Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook of Response to Intervention pp 223–233Cite as

Monitoring Response to General Education Instruction

  • Chapter

Abstract

The purpose of this chapter is to describe a critical component of the response-to-intervention (RTI) process: monitoring student response to general education instruction. First, we discuss the importance of the role of general educators in monitoring students’ response to intervention. Second, we provide the conceptual framework for an RTI model within which general educators play a critical role in identifying students at risk and monitoring their progress during classroom-based instruction. Third, we describe specific approaches for each of the steps included in this model.We then illustrate this process using a case example from research. We end with a summary of recommendations for general educators, and emphasize the need for further research if RTI is to be adopted as part of the special education identification process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Al Otaiba, S. & Fuchs, D. (2002). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention: a review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 300–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Zook, D., Ogier, S., Lemos-Britton, Z., & Brooksher, R. (1999). Early intervention for reading disabilities: teaching the alphabet principle in a connectionist framework. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 491–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, M. K. & Senesac, B. V. (2005). Comparison of dual discrepancy criteria to assess response to intervention. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 393–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnine, D., Silbert, J., & Kame'enui, E. J. (1990). Direct Instruction Reading. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, H., Nye, B., Charlton, K., Lindsay, J., & Greathouse, S. (1996). The effects of summer vacation on achievement test scores: a narrative and meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 66, 227–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, L., Tindal, G., & Stieber, S. (2001). Using oral reading rate to predict student performance on statewide assessment tests. Educational Assessment, 7, 303–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delquadri, J., Greenwood, C. R., Whorton, D., Carta, J. J., & Hall, R. V. (1986). Classwide peer tutoring. Exceptional Children, 52, 535–542.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: the emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219–232.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deno, S. L. (1992). The nature and development of curriculum-based measurement. Preventing School Failure, 36, 507–510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deno, S. L., Fuchs, L. S., Marston, D., & Shin, J. (2001). Using curriculum based measurement to establish growth standards for students with learning disabilities. School Psychology Review, 30, 507–524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Morris, R. D., & Lyon, G. R. (2005). Evidence-based assessment of learning disabilities in children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 34, 506–522.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Francis, D. J., Shaywitz, S. E., Stuebing, K. K., Shaywitz, B. A., & Fletcher, J. M. (1996). Developmental lag versus deficit model of reading disability: a longitudinal, individual growth curve analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D. & Fuchs, L. S. (2005a). Responsiveness-to-intervention: a blueprint for practitioners, policymakers, and parents. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38, 57–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D. & Fuchs, L. S. (2005b). Peer-assisted learning strategies: promoting word recognition, fluency, and reading comprehension in young children. Journal of Special Education, 39, 34–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D. & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: what, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 92–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Mathes, P. G., & Simmons, D. C. (1997). Peer-assisted learning strategies: making classrooms more responsive to diversity. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 174–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Assessing intervention responsiveness: conceptual and technical issues. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 172–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S. & Deno, S. L. (1991). Paradigmatic distinctions between instructionally relevant measurement models. Exceptional Children, 57, 488–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S. & Fuchs, D. (1998). Treatment validity: a unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 204–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., & Stecker, P. M. (1991). Effects of curriculum-based measurement and consultation on teacher planning and student achievement in mathematics operations. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 617–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C., Walz, L., & Germann, G. (1993). Formative evaluation of academic progress: How much growth can we expect? School Psychology Review, 22, 27–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., Chard, D., & Baker, S. (2000). Factors enha- ncing sustained use of research-based instructional pra- ctices. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 443–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Compton, D., Coyne, M., Greenwood, C., & Innocenti, M. S. (2005). Quality indicators for group experimental and quasi-experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 149–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good III, R. H., Simmons, D. C., & Kame'enui, E. J. (2001). The importance and decision-making utility of a continuum of fluency-based indicators of foundational reading skills for third-grade high-stakes outcomes. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 257–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller, K. A., Holtzman, W. H., & Messick, S. (1982). Placing Children in Special Education: A Strategy for Equity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintze, J. M. & Christ, T. J. (2004). An examination of variability as a function of passage variance in CBM progress monitoring. School Psychology Review, 33, 204–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintze, J. M., Shapiro, E. S., & Daly III, E. J. (1998). An investigation of the effects of passage difficulty level on outcomes of oral reading fluency progress monitoring. School Psychology Review, 27, 433–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintze, J. M. & Silberglitt, B. (2005). A longitudinal examination of the diagnostic accuracy and predictive validity of R-CBM and high-stakes testing. School Psychology Review, 34, 372–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosp, M. K. & Fuchs, L. S. (2005). Using CBM as an indicator of decoding, word reading and comprehension: do the relations change with grade. School Psychology Review, 34, 9–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • IDEIA (2004). Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, P. L. 108-446 U.S.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, J. R., Zumeta, R., Dupree, O., & Johnson, K. (2005). Measuring gains in reading ability with passage reading fluency. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20, 245–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, K. & Street, E. M. (2004). The Morningside Model of Generative Instruction. Concord, MA: Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: a longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klingner, J. K. & Edwards, P. A. (2006). Cultural considerations with response to intervention models. Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 108–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marston, D. B. (1989). A curriculum-based measurement approach to assessing academic performance: what is it and why to do it. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-Based Measurement: Assessing Special Children(pp. 18–78). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMaster, K. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Compton, D. L. (2005). Responding to nonresponders: an experimental field trial of identification and intervention methods. Exceptional Children, 71, 445–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minnesota Department of Education (2003). Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments: Grade 3 Reading and Math Specifications. Roseville, Minnesota: Minnesota Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. Retrieved March 3, 2006 from http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubskey.cfm? from=nrp.

