Reading and Writing

, Volume 25, Issue 7, pp 1691–1723

Teachers’ knowledge base for implementing response-to-intervention models in reading



This study examined the knowledge base of 142 elementary-level educators for implementing response-to-intervention (RTI) models in reading. A questionnaire assessed participants’ professional background for teaching reading, as well as their familiarity with specific assessments, research-based instructional models, and interventions potentially useful in RTI approaches. A multiple-choice knowledge survey patterned after a teacher licensure exam, including items situated in classroom contexts, assessed participants’ knowledge about different components of reading, assessment, and RTI practices. Overall, participants obtained the highest scores on a knowledge survey subscale involving fluency/vocabulary/comprehension and the lowest on a subscale involving assessment/RTI practices, with a subscale involving phonemic awareness/phonics in the middle. Mean percentages correct on the subscales ranged from about 58–65% correct. However, participants who said they had prior code-focused professional development outperformed other participants on all survey subscales. General elementary certified teachers performed comparably to special education certified teachers on two out of three subscales, with both groups outperforming unlicensed participants; on the assessment/RTI subscale, only the special educators outperformed unlicensed participants. Most participants were familiar with basic features of RTI such as the three tiered model but were unfamiliar with the research-based instructional approaches and interventions named in the study questionnaire, although participants who had experienced code-focused PD were significantly more likely to be familiar with certain interventions. The study suggests that professional development will be important to enable many educators to implement RTI effectively in reading.


Response to intervention RTI Reading Literacy Teacher knowledge Teacher preparation 


