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.

Margo Mastropieri of George Mason University presented this invited paper during the symposium. For links to other papers and materials, visit the main Symposium 2003 page.

Feasibility and Consequences of Response to Intervention (RTI): Examination of the Issues and Scientific Evidence as a Model for the Identification of Individuals with Learning Disabilities

Previous Page | Next Page
(Table of Contents) | (Introduction)

About the Speaker

Report Text

Figures

Abstract

This paper provides a response to the thoughtful papers presented by Reschly (2003) and Gerber (2003) at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Symposium in Kansas City with guidance from five major questions posed by the organizers of the symposium. Both scholars' papers provide interesting perspectives regarding the alternative approach to identification of learning disabilities or the "Response to Intervention" (RtI). Reschly proposes a four-tier model for providing interventions in a systematic fashion within general education settings as a substitute for the current methods of identification of learning disabilities. Conversely, Gerber raises questions and concerns about the theoretical and practical aspects of a response to intervention model on either a small or large-scale basis. Guiding questions for this response include an examination of:

  1. Changing roles of teachers and diagnosticians.
  2. Responsibility for fidelity of treatment implementation.
  3. Applications in secondary settings.
  4. Consistency of implementation from local to state to national levels.
  5. Differentiation of learning disabilities from other disabilities.
Conclusions are discussed with respect to existing research-based evidence.

Previous Page | Next Page
(Table of Contents) | (Introduction)

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.