Response To Intervention: A Survey Of Attitudes And Perceptions

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SAN BERNARDINOResponse to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and PerceptionsEDUC 607Daniel Pavoni, Benita Ansari, Michelle Rozsi, Brian Stephens, Trina Lange 3/19/2012 Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 2AbstractThis study surveys the attitudes and perceptions of Response to Intervention (RTI) in selected schools and districts. The survey mainly seeks to find the prevalence of RTI and teacher knowledge of the program. Results of the survey show most of the school districts employ RTI in elementary settings, while secondary settings are inconsistent in their implementation.Additional information was found by informally interviewing staff members at different school sites to hear their attitudes and opinions of RTI. A review of the literature shows there is an abundant amount of research done on the subject already but there is much more to be done in following up research Keywords: Response to Intervention, tiered instruction, discrepancy model, inclusion Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 3IntroductionIn reflecting on the current issues in special education in schools today, one has to consider Response to Intervention as one of the most important programs school districts consider. As a group, we decided that the use of RTI in determining eligibility for special education services would be the most interesting part to research. Since RTI is a relatively new phenomenon, we were not sure how prevalent it is among schools and how it is being used, if at all. We wanted to find out not just if the method is used consistently, but how teachers and staff felt about the “new” method for getting students qualified for special education. What exactly do the educators know about the process anyway? Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 4Literature ReviewsTran, L., Sanchez, T., Arellano, B., & Swanson, H. (2011). A Meta-Analysis of the RTI Literature for Children at Risk for Reading Disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(3), 283-295.This study is a meta-analysis. The general purpose of the study is to synthesize the literature comparing at-risk children designated as responders and low responders to interventions in reading. The questions it raises include: Do the syntheses determine the characteristics (i.e. age, psychometric, and demographic) of responders and low responders in children at risk for reading disabilities? And do the syntheses identify those variables that moderate posttest outcomes? The central question addressed in this review is whether individual differences in reading-related skills at pretest predict responders at posttest across a variety of interventions and sets of criteria for determining responding and low-responding. Answering this question adds to what’s already known in Response to Intervention because it attempts to analyze the literature already done on RTI and gives a more comprehensive look. A total of 13 studies met criteria for the meta-analysis, yielding 107 weighted effect sizes (ESs) at posttest and 108 weighted ESs at pretest. The major steps in performing the study were as follows:1. Published studies were selected from two electronic databases.2. References were hand searched using keywords.3. A manual search of 11 peer-reviewed English journals was completed.4. A manual search of frequently cited authors related to RTI completed. Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 55. Each study was coded using a standard procedure.6. Categorization of independent measures and classification criteria are given (basically four additional coding categories are given.)7. Authors calculate the effect sizes in the studies.8. A statistical analysis is provided for each study.9. Interrater agreement is found.10. Results, including general characteristics of the studies, are given.11. A general discussion of the findings is shown, including limitations of the study.The data that was recorded was effect sizes, or ESs of studies chosen for the meta-analysis. The kinds of data-analysis used included: hierarchical linear modeling, comparing dependent and independent measures, correlation, gains, standard deviation, variance, and standard error.The results of the data show that there is weak support for both assumptions that: a) children at risk are considered as low responders in the intervention literature and b) their performance on specific individual difference variables at pretest, such as phonological awareness, better predicted posttest performance than other measures (e.g. rapid automatic naming).The authors conclude that although one of the key assumptions of RTI models is that children with reading disabilities (RD) are more accurately identified at risk after treatment, they found that children’s performance at pretest is fairly accurate at predicting performance at posttest. These authors caution that the validity of RTI procedures, particularly in comparisons to Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 6 other assessment approaches, has not been adequately established in the present synthesis of the literature. What I found interesting from reading this report is that it seems these authors do not fully support RTI as a valid alternative to the discrepancy model of qualifying students for Special Education under the learning disabilities category. At the bare minimum, the study opens the door to further research into the statistical significance of RTI.White, R. B., Polly, D., & Audette, R. H. (2012). A Case Analysis of an Elementary School's Implementation of Response to Intervention. