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

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 58-61

  Vaughn, Sharon ^a   Fuchs, Lynn S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84992830841     PISSN: 15345084     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/15345084060320010801     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Batsche, G., Elliott, J., Graden, J.L., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J.F., Prasse, D., et al. (2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.
2. Elliott, S.N., & Fuchs, L.S. (1997). The utility of curriculum-based measurement and performance assessment as alternatives to traditional intelligence and achievement tests. School Psychology Review, 26, 224—233.
3. Fletcher, J.M., Shaywitz, S.E., Shankweiler, D.P., Katz, L., Liberman, I.Y., Fowler, A., et al. (1994). Cognitive profiles of reading disability: Comparisons of discrepancy and low achievement definitions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 6—23.
4. Foorman, B.R., Francis, D.J., Fletcher, J.M., & Lynn, A. (1996). Relation of phonological and orthographic processing to early reading: Comparing two approaches to regression-based, reading-level-match designs. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 639—652.
5. Fuchs, L.S. (1995). Incorporating curriculum-based measurement into the eligibility decision-making process: A focus on treatment validity and student growth. Paper presented at the National Academy of Sciences Workshop on Alternatives to IQ Testing, Washington, DC.
6. Fuchs, L.S., & Vaughn, S. (2006). Response-to-intervention as a framework for the identification of learning disabilities. Trainers of School Psychologist Forum 34(6), 1, 4—6.
7. Gerber, P.J. (2001). Learning disabilities: A life-span approach. In D. P. Hallahan & B. K. Keogh (Eds.), Research and global perspectives in learning disabilities (pp. 167—180). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Lerner, J.W. (2000). Learning disabilities: Theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies (8th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
9. Linan-Thompson, S., Vaughn, S., Prater, K., & Cirino, P.T. (in press). Response to intervention for English language learners. Journal of Learning Disabilities.
10. Reynolds, C.R. (1984). Critical measurement issues in learning disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 18, 451—476.
11. Stanovich, K.E., & Siegel, L.S. (1994). Phenotypic performance profiles of children with reading disabilities: A regression-based test of the phonological-core variable difference model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 24—53.
12. Stuebing, K.K., Fletcher, J.M., LeDoux, J.M., Lyon, G.R., Shaywitz, S.E., & Shaywitz, B.A. (2002). Validity of IQ-discrepancy classifications of reading difficulties: A meta-analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 469—518.
13. Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L.S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to treatment: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 137—146.
14. Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Mathes, P.G., Cirino, P.T., Carlson, C.D., Pollard-Durodola, S.D., et al. (2006). Effectiveness of Spanish intervention for first-grade English language learners at risk for reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 56—73.
15. Vaughn, S., Mathes, P.G., Linan-Thompson, S., Cirino, P.T., Carlson, C.D., Pollard-Durodola, S.D., et al. (2006). First-grade English language learners at-risk for reading problems: Effectiveness of an English intervention. Elementary School Journal.