Response to Intervention

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In education, Response to Intervention (RTI or RtI) is an approach used to provide early, systematic, and appropriately intensive supplemental instruction and academic support to children who are at risk for or already underperforming as compared to appropriate grade or age level standards. However, to better reflect the transition to a broader approach to intervention, there has been a shift in recent years from the terminology referring to RTI to MTSS, which stands for "Multi-Tiered System of Supports."[1] MTSS represents the latest framework of support that is being implemented to systematically meet the wider needs which influence student learning and performance.

Description[edit]

The RTI framework encompasses tiered levels of support and interventions to adequately meet students' academic needs.[1] It was originally developed as another method for supporting students appearing below-grade level in demonstrating academic skills and identifying students with learning disabilities. However, to broaden RTI and meet the wider range of needs that can affect students' performance, there was a shift to labeling this as one of the approaches of a Multi-Tier System of Supports (MTSS) occurring in schools and the professional literature.[2]

Within the RTI process that is embodied by the MTSS framework, instruction is differentiated using varying tiers of intervention, progress monitoring of students' performance, and flexible groupings to meet the academic needs of students.[3] The level of support that is provided to individual students intensifies as the tiers increase in number. Tier 1 instruction is the broadest tier of support that is provided to all general education students, which covers all core content and grade-level standards. Instruction and the academic supports provided in this tier are differentiated to meet students' needs and learning styles.[3] Students who appear below-grade level on academic screener assessments receive Tier 2 instruction, which typically involves evidence-based interventions focusing on specific content or skills, and is often taught in a small-group setting.[3] Standardized screeners and regular progress monitoring assessments are used to evaluate students' proficiency in performing specific skills, as well as determine any necessary modifications to the instruction or appropriate interventions for those appearing as below grade level.[3] Universal screeners are given to all students and help to identify those who may be at risk of falling below grade-level.[4] Benchmark assessments are typically given at the beginning, middle, and end of year, and measure students' developing proficiency with performing skills. Using screening and benchmark assessments helps to systematically identify those needing additional support who may appear below grade level, or are at risk of falling below grade level, and plan appropriate interventions. To evaluate students' learning more regularly, progress monitoring assessments are administered to assess students' proficiency in independently applying a specific skill and inform any adjustments to the instruction. Students who continue to perform below grade level on benchmark assessments, and show little to no response to the Tier 2 interventions, may then be eligible for Tier 3 intervention, which consists of either small-group, or in some cases one-to-one, instruction.[3] Those who do not advance after receiving Tier 3 intervention will qualify for a referral to special education.[3] Using a tiered approach to intervention helps in guiding the efforts of schools to determine students' specific instructional levels across subject areas and inform instructional support. Through administering educational assessments and conducting a critical analysis of the data collected, schools can provide academic supports to students at an appropriate level of intensity under the RTI framework.

A study of the nationwide implementation of MTSS reflected that a greater number of states in the U.S. are integrating MTSS as a broader approach to provide services to students with learning disabilities, English Language Learners, and academically advanced students.[1] Whereas RTI focuses primarily on meeting the academic needs of students, MTSS takes into account other factors which influence student performance. MTSS as a whole offers educators a data-based approach to assess students' current levels of academic performance and provide targeted interventions, while also evaluating ways of continuing to promote their overall social-emotional growth.[1]

The systematic shift toward MTSS in schools provides educators with a framework that allows them to target a more diverse range of students' academic, behavioral, and social-emotional needs by using data to inform intensive instructional supports and interventions.[5] MTSS has been adopted nationally as an umbrella term to reference a multi-tiered and more whole-child approach to meeting students' learning needs and supporting all areas of their development.[1] Whereas RTI focuses on providing tiered academic interventions, MTSS delivers a more comprehensive approach. As MTSS integrates components of both the RTI and PBIS (Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports) frameworks, it produces challenges for schools to successfully balance and employ to improve student outcomes.[6] However, when implemented with fidelity and uses of best practices to support students across grade levels and subject areas, this framework can yield positive academic and behavioral results.[6]

Reasons for Implementation[edit]

There are at least four main reasons for implementing RTI to address the academic needs of students: 1)To increase achievement for all students; 2) To reduce racial/ethnic disproportionate representation of minority students in special education; 3)To increase collaboration and integration of general and special education; and 4)To identify students with learning disabilities through a different lens than the IQ-achievement discrepancy model.[7]

