Browsing by Subject "Response to intervention"
Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item ESL teachers' perspectives on methods and practices of supporting struggling learners and identifying a possible disability(2016-05) Philpott, Anna Jura Mary; Toste, Jessica; Ainslie, Ricardo; Linan-Thompson, SylviaEfforts to implement the Response to Intervention (RTI) framework in middle schools are increasing. Concurrently the number of English Learners (ELs) enrolled in middle schools is growing rapidly, yet little research exists regarding efficacy of the RTI framework for ELs at the middle school level. This study used qualitative focus group methodology to explore middle school English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers’ perceptions of effective instruction and interventions for ELs and to gain insight into their experiences of referring a struggling student to special education services. Specifically, three research questions are addressed: (1) In districts with at least 25% EL populations, how do ESL teachers currently respond to struggling ELs who may need special education services?; (2) What barriers exist that make it difficult to provide support for these students?; and (3) What critical success factors can be distilled from the experience of ESL teachers interviewed? Themes discussed include the challenge of distinguishing struggles related to limited English proficiency from a possible learning disability, the need for more structure and guidance within the RTI process, and support provided by district ESL departments. Implications of these findings are discussed and direction for future research is stated.Item Fidelity of response to intervention in Texas schools(2015-12) Henning, Rachel Feile; Flower, Andrea L.; Bryant, Diane P; Linan-Thompson, SylviaResponse to Intervention (RtI) is a framework intended to provide high quality classroom instruction, identification of students at risk of failure and tiered levels of interventions for those students. This study outlines the essential components of an RtI framework. Currently, Texas has broad guidelines about the implementation of RtI, so there is potential for much variability at the campus level. In this study, Texas elementary school principals were contacted and asked to participate in a survey about the fidelity of implementation of RtI on their campus. This study sought to answer: (1 to what degree are Texas schools implementing RtI with fidelity by incorporating the essential features into their RtI models? And (2 how do Texas schools perform with regard to the percentages of students at each tier of the RtI model? Due to a poor response rate, results from this survey are minimal. The overall results reveal that most of the schools in this study are successful in the formation multiple levels of increasing intensity and data-based decision making, while most need improvement in the percentage of students in each tier and empirically validated instruction.Item Patterns of processing strengths and weaknesses for LD identification : identification rates, agreement, and group characteristics(2013-05) Miciak, Jeremy Richard; Vaughn, Sharon, 1952-Two models for learning disabilities (LD) identification are explicitly allowed in federal regulations: (a) ability-achievement discrepancy and (b) response to intervention. Dissatisfaction with both models has led to calls for a third model, which identifies a pattern of cognitive processing strengths and weaknesses (PSW model) as a marker of LD. However, little empirical research has investigated this proposed model. This study investigated two proposed approaches for implementing a PSW model: (a) the concordance/discordance model (C/DM) and (b) the cross battery assessment (XBA) approach. All 139 participants demonstrated inadequate response to a Tier 2 intervention in sixth or seventh grade. Following Tier 2 intervention, participants completed a comprehensive battery of cognitive and academic tests. I utilized results to empirically categorize each participant as either meeting or not meeting LD criteria according to the two PSW approaches at different academic deficit cut points. Resulting group status was utilized to determine: (a) LD identification rates, (b) agreement between approaches, and (c) the relative academic performance and sociodemographic characteristics of resulting groups. The number of participants that met LD criteria varied widely, dependent upon the approach and deficit cut point (range: 10.8% - 47.5%). More participants met criteria for both approaches at higher deficit cut points. More participants met C/DM criteria than XBA criteria at similar cut points. Agreement between the two approaches was generally low. Kappa ranged from -.04 - .56 when comparing classification decisions across different iterations of the two approaches. Comparisons of groups that met and did not meet C/DM and XBA criteria on external academic and sociodemographic variables were largely null. The results highlight several potential challenges to widespread implementation of a PSW model. Both approaches identified a low percentage of students, raising questions of efficiency. Low agreement is an inevitable result of measurement error and implementation differences between the two approaches. Such variability in classification decisions suggests the models may be incompatible and should be independently validated. Further, the failure to find qualitative differences in academic needs between groups that met and did not meet LD criteria for either approach raises questions about the utility of the identification model.Item Problem-solving team deliberations in a response to intervention framework about struggling Latino English language learners in early primary grades(2013-12) Takakawa, Nara Nami; Sorrells, Audrey McCrayResponse to Intervention (RTI) is a multi-tiered framework that focuses on the early identification and support of students who are struggling to learn. In the problem-solving model of RTI, where a multidisciplinary team uses data to drive decision making, much remains unknown about how RTI should be implemented when struggling English language learners (ELLs) are the focus of team deliberations. The development of the multidisciplinary problem-solving team (PST) is grounded in the assumption that professionals from different disciplines such as school psychology, special education, and counseling would make less biased decisions than a single individual. However, a group of professionals may still make biased decisions based on stereotypes of ethnicity (Orosco, 2010), social class (Knotek, 2003), and inadequate knowledge of second language acquisition and bilingualism (Orosco, 2010). Not much is known about the process of team decision-making; in fact, no research to-date has examined how a PST deliberates about struggling ELLs. A qualitative case study approach was utilized to investigate how one school’s multidisciplinary problem-solving team used data in their deliberations about struggling ELLs in early primary grades. Ten members of a PST at an elementary school in an urban area of Texas participated in this study; seven ELLs were the focus of the observed team meetings. Data were generated from the discourse of the team meetings, interviews, and school documents, including students’ cumulative folders and language proficiency assessment records. Data were analyzed using discourse analysis, content analysis, and pattern-matching logic. Findings revealed that the Tier 3 problem-solving process was not aligned with the district’s expressed intent. In addition, a hierarchy of control constrained the problem-solving process and restricted the PST’s ability to freely discuss the cases of struggling ELLs. Implications for implementing RTI with ELLs and suggestions for future research are presented.Item Response to intervention viewed through the lens of adoption of innovation(2012-12) Fugate, Margrette Katherine; Pazey, Barbara Lynn, 1951-; Yates, James R.; Holme, Jennifer J; Schaller, James L; Kane, Ruth AThe reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) in 2004 states that a local education agency (LEA) may use a process that determines whether a child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as part of the evaluation procedures to identify the child as having a specific learning disability and as eligible to receive special education services. One such process that LEAs are using is response to intervention (RTI). Typically, RTI has been conceptualized and implemented as a multitiered prevention and intervention instructional support system for struggling learners. The implementation of RTI requires practitioners’ knowledge and skill in the planning, development, and execution of its innovative, scientifically based research methods. Rogers’s (2003) diffusion of innovation model served as the framework for this study. Rogers’s 5 main steps in the innovation-decision process were examined: (a) knowledge, (b) persuasion, (c) decision, (d) implementation, and (e) confirmation. Through this lens, how the innovation-decision process influences educators and schools to adopt or not adopt multitiered instruction defined as RTI was examined. The study explored whether practitioners did adopt RTI; whether all 5 stages were implemented by the educators; and, if so, whether they were sequenced. The study also examined whether adoption occurred and all aspects of RTI were being adhered to. Despite an abundance of research and writings on the pedagogical implications related to RTI, largely due to recent federal policy, there is a paucity of research on RTI regarding the organizational complexity related to implementing RTI. This lack of inquiry of organizational processes and effects of RTI affects both general and special educators, and consequently students of all ages.