Regulatory Requirements

The RTI approach promotes parent involvement and is flexible can be used in multiple subject areas. The concerns with RTI approach include: no guidelines that for moving on to the next level of RTI. The roles of the adults are not defined clearly as well in the approach. Other underlying issues with RTI include exclusion from normal classroom setting, labeling all children with learning disability and the cost for adequate training of the

Instruction should be differentiated according to how students learn, build on existing student knowledge and experience, and be language appropriate. In addition, decisions about Tier 2 and 3 interventions should be informed by an awareness of students’ cultural and linguistic strengths and challenges in relation to their responsiveness to instruction. Teachers use student assessment data and knowledge of student readiness, learning preferences, language and culture to offer students in the same class different teaching and learning strategies to address their needs. Differentiation can involve mixed instructional groupings, team teaching, peer tutoring, learning centers, and accommodations to ensure that all students have access to the instructional program. Differentiated instruction is not the same as providing more intensive interventions to students with learning problems. RtI has three levels of prevention: primary (core curriculum), secondary (Tier 2 intervention), and tertiary (Tier 3 intervention). Through this framework, student assessment and instruction are linked for data-based decision-making. If students move through the framework’s specified levels of prevention, their instructional program becomes more intensive and more individualized to target their specific areas of learning or behavioral need. Typically each level of intervention lasts from 9–12 weeks with data collection completed regularly, e.g., weekly to three times per week. If the child’s skills improve, the intervention is considered successful. In addition, An academic intervention is successful if there is a sustained narrowing of the achievement gap for the

RTI has three tier levels. At Tier 1, all students are at the general instruction and assessment stage. At Tier 2, some students are at the supplementary instruction and assessment stage. At Tier 3, few students are at the specialized instruction and assessment stage. This stage can take quite some time for students to get out of, but educational professionals need to continue to be patient and work with students. This is also an opportunity for educational professionals to collaborate with their team to come up with differentiated instructional

This week the topic we covered was over Special Education. While reading the text the information on Response to Intervention (RTI) really stood out to me. According to the text, RTI is a concept used to identify students who may have a learning disability (Walsh, p. 94). I am all for providing more focus interventions to students who are struggling in regular education. The way it operates on my campus, RTI is operated through P.E.classes only. RTI pullouts take place at the start of each class period. The pullouts can last up to 45 minutes. I question the effectiveness of the RTI pullouts because I have students that try to skip the intervention because they rather stay in P.E. To minimize the skipping, if my aide is present, I

The purpose of this method is to closely monitor the progress of struggling students at each tier in the intervention model to conclude if further research-based instruction is needed. RtI constructs the essential resources accessible to ensure that students have access to and make advancements in the general education classroom setting. As an implemented school-wide prevention method, RtI involves modifying instruction for students struggling to aid them in ways that will improve academic skills (Gresham, 2005). Meeting the needs of students, despite their disabilities. The RtI model allocates early interventions and assistance to preclude learning difficulties from developing into something bigger. These differentiated instructions may be conceptualized as an educator’s reaction to varied learning needs of a student (Brown-Chidsey & Steege,

That being said I find it important that we identify what level of English your ELL student knows. Because some may know no English, able to read and write English, some English, and etc. Once the school is able to identify what level of English the ELL student has then we they are able to place that student in the right program and class. After the student is given an IPT assessment

English Language Learners face a variety of unique challenges when compared to their non-ELL peers. For example, when assessing new English Language Learners, once such challenge is the lack of effective assessment tools. Many of the available instruments are not culturally relevant to the ELL student’s background, nor created at an appropriate level for their developing English language skills. Another challenge is the lack of availability of qualified education professionals, who are equipped to meet their specific needs linguistically. Language and cultural differences may serve to put ELL students at an academic disadvantage, regardless of whether they possess normal cognitive skills. For the educator and student alike, this matter is further complicated when an ELL is affected by a learning disability. In this essay, I will discuss some special factors and issues that an ELL professional may encounter when assessing an ELL student, and attempting to determine the cause of a language difficulty; whether it occurs because of normal language acquisition issues, or because of an underlying learning disability that calls for special education intervention and support.

Response to Intervention (RTI) is “an assessment and intervention model that enables schools to deliver sound instructional methods to students who might otherwise “fall through the cracks”” (Brown-Chidsey & Steege, 2010, p. 2). Prior to RTI, students were only referred for the assessment of special education eligibility once they were left behind, or completely failing in school. This method worked to ensure that failing students would eventually end up receiving services, however once they were finally identified, it was often too late. Now, RTI supports all students in the general education system, working alongside the special education procedures, and the data from RTI can be used in special education decision making and eligibility (Brown-Chidsey & Steege, 2010, p. 25). RTI has helped with early identification of students that not only need additional help or resources, but it has also helped with identifying students that need to be evaluated to determine eligibility for special education services. Students who receive interventions or services after being identified early are far more likely to succeed in school. In addition, these students are less likely to need special education services in the future, as the early identification and interventions may resolve the child’s issue. RTI methods were included in, and fit with, the reauthorization of IDEA in 2004 and the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 (Brown-Chidsey & Steege, 2010, p. 12). RTI works to

Along with the language barrier, English Language Learners (ELLs) often have high transient rates which pose a challenge to educators concerned with

Achievement measures standardized and norm referenced must be given the student after consent is gained from the parents when a disability is considered. Again, all this must happen after the child moves through all the Response to Intervention (RTI) tiers have been complete. The IEP team will be involved in all educational decisions.

services. The purpose of RTI is to identify those children that present with either learning disabilities or language impairment as well as prevention. “The primary prevention goal of RTI is to help children avoid failure”, (Nelson, 2010). The RTI program also targets early literacy abilities. It is divided into three (3) tiers of instructional activities. Tier 1 is mainly core instruction, which includes all children. During this tier the students’ progress is investigated to measure whether the child is actually responding to the intervention. Tier 1 includes literacy skills with the younger elementary grades. If children demonstrate difficulty then they are moved into Tier 2, where they receive intensified group instruction. In this Tier the instruction goes from being generalized across all students to being implemented only in smaller groups. If the child still continues to demonstrate difficulties then they are moved into Tier 3, where they receive individualized

RTI is a national program which helps children who have learning and behavior difficulties in the school. Each state evaluates the students’ progress to know what student has those difficulties and how different specialist, teacher and special educators can help the child overcomes his difficulties. The children’s improves are evaluate periodic to know if the children are responding positively to the program. General and special education are working together to help the children with learning and behavior problems to improve their condition.

Response to intervention originated after the use of the discrepancy model. The discrepancy model identified a student with a specific learning disability by looking to see if there is a severe difference between the student's IQ and what the student is achieving (Shepard & Linn, 2015, p.253). Due to students having to fail before they can be identified for a learning disability, RTI was created as an alternative model. Later on with No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and IDEA 2004, the discrepancy model was no longer required and the RTI model was taken over (Shepard & Linn, 2015, p.253). It was taken over as the best way to qualify students for special education because it is emphasizes scientifically based interventions.

With this being valid, RTI interventions in fact are being delivered by special educational teachers. RTI is known

I respect your viewpoint, but I disagree that response to intervention (RTI) should be used as the sole means to diagnose learning disabilities (LD). Because of their lack of standardization; these procedures might be object of much measurement errors. For example, let us consider a teacher that uses RTI and test LD students every four months using a battery of tests. Because there are no guidelines for RTI, school districts and/or teachers use the measure that they most favor.