutsoftasA. D.HarmonM. T.GrayS. (2009). The effect of Tier 2 intervention for phonemic awareness in a response-to-intervention model in low-income preschool classrooms. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 116–130.
45.
McMasterK. L.FuchsD.FuchsL. S.ComptonD. L. (2005). Responding to nonresponders: An experimental field trial of identification and intervention methods. Exceptional Children, 71, 445–463.
46.
MusgroveM. (2011). Memorandum: A response to intervention (RTI) process cannot be used to delay-deny an evaluation for eligibility under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Retrieved from www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/memosdcitrs/osep11-07rtimemo.pdf
47.
National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education. (2003). Early childhood curriculum, assessment, and program evaluation: Building an effective, accountable system in programs for children birth through age 8. Retrieved from http://www.naeyc.org/positionstatements/cape
48.
National Center on Response to Intervention. (2010). Essential components of RTI—A closer look at response to intervention. Washington, DC: Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
49.
National Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center. (2012). Response to intervention in early childhood resource page. Retrieved from http://nectac.org/topics/RTI/RTI.asp
50.
National Professional Development Center on Inclusion. (2012). Response to intervention (RTI) in early childhood: Building consensus on the defining features. Chapel Hill: FPG Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina.
51.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115, Stat. 1425 (2002).
52.
ParksS. (2007). Hawaii Early Learning Profile (HELP) Strands (0–3). Palo Alto, CA: VORT Corporation.
53.
PearceL. R. (2009). Helping children with emotional difficulties: A response to intervention investigation. Rural Educator, 30(2), 34–46.
54.
RaverS. (2003). Keeping track: Using routine-based instruction and monitoring. Young Exceptional Children, 6(3), 12–20.
55.
SandallS. R.HemmeterM. L.SmithB. J.McLeanM. E. (2005). DEC recommended practices: A comprehensive guide for practical application in early intervention/early childhood special education. Missoula, MT: Division for Early Childhood.
56.
SandallS. R.SchwartzI. S. (2008). Building blocks for teaching preschoolers with special needs (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
57.
SandallS. R.SchwartzI. S.JosephG. E.ChouH. Y.HornE. M.LieberJ.. . . WoleryR. (2002). Building blocks for teaching preschoolers with special needs. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
58.
ShapiroE. S.ZigmondN.WallaceT.MarstonD. (2011). Models for implementing response to intervention: Tools, outcomes, and implications. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
59.
SheridanS. M.EdwardsC. P.MarvinC. A.KnocheL. L. (2009). Professional development in early childhood programs: Process issues and research needs. Early Education and Development, 20, 377–401.
60.
SheridanS. M.MarvinC.KnocheL.EdwardsC. P. (2008). Getting ready: Promoting school readiness through a relationship-based partnership model. Early Childhood Services, Special Issue on Young Children’s Relationships, 2, 149–172.
61.
SlentzK. L.HyattK. J. (2008). Best practices in applying curriculum-based assessment in early childhood. In ThomasA.GrimesJ. (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (Vol. 2, pp. 519–534). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
62.
SnyderP.HemmeterM. L.McLaughlinT. (2011). Professional development in early childhood intervention: Where we stand on the silver anniversary of PL 99-457. Journal of Early Intervention, 33, 357–370.
63.
SpencerE.GoldsteinH.ShermanA.NoeS.TabbahR.ZiolkowskiR.SchneiderN. (2012). Effects of an automated vocabulary and comprehension intervention: An early efficacy study. Journal of Early Intervention, 34, 195-221.
64.
SugaiG.HornerR. H. (2009). Responsiveness-to-intervention and school-wide positive behavior supports: Integration of multi-tiered system approaches. Exceptionality, 17, 223–237. doi:10.1080/09362830903235375
65.
TabaH. (1962). Curriculum development theory and practice. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace & World.
66.
TorgesenJ. K. (2009). The response to intervention instructional model: Some outcomes from a large-scale implementation in reading first schools. Child Development Perspectives, 3, 38–40. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2009.00073.x
67.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Head Start. (2011). The Head Start Child Development and Early Learning Framework: Promoting positive outcomes in early childhood programs serving children 3–5 years old. Arlington, VA: Head Start Resource Center.
68.
VanDerHeydenA. M.SnyderP. (2006). Integrating frameworks from early childhood intervention and school psychology to accelerate growth for all young children. School Psychology Review, 35, 519–534.
69.
VanDerHeydenA. M.SnyderP.BroussardC.RamsdellK. (2008). Measuring response to early literacy intervention with preschoolers at risk. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 27, 232–249.
70.
WalkerH. M.ShinnM. R. (2010). Systematic, evidence-based approaches for promoting positive student outcomes within a multi-tier framework: Moving from efficacy to effectiveness. In ShinnM. R.WalkerH. M. (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior problems in a three-tier model including RTI (pp. 1–26). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
71.
WoleryM. (2004). Monitoring child progress. In McLeanM.WoleryM.BaileyD. B.Jr. (Eds.), Assessing infants and preschoolers with special needs (3rd ed., pp. 545–584). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
72.
YsseldykeJ. E.ThurlowM. L.ChristensonS. L. (1987). Teacher effectiveness and teacher decision-making: Implications for effective instruction of handicapped students (Monograph No. 5, Instructional Alternatives Project). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
73.
ZaslowM. J. (2009). Strengthening the conceptualization of early childhood professional development initiatives and evaluations. Early Education and Development, 20, 527–536.
74.
ZaslowM. J.ToutK.HalleT.WhittakerJ. V.LavelleB. (2010). Toward the identification of features of effective professional development for early childhood educators. Washington, DC: Child Trends.
