Response to intervention (RTI): What teachers of reading need to know

Reading Teacher

Volumn 62, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 280-290

  Mesmer, Eric M ^a   Mesmer, Heidi Anne E ^b  

^a RADFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 58149268942     PISSN: 00340561     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1598/RT.62.4.1     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Bell, M. (2007). Reading teachers play key role in successful response to intervention approaches. Retrieved May 31, 2007, from www.reading.org/ downloads/resources/IDEA-RTI-teachers-role.pdf
2. Bentum, K.E., & Aaron, P.G. (2003). Does reading instruction in learning disability resource rooms really work?: A longitudinal study. Reading Psychology, 24(3-4), 361-382. doi:10.1080/02702710390227387
3. Cassidy, J., & Cassidy, D. (2008). What's hot, what's not for 2008? Reading Today, 25(4), 1, 10-11.
4. Clay, M.M. (1987). Learning to be learning disabled. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 22(2), 155-173.
5. Deno, S.L., Mirkin, P.K., & Chiang, B. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49(1), 36-45.
6. Eisenhart, M., & Towne, L. (2003). Contestation and change in national policy on "scientifically based" education research. Educational Researcher, 32(7), 31-38. doi:10.3102/0013189X032007031
7. Flugum, K., & Reschly, D. (1994). Prereferral interventions: Quality indices and outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 32(1), 1-14. doi:10.1016/0022-4405(94)90025-6
8. Francis, D.J., Fletcher, J.M., Stuebing, K.K., Lyon, G.R., Shaywitz, B.A., & Shaywitz, S.E. (2005). Psychometric approaches to the identification of LD: IQ and achievement scores are not sufficient. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(2), 98-108. doi:10.1177/00222194050380020101
9. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., & Bahr, M. (1990). Mainstream assistance teams: A scientific basis for the art of consultation. Exceptional Children, 57(2) 128-139.
10. 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. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00072
11. Fuchs, L.S., & Deno, S.L. (1981). The relationship between curriculum-based mastery measures and standardized achievement tests in reading (Research Report No. 57). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED212662)
12. Gersten, R., & Dimino, J.A. (2006). RTI (Response to Intervention): Rethinking special education for students with reading difficulties (again). Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 99-108. doi:10.1598/RRQ.41.1.5
13. Good, R., & Kaminski, R. (2002). DIBELS oral reading fluency passages for first through third grades (Technical Report 10). Eugene: University of Oregon.
14. Gresham, F. (2002). Responsiveness to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. In R. Bradley, L. Danielson, & D. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 467-519). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Illinois State Board of Education. (2008). Illinois Snapshots of Early Literacy. Retrieved June 5, 2007, from www.isbe.state.il.us/curriculum/ reading/html/isel.htm
16. International Reading Association. (2007). Implications for reading teachers in Response to Intervention (RTI). Retrieved May 31, 2007, from www.reading.org/downloads/resources/rti0707-implications.pdf
17. Invernizzi, M., Juel, C., Swank, L., & Meier, J. (2005). Phonological awareness literacy screening. Virginia: The Rector and The Board of Visitors of the University of Virginia.
18. Kavale, K. (1990). Effectiveness of special education. In T.B. Gutkin & C.R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of school psychology (2nd ed., pp. 868-898). New York: Wiley.
19. Lyon, G.R. (1995). Research initiatives in learning disabilities: Contributions from scientists supported by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Journal of Child Neurology, 10(Suppl. 1), S120-S126.
20. Lyons, C., & Beaver, J. (1995). Reducing retention and learning disability placement through reading recovery: An educationally sound cost-effective choice. In R. Allington & S. Walmsley (Eds.), No quick fix: Rethinking literacy programs in America's elementary schools (pp. 116-136). New York: Teachers College Press.
21. National Center on Student Progress Monitoring. (2007). Common questions for progress monitoring. Retrieved May 20, 2007, from www.studentprogress.org/ progresmon.asp#2
22. O'Connor, R.E., Fulmer, D., Harty, K.R., & Bell, K.M. (2005). Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third grade: Changes in teaching and student outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(5), 440-455. doi:10.1177/00222194050380050701
23. O'Malley, K., Francis, D.J., Foorman, B.R., Fletcher, J.M., & Swank, PR. (2002). Growth in precursor and reading-related skills: Do low-achieving and IQ-discrepant readers develop differently? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(1), 19-34. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00029
24. Paris, S.G. (2005). Reinterpreting the development of reading skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(2), 184-202. doi:10.1598/RRQ.40.2.3
25. Parker, R., Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. (1992). Greater validity for oral reading fluency: Can miscues help? The Journal of Special Education, 25(4), 492-503.
26. Powell-Smith, K., & Ball, P. (2002). Best practices in reintegration and special education exit decisions. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology-IV (pp. 541-557).
27. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Pressley, M. (2003). A few things reading educators should know about instructional experiments. The Reading Teacher, 57(1), 64-71.
28. Riedel, B. (2007). The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban first grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(4), 546-567. doi:10.1598/RRQ.42.4.5
29. Scarborough, H. (2005). Developmental relationships between language and reading: Reconciling a beautiful hypothesis with some ugly facts. In H.W. Catts & A.G. Kamhi (Eds.), The connections between language and reading disabilities (pp. 3-24). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
30. Shinn, M. (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: Guilford.
31. Stanovich, K. (2005). The future of a mistake: Will discrepancy measurement continue to make the learning disabilities field a pseudoscience? Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 103-106. doi:10.2307/1593604
32. Taylor-Greene, S., Brown, D., Nelson, L., Longton, J., Cohen, J., Swartz, J., et at. (1997). School-wide behavioral support: Starting the year off right. Journal of Behavioral Education, 7(1), 99-112. doi:10.1023/A: 1022849722465
33. Texas Education Agency & University of Texas System. (2006). Texas Primary Reading Inventory. Retrieved from www.tpri.org/products/
34. University of Texas Center for Reading and Language Arts. (2003). Three-tier reading model: Reducing reading difficulties for kindergarten through third grade students. Austin, TX: Author.
35. U.S. Department of Education. (1977). 1977 code of federal regulations. Washington, DC: Author.
36. U.S. Department of Education. (2006). Assistance to states for the education of children with disabilities and preschools grants for children with disabilities, final rule. Retrieved May 17, 2007, from eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/ data/ericdocs2sql/content-storage-01/0000019b/80/lb/e9/95.pdf
37. Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L.S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3), 137-146. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00070
38. Vellutino, F.R., Scanlon, D.M., & Lyon, G.R. (2000). Differentiating between difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: More evidence against the IQ-discrepancy definition of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(3), 223-238. doi:10.1177/002221940003300302
39. Walmsley, S., & Allington, R. (2007). No quick fix, the RTI edition: Rethinking literacy programs in America's elementary schools. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
40. Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2008). Response to varying amounts of time in reading intervention for students with low response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(2), 126-142. doi: 10.1177/0022219407313426