Skip to main content

Implementing Response to Intervention in Secondary Schools

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Response to Intervention

Abstract

This chapter addresses key elements in secondary-level (i.e., middle and high school) implementation of response to intervention (RTI), more suitably labeled multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS). This chapter provides a specification of what features and actions of secondary MTSS are similar to elementary-level practices and, most importantly, what features and actions are different and require special attention for implementation success. This chapter proposes that the appropriate purpose of secondary MTSS is to advance college and career readiness in two important ways: (a) to increase the quality and quantity of evidence-based instructional and behavior support practices in core content-area instruction, and (b) to enable basic academic and behavioral skills interventions of suitable intensity to be provided to those students who remain discrepant.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 269.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 349.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Germann (2010) for a history of the former and Gresham, Reschly, and Shinn, (2010) for a chronology of the latter.

References

  • Archer, A., & Gleason, M. (2001). Rewards: Reading excellence word attack and rate development strategies. Longmont: Sopris West.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth, A. E., Stuebing, K. K., Fletcher, J. M., Cirino, P. T., Francis, D. J., & Vaughn, S. (2012). Reliability and validity of the median score when assessing the oral reading fluency of middle grade readers. Reading Psychology, 33(1–2), 133–161.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, B. D., & Linden, M. A. (2006). Better IEPs: How to develop legally correct and educationally useful programs (4th ed.). Verona: Attainment Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann, J. F., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2004). Vocabulary instruction: Research to practice. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buffum, A., Mattos, M., & Weber, C. (2012). Simplifying response to intervention four essential guiding principles. Bloomington: Solution Tree.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulgren, J. A. (2006). Integrated content enhancement routines: Responding to the needs of adolescents with disabilities in rigorous inclusive secondary content classes. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38, 25–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulgren, J. A., Deshler, D. D., & Schumaker, J. B. (1998). Reasoning strategies and teaching routines for use in mainstream content classrooms. Final research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Education, Special Education Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulgren, J. A., Deshler, D. D., Schumaker, J. B., & Lenz, B. K. (2000). The use and effectiveness of analogical instruction in diverse secondary content classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 426–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bulgren, J. A., Lenz, B. K., Schumaker, J. B., Deshler, D. D., & Marquis, J. G. (2002). The use and effectiveness of a comparison routine in diverse secondary content classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bulgren, J. A., Marquis, J. G., Lenz, B. K., Deshler, D. D., & Schumaker, J. B. (2011). The effectiveness of a question-exploration routine for enhancing the content learning of secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 578–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, M. K., Sarlo, R., & Pettersson, H. (2013). Response to intervention for literacy in secondary schools. http://rtinetwork.org/learn/rti-in-secondary-schools/rti-literacy-secondary-schools.

