Technical adequacy of response to intervention decisions

Exceptional Children

Volumn 77, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 335-350

  Vanderheyden, Amanda M ^a  

^a Education Research and Consulting Inc ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84863652159     PISSN: 00144029     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/001440291107700305     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. 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, 300-316. doi: 10.1177/07419325020230050501
2. Al Otaiba, S., & Torgesen, J. (2007). Effects from intensive standardized kindergarten and first-grade interventions for the prevention of reading difficulties. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 213-222). New York, NY: Springer.
3. American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA), and the National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
4. Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Bryant, J. D. (2006). Selecting at-risk readers in first grade for early intervention: A two-year longitudinal study of decision rules and procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 394-409. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663 .98.2.394
5. Cone, J. D. (1988). Psychometric considerations and the multiple models of behavioral assessment. In A. S. Bellack & M. Hersen (Eds.), Behavioral assessment: A practical handbook (3rd ed., pp. 42-66). New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
6. Dawes, R. M. (1962). A note on base rates and psychometric efficiency. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 26, 422-424.
7. Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Assessing intervention responsiveness: Conceptual and technical issues. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 18, 172-186. doi: 10.1111/1540-5826.00073
8. Gerber, M. M. (2005). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 516-524. doi: 10.1177/00222194050380060701
9. Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement. Retrieved from: http://dibels. uoregon.edu
10. Hintze, J. M., Ryan, A. L., & Stoner, G. (2003). Concurrent validity and diagnostic accuracy of the dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills and the comprehensive test of phonological processing. School Psychology Review, 32, 541-556.
11. 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.
12. Leeflang, M. M. G., Moons, K. G. M., Reitsma, J. B., & Zwinderman, A. H. (2008). Bias in sensitivity and specificity caused by data-driven selection of optimal cutoff values: Mechanisms, magnitude, and solutions. Clinical Chemistry, 54, 729-737. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2007.096032
13. McGlinchey, M. T., & Hixson, M. D. (2004). Using curriculum-based measurement to predict performance standards on state assessments in reading. School Psychology Review, 33, 193-203.
14. Meehl, P. E., & Rosen, A. (1955). Antecedent probability and the efficiency of psychometric signs, patterns, or cutting scores. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 194-216.
15. Moons, K. G., van Es, G. A., Deckers, J. W., Habbema, J. D., & Grobbee, D. E. (1997). Limitations of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio, and Bayes' theorem in assessing diagnostic probabilities: A clinical example. Epidemiology, 8, 2-7.
16. O'Connor, R. E., Fulmer, D., Harty, K., & Bell, K. (2005). Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third grade: Changes in teaching and child outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 440-455. doi: 10.1177/00222194050380050701
17. Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2006). Response to "Competing views: A dialogue on response to intervention." Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32, 62-64. doi: 10.1177/15345084060320010901
18. Speece, D. (2005). Hitting the moving target known as reading development: Some thoughts on screening children for secondary interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 487-493. doi:10.1177/00222194050380060301
19. Speece, D., Mills, C., Ritchey, K., & Hillman, E. (2003). Initial evidence that letter fluency tasks are valid indicators of early reading skill. Journal of Special Education, 36, 223-234. doi: 10.1177/002246690303600403
20. 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. doi: 10.1111/1540-5826.00071
21. Swets, J. A. (1992). The science of choosing the right decision threshold in high-stakes decisions. American Psychologist, 47, 522-532.
22. VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Burns, M. K. (2010). Essentials of response to intervention. In A. S. Kaufman & N. L. Kaufman (Series Eds.), Essentials of psychological assessment series. Hoboken, NJ:Wiley.
23. VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Witt, J. C. (2005). Quantifying the context of assessment: Capturing the effect of base rates on teacher referral and a problem-solving model of identification. School Psychology Review, 34, 161-183.
24. VanDerHeyden, A. M., Witt, J. C., & Barnett, D. A. (2005). The emergence and possible futures of response to intervention. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23, 339-361. doi: 10.1177/073428290502300404
25. VanDerHeyden, A. M., Witt, J. C., & Naquin, G. (2003). Development and validation of a process for screening referrals to special education. School Psychology Review, 32, 204-227.
26. Vellutino, F., Scanlon, D., Sipay, E., Small, S., Pratt, A., Chen, R., & Denckla, M. (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.
27. Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., & Tanzman, M. S. (1998). The case for early intervention in diagnosing specific reading disability. Journal of School Psychology, 36, 367-397. doi: 10.1016/S0022-4405(98)00019-3
28. Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., & Zhang, H. (2007). Identifying reading disability based on response to intervention: Evidence from early intervention research. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 185-211). New York, NY: Springer.
29. Wagner, R., Torgesen, J., & Rashotte, C. (1999). Comprehensive test of phonological processing (CTOPP). San Antonio, TX: Pearson.