Response To Intervention System
Introduction
Response to intervention system can be termed as a technique of academic intervention that is used in most parts of the world for the purposes of helping children who are having challenges in learning. The technique is aimed at averting the academic failure of children. It does this by conducting early intervention, instructional interventions that are thorough research based and measuring the progress of the students with difficulties on a frequent basis. Studies have shown that students who do not have a response to the efficient intervention most probably could be suffering from learning disabilities that are biologically based and therefore require special education. Fuchs L. S (2005).
Response to intervention
The response to intervention technique was developed as a substitute to the model of ability achievement with regard to identification of learning disabilities. The ability achievement model requires that children should portray an inconsistency when comparison is done between their academic achievement and their ability. The ability of the children is measured through the IQ whereas the academic achievement is measured by assessment of the children’s grades and other testing that is standardized.
Researchers in favor of use of the response to intervention system claim that the technique has more capabilities and is more efficient and effective in clarifying the specific learning disability. This is because the response to intervention system is usually instruction and intervention research based which is accompanied by monitoring of the student’s progress that is conducted on a regular basis. This therefore enables those education institutions that adopt the response to intervention system in arriving at educational decisions. By application of interventions that are scientifically based and have the potential to perform in controlled trials that are randomized, the response to intervention system is able to effect accountability to educational programs.
The response to intervention system is implemented under certain assumptions. It assumes that the system of education that has been put in place has the capability of teaching all students. It is also based on the assumption that in order to avert problems going out of control, it is critical for there to be early intervention.
The system also has an assumption that decisions that are made between the levels of support should be based on a model that is problem solving. Other assumptions of the system include; implementation of interventions that are research based to the furthest possible extent. For the purposes of informing instruction, it is essential to implement progress monitoring. Fuchs, D. (2009).
The response to intervention technique is largely divided into three levels of support, where there are more rigorous interventions with each level. The interest and focus of the first level is based on the main curriculum of the students whereby the interventions and instructions that are conducted are meant for every student.
It is expected that under normal circumstances, eighty to eighty five percent of the students should be in a position to meet the expected performance in the grades of the first level. This should be possible without getting any kind of assistance beyond the first level. In situations where children or students are unable to consistently meet the expected standards in the first level, they are then provided with extra interventions that are present in level two of the response to intervention system.
The second level of the system is featured by instructions that are focused on small groups. It is then expected that there will be students who will still have problems and difficulties after being provided with interventions at the second level. This should form about three to six percent of the students who are then taken to the next level which is level three. This level has the most powerful interventions and is usually conducted on a one on one basis. This is so as there needs to be implementation of individual focus on the students that are at this level of the system. The three levels of the system are aimed at providing supplements to the regular and common education that the children get ijn their curriculum. Kovaleski, J. (2006).
Response intervention and assistive technology
Assistive technology usually comes into place where the special education students, that is those who have been unable to cope in the third level of the response to intervention system. The response to intervention system therefore serves to identify those students who require the use of assistive technology after they have been unable to perform in the third tier of the system. Assistive technology therefore serves to provide students with special education in the fourth level with te4chnologies that they require for them to be able to gain access to the curriculum.
Repercussions of neglecting to use RTI.
The old system of education was characterized by normal education for the ordinary students and another education for those students with various disabilities. This saw special education being considered as a place where students with disabilities belong to rather than it being a service to those children with the disabilities.
Consequently, due to the failure of using and adopting the response to intervention system most of the students with disabilities did not receive the services that they ought to receive. For children to receive the kind of assistance that they required they had to be termed as having a disability and most of them were termed as having specific learning disability. This was determined where psychologists performed various tests where the intelligence and achievement tests were used for assessment. In situations where there was a large difference between the IQ and the achievement tests then the child was termed as requiring special education services.
The failure to use the response intervention system saw some of the children being identified as requiring special learning services. However the large number of the students with disabilities was not receiving the kind of help they ought to have. Another consequence of not using the response to intervention system was that there was a lot of time and resource wastage on testing children who had been referred for aid. It therefore meant that the resources which would have been used fro helping the children were used for testing purposes. The failure of using the response to intervention system also paces learning institutions at the risk of incorrectly identifying the needs of the children and hence the needy students become desperate as they do not receive aid. Steege, M. (2005).
Conclusion
Leaning institutions should ensure that they use the response to intervention system in their school program. This is to enable accurate identification of those students that require help at the different levels. The failure of use of this system often leaves many students who are in need of the services offered by the system.
Reference:
Steege, M. (2005). Response to Intervention: Principles and Strategies for Effective Practice. NY, Guilford Press.
Kovaleski, J. (2006). Competing Views: A Dialogue on Response to Intervention. Assessment for Effective Intervention.
Fuchs, D. (2009). What Does RTI Mean for the Classroom? Education Week, Spotlight on Response to Intervention .
Fuchs L. S (2005). Responsiveness To Intervention: A Blueprint for Practitioners, Policymakers, and Parents. Teaching Exceptional Children.
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
