Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium

December 4-5, 2003 * Kansas City, Missouri

The National Research Center on Learning Disabilities sponsored this two-day symposium focusing on responsiveness-to-intervention (RTI) issues. The speakers, discussants, and participants assembled represented the wide diversity of individuals with a vested interest in LD determination issues. Advocates, instructional staff, researchers, and state-level education officials brought their collective and considerable expertise to the discussions.

Michael M. Gerber of the University of California, Santa Barbara presented this invited paper during the symposium. For links to other papers and materials, visit the main Symposium 2003 page.

Teachers Are Still The Test:
Limitations of Response To Instruction Strategies
For Identifying Children With Learning Disabilities

Previous Page
(Who is LD?)

About the Speaker

Report Text

Tables & Figures

References

Aylward, E. H., Richards, T. L., Berninger, V. W., Nagy, W. E., Field, K. M., Grimme, A. C., Richards, A. L., Thomson, J. B., & Cramer, S. C. (2003). Instructional treatment associated with changes in brain activation in children with dyslexia. Neurology, 61, 212-219.

Carroll, J. B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers College Record, 64, 723-733.

Cook, B., Gerber, M. M., & Semmel, M. I.. (1997). Are effective schools reforms effective for all students. The implications of joint outcome production for school reform. Exceptionality, 7, 77-96.

Temple, E., Deutsch, G. K., Poldrack, R. A., Miller, S. L., Tallal, P., Merzenich, M. M., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2003). Neural deficits in children with dyslexia ameliorated by behavioral remediation: Evidence from functional MRI, PNAS, 100, 2860-2865.

Denton C. A., Vaughn, S.& Fletcher, J. M. (2003). Bringing research-based practice in reading intervention to scale. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 201-211.

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1998). Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 13, 201-219.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Speece, D. L. (2002). Treatment validity as a unifying construct for identifying students with learning disabilities. Elementary School Journal,92, 261-281.

Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 157-171.

Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Assessing intervention responsiveness: Conceptual and technical issues. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 172-186

Gerber, M. M. (1988). Tolerance and technology of instruction: Implications of the NAS Report for special Education. Exceptional Children, 54, 309-314.

Gerber, M. M. (1995). Inclusion at the high-water mark? Some thoughts on Zigmond and Baker's case studies of inclusive educational programs. Journal of Special Education, 29, 181-191.

Gerber, M. M. (2000). An appreciation of learning disabilities: The value of blue-green algae. Exceptionality, 8, 29-42.

Gerber, M. M. (2002). All teachers are dynamic tests. Issues in Education: Contributions from Educational Psychology, 7, 193-200.

Gerber, M. M., & Kauffman, J. M. (1979). Production functions in special education: Microanalysis and behavioral technology. Journal of Special Education Technology, 3, 25-28.

Gerber, M. M. & Semmel, M. I. (1984). Teacher as imperfect test: Reconceptualizing the referral process. Educational Psychologist, 19, 1-12.

Gerber, M. M., & Semmel, M. I. (1985). Microeconomics of referral and reintegration: A paradigm for evaluation of special education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 11, 13-29.

Gettinger, M., & White, M. A. (1979). Which is the stronger correlate of school learning? Time to learn or measured intelligence? Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 405-12.

Gettinger, M. (1983). Relationship among IQ, time needed for learning, and retention in children referred for behavior problems. Psychological Reports, 52, 695-701.

Gettinger, M. (1984a). Achievement as a function of time spent in learning and time needed for learning. American Educational Research Journal, 21,617-628.

Gettinger, M. (1984b). Individual differences in time needed for learning: A review of literature. Educational Psychologist, 19, 15-29.

Gettinger, M. (1984c). Measuring time needed for learning to predict learning outcomes. Exceptional Children, 51, 244-248.

Gresham, F. M. (2002). Responsiveness to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. In R. Bradley, L. Danielson, & D. L. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 467-519). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

King, R., & Torgesen, J. K. (2000). Improving the effectiveness of reading instruction in one elementary school: A description of the process (Technical Report #3). Florida Center for Reading Research.

Leach, J. M., Scarborough, H. S., Rescorla, L. (2003). Late-emerging reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology 95, 211-224.

Larivee, B., Gerber, M. M., & Semmel, M. I. (1997). Case studies of schools varying in effectiveness with mildly handicapped learners. The Elementary School Journal, 98, 27-50.

Paulesu, E., De'monet, J.-F., Fazio, F., McCrory, E., Chanoine, V., Brunswick, N., Cappa, S. F., Cossu, G., Habib, M., Frith, C. D., & Frith, U. (2001). Dyslexia: Cultural diversity and biological unity. Science, 291, 2165-67.

Reynolds, C. (1988). Putting the individual into aptitude-treatment interaction. Exceptional Children, 54, 324-331.

Schneider, A.L., & Ingram, H. (1990). The behavioral assumptions of policy tools. Journal of Politics, 52, 511-529.

Speece, D. L., Case, L. P. & Molloy, D. E. (2003). Responsiveness to general education instruction as the gate to learning disabilities identification. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 147-156.

Torgesen, J. K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 55-64.

Torgesen, J. K. (2003). New expectations for outcomes from effective reading interventions with younger and older children: Lessons from research. Presentation at the annual meeting of the International Dyslexia Association, San Diego, CA.

Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K. K. S. & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive reading instruction for children with severe reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33-58, 78.

Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 137-146.

Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., & Hickman, P. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69, 391-409.

Weatherley, R. & Lipsky, M. (1977). Street-level bureaucrats and institutional innovation: Implementing special education reform. Harvard Educational Review, 47, 171-97.

Previous Page
(Who is LD?)

IDEAs that Work logo

The symposium was made possible by the support of the U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs. Renee Bradley, Project Officer. Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position of the U.S. Department of Education.