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 26(1), 73-90.The investigators are Richard B. White, Drew Polly, and Robert H. Audette of the University of North Carolina at Charlotte in Charlotte, North Carolina. It is not known what the background of each of these investigators is, but it can be assumed based on their affiliations that they have educational backgrounds and are concerned for the issue of Response to Intervention. This qualitative research is done as an inductive study. It is a descriptive case study design. The vantage point is of educators using the study from a very practical standpoint. They are concerned with piloting new programs in specified schools and districts. The purpose of the study was to delineate critical features of an elementary school’s implementation of an RTI model and the contextual influences related to those events, according to the perspectives of the participants. The focusing questions that framed the study were: Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 71. What was the sequence of events entailed in the development of the school’s RTI implementation?2. Who were the key individuals involved in the implementation?3. How did the state and county educational systems influence the implementation?4. What were the particular school and local school system strengths that abetted the implementation?5. What were the barriers to implementation?6. What were the difficult issues or challenges regarding the implementation?7. What were unique aspects of the model implementation for the school?8. What changes at the school or school system resulted from the model of implementation?9. What data sources or other sources contributed to model implementation?10. What changes to the process of implementation were recommended by participants?The study takes place in an elementary school in the southeastern section of the state of North Carolina. The school had only been in operation for 2 years prior to the RTI implementation. The school served 955 students in Grades K-5. The student population consisted of 15.4% African American, 6.1% Hispanic, 0.3% Native American, 3.6% Asian, 70.1% White, and 4.5% multi-racial. 13.2% of students were students with disabilities and 20% received free and or reduced-priced lunch. Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 8Fifteen participants selected to be interviewed for the study. The interviews were given as unstructured, focused on a few primary questions. They were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts unitized and initially coded using an open-coding system. Research team met again and discussed any data excerpts that were difficult to decode. Seven issues emerged from the data collection. Each is summarized in the study and described further later on. A discussion of the findings is given, including the processes related to the implementation of RTI and perspectives related to RTI implementation. Implications for practice are listed, based on the data in the study. Limitations and the summary of the study are given in the end.Data was collected using transcriptions of audio-recorded interviews being unitized and coded using an open-coding system. The authors’ roles while collecting data was to interview participants, code interviews, and analyze and discuss the data. The data was analyzed through discussion of the research team and descriptions of seven major themes from the interviews are given. The findings from the study confirm that the RTI model employed at the school was the four-level problem-solving model disseminated by the NCDPI and described elsewhere in the literature. The findings provide an illustration of the impact of state-level professional development on the capacity of districts and schools to implement RTI. The research method of unitizing transcripts enhances the credibility of the study.I found the various categories (findings) of the interview answers to be instructive because they provide insight into other attitudes towards RTI in a completely different area of the country. Since they use many of the same methods as in California schools, it’s nice to see they work in other places. Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 9In the article, Response to intervention: How is it practiced and perceived? , two researchers examined how school personnel implement the RTI process and how they perceive the process. This online study was made available to general and special educators, school administrators, and related personnel in South Eastern Texas schools. The results of the study were based on answers from 99 participants. The participants had some degree of experience or knowledge about the response to intervention process. This descriptive study identified the benefits of using RTI for early identification of students. It also found that the collaboration of school personnel was positive in implementing the RTI process. The overall results of this study indicated that the RTI process is perceived positively and that many teachers were implementing the RTI process before it was mandated in their schools. The results also indicated that many teachers were frustrated with RTI mandates because they were already doing intervention on their own. Results indicate that the use of RTI in conjunction with standardized assessments is critical in determining eligibility for special education services.Although research has shown that students in secondary schools tend to be less successful with RTI, some studies have shown that students in middle school benefit from RTI instruction. In a study conducted by Graves, et al, a comparison was made between two groups of sixth grade students with and without learning disabilities, who were "far below" or "below" basic level in literacy