Response to Intervention is not a particular program, curriculum, or model. Rather, it is a framework for allocating instructional services that are aligned to students’ individual needs. It aims to prevent unnecessary assignments to special education through the provision of tiers of intervention and continuous progress monitoring.
The RTI framework requires schools to:
1.Provide tiers of increasingly intensive, research-based intervention matched to students’ needs;
2. Measure and continually monitor students’ progress over time; and use resulting data to drive educational decision making.
The purpose of RTI is to:
1.Focus on prevention and early identification of students in need of special services; and
2.Better integrate services between general and special education populations.
TheMultitiered InterventionModel
RTI uses a multitiered model of service delivery to promote efficient response to students’ needs. Each tier provides increasingly intensive support structures to ensure that students succeed.
Tier 1: Core Instructional Interventions
- General curricula for all students
- Proactive interventions based on instructional variables within whole-group instruction
Tier 2:Targeted Group Interventions
- Supplemental instruction for students who are not successful in Tier 1
- Targeted interventions oriented toward small-group instruction
- Explicit instruction, rapid response
Tier 3: Intensive, Individual Interventions
- Individualized instruction for students who are not successful in Tier 2
- Intensive interventions oriented toward individual students
- Diagnostic assessments to determine student need
- Higher intensity, longer duration
Core Components of Response to Intervention
1. AMultitiered InterventionModel
Three tiers of intervention allow schools to offer increasingly intensive interventions to those students who are not making adequate progress in the core curriculum (Tier 1). Interventions in Tiers 2 and 3 are intensified by increasing instructional time, decreasing group size, using materials matched to students’ instructional levels, modifying modes of presentation, and providing regular corrective feedback.
2. Universal Screening
Screening measures should be brief, reliable, valid, and should help to identify those students who require more intense interventions.
3. Scientifically Validated and Research-Based Interventions
IDEA 2004 and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) require that interventions be research-based. The research must also be validated by data gathered from scientific studies.
4. FrequentMonitoring of Student Progress
The progress of students receiving interventions must be monitored frequently in order to determine whether the interventions are producing the desired academic gains. The progress-monitoring measures should be brief, target specific skills, be administered easily, and be used to inform instruction.
5. Data-Based DecisionMaking
In all tiers of intervention, data from screening and progress monitoring measures should be used to make educational decisions for individual students.
6. Supplemental InstructionalMaterials
Use supplemental instructional materials, where appropriate, to strengthen the efficacy of the comprehensive core curriculum and support student learning.
7. English Language Learners
Instructional strategies should be included to address the specific needs of English language learners.
8. Professional Development
A high-quality professional development plan should be included to support teachers who are implementing interventions within the RTI framework. The plan should allow for coaching and other opportunities.
9. Coordinated Funding
Components of RTI funded by IDEA may be coordinated with activities funded by, and carried out under, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).
The program’s instructional design not only applies what one knows, but also what research concludes about reaching a wide variety of students who struggle with math. The following eight proven instructional strategies are drawn from a foundation of research:
1. Scaffolding Content calls for identifying and sequencing the concepts and skills that are essential to the content being taught. Research shows that scaffolding benefits all students, particularly those with learning disabilities and in special education (Gersten, 1998), and those whose second language is English. Students learn better when new knowledge is connected to things they already know and understand (Hiebert & Carpenter, 1992; Hiebert et al., 1997), and their individual needs are more readily met (Kame’enui et al., 2002). Moreover, strategies for scaffolding content, such as organization of concepts, sequencing, and chunking, support teaching for conceptual understanding (Grouws & Cebulla, 2000).
2. Explicit Instruction helps students to develop understanding, learn skills, see relationships, and make connections between new learning and what they already know. Explicit concrete-to-representational-to-abstract sequenced instruction is a proven pedagogical strategy for building mathematical knowledge and skills (Witzel, Mercer, & Miller, 2003). Research reveals that explicit instruction yields positive effects on both special education and low-achieving students (NMAP, 2008; NCTM, 2007; Hall, 2002; Adams & Englemann, 1996).
3. Multiple Strategies to approaching mathematical knowledge, such as the use of modeling with manipulatives (Sabean & Bavaria, 2005; Sowell, 1989), presenting ideas through literature, and engaging in math concepts and skills through discussion and games, grants students better chances to build number sense, develop mathematical skills, and deepen their understanding (Ball et al., 2005; Tomlinson, 1999), as compared to instruction that relies on a single representation (NMAP, 2008; Ozgun-Koca, 1998; Goldin, 2000; McArthur et al., 1988; Yerushalmy, 1991).
4. Gradual Release is a process that begins with teacher modeling, moves to guided practice followed by paired practice, and ends in students completing work independently. Research concludes that optimal learning is achieved when students move through phases of dependence to independence through a gradual release of responsibility model of instruction (Routman, 2003).
5. Student Interaction helps students to clarify, explain, and evaluate their own mathematical thinking, as well as the thinking of their partner. Eventually, the practice supports the organization and development of mathematical reasoning skills (Hanna & Yackel, 2000; Chapin et al., 2003). Several studies show that collaborative learning methods such as peer-mediated instruction produce increased achievement and conceptual understanding for students with and without disabilities (Fuchs et al., 1997).
6. Meaningful Practice provides students with opportunities to strengthen and reinforce their learning and maximize their success. Practice that focuses on building conceptual understanding related to skills and procedures helps students gain a deeper understanding of a topic (Marzano et al., 2000). Research shows that repeated practice and application are essential for students to attain higher levels of competence (Newell
& Rosenbloom, 1981; Gee, 2003; Marzano, 2002; Pressley, 1995).
7. Vocabulary and Language are necessary for students to be able to articulate mathematical thinking coherently and precisely. When students receive direct instruction in mathematics vocabulary, they are more successful at solving math problems (Marzano, 2002; Allen, 1988; Ball et al., 2005). Direct vocabulary instruction alleviates confusion about the precise meaning of mathematical words (Raiker, 2002; Shuard &
Rothery, 1984).
8. Assessment and Differentiation ensure that the needs of all children are met. Providing teachers with specific information about how each student is performing consistently enhances students’ mathematics achievement (NMAP, 2008; Baker et al., 2002). Several studies show that all children, including those who have been traditionally under served, can learn mathematics when they have access to high-quality instructional programs that support their learning (Campbell, 1994; Griffin et al., 1994; Knapp et al., 1995; Silver & Stein, 1996).
A math intervention program that proactively improves young students’ access to the core curriculum by supporting the development of the underlying concepts of mathematics for all students (Tier 1), differentiating and targeting intervention for groups of students who need additional support (Tier 2), or providing assessments and targeted interventions for individual students who have not yet acquired a foundational understanding of key topics in number and operations (Tier 3).
Mathematics intervention program that addresses the diverse needs of all students. Incorporating research-based instructional strategies to specifically meet the needs of students who struggle with math, the program helps students to gain the necessary conceptual understanding of addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and fractions. Moreover, there are assessments and suggestions for differentiation embedded in the program that guide the teacher as to when a student may need additional support in order to succeed. Ongoing progress monitoring, professional development resources, and supplementary materials further assist practitioners to use the program effectively to meet the goals of RTI.
No comments:
Post a Comment