    Google Scholar 

  • NCLB (2002). No Child Left Behind Act, Public Law No. 107–110, 115 Stat. 1425, 2002 U.S.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Shaughnessy, T. E., Lane, K. L., Gresham, F. M., & Beebe-Frankenberger, M. E. (2003). Children placed at risk for learning and behavioral difficulties: implementing a school-wide system of early identification and intervention. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 27–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Psychological Corporation (2001). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–II. San Antonio: Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Speece, D. L. & Case, L. P. (2001). Classification in context: an alternative approach to identifying early reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 735–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speece, D. L., Case, L. P., & Molloy, D. E. (2003). Responsiveness to general education instruction as the first gate to learning disabilities identification. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 147–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stage, S. & Jacobsen, M. D. (2001). Predicting student success on a state-mandated performance-based assessment using oral reading fluency. School Psychology Review,30, 407–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, P. J. & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Research into practice in special education. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 477–481.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stein, M., Silbert, J., & Carnine, D. (1997). Designing effective Mathematics Instruction: A Direct Instruction Approach(3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, MN: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: the lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K. S., & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34,33–53, 78.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1997). Prevention and remediation of severe reading disabilities: keeping the end in mind. Scientific Studies of Reading, 217–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • US Department of Education (2002). What Works Clearinghouse. Retrieved March 3, 2006 from http://www.whatworks.ed.gov/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S. & Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: the promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 18, 137–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., & Hickman, P. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69, 391–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Sipay, E. R., Small, S., Chen, R., Pratt, P. A., et al. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodcock, R. W. (1987). Woodcock Reading Mastery Test–Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodcock, R. W. & Johnson, M. B. (1989). Woodcock–Johnson Psychoeducational Battery, Revised. Allen, TX: DLM.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Assistant Professor in Special Education at the University of Minnesota, Minnesota

    Kristen L. McMaster

  2. doctoral candidate in Special Education at the University of Minnesota, Minnesota

    Dana Wagner

Authors
  1. Kristen L. McMaster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dana Wagner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA

    Shane R. Jimerson

  2. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Matthew K. Burns

  3. Education Research and Consulting in Fairhope, Alabama

    Amanda M. VanDerHeyden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

McMaster, K.L., Wagner, D. (2007). Monitoring Response to General Education Instruction. In: Jimerson, S.R., Burns, M.K., VanDerHeyden, A.M. (eds) Handbook of Response to Intervention. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-49053-3_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation