Gerber's Concerns Regarding Response to Intervention
Gerber presents a thoughtful paper that addresses some concerns with the conceptualizations of the RtI model. Specifically Gerber addresses issues with:
- standard treatment protocols for the delivery of instruction for the purposes of identifying individuals with learning disabilities.
- with scaling up RtI procedures on a national level and
- whether an RtI model can identify individuals with learning disabilities.
Issues with Standard Protocol
Gerber posits that RtI as measurement for the identification of learning disabilities ignores the interaction of the teacher and the student and does not acknowledge that learning failure is based on the interaction. He describes at length the interaction of the teacher with the student during instruction, which is based on teachers responding to students' responses to instruction, as an iterative process continuously occurring throughout instruction. Conceptualized this way, teachers are constantly "testing" students, modifying their instruction based student responses, and as such employing a very dynamic process. Further, the instructional RtI model neglects to account for ecological validity within classroom settings during instruction, and as such will be unable to meet necessary measurement requirements. Gerber warns the field to examine issues with implementing a standard protocol treatment closely, when in fact that standard treatment may be a moving target.
Issues with Scaling up RTI
Gerber also addresses issues associated with scaling up the RtI model based on several concerns. First, given the variability within teachers and organizations it may be impossible to expect any type of "standard treatment protocol" that could be implemented and replicated from teacher to teacher, school to school district to district and state to state. Given his earlier warnings concerning the fact that a standard treatment protocol may be a moving target, it would be extremely difficult to replicate this model on a local basis, let alone a state or national basis.
Gerber also speculates on the costs associated with scaling up the retraining of all general educators across the country. Gerber's presents cost estimates based on estimates of kindergarten though grade three scale up for RtI. His cost-effectiveness figures yield figures well beyond amounts allocated currently for implementing No Child Left Behind. Given the enormity of the costs along with the amount of retraining required, Gerber questions the feasibility of implementing RtI on a national basis.
Issues with Learning Disabilities Construct
Gerber questions whether this RtI model will be able to identify the individual with learning disabilities or will have to change the definition of learning disabilities. Gerber presented evidence from recent fMRI studies that have indicated identifiable, discrete brain activation differences between individuals with and without learning disabilities (Gerber, 2003). The issues raised by Gerber pose considerable consequences to the field of learning disabilities.
Previous Page | Next Page
(Reschly's Points) | (Guiding Questions)
