RtI is the response to intervention process used to help struggling students in any subject area. It was introduced with the 2004 Individuals with Disabilities Act. If a student is identified in the classroom as struggling with a skill or lesson, the educator will use a set of interventions and test scores to help the student grasp the concept. If the student does not make progress, further intensive interventions will be applied to help with the student’s needs. In recent years, school districts started using the RtI process instead of the discrepancy model. The discrepancy model is the assessment of a student to see if requirements for special education services are met. The discrepancy model takes a student’s IQ and measures it against
…show more content…
This would lead to deciding if additional interventions need to be added or adjusted to better suit the child. Each student has his or her own struggles. Not every student is going to respond the same to each intervention. Therefore, a teacher has to be able to adjust their teaching style to fit the student. Using ten to twenty minutes of a small pull out time during independent reading, recess, or clean up time two times a week can make an impact.
Benefits to RtI include students getting immediate help from a professional educator rather than waiting to see if the student qualifies for special education. It also impacts how students can be referred to special education services, rather than having to qualify using the discrepancy model. Students can immediately receive help from another resource teacher rather than waiting to have options discussed. Data can be collected by the resource teacher and used to determine if the student needs to be qualified as having a learning disability and should receive special education services as soon as …show more content…
He thought RtI needed more research on how special education would fit within the process. Hoover (2010), stated the dual discrepancy model, which compared the rate of progress and the student’s proficiency level, would eliminate some students qualifying for a learning disability if their level of proficiency and rate of progress were evenly matched. The dual discrepancy model had a better chance of actually measuring whether the student did or did not need services through special education. However, it leads into the question of whether failure to grow means there is a learning disability or not. Hoover (2010), decided that the RtI needed to clarify several areas in more depth in order to see if it eliminated the need for the discrepancy model. According to the research gathered in the documentation, I learned that RtI is a great process to eliminate the discrepancy model that is traditionally used. Students, who would otherwise not qualify for special education, can now qualify using
This would lead to deciding if additional interventions need to be added or adjusted to better suit the child. Each student has his or her own struggles. Not every student is going to respond the same to each intervention. Therefore, a teacher has to be able to adjust their teaching style to fit the student. Using ten to twenty minutes of a small pull out time during independent reading, recess, or clean up time two times a week can make an impact.
Benefits to RtI include students getting immediate help from a professional educator rather than waiting to see if the student qualifies for special education. It also impacts how students can be referred to special education services, rather than having to qualify using the discrepancy model. Students can immediately receive help from another resource teacher rather than waiting to have options discussed. Data can be collected by the resource teacher and used to determine if the student needs to be qualified as having a learning disability and should receive special education services as soon as …show more content…
He thought RtI needed more research on how special education would fit within the process. Hoover (2010), stated the dual discrepancy model, which compared the rate of progress and the student’s proficiency level, would eliminate some students qualifying for a learning disability if their level of proficiency and rate of progress were evenly matched. The dual discrepancy model had a better chance of actually measuring whether the student did or did not need services through special education. However, it leads into the question of whether failure to grow means there is a learning disability or not. Hoover (2010), decided that the RtI needed to clarify several areas in more depth in order to see if it eliminated the need for the discrepancy model. According to the research gathered in the documentation, I learned that RtI is a great process to eliminate the discrepancy model that is traditionally used. Students, who would otherwise not qualify for special education, can now qualify using