RTI and the Discrepancy Model-Leslie Oeftering

RTI: RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

Evidenced-based intervention

Tier I

Instruction of all students in general class

Monitor progress

80% of students

Tier II

Intense evidenced-based instruction 

·         Identify and define the area of concern

·         Design the intervention and progress monitoring plan

·         Implement the plan

·         Evaluate progress

Progress monitoring

10-15% of students

Tier III

Intense evidence-based instruction in small   group or individually

Progress monitoring

5-10% of students

Referral for testing

Comprehensive evaluation

+Pros

Earlier identification and prevention of disabilities, reduced numbers of minorities referred for SpEd, responsibility of general education teacher, materials that are evidenced based (or) scientific researched, focus on outcomes and increased accountability, no labeling, promotes shared responsibility and collaboration

-Cons

Financial expense, delay recognizing disabilities, not all children respond to intervention, concept of LD lost, rights and protections of students with disabilities protected, neurobiological correlates of LD need to be considered

                      

DISCEPTANCY MODEL

I.                   General education teacher notes student academic and behavior difficulties

II.                Teacher calls on pre-referral team for strategies for improvement

III.              Teacher implements interventions and monitors progress

IV.               A member of the Collaboration Team makes an observation

V.                 Referral for a formal evaluation

VI.               Information is gathered: History from birth, family history, educationally relevant medical findings, native language, grades

VII.          Cognitive abilities  and achievement test administered

VIII.       Discrepancy found between intellectual ability and achievement

   

               IEP  

Independent Educational Plan

 (Progress monitored)

-Cons   Quantitative and qualitative information should be combined, using IQ score to measure potential may not be useful,  poor achievers often have similar learning characteristics, whether high IQ or low IQ score, discrepancy formulas vary from state to state