  • Carnine, D., Miller, S., Bean, R. M., & Zigmond, N. (1994). Social studies: Educational tools for diverse learners. School Psychology Review, 23, 428–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnine, D. W., Crawford, D. B., & Harniss, M. K. (2007). Effective strategies for teaching social studies. In M. D. Coyne, E. J. Kame’enui, & D. W. Carnine (Eds.), Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners (3rd ed., pp. 139–158). Upper Saddle River: Pearson, Merrill Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conderman, G., & Petersen, T. (2005). Promoting positive special education practices. NASSP Bulletin, 89, 90–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conderman, G., & Petersen, T. (2007). Avoid the tutoring trap. Intervention in School & Clinic, 42, 234–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, C. R., Sprague, J., Browning Wright, D., & Sadler, C. (2008). RTI and behavior answer book on RTI. Horsham: LRP Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, M. D., Kame’enui, E. J., & Carnine, D. W. (2007a). Effective strategies for teaching writing. In M. D. Coyne, E. J. Kame’enui, & D. W. Carnine (Eds.), Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson: Merrill Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, M. D., Kame’enui, E. J., & Carnine, D. W. (2007b). Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson: Merrill Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deno, S. L. (2012). Problem-solving assessment. In R. Brown-Chidsey & K. Andren (Eds.), Assessment for intervention: A problem-solving approach (2nd ed., pp. 10–36). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deno, S. L., Mirkin, P., & Wesson, C. (1984). How to write effective data-based IEPs. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 16, 99–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denton, C. A., Barth, A. E., Fletcher, J. M., Wexler, J., Vaughn, S., Cirino, P. T., Romain, M., & Francis, D. J. (2011). The relations among oral and silent reading fluency and comprehension in middle school: Implications for identification and instruction of students with reading difficulties. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15, 109–135.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deshler, D. D., & Cornett, J. (2012). Leading to improve teacher effectiveness: Implications for practice, reform, research, and policy. In J. B. Crockett, B. S. Billingsley, & M. L. Boscardin (Eds.), Handbook of leadership and administration for special education. New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deshler, D. D., & Kovaleski, J. F. (2007). Secondary applications of RtI: A guided discussion. Presentation at the response to intervention summit, Arlington, Virginia. Retrieved 15 June 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deshler, D. D., & Schumaker, J. B. (2005). Teaching adolescents with disabilities: Accessing the general curriculum (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Corwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deshler, D. D., Ellis, E., & Lenz, B. K. (1996). Teaching adolescents with learning disabilities (2nd ed.). Denver: Love.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deshler, D. D., Schumaker, J. B., Lenz, B. K., Bulgren, J. A., Hock, M. F., Knight, J., & Ehren, B. (2001). Ensuring content-area learning by secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(2), 96–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deshler, D. D., Hock, M. F., & Catts, H. W. (2006). Enhancing outcomes for struggling adolescent readers. Perspectives (Gerontological Nursing Association (Canada)), 32, 21–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, L. (2004). Implementing and sustaining a middle and high school reading and intervention program. Berkeley: Consortium on Reading Excellence.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, R. D. (2008). Getting the school ready for the adolescents: Designing RtI Practices at the secondary level. Presentation at the annual meeting of the Minnesota Association of School Psychologists, St. Paul, MN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, R. D. (2009). Getting the School Ready for the Adolescents: Designing RtI Practices at the Secondary Level. Presentation at the Wisconsin RtI Summit, Green Bay, WI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, H. (2007). Meeting the needs of significantly struggling learners in high school: A look at approaches to tiered intervention. Washington, DC: National High School Center, American Institute for Research (AIR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving student learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ehren, B. J., Deshler, D. D., & Graner, P. S. (2010). Using the content literacy continuum as a framework for implementing RtI in secondary schools. Theory into Practice, 49, 315–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, J. D., & Bulgren, J. (2009). Improving teaching of scientific argumentation skills. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Science Teacher Educators, Hartford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelmann, S., & Carnine, D. (1982). Theory of instruction. New York: Irvington Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelmann, S., Hanner, S., & Johnson, G. (1999). Corrective reading series. Columbus: McGraw Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espin, C., & Campbell, H. M. (2012). They’re getting older…but are they getting better? The influence of curriculum-based measurement on programming for secondary-school students with learning disabilities. In C. A. Espin, K. McMaster, S. Rose, & M. Wayman (Eds.), A measure of success: The influence of curriculum-based measurement on education (pp. 149–164). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Espin, C. A., & Foegen, A. (1996). Validity of general outcome measures for predicting secondary students’ performance on content-area tasks. Exceptional Children, 62, 497–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espin, C., & Tindal, G. A. (1998). Curriculum-based measurement for secondary students. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement (pp. 214–253). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espin, C. A., Wallace, T., Lembke, E., Campbell, H., & Long, J. D. (2010). Creating a progress measurement system in reading for middle-school student: Monitoring progress towards meeting high stakes standards. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 25, 60–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foegen, A. (2012). Big ideas and core values: The influence of Stanley Deno’s work on secondary progress monitoring. In C. A. Espin, K. McMaster, S. Rose, & M. Wayman (Eds.), A measure of success: The influence of curriculum-based measurement on education (pp. 139–148). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frey, A. J., Lingo, A., & Nelson, C. M. (2010). Implementing positive behavior support in elementary schools. In M. R. Shiinn & H. M. Walker (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior problems in a three-tier model, including RTI (pp. 397–433). Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., & Deno, S. L. (1991). Paradigmatic distinctions between instructionally relevant measurement models. Exceptional Children, 57(6), 488–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2008). Best practices in progress monitoring reading and mathematics at the elementary level. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 2147–2164). Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., & Vaughn, S. R. (2005). Response to Intervention as a framework for the identification of learning disabilities. Forum for trainers of school psychologists, spring, 12–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Compton, D. L. (2010). Rethinking response to intervention at middle and high school. School Psychology Review, 39, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 239–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gansle, K. A., & Noell, G. H. (2007). The fundamental role of intervention implementation in assessing response to intervention. In S. Jimerson, M. Burns, & A. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention the science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 244–251). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gawande, A. (2009). The checklist manifesto. New York: Henry Holt Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Germann, G. (2010). Thinking of yellow brick roards, emerald cities, and wizards. In M. R. Shinn & H. M. Walker (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior problems in a three-tier model, including RTI (pp. xiii–xxxv). Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Germann, G. (2012). Implementing data-based program modification: Big ideas. In C. A. Espin, K. McMaster, S. Rose, & M. Wayman (Eds.), A measure of success: The influence of curriculum-based measurement on education (pp. 79–87). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., Beckman, S., Clarke, B., Foegen, A., Marsh, L., Star, J. R., & Witzel, B. (2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools (pp. 1–104). Washington, DC: US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gresham, F., Reschly, D., & Shinn, M. R. (2010). RTI as a driving force in educational improvement: Historical legal, research, and practice perspectives. In M. R. Shinn & H. M. Walker (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior problems in a three-tier model, including RTI (pp. 47–77). Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossen, B., Romance, N. R., & Vitale, M. R. (1994). Science: Educational tools for diverse learners. School Psychology Review, 23, 442–463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Mason, L. H., & Friedlander, B. (2008). Powerful writing strategies for all students. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Riverside Assessment. (2013). easyCBM. Rolling Meadows: Houghton Mifflin Riverside Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, J. R., & Jewell, M. (1993). Examining the validity of two measures for formative teaching: Reading aloud and maze. Exceptional Children, 59(5), 421–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, J. R., & Fuchs, L. S. (2012). Curriculum-based measurement: The paradigm, history, and legacy. In C. A. Espin, K. McMaster, S. Rose, & M. Wayman (Eds.), A measure of success: The influence of curriculum-based measurement on education (pp. 7–23). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kame’enui, E. J., & Baumann, J. F. (Eds.). (2004). Vocabulary instruction: Research to practice. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., & Torgesen, J. K. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices: A practice guide. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenz, B. K., Deshler, D. D., & Kissam, B. R. (2003). Teaching content to all: Evidence-based inclusive practices in middle and secondary schools. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenz, B. K., Ehren, B. J., & Deshler, D. D. (2005). The content literacy continuum: A school-reform framework for improving adolescent literacy for all students. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 37(6), 60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchand-Martella, N. E., & Martella, R. C. (2010). Read to achieve: Comprehending content-area text and comprehending narrative text. Chicago: McGraw Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchand-Martella, N. E., Martella, R. C., Modderman, S. L., Petersen, H., & Pan, S. (2013). Key areas of effective adolescent literacy programs. Education and Treatment of Children, 36, 161–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marston, D., & Magnusson, D. (1985). Implementing curriculum-based measurement in special and regular education settings. Exceptional Children, 52, 266–276.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMaster, K., & Espin, C. (2007). Technical features of curriculum-based measurement in writing. The Journal of Special Education, 41(2), 68–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McPeak, L., & Trygg, L. (2007). The secondary literacy instruction and intervention guide: Helping school districts transform into systems that produce life-changing results for all children. Mill Valley: Stupski Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). The nation’s report card: a first look: 2013 mathematics and reading (NCES 2014–451). Washington, DC: Institute for Education Sciences, US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2012). Common Core State Standards Initiative. http://www.corestandards.org.

