Response to intervention: Considerations for research and systems change

School Psychology Review

Volumn 36, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 638-646

  Kovaleski, Joseph F ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 38549098320     PISSN: 02796015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Note

References (36)

1. Barnett, D. W., Elliott, N., Graden, J., Ilho, T., Macmann, G., Nantais, M., et al. (2006). Technical adequacy for response to intervention practices. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(1), 20-31.
2. Batsche, G., Elliott, J., Graden, J., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J. F., Prasse, D., et al. (2006). IDEA 2004 and response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.
3. Daly, E. J., Martens, B. K., Barnett, D., Witt, J. C., & Olson, S. C. (2007). Varying intervention delivery in response to intervention: Confronting and resolving challenges with measurement, instruction, and intensity. School Psychology Review, 36, 562-581.
4. Deno, S., & Mirkin, P. K. (1977). Data-based program modification. Resten, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
5. Flugum, K. R., & Reschly, D. J. (1994). Prereferral interventions: Quality indices and outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 32(1), 1-14.
6. 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 & Practice, 18(3), 157-171.
7. Glover, T. A., & DiPerna, J. C. (2007). Service delivery for response to intervention: Core components and directions for future research. School Psychology Review, 36, 526-540.
8. Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (2005). Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (6th ed.). Longmont, CO: Sopris West Educational Services.
9. Hale, J. B., Kaufman, A., Naglieri, J. A., & Kavale, K. A. (2006). Implementation of IDEA: Integrating response to intervention and cognitive assessment methods. Psychology in the Schools, 43(1), 753-770.
10. Howell, K. W., & Nolet, V. (2000). Curriculum-based evaluation: Teaching and decision making (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.
11. Individuals With Disabilities Education Act. (2006). Assistance to States for the Education of Children with Disabilities and Preschool Grants for Children with Disabilities; Final Rule, 34 Fed. Reg. 46540 (Aug. 14, 2006) (to be codified at 34 C.F.R. pt. 300 and 301).
12. Jenkins, J. R., Hudson, R. F., & Johnson, E. S. (2007). Screening for at-risk readers in a response to intervention framework. School Psychology Review, 36, 582-600.
13. Kovaleski, J. F. (2007). Potential pitfalls of response to intervention. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 80-92). New York: Springer.
14. Kovaleski, J. F., & Glew, M. C. (2006). Bringing instructional support teams to scale: Implications of the Pennsylvania experience. Remedial and Special Education, 27(1), 16-25.
15. Kovaleski, J. F., & Pedersen, J. (in press). Best practices in data analysis teaming. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V. Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
16. Kratochwill, T. R., Volpiansky, P., Clements, M., & Ball, C. (2007). Professional development in implementing and sustaining multitier prevention models: Implications for response to intervention. School Psychology Review, 36, 618-631.
17. National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching students to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instructions. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Government Printing Office.
18. No Child Left Behind Act. (2001). Vol. Pub.L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425.
19. Noell, G. H., & Gansle, K. A. (2006). Assuring the form has substance: Treatment plan implementation as the foundation for assessing response to intervention. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(1), 32-39.
20. Reschly, D. J., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (2002). Paradigm shift: The past is not the future. In Best practices in school psychology IV (pp. 3-20). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
21. Reyna, V. F. (2004). Why scientific research? The importance of evidence in changing educational practice. In P. McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 47-58). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
22. Rosenfield, S., & Gravois, T. (1996). Instructional consultation teams: Collaborating for change. New York: Guilford Press.
23. Shapiro, E. S., Keller, M. A., Lutz, J. G., Santero, L. E., & Hintze, J. M. (2006). Curriculum-based measures and performance on state assessment and standardized tests: Reading and math performance in Pennsylvania. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 24(1), 19-35.
24. Shinn, M. R. (2007). Identifying students at risk, monitoring performance, and determining eligibility within response to intervention: Research on educational need and benefit from academic intervention. School Psychology Review, 36, 601-617.
25. Shinn, M. R., & Germann, G. (2006). AIMSweb. Eden Prairie, MN: Edformation, Inc.
26. Static, T. M. (1991). Behind special education: A critical analysis of professional culture and school organization. Denver, CO: Love.
27. Slavin, M. R., & Madden, N. A. (2006). 4Sight benchmark assessments. Baltimore, MD: Success for AU Foundation.
28. Success for All Foundation. (2007). 4Sight reading and math benchmarks 2006-2007. Technical report for Pennsylvania. Baltimore, MD: Author.
29. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: School-wide positive behavior supports. In J. K. Luiselli & C. Diament (Eds.), Behavior psychology in the schools: Innovations in evaluation, support, and consultation (pp. 23-50). Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.
30. Telzrow, C., McNamara, K., & Hollinger, C. (2000). Fidelity of problem-solving implementation and relationship to student performance. School Psychology Review, 29(3), 443-461.
31. Tilly, D. (2003, December). How many tiers are needed for successful prevention and early intervention? Heartland Area Education Agency's evolution from four to three tiers. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.
32. Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. (2006). A response to "Competing views: A dialogue on response to intervention": Why response to intervention is necessary but not sufficient for identifying students with learning disabilities. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(1), 58-61.
33. Walsh, K., Glaser, D., & Wilcox, D. D. (2006). What education schools aren't teaching about reading and what elementary teachers aren't learning. National Council on Teacher Quality. Retrieved October 19, 2007 from http://www.nctq.org/nctq/index.jsp
34. Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2007). Research-based implications from extensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 36, 541-561.
35. Witt, J. C., & Elliott, S. N. (1985). Acceptability of classroom intervention strategies. In T. R. Kratochwill (Ed.), Advances in school psychology (Vol. IV, pp. 251-288). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Ysseldyke, J. E., Spicuzza, R., Kosciolek, S., & Boys, C. (2003). Effects of a learning information system on mathematics achievement and classroom structure. Journal of Educational Research, 96(3), 163-173.