to explore the development of a response-to-intervention model in middle school. The question the study sought to answer was if middle school students would benefit from intensive literacy intervention. These two groups received intensive reading instruction. Assessments were made on students before and after the study. After a 10-week instruction study, both groups showed improvement in literacy. The treatment group which received Tier 1 and Tier 2 Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 10 instruction grew more than the control group which received Tier 1 instruction. The author concluded that stronger interventions are possible and need to be designed to benefit middle school students. Brown, E. (2011). Response to intervention: Are schools prepared to implement? ProQuest LLC.The kind of study that was researched is Response to Intervention. The purpose of this study is to see if two elementary school teachers are ready to implement the Response to Intervention and to identify teacher’s priorities to improve instruction. To understand how important the RTI process the article emphasized on how to improve teacher instruction and student achievement. The article describes how the RTI processed worked. Within the intervention process there are three tiers. Within the tiers there are steps to take for intervention. Most of the data was that was conducted was within questionnaires and notes, research questions and hypothesis on what were the practices to measure student achievement? The results were that teachers needed more knowledge on the RTI process and schools who are in need of improvement; need to find out how the process works and the appropriate steps that are needed. The author concludes that there are inconsistency of IQ testing and the processes that it takes to improve schools. The cautions that the author raises is the RTI process and understanding. The information that I learned from the reading is that a lot of schools sometimes do not understand what they need to do to improve student achievement. They need data and understanding of teachers and students to implement an effective way of improvement. Stuart, S. , Rinaldi, C. , & Higgins-Averill, O. (2011). Agents of change: Voices of teachers on response to intervention. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 7(2), 53-732) Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 11Investigators were university students Shannon Stuart -University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, Claudia Rinaldi, Educational Development Center, Orla Higgins-Averill-Boston College the type of qualitative research is the Interactionist- it is because of the nature of human interactive and perspective, it is also because of observations used of teachers and students. The purpose of this study to collect data over a period of time and find out what methods, participants are using to get their findings. Another purpose of this study was to find the differences in what was done and what needed to be done to refer a student for special education.The study takes place in Garden Elementary is a pilot school with control over budgeting, staffing, curriculum, and scheduling. This school was a pilot school and the staff members, consists of 26 teachers who were mostly predominantly white with 15 teachers that were considered highly qualified. Staff members were first taking professional development classes, then asked a series of questionnaires (prompts) about the RTI process, and then collected data on the Intervention process in the past 3 years. There were also using two chart tables one for the response to Intervention model and the other to study participant characteristics. The data was collected through spending extensive time, interviews and observations, parent interviews, and field notes.The author’s role was to analyze the data and look at what changed the RTI process in the course of 3 years. Garden Elementary is a pilot school and has predominantly Latinos and African Americas. Only 15 out of 26 educators were highly qualified to teach EL students. The procedures used were data information and knowledge from the teachers about the process for RTI. By interviewing staff members and researching what methods were used for the RTI Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 12 process, mindsets were changed; also looking at it clearly how should be the RTI process should be. As a result of data collecting teachers changed their viewpoint on RTI. Teachers and administrators realized that advanced data needed to be collected in order to properly recommend and refer students for special education. The method that was used was a course of three years and the study describes in detail the process from the beginning to the end of the study. It also shows the percentages of teachers that were researched. The part of the study that I found fascinating and powerful was the extensive data that was not collected before this research and then how the school mindset changed after the process and information that was given to the staff. The staff had very limited amount of knowledge about the RTI process and what data and information that needed to done before referring a student to special education. Moors, A., Snyder, A., & Robbins, J. (n.d.). Integrating frequency-based mathematic instruction with a multi-level assessment system to enhance response to intervention frameworks. The Behavior Analyst Today, 11(4), 226-244.This study was quantitative. The study illustrates how a multi-level assessment system aligns annual normative measures with daily frequency building practice and curriculum-based measurement probes within an RTI framework to drive academic outcomes. If the research found out whether or not a model like the RTI model was more or less successful then other models educators would know what process is the best for them to use. The study covered the mathematics progress of two 4th grade students placed in tier 2 interventions were examined. Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 13The study started off explaining the RTI model and how they want to incorporate mathematics into it. In the study with the two 4th graders they started off by pretesting the students then working with them throughout the year following the RTI model. Then at the end they were tested to see how much they had progressed. The authors analyzed numerous studies regarding the RTI model, its process and its effectiveness. Statistical analysis was used in determining how students progressed in the different tiers of the RTI model. Also in some of the studies presented in this article students were categorized based on their levels and how much they progressed using the RTI model and mathematics. In the study of the two 4th graders, both students made significant progress. One students gained two grade levels in one academic year in math fluency and four grade levels on the quantitative concepts subtest. The other students gained one grade level in two subjects and two grade levels on the subtest. The author concludes that RTI provide another opportunity for nationwide educational improvements in both general education and special education. The goal of the system described in the article is highly effective and inclusive for all students in all classrooms. The author doesn’t state any cautions. The authors seem to be big supporters of the RTI, mathematics model. I would be worried that RTI is fairly new and does not have a whole lot of data backing it. I found it interesting that the authors didn’t talk about any downfalls of this model. The entire article focused on the positive, but I find it hard to believe all the research is that positive. I learned a lot reading the article though. I am going in blind to this RTI model, so the article taught me a lot about the model and the process.Hughes, C., & Dexter, D. (2011). Response to intervention: A research-based summary. Theory into practice, 50, 4-11. doi: 00405841.2011.534909 Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 14The investigators for this article are the authors Charles A. Hughes and Douglas D. Dexter. Interpretivist? Not sure, but it seems like you can look at the data and interpret it in a couple ways because there is not a whole lot of research regarding the RTI model. The purpose of the article is to summarize the research typically related to response to intervention. The primary purpose of the article is for practical purposes. It was written to inform readers of the RTI process and its components. This article incorporates findings from 13 published field studies. The studies had to be published in a peer reviewed journal or textbook and employed instruction in at least two tiers of the RTI model. The overall evaluation of the studies they used led to numerous findings. Most of the findings examining the impact of RTI showed improvement. The results primarily focus early reading and math skills and don’t study higher level learning. Lastly, the authors state that the impact of RTI programs in special education remain constant, but more research is needed to know if RTI is the best approach for educators to use. The data was collected through document analysis. The authors studied 13 published field studies to collect the information they needed/wanted for the article. The authors had to go through and find all the relevant research pertaining to the RTI model and use all those studies to break down the model and examine its effectiveness. The studies used had to have been in a peer reviewed journal or textbook, used at least two tiers of the RTI model, and provided quantifiable measures of student academic and behavioral outcomes. They also examined the type and quality of the research designs. The designs included single case, historical control, quasi-experimental with no baseline equivalency, and descriptive. Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 15The studies examining the impact of RTI on academic achievement or performance saw some level of improvement. The outcomes only focus on early math and reading skills, none of them examine the effect on RTI on higher level reading or math skills. With regard to the impact of RTI programs on referral and placement rates, it showed that overall rates remained constant.I think that the criteria the authors used to find the studies they used in the article make the article and its findings very credible. They took the time to weed through numerous studies and narrow it down to only 13 that fir the criteria they were looking for. With my very low level of knowledge regarding RTI, I found the entire article to be very helpful. Along with all the studies it used to examine the RTI process, the authors broke down the different parts of the process, making it easier to understand how the RTI model works.Research Question (s) hypothesis, or Foreshowed Problems Our team researched the benefits of the Response to Intervention process and the effect it will have on the eligibility process of students in special education. The research method that was conducted was qualitative. The research was qualitative because the group used surveys and overall data information of the findings. As a group we decided to research questions that pertain to the RTI (response to intervention) process in schools. Our objective was to analyze how schools and districts view and understand the RTI process. The team surveyed six districts and seven schools. We found that most of the elementary schools used the RIT process and understood the implementations; however not all the elementary schools had the proper training for RTI. When surveying secondary schools most of them did not know what the RTI process was. The problem was that the districts and some schools did not use the RTI process the correct Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 16 way. Students were not being successful, due to this misunderstanding of the misguidedness of RTI. As a group our goal was to identify why the RTI process was not properly used. Obviously it was due to lack of training, communication and misunderstanding of what RTI really is. Our study plan fits into applied research. Definition of TermsRTI which stands for response to intervention is an intervention process that begins in a general education setting before students are placed in special education. There are three levels of the process tier 1, tier 2 and tier3. In tier 1 is the instruction and assessment process in a general education setting, tier 2 is to conduct specific strategies for the student to progress in a general education setting and tier 3 is the when a team decides if the student has a disability. If the student is successful in tier 1 and tier 2 then tier 3 does not have to go further in placing the student in special education classes. RTI can be successful if it is properly conducted. Significance of the proposed study It is important to study RTI because it helps districts and schools to implement the process the right way and to help students to be successful in general education classes. Historically before the implementation of RTI students who were not being successful were thought of having a learning disability and are placed into special education classes before any type of intervention. The majority of schools that do not have the RTI process are being placed without the proper intervention. It is important for schools to help students to be successful without placing them into the classes they could have done without. Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 17Design and MethodologySubjectsThe subjects in this study were educators in six local school districts with Riverside and San Bernardino counties. The school districts included Rialto, San Jacinto, Riverside, Yucaipa, Val Verde, and Etiwanda. The subjects were part of a random convenience sample. The survey included responses from educators at the schools in which each of the researchers are currently employed. The survey was random to obtain a sampling of diverse RTI experiences throughout several schools. A total of 60 surveys were completed. The respondents included 12 males and 48 females. Of the respondents, there were 35 general education teachers, 9 special education teachers, 3 administrators, 2 psychologists, and 11 other staff members. (Appendix A) Instrumentation/Data CollectionThe research group discussed the use of Response to Intervention (RTI) to determine special education eligibility at our school sites. The general concern of our group was whether the RTI process was consistently and properly used. Our discussion led to the discovery that the use and knowledge of the RTI process was limited, modified, or nonexistent in some school sites. The research group decided to conduct a survey within our school sites and districts to determine the educators’ knowledge of RTI, administration of RTI, and how RTI affected special education eligibility determination. The discussions and the survey led to the development of a qualitative study.The research group developed a list of 20 survey questions (Appendix B). The questions were initially developed with a 5 point Likert scale with answers ranging from strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree, or not sure. The research group decided that the 5 point scale Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 18 was not necessary in determining whether educators were aware of the RTI process. The answer choices were revised and based on a 3-item scale with answers ranging from yes, no, or not sure. Comment sections were added to allow for further explanation. The survey was conducted using Survey Monkey, (www.SurveyMonkey.com), an online survey tool. Each researcher invited participants through mass email or letters to take the survey by accessing the online survey. The survey was accessible for a two week period. The survey consisted of 21 questions which asked respondents to use a rating to determine their knowledge and experience with the RTI process. Of the 21 questions, three included a comment section for further explanation of answers. The final question was reserved for additional comments. Although the participants remained anonymous, demographic information for each of the respondents was obtained. The advantage of using a survey tool for this research project was that it allowed for information to be easily gathered and organized. A disadvantage for using a survey tool is that it does not allow for ongoing dialogue or clarification of answers or comments.Data Treatment ProceduresThis was a survey research. The research group was interested in discovering the extent of educators’ knowledge and experience with the RTI process. Data was retrieved through collecting the various surveys. The frequencies and response descriptions were presented and discussed. Each member received a printout of the answers for each question and comments. Survey Monkey allows for filtering of information based on different responses and categories. Our research group was able to determine the extent of RTI knowledge and experience within our study. We were able to filter data based on demographic information