  • National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: National mathematics advisory panel final report. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Northwest Evaluation Center. (2014). Measures of academic progress. Portland: NWEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pericola Case, L., Speece, D. L., & Eddy Molloy, D. (2003). The validity of response-to-instruction paradigm to identify reading disabilities: A longitudinal analysis of individual differences and context factors. School Psychology Review, 32, 557–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, M. Dissertation. (2002). An examination of the instructional needs of secondary students with learning disabilities and the reading interventions they receive. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Eugene. University of Oregon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prewett, S., Mellard, D. F., Deshler, D. D., Allen, J., Alexander, R., & Stern, A. (2012). Response to intervention in middle schools: Practices and outcomes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27, 136–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, D. (2008). Effective grading practices. Educational Leadership, 65,(5), 85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renaissance Learning. (2012). STAR reading technical manual. Wisconsin Rapids: Renaissance Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, T. E., & Zirkel, P. A. (2007). Orton-Gillingham methodology for students with reading disabilities: 30 years of case law. The Journal of Special Education, 41(3), 171–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scammacca, N., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Edmonds, M., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C. K., & Torgesen, J. K. (2007). Interventions for adolescent struggling readers: A meta-analysis with implications for practice. Portsmouth: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholastic Inc. (2001). Scholastic reading inventory. New York: Scholastic Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (2010). Using a tiered intervention model in secondary schools to improve academic outcomes in subject-area courses. In M. R. Shinn & H. M. Walker (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior in a 3-tier model including RTI (pp. 609–632). Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuta, T., Mauricio, D., & Comerford, S. (2012). Significant steps forward. Principal Leadership (November), 32–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinn, M. R. (Ed.). (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinn, M. R. (Ed.). (1998). Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinn, M. R. (2008). RTI at the secondary level. In S. A. Fernley, S. D. LaRue, & J. W. Norlin (Eds.), What do I do when… The answer book on RTI. Horsham: LRP Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinn, M. R. (2010). Building a scientifically based data system for progress monitoring and universal screening across three tiers including RTI using curriculum-based measurement. In M. R. Shinn & H. M. Walker (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior problems in a three-tier model, including RTI (pp. 259–293). Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinn, M. R., & Shinn, M. M. (2000). Writing and evaluating IEP Goals and making appropriate revisions to ensure participation and progress in general curriculum. In C. F. Telzrow & M. Tankersley (Eds.), IDEA Amendments of 1997: Practice guidelines for school-based teams (pp. 351–381). Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spectrum K12 School Solutions. (2011). Response to Intervention Adoption Survey 2011: Global Scholar/Spectrum K12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprague, J. R., & Walker, H. M. (2010). Building safe and healthy schools to promote school success: Critical issues, current challenges, and promising approaches. In M. R. Shinn & H. M. Walker (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior problems in a three-tier model, including RTI (pp. 225–258). Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprick, R. S. (2006). START on Time! Safe transitions and reduced tardies. Eugene: Safe and Civil Schools/Pacific Northwest Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprick, R. S., & Borgmeier, C. (2010). Prevention and management of behavior in three tiers at the secondary level. In M. R. Shinn & H. M. Walker (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior problems in a three-tier model including RTI (pp. 435–468). Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprick, R. S., & Garrison, M. (2008). Interventions: Evidence-based behavioral strategies for individual students (2nd ed.). Eugene: Pacific Northwest Publishing, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, S., & Kapinus, B. (2001). Word power: What every educator needs to know about teaching vocabulary. Washington, DC: National Education Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stepanek, J., & Peixotto, K. (2009). Models of response to intervention in the northwest region states. Issues & Answers Report, REL, (079).

