Severe Discrepancy vs. Response to Intervention

Severe Discrepancy Model of Eligibility Determination (1974 – present) This method is used for students who have disabilities that are not physically obvious Students are given cognitive tests (commonly referred to as IQ tests) and academic performance tests across content areas The two scores are compared If there is a severe discrepancy between cognitive ability and achievement levels (i.e., the student’s IQ is markedly higher than academic performance) and the student has received ample appropriate instruction the student is said to have a learning disability

Mental Retardation MR IQ cut points: = mild = moderate = severe Below 20 = profound

Lyon, R. G., Fletcher, J. M., Shaywitz, S. E., Shaywitz, B. A., Torgesson, J. K., Wood, F. B., et al. (2001). Rethinking learning disabilities. In C. E. Finn, A. J. Rotherham, & C. R. Hokanson (Eds.), Rethinking special education for a new century (p. 270).

Why we use Two Models Has been referred to as a “wait-to-fail” model because students’ academic achievement must be significantly below (e.g., 1.5 standard deviations) their cognitive potential before they are provided with an individual education program and specialized instruction. Response-to-Intervention (RTI) holds promise as a more effective measure of the presence of a learning disability because it provides increased levels of individualized instruction when students are identified as “at-risk”, rather than waiting for the presence of a severe discrepancy. Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004), IEP teams are allowed to use both the severe discrepancy model and RTI when determining the presence of a specific learning disability.

Defining RTI “…an assessment and intervention process for systematically monitoring student progress and making decisions about the need for instructional modifications or increasingly intensified services using progress monitoring data.” The National Research Center on Learning Disabilities (NRCLD, 2006)

Seven Core Principles of RTI Use all available resources to teach students Use scientific, research-based instruction Monitor classroom performance Conduct universal screening / benchmarking Use a multi-tier model of service delivery Make data-based decisions Monitor progress frequently

Three-Tier Model of School Supports Short-term ( weeks) interventions provided to small groups of students (3 - 6) where remedial instruction occurs in a core academic, social skills, or behavioral area (e.g., phonemic awareness). Three to four sessions per week min. per session. Progress monitoring biweekly (minimum) All students Preventative / proactive Students benchmarked 3x per year on core academic skills Small group (3 or less) or individual instruction May be for 12 weeks or more Up to two 30 min sessions daily Weekly progress monitoring (minimum )

RTI is a Problem Solving Process RTI is a flexible service delivery model Define the problem Analyze the cause - this requires a conceptual shift from the problem occurring in the student to a need for improvement educational environment “What can we as educators do differently?” Develop a plan Implement the plan Evaluate the plan

Key Terms Fidelity - the extent to which the instruction is implemented as planned. Universal screening (Tier I) - benchmarking of academic, social skills, and behavior (fall, winter, & spring). Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) - a means to measure student development over time.