  1. Al Otaiba, S. (2001). Children who do not respond to early literacy instruction: A longitudinal study across kindergarten and first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 344–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beck, I., McKeown, M., Hamilton, R., & Kucan, L. (1997). Questioning the author: An approach for enhancing student engagement with text. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
  3. Blachowicz, C., & Fisher, P. (2004). Vocabulary lessons. What Research Says about Reading, 61, 66–69.Google Scholar
  4. Bos, C., Mather, N., Dickson, S., Podhajski, B., & Chard, D. (2001). Perceptions and knowledge of preservice and inservice educators about early reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 51, 97–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brady, S., Gillis, M., Smith, T., Lavalette, M., Liss-Bronstein, L., Lowe, E., et al. (2009). First grade teachers’ knowledge of phonological awareness and code concepts: Examining gains from an intensive form of professional development. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 425–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carlisle, J. F., Cortina, K. S., & Katz, L. A. (2011). First-grade teachers’ response to three models of professional development in reading. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 27, 212–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carlisle, J. F., Kelcey, B., Rowan., B., & Phelps, G. (in press). Teachers’ knowledge about early reading: Effects on students’ gains in reading achievement. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness.Google Scholar
  8. Carreker, S. H., Swank, P. R., Tillman-Dowdy, L., Neuhaus, G. F., Monfils, M. J., Montemayor, M. L., et al. (2005). Language enrichment teacher preparation and practice predicts third-grade reading comprehension. Reading Psychology, 26, 401–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Catts, H. W., Hogan, T. P., & Adlof, S. M. (2005). Developmental changes in reading and reading disabilities. In H. W. Catts & A. Kamhi (Eds.), The connections between language and reading disabilities (pp. 25–40). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Cheesman, E. A., Hougen, M., & Smartt, S. M. (2010). Higher education collaboratives: Aligning research and practice in teacher education. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 36, 31–35.Google Scholar
  11. Consortium on Reading Excellence. (2008). CORE assessing reading: Multiple measures for kindergarten through twelfth grade (2nd ed.). Novato, CA: Arena Press.Google Scholar
  12. Cunningham, A. E., Perry, K. E., Stanovich, K. E., & Stanovich, P. J. (2004). Disciplinary knowledge of K-3 teachers and their knowledge calibration in the domain of early literacy. Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 139–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., Anthony, J. L., & Francis, D. J. (2006). An evaluation of intensive intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 447–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Denton, C. A., & Hocker, J. L. (2006). Responsive reading instruction: Flexible intervention for struggling readers in the early grades. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.Google Scholar
  15. Denton, C. A., Nimon, K., Mathes, P. G., Swanson, E. A., Kethley, C., Kurz, T. B., et al. (2010). Effectiveness of a supplemental early reading intervention scaled up in multiple schools. Exceptional Children, 76, 394–416.Google Scholar
  16. Foorman, B. R., & Moats, L. C. (2004). Conditions for sustaining research-based practices in early reading instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2005). Peer-assisted learning strategies: Promoting word recognition, fluency, and reading comprehension in young children. Journal of Special Education, 39, 34–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Thompson, A., Roberts, P. H., Kubec, P., et al. (1994). Technical features of a mathematics concepts and applications curriculum-based measurement system. Diagnostique, 19, 23–49.Google Scholar
  19. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Stecker, P. M. (2010). The “blurring” of special education in a new continuum of general education placements and services. Exceptional Children, 76, 301–323.Google Scholar
  20. Gillingham, A., & Stillman, B. (1970). Remedial training for children with specific language disability. Cambridge, MA: Educators’ Publishing Service.Google Scholar
  21. Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (2002). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement.Google Scholar
  22. Hasbrouck, J. E., Ihnot, C., & Rogers, G. (1999). “Read naturally”: A strategy to increase oral reading fluency. Reading Research and Instruction, 39, 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. International Dyslexia Association. (2010). Knowledge and practice standards for teachers of reading. Baltimore, MD: International Dyslexia Association.Google Scholar
  24. International Reading Association. (2003). Investment in teacher preparation in the United States. Newark, DE: Author.Google Scholar
  25. Johns, J. L. (2008). Basic reading inventory: Pre-primer through grade 12 and early literacy assessments. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.Google Scholar
  26. Joshi, R. M., Binks, E., Graham, L., Ocker-Dean, E., Smith, D., & Boulware-Gooden, R. (2009a). Do textbooks used in university reading education courses conform to the instructional recommendations of the National Reading Panel? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 458–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Joshi, R. M., Binks, E., Hougen, M., Dahlgren, M., Ocker-Dean, E., & Smith, D. (2009b). Why elementary teachers might be inadequately prepared to teach reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 392–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Keenan, J. M., & Betjemann, R. S. (2006). Comprehending the gray oral reading test without reading it: Why comprehension tests should not include passage-independent items. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 363–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Leach, J. M., Scarborough, H. S., & Rescorla, L. (2003). Late-emerging reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 211–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lindamood, P. C., & Lindamood, P. D. (1998). The Lindamood phoneme sequencing program for reading, spelling, and speech. San Luis Obispo, CA: Lindamood-Bell Learning Processes.Google Scholar
  31. McCombes-Tolis, J., & Feinn, R. (2008). Comparing teachers’ literacy-related knowledge to their state’s standards for reading. Reading Psychology, 29, 236–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McCombes-Tolis, J., & Spear-Swerling, L. (2011). The preparation of pre-service elementary educators in understanding and applying the terms, concepts, and practices associated with response to intervention in early reading contexts. Journal of School Leadership, 21, 360–389.Google Scholar
  33. McCutchen, D., Green, L., Abbott, R. D., & Sanders, E. A. (2009). Further evidence for teacher knowledge: Supporting struggling readers in grades three through five. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 401–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mercer, C. D., Campbell, K. U., Miller, W. D., Mercer, K. D., & Lane, H. B. (2000). Effects of a reading fluency intervention for middle schoolers with specific learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 179–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moats, L. C. (1994). The missing foundation in teacher education: Knowledge of the structure of spoken and written language. Annals of Dyslexia, 44, 81–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Moats, L. C. (2005). Language essentials for teachers of reading and spelling. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.Google Scholar
  37. Moats, L. C., & Foorman, B. R. (2003). Measuring teachers’ content knowledge of language and reading. Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 23–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
  39. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Phelps, G., & Schilling, S. (2004). Developing measures of content knowledge for teachers of reading. Elementary School Journal, 105, 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Piasta, S. B., Connor, C. M., Fishman, B. J., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). Teachers’ knowledge of literacy concepts, classroom practices, and student reading growth. Scientific Studies of Reading, 13, 224–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Podhajski, B., Mather, N., Nathan, J., & Sammons, J. (2009). Professional development in scientifically based reading instruction: Teacher knowledge and reading outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 403–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Scarborough, H. S., Ehri, L. C., Olson, R. K., & Fowler, A. E. (1998). The fate of phonemic awareness beyond the elementary school years. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 115–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Simmons, D. C., Coyne, M. D., Hagan-Burke, S., Kwok, O., Simmons, L., Johnson, C., et al. (2011). Effects of supplemental reading interventions in authentic contexts: A comparison of kindergartners’ response. Exceptional Children, 77, 207–228.Google Scholar
  45. Slingerland, E. (1971). A multisensory approach to language arts. Cambridge, MA: Educators’ Publishing Service.Google Scholar
  46. Spear-Swerling, L. (2009). A literacy tutoring experience for prospective special educators and struggling second graders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 431–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Spear-Swerling, L., & Brucker, P. (2004). Preparing novice teachers to develop basic reading and spelling skills in children. Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 332–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Spear-Swerling, L., Brucker, P., & Alfano, M. (2005). Teachers’ literacy-related knowledge and self-perceptions in relation to preparation and experience. Annals of Dyslexia, 55, 266–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Speece, D. L., Case, L. P., & Molloy, D. W. (2003). Responsiveness to general education instruction as the first gate to learning disabilities identification. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 147–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Spear-Swerling, L., & Coyne, M. (2010). How research-based licensure exams can improve teacher preparation in reading: Lessons from Connecticut. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 36, 18–21.Google Scholar
  51. Stotsky, S. (2009). Licensure tests for special education teachers: How well they assess knowledge of reading instruction and mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 464–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2007). Research-based implications from extensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 36, 541–561.Google Scholar
  53. Wilson, B. A. (1988). Wilson reading system. Oxford, MA: Wilson Language Training Corporation.Google Scholar
  54. Zirkel, P. A., & Krohn, N. (2008). RtI after IDEA: A survey of state laws. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40, 71–73.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Special Education and ReadingSouthern Connecticut State UniversityNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.Department of Special EducationUniversity of Colorado at Colorado SpringsColorado SpringsUSA

Personalised recommendations