scholarly journals Response to Intervention (RTI) and Changes in Special Education Categorization

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 59-71
Author(s):  
Kasandra Raben ◽  
Justin Brogan ◽  
Mardis Dunham ◽  
Susana Bloomdahl
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
School District ◽  
Response To Intervention ◽  
School Districts ◽  
The United States ◽  
Similar Proportion ◽  
Special Education Eligibility ◽  
Special Education Referral ◽  
Treatment Providers ◽  
Rti Implementation

Response to intervention (RTI) is used as a prerequisite to referring children for special education eligibility for learning disabilities (LD). RTI provides schools with a framework for helping students with learning challenges. In the United States, while the number of students receiving services through RTI has remained consistent, the overall number of students receiving some educational intervention through an alternate path has increased. The purpose of this study was to determine the influence that the RTI model had upon eligibility numbers in a large special education co-operative spanning 21 rural school districts in southern Illinois that represented 15,128 students. Each of the school districts maintained its own policies and procedures governing RTI implementation, special education referral, and special education eligibility. The study revealed that while the number of students with LD dropped significantly over the past decade, the numbers of children eligible for other disability categories increased in a similar proportion. This changing trend may be the result of several factors including changes in school district policy, parent advocates pressing for quicker paths to treatment, treatment providers shifting categories for a wide variety of reasons, or some yet unknown factor. These possible explanations suggest that family issues, time, finances, and procedural dynamics may play a role in the changing categorizations and should be better understood. Future studies should focus on the inclusion of more culturally and economically diverse students, within and outside the Unites States. Last, school district policies and RTI implementation procedures should be investigated to better uncover any potential relationship to this shifting data trend.

A Comparison of the Prevalence Rates of Language Impairment Before and After Response-to-Intervention Implementation

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 703-709 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon Hall-Mills
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Response To Intervention ◽  
School Districts ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Prevalence Rates ◽  
Prevalence Data ◽  
Rti Implementation ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Primary Disability

Purpose This research note presents a secondary data analysis of language impairment (LI) prevalence rates of children in public schools before and after a statewide mandate for response-to-intervention (RTI) implementation. Method Statewide and district-level LI prevalence rates were compared across 10 school years. Prevalence data from 67 school districts located in 1 state in the United States are reported as the proportion of the general student population (students ages 3–21 years) who were identified with a primary disability of LI. Results The mandated implementation of RTI within special education prereferral, evaluation, and eligibility processes coincided with significant changes in LI prevalence as a primary disability for most of the school districts. The majority of school districts experienced an increase in LI prevalence within 1 school year following RTI implementation. However, the degree and direction of change in prevalence rates varied across some of the school districts. Similar degrees of change were not evident across the other years of prevalence data review, suggesting the systemic change that occurred via RTI requirements coincided with fluctuations in the LI prevalence rates for the majority of school districts in the state. Conclusion A causal relation between RTI and LI prevalence cannot be established with the current data; however, this study establishes a temporal connection between the timing of RTI implementation and changes in LI prevalence in public schools of 1 very large state. Implications are presented for further research investigating the potential impact of systemic mandates on the identification of school-age children with LI. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.8968676

Response to Intervention

Education ◽  
2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Eppolito ◽  
Kathryn White ◽  
Janette Klingner
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Special Education ◽  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Response To Intervention ◽  
General Education ◽  
Progress Monitoring ◽  
The United States ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
Data Driven Decision Making ◽  
Rti Model

Response to intervention (RTI) is a comprehensive, systematic approach to teaching and learning designed to monitor academic and behavioral progress for all students, provide early interventions of increasing intensity to struggling learners, and potentially identify learners with more significant learning disabilities. The model is implemented with multitiered instruction, intervention, and assessment. The key components of the RTI model include (1) high-quality instruction matched to the needs of students, (2) evidence-based interventions of increasing intensity, (3) ongoing progress monitoring, and (4) data-driven decision making. Components of the model, such as data-driven decision making and multitiered instruction, have been studied for the past few decades, but the model as an integrated whole has been developed more recently. One catalyst for increased research and interest in RTI has been a change in federal legislation in the United States. The most recent reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) in 2004 permits the RTI model to be implemented as an alternative means to identify students with learning disabilities (LDs). These amendments to IDEA stipulate that the RTI process may be used to determine if a child is responding to research-based instruction and intervention as part of the special education evaluation process. Although driven by special education policy, RTI has been lauded as an instructional model that can improve general education overall and for special populations. However, critiques of the model argue that it has been implemented with limited research, resources, and funding and may not be valid for identifying LDs. Some experts question the psychometric validity of the model and promote using multiple forms of assessment, including more traditional standardized psycho-educational tests, in combination with RTI when evaluating students for possible LDs.

scholarly journals Exploring the K-5 special education referral process in one Midwest suburban school district

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Jake W. Boswell
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
School District ◽  
School Environment ◽  
Regular Education ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Referral Process ◽  
Regular Education Teachers ◽  
Special Education Referral ◽  
Suburban School District ◽  
Referrals For Special Education

Studies have shown referrals for special education evaluations and the evaluation process itself is marred by teacher subjectivity and a lack of quantitative data (Dunn, 2006; Mamlin and Harris, 1998; and Ysseldyke et al.,1982). Consequently, this behavior leads to over identification of students from minority cultures due to their struggle to assimilate into the school environment (Deninger, 2008; Klingner and Harry, 2006; Parette, 2005; Poon-McBrayer and Garcia, 1994; Skiba et al., 2008; Wehmeyer and Schwartz, 2001). This study seeks to better understand the special education referral process in one Midwestern school district. Specifically, this qualitative study employed focus groups, interviews, and artifact collection to engage K-5 regular education teachers in conversations about common behaviors that prompt a referral for special education evaluation. The research was conducted in three elementary schools in a metropolitan school district.

School District Budgeting and Financial Management in the United States

Education ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent Reitano
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Education ◽  
School District ◽  
School Districts ◽  
Financial Management ◽  
The United States ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Debt Management ◽  
Budget Process ◽  
Financial Condition

In the United States, school districts operate as a type of special purpose local government. Similar to general purpose governments, school districts are funded by own-source and intergovernmental revenues, although there is considerable variation in their revenue mix, contingent in part upon state-funding formulas. Unlike general purpose governments, school districts focus on the provision of public education to facilitate student learning, and therefore, expenditures are primarily relegated to teacher, support staff, and administrator salaries and benefits. Ensuring the provision of public education begins in part with the budget process. The school district budget process can assume different forms from incremental to rational and may involve a range of stakeholders, including elected officials and members of the public. Incremental budgeting begins with the prior-year budget and small upward increments, while alternatives can be based on rational decision-making theories, such as performance budgeting or zero-based budgeting. Despite these different potential budgeting methods, systematic evidence of their implantation in school districts is generally unavailable. As a complement to the budget process, school districts are also involved in financial management, which involves the strategic analysis of financial condition in the pursuit of financial resiliency and sustainability. In particular, school district budgeting and financial management involves strategically planning for and responding to internal and external trends to ensure continued public service provision in the form of public education. As a growing area of research, school district budgeting and financial management encompasses topics such as budget forecasting, financial condition analysis, optimization of fiscal reserves over the business cycle, and debt management, among other topics.

Comparing Autism Symptom Severity Between Children With a Medical Autism Diagnosis and an Autism Special Education Eligibility

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 186-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Safer-Lichtenstein ◽  
Laura Lee McIntyre
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Symptom Severity ◽  
Challenging Behavior ◽  
Adaptive Functioning ◽  
Challenging Behaviors ◽  
The United States ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Special Education Eligibility

Rates of children identified as having autism spectrum disorder (ASD) continue to increase in both medical and school settings. While procedures for providing a medical diagnosis are relatively consistent throughout the United States, the process for determining special education eligibility under an ASD classification varies by state, with many states adopting looser identification criteria than medical taxonomies. This study included a sample of 73 school-age children with ASD and sought to examine differences in ASD symptom severity, adaptive functioning, and challenging behaviors between those identified in the medical system versus those identified in schools. Results indicate that children identified as having ASD only by their school had less severe clinician-rated ASD symptomatology than children with a medical ASD diagnosis but that caregiver reports of adaptive functioning and challenging behavior did not differ between the two groups. These findings do not appear to have been influenced by demographic factors including caregiver education, household income, or health insurance status. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Implementing Response to Intervention: Challenges of Diversity and System Change in a High-Stakes Environment