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L., & Deshler, D. (2003). Instructing adolescents with learning disabilities converting a meta-analysis to practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36(2), 124–135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. J. (2006). Preparing a broken foundation: Solutions to help middle school students struggle with math (Vol. Fall). Dallas: Voyager

    Google Scholar 

  • Tindal, G. A., & Germann, G. (1991). Mainstream consultation agreements in secondary schools. In G. Stoner, M. R. Shinn, & H. M. Walker (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior problems (pp. 495–518.). Bethesda: NASP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tindal, G. A., Wesson, C., Deno, S. L., Germann, G., & Mirkin, P. (1985). The pine county model for special education delivery: A data-based system. In T. Kratochwill (Ed.), Advances in school psychology (Vol. IV, pp. 223–250). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tindal, G. A., Shinn, M. R., Walz, L., & Germann, G. (1987). Mainstream consultation in secondary settings: An evaluation of the Pine County Model. The Journal of Special Education, 21, 94–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolar, T., Barth, A. E., Francis, D. F., Fletcher, J. M., Stuebing, K. K., & Vaughn, S. (2012). Psychometric properties of maze tasks in middle school students. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 37(3), 131–146.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K. (2004). Lessons learned from the last 20 years of research in the interventions for students who experience difficulty learning to read. In P. McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 225–229). Baltimore: Brookes Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Nettle, S., Howard, P., & Winterbottom, R. (2005). Brief report of a study to investigate the relationship between several brief measures of reading fluency and performance on the florida comprehensive assessment test-reading in 4th, 6th, 8th, and 10th grades. FCRR technical report 6. 2005. http://www.fcrr.org/TechnicalReports/Progress_monitoring_report.pdf.

  • Torgesen, J. K., Houston, D. D., Rissman, L. M., Decker, S. M., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Francis, D. J., Rivera, M. O., & Lesaux, N. (2007a). Academic literacy instruction for adolescents: A guidance document from the center on instruction. Portsmouth: RMC Research Corporation Center on Instruction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Houston, D., & Rissman, L. (2007b). Improving literacy instruction in middle and high schools: A guide for principals. Portsmouth: RMC Research Corporation, Center for Instruction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Troia, G. A., & Olinghouse, N. G. (2013). The common core state standards and evidence-based educational practices: The case of writing. School Psychology Review, 42, 343–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., Cirino, P. T., Wanzek, J., Wexler, J., Fletcher, J. M., Denton, C. D., et al. (2010). Response to intervention for middle school students with reading difficulties: Effects of a primary and secondary intervention. School Psychology Review, 30, 3–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, H. M. (2004). Commentary: Use of evidence-based interventions in schools: Where we’ve been, where we are, and where we need to go. School Psychology Review, 33, 398–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, H. M., & Shinn, M. R. (2010). Systemic, evidence-based approaches for promoting positive student outcomes within an RTI framework: Moving from efficacy to effectiveness. In M. R. Shinn & H. M. Walker (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior problems in a three-tier model, including RTI (pp. 1–26). Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, T., Espin, C. A., McMaster, K., Deno, S. L., & Foegen, A. (2007). CBM progress monitoring within a standards-based system: Introduction to the special series. The Journal of Special Education, 41, 66–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, B., & Gersten, R. (2013). A randomized evaluation of Safe and Civil Schools model for positive behavioral interventions and supports at elementary schools in a large urban district. School Psychology Review, 42, 317–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickstrom, K. F., Jones, K. M., La Fleur, L. H., & Mortenson, B. P. (1998). An analysis of treatment integrity in school-based behavioral consultation. School Psychology Quarterly, 13, 141–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windram, H., Bollman, K., & Johnson, S. (2012). How RtI works in secondary schools building a framework for success. Bloomington: Solution Tree.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windram, H., Scierka, B., & Silberglitt, B. (2007). Response to intervention at the secondary level: A description of two districts’ models of implementation. Communiqué, 35, 43–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wormeli, R. (2006). Accountability: Teaching through assessment and feedback, not grading. American Secondary Education, 34, 14–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yell, M. L., & Busch, T. W. (2012). Using curriculum-based measurement to develop educationally meaningful and legally sound individualized educational programs. In C. A. Espin, K. McMaster, S. Rose, & M. Wayman (Eds.), A measure of success: The influence of curriculum-based measurement on education (pp. 79–87). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yell, M. L., Ryan, J. B., Rozalski, M. E., & Katsiyannis, A. (2009). The US Supreme Court and special education: 2005 to 2007. TEACHING Exceptional Children, Jan/Feb, 68–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zigmond, N. (1990). Rethinking secondary school programs for students with learning disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 23(1), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark R. Shinn PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shinn, M., Windram, H., Bollman, K. (2016). Implementing Response to Intervention in Secondary Schools. In: Jimerson, S., Burns, M., VanDerHeyden, A. (eds) Handbook of Response to Intervention. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7568-3_32

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics