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.

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


Alternatives to RTI in the Assessment of Learning Disabilities

Previous Page | Next Page
(Introduction) | (Problems)

Advantages of RTI in Identification of LD

RTI has been proposed as a possible alternative to present procedures. There are several reasons for considering RTI a promising alternative. One is the fact that RTI as proposed emphasizes an important deficit area of LD, that is, reading. Although it is argued that RTI could be used for other skill areas, reading is the one usually described by advocates. Justification for this is offered in evidence that as many as 80% of students identified as LD exhibit severe deficits in reading. RTI also emphasizes early identification, in its focus on reading in the early grade levels. This emphasis addresses the "wait to fail" concern often voiced about discrepancy models, where students advance several grade levels before being identified, and early opportunities for remediation are lost. Another advantage of RTI is its expectation of evidence-based, high-quality instruction as a baseline condition to identification. This expectation is likely to eliminate or greatly reduce "teaching disabilities" -- that is, those supposed learning problems that are really the fault of ineffective instruction.

Previous Page | Next Page
(Introduction) | (Problems)

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.