2016 ◽  
Vol 118 (5) ◽  
pp. 1-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy Cavendish ◽  
Beth Harry ◽  
Ana Maria Menda ◽  
Anabel Espinosa ◽  
Margarette Mahotiere
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Response To Intervention ◽  
Urban Schools ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Implementation Process ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Grounded Theory Research ◽  
Change Factors ◽  
Rti Implementation

Background The Response to Intervention (RTI) approach involves the use of a dynamic model built around the systematic documentation of students’ response to research-based instructional interventions. Although there has been widespread implementation of RTI models for early intervention and in some cases, as a means to identify students with learning disabilities (LD), little has been published on teacher implementation of RTI in naturalistic school settings. Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine the RTI implementation process in two culturally diverse, urban schools. The authors describe the process of large-scale RTI implementation through the lens of Systems Change Theory. Research Design This study of RTI in a naturalistic setting used grounded theory research methods to provide an in-depth description and qualitative analysis of challenges and successes experienced by RTI teams and teachers in schools required by state mandate to implement RTI. Data collection included semi-structured interviews and observations with 30 participants in two urban schools. Transcripts of interviews and field notes of direct observations were analyzed inductively through a four-tiered interpretive coding process that moved from the most concrete to more abstract levels of interpretation. Conclusions The present study highlights challenges related to changes in procedures for monitoring student responsiveness in an RTI system used for special education identification. The emergence of themes from observation and interview data revealed how professional development gaps, school personnel's assumptions about culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) learners and families, and external pressures from district and state accountability systems affected RTI implementation across two schools. Our observations revealed confusion over the components for practice in RTI as well as a lack of understanding related to the purpose of RTI to potentially improve outcomes and reduce referrals to special education for CLD youth. The issues that emerged as barriers to implementation serve to identify the systemic change factors needed to support large-scale RTI implementation.

The Use of Response to Intervention to Inform Special Education Eligibility Decisions for Students With Specific Learning Disabilities

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 195-200
Author(s):  
Debi Gartland ◽  
Roberta Strosnider
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Response To Intervention ◽  
Specific Learning Disability ◽  
Active Member ◽  
Special Education Eligibility ◽  
Official Position ◽  
National Joint Committee ◽  
Method Of Evaluation ◽  
Specific Learning

This is an official position paper of the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (NJCLD), of which the Council for Learning Disabilities has been a long-standing, active member. Response to intervention (RTI) is a critical component of a multi-tiered service delivery system. This NJCLD paper presents concerns related to the implementation of RTI and its use as the sole method of evaluation to determine the identification and eligibility for special education as a student with a specific learning disability (SLD) and implications for transition.

Special Education Policy Change

2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 64-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenda L. Barrio
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
English Language Learners ◽  
School Districts ◽  
Policy Change ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
English Language ◽  
The United States ◽  
Rural School ◽  
Disproportionate Representation ◽  
Rural School Districts

Research suggests that disproportionate representation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in special education has been a recurring topic of concern in the field of special education within the United States. Over the past few years, this concern has shifted to focus on the disproportionate representation of English Language Learners (ELLs) in categories of mild to moderate disabilities, specifically within the category of learning disabilities. Although improvements in educational policy have been made through federal legislation, local rural school districts continue to battle this concern, especially those in rural areas. The following article focuses on the recommendations for development, implementation, and evaluation of local policy change to improve the disproportionate representation of ELL students within rural school districts.

scholarly journals Addressing the inclusion imperative: an urban school district’s responses

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 61 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Edward DeMatthews ◽  
Hanne Mawhinney
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
School Districts ◽  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Implementation Process ◽  
Urban School ◽  
The United States ◽  
Minority Children ◽  
Implementation Processes ◽  
District Administrators

Over the past forty years, schools across the United States have become more inclusive for students with disabilities.  However, in many high-poverty urban school districts, a disproportionate number of minority children with disabilities are segregated from their non-disabled peers.  This article presents findings from a qualitative case study of one urban school district implementing special education-related inclusion reform over the course of four years.  The district had a history of segregating students and numerous compliance issues with special education mandates; however, the arrival of a new superintendent brought new hopes for change.  The authors argue that existing research regarding inclusion has typically ignored the policy implementation processes employed by school districts in establishing more inclusive schools and improved special education programs.  This article provides a case description of a district’s special education inclusion policy implementation process, the challenges district administrators were confronted with, and the positive and negative outcomes of the district’s policies. The findings inform next-generation policy initiatives and future lines of inquiry.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document