A study evaluating the effects of supplemental reading interventions under MTSS and RTI initiatives found that when Tier 2 intervention is integrated with high levels of fidelity, consistency, and intensity, it is possible for students’ reading outcomes to improve.[4] The same study supports the existing research surrounding the use of Tier 2 intervention to improve student reading performance, especially in schools with low reading achievements levels, and across varying school districts.[4] Setting reading goals that students are also aware of can develop reading self-concept, which influences reading fluency skills and promotes the importance of goal setting in reading intervention programs.[8] Students involved in multiple-component reading intervention programs show significant improvement, and students in different socioeconomic, racial, and intellectual quotient groups make equivalent gains.[9]

MTSS is also very useful when working with students who have severe emotional problems. The structure and evaluation process for RTI encompassed by MTSS will help this particular group of students to be successful in the academic environment.[10]

Proponents feel that response to intervention is the best opportunity for giving all students the additional time and support needed to learn at high levels,[11] and see great benefit in that it applies to the classroom teachers, paraeducators, counselors, and the administration. The RTI process under MTSS can help identify students who are at-risk, guide adjustments to instruction, monitor student progress, and then make other recommendations as necessary. The objective is that with minor adjustments or simple interventions, students may respond and achieve at higher levels.

When broader MTSS initiatives are implemented using tiered methods of assessments and interventions, schools are able to support the academic performance of students. Through research of MTSS, it has also been found that students' academic performance improved when the proper social-emotional and behavioral supports are implemented with fidelity.[1] Utilizing MTSS frameworks with the resources available to them, schools are able to respond to the comprehensive needs of students which impact their learning.

Fidelity of Implementation[edit]

When implementing an MTSS model, it is important to ensure that instruction and interventions in place are conducted with fidelity.

Factors that can reduce fidelity when implementing instruction include:[12]

  • Complexity of the interventions and the time required to implement them
  • Inaccessibility of required materials and resources
  • Low perceptions/expectations of effectiveness (teachers may not fully commit to an intervention if they believe that it will not be effective, or if it is inconsistent with their teaching style)
  • Low numbers, expertise, and motivation of those who deliver the interventions

Factors that can increase fidelity include:[13]

  • Well-functioning professional learning communities
  • Using a universal screener that is brief, aligned with the curriculum, result in reliable data, and is validated for screening decisions
  • Using a data-management system that is easily accessible by classroom teachers
  • Implementing interventions that address the skill deficit of students
  • Identifying and addressing class-wide needs
  • Establishing well-defined decision rules
  • Clear leadership from the building principal
  • Ongoing training and professional development
  • Key stakeholders working together in a flexible manner to improve student learning
  • Use of standard-protocol interventions for tier 2
  • Not making entitlement (i.e., special education disability identification) decisions until the RTI system is in place and well established.

Integrating features of MTSS or RTI in schools with fidelity is key to ensuring effective intervention among each of the three levels of support. When implemented in this manner, studies have found evidence of positive academic and behavioral outcomes among students.[6] Schools that decide to incorporate models of MTSS and RTI are equipped with the approaches and supports necessary to appropriately address various student behavioral, social-emotional, and academic needs.

Challenges Influencing Implementation Fidelity[edit]

Certain barriers exist in schools which can affect their ability to achieve adequate implementation fidelity of MTSS frameworks. Although many schools may recognize the need to administer Tier 2 assessments and instruction, they are forced to fully consider the systems and supports that are required to deliver sustained MTSS practices prior to their implementation.[4] The successful integration of RTI/MTSS initiatives in schools is shaped by the context in which it they are being coordinated, when considering the existing programs and resources available, the potential staffing arrangements that can be assigned, and the decisions being made around instruction.[3] Recognizing the different structures and supports needed by the students, schools are able to properly prepare for the successful integration of MTSS efforts.

Another challenge is the variation that can occur among schools’ models of MTSS, as they adjust the systems and supports that are put in place to meet the complex academic and behavioral needs of their students. Variability exists among schools in their definitions of what qualifies as “intensive” instruction and interventions.[14] This definition can be swayed by the varying data that is collected from using different assessments to evaluate their particular body of students. For all schools to achieve the successful integration of MTSS, it is critical that there is a balance between the implementation of fidelity and the customization of the systems and supports that are developed.[5] When forming their own MTSS models, schools follow a series of problem-solving and informed decision making. The use of data-informed decisions will enable schools to determine whether the structure of MTSS being implemented is sufficient toward meeting the intended student achievement outcomes.[5] Following a critical and systematic approach of integrating MTSS can help schools determine the specific interventions required to meet a range of students' academic, social-emotional, and behavioral needs, and ensure the successful launching of MTSS.

