Upfront Summary.
Before dismissing the RtI framework, or the MTSS/PBIS models associated with it, educators, specifically school leaders should address the following:
- It is not necessary to wait in Tier – 1 when students identify as needing additional support
- Choose either growth or achievement for determining when exiting students from Tier 2 & 3 interventions, and be consistent across the board. (A combination of the two may be most reliable).
- A true understanding and of success can only be achieved through consistency. Not only of the actual intervention but also for: teacher training, intake and exit protocols, team meeting protocols and finally the assignment of interventions to match the different tiers.
There is no shortage of information about Response to Intervention and its effectiveness in schools. Below, I outline some of the more recent research surrounding it, with a specific focus on elementary schools.
To begin, it’s apparent that schools across the country are frustrated with RtI and its effectiveness, and understandably so – a significant body of research has shown that perhaps it is not effective after all. (Bath, 2017) However, there is substantial research to suggest that there are commonalities in the hold-ups to RtI.
To wait or not
NOT – Otaiba et al (2014) used a controlled experiment of first-grade literacy students to understand the dynamics of waiting on Tier 2 or Tier 3 intervention, versus intervening immediately. The research suggested that “there was no reason to delay intervention.” This is in stark contrast to the idea that students should wait 6-8 weeks in Tier-1 instruction and see how they respond, before providing intervention.
Growth or Achievement to Measure Responsiveness
A debate rages on whether student progress should be measured in growth or against a standardized achievement scale. Milbur, Lonigan & Philips, 2017, report that perhaps the best indicator would be a combination of the two. This would result in perhaps the most conservative criteria for a student to “exit” RtI, but is likely the most accurate. Before a school can identify whether a student has made progress, this would be a key insight to agree on. If not, there is a significant disparity in exiting students from Tier II and Tier III interventions. (Milbur, Lonigan & Philips, 2017).
Consistency – A Must
As stated above, consistency, like most things in life is key. Unfortunately, the research overall suggests that schools and school districts are not consistent with their approaches, cut-offs, and interventions. Several types of research show that there is a need for consistency in training among the instructors providing Tier-2 intervention – be it classroom, or specific intervention teachers. Additionally is the need for consistency in the intervention itself. Finally, a requirement of proper protocols for assigning interventions, be it the length of time or intensity, is critical to determining whether it RtI is effective or not. Without these factors “the impact of being assigned to receive intervention service….was not significantly significant. ”
Works Cited/Consulted:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0731948717745646?journalCode=ldqa
https://nyuscholars.nyu.edu/en/publications/response-to-intervention-is-the-sky-falling
Sean D'Abreu 