The implementation of Response to Intervention (RTI) in elementary schools may have important implications for school psychologists. Therefore, it is important to better understand how elementary school psychologists perceive RTI and what barriers to successful RTI implementation they identify. Although previous research has investigated the perceptions of school psychologists in general Marrs and Little (Contemporary School Psychology, 18, 24–34, 2014) and at the secondary level Sansosti et al. (School Psychology Review, 39, 286–295, 2010a), (School Psychology Forum: Research in Practice, 4, 1–21, 2010b), no current studies have focused on the perceptions of school psychologists at the elementary level. In the current study, practicing elementary school psychologists were interviewed to explore how they view RTI in general and to identify any perceived barriers and challenges to implementation. Five participants were interviewed, and transcripts were analyzed using a consensual qualitative research approach. The school psychologists interviewed revealed two major themes in their perceptions of the implementation of RTI at their sites including roles and barriers with subthemes of barriers that included teacher concerns, system-level needs, and administration. Implications of the current study include that while school psychologists may have a positive view of RTI in general, there is some confusion about the role of school psychologists within this paradigm and there are many perceived barriers to the successful implementation of RTI within the elementary school setting.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Bergstrom, M. K. (2008). Professional development in response to intervention: implementation of a model in a rural region. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 27, 27–36.
Burns, M. (2008). Implementing RTI: Practitioner perspectives on the effect of RTI. NASP Communique, 36 (8). Retrieved from http://www.naspoline.org/publications/periodicals/communique/issues/volume-36-issue-8/
Crepeau-Hobson, F., & Sobel, D. M. (2010). School psychologists and RTI: analysis of training and professional development needs. School Psychology Forum: Research in Practice, 4, 22–32.
Darling-Hammond, L., Amrein-Beardsley, A., Haertel, E., & Rothstein, J. (2012). Evaluating teacher evaluation. Phi Delta Kappan, 93(6), 8–15.
Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 157–171.
Greenfield, R., Rinaldi, C., Procter, C. P., & Cardarelli, A. (2010). Teachers’ perception of a response to intervention (RTI) reform effort in an urban elementary school: a consensual qualitative analysis. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 21, 47–63. doi:10.1177/1044207310365499.
Harn, B. A., Chard, D. J., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2011). Meeting societies’ increased expectations through responsive instruction: the power and potential of systemwide approaches. Preventing School Failure, 55, 232–239.
Hill, C. E., Thompson, B. J., & Williams, E. N. (1997). A guide to conducting consensual qualitative research. The Counseling Psychologist, 25, 517–572.
Hord, S. M., Rutherford, W. L., Huling, L., & Hall, G. E. (2006). Taking charge of change. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
Kaplan, J.P. (2011). Massachusetts school psychologists’ concerns regarding the implementation of responsiveness-to-intervention: A concerns-based adoption model approach (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2008). Qualitative data analysis: a compendium of techniques and a framework for selection for school psychology research and beyond. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 587–604.
Lembke, E. S., McMaster, K. L., & Stecker, P. M. (2010). The prevention science of reading research within a response-to-intervention model. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 22–35. doi:10.1002/pits.20449.
Marrs, H., & Little, S. (2014). Perceptions of school psychologists regarding barriers to response to intervention (RTI) implementation. Contemporary School Psychology, 18, 24–34. doi:10.1007/s40688-013-0001-7.
Mellard, D. F., McKnight, M., & Woods, K. (2009). Response to intervention screening and progress-monitoring practices in 41 local schools. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24, 186–195.
O’Connor, E. P., & Freeman, E. W. (2012). District-level considerations in supporting and sustaining RTI implementation. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 297–310.
Polcyn, D. M., Levine-Donnerstein, D., Perfect, M. M., & Orbzut, J. E. (2014). Reading intervention and special education referrals. School Psychology Forum: Research in Practice, 8, 156–167.
Powers, K., Hagans, K., & Busse, R. T. (2008). School psychologists as instructional consultants in a response-to-intervention model. The California School Psychologist, 13, 41–53.
Sansosti, F. J., Noltemeyer, A., & Goss, S. (2010b). Principal’s perceptions of the importance and availability of response to intervention practices within high school settings. School Psychology Review, 39, 286–295.
Sansosti, F. J., Telzrow, C., & Noltemeyer, A. (2010a). Barriers and facilitators to implementing response to intervention in secondary schools: qualitative perspectives of school psychologists. School Psychology Forum: Research in Practice, 4, 1–21.
Sullivan, A. L., & Long, L. (2010). Examining the changing landscape of school psychology practice: a survey of school-based practitioners regarding response to intervention. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 1059–1070. doi:10.1002/pits.
Swanson, E., Solis, M., Ciullo, S., & McKenna, J. W. (2012). Special education teachers’ perceptions and instructional practices in response to intervention implementation. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35, 115–126. doi:10.1177/0731948711432510.
Wnek, A. C., Klein, G., & Bracken, B. A. (2008). Professional development issues for school psychologists: What’s hot, what’s not in the United States. School Psychology International, 29, 145–160. doi:10.1177/0143034308090057.
Suzanne Little, St. John County Schools, St. Augustine, FL.
Heath Marrs, Department of Psychology, Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA.
Heidi Bogue, Department of Psychology, Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA.
We would like to thank Rachel Border, who was a student at Central Washington University during the data collection phase, for her assistance with this project.
No funding was obtained for this study.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
About this article
Cite this article
Little, S., Marrs, H. & Bogue, H. Elementary School Psychologists and Response to Intervention (RTI). Contemp School Psychol 21, 103–114 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-016-0104-z
- Roles of school psychologists
- School psychologist’s role in RTI
- RTI in elementary schools