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d e f Zhang, Jingyuan; Martella, Ronald C; Kang, Sungwoo; Yenioglu, Busra Yilmaz (Fall 2023). "Response to Intervention (RTI)/Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS): A Nationwide Analysis". Journal of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies. 7 (1): 26.
  2. ^ Gresham, F.; Reschly, D.; Shinn, M. R. (2010). "RTI as a driving force in educational improvement: Historical legal, research, and practice perspectives". In Shinn, M. R.; Walker, H. M. (eds.). Interventions for academic achievement problems in a three-tier model, including RTI. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. pp. 47–77.
  3. ^ a b c d e f g Miesner, Helen, Rose; Blair, Elizabeth E.; Packard, Chiara C.; MACGREGOR, Lyn; Grodsky, Eric (August 2023). "Instructional Coordination for Response to Intervention: How Organizational Contexts Shape Tier 2 Interventions in Practice". American Journal of Education: 565–592.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  4. ^ a b c d Coyne, Michael D.; Oldham, Ashley; Dougherty, Shaun M.; Leonard, Kaitlin; Koriakin, Taylor; Gage, Nicholas A.; Burns, Darci; Gillis, Margie. "Evaluating the Effects of Supplemental Reading Intervention within an MTSS or RTI Reading Reform Initiative Using a Regression Discontinuity Design". Exceptional Children. 84 (4): 350–67 – via EBSCOhost.
  5. ^ a b c Morrison, Julie Q.; Russell, Christine; Dyer, Stephanie; Metcalf, Terri; Rahschulte, Rebecca L. (July 2014). "Organizational Structures and Processes to Support and Sustain Effective Technical Assistance in a State-Wide Multi-Tiered System of Support Initiative". Journal of Education and Training Studies. 2 (3): 129–37.
  6. ^ a b c Scott, Terrance M.; Gage, Nicholas A.; Hirn, Regina G.; Lingo, Amy Shearer; Burt, Jon (2019). "An examination of the association between MTSS implementation fidelity measures and student outcomes". Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth. 63 (4): 308–316.
  7. ^ Sawyer, R.; Holland, D.; Detgen, A. "State policies and procedures and selected local implementation practices in response to intervention in the six southeast region states" (PDF). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, regional educational laboratory southeast. Retrieved Feb 6, 2015.
  8. ^ Quirk, M.; Schwaneflugel, P. J.; Webb, M. Y. (2009). "A short-term longitudinal study of the relationship between motivation to read and reading fluency skill in second grade". Journal of Literacy Research. 41 (2): 196–227. doi:10.1080/10862960902908467. PMC 2838245. PMID 20300541.
  9. ^ Morris, R. D.; Lovett, M. W.; Wolf, M.; Sevcik, R. A.; Steinbach, K. A.; Frijters, J. C.; Shapiro, M. B. (2012). "Multiple-component remediation for developmental reading disabilities: IQ, socioeconomic status, and race as factors in remedial outcome". Journal of Learning Disabilities. 45 (2): 99–127. doi:10.1177/0022219409355472. PMC 9872281. PMID 20445204. S2CID 13388168.
  10. ^ Pearce, I. R. (2009). "Helping children with emotional difficulties: A response to intervention investigation" (PDF). The Rural Educator. 30 (2): 34–36.
  11. ^ Buffum, Austin; Mattos, Mike; Weber, Chris (October 1, 2010). "The Why Behind RTI". ascd.org.
  12. ^ Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006). Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.
  13. ^ Burns, Matthew; Gibbons, Kimberly (2012). Implementing response to intervention in elementary and secondary schools: Procedures to assure scientific-based practices (2nd ed.). Routledge.
  14. ^ Weisenburgh-Snyder, Amy B.; Malmquist, Susan K.; Robbins, Joanne K.; Lipshin, Alison M. "A Model of MTSS: Integrating Precision Teaching of Mathematics and a Multi-Level Assessment System in a Generative Classroom". Learning Disabilities- A Contemporary Journal. 13 (1): 21–41 – via EBSCOhost.

References[edit]

Further reading[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Response_to_Intervention&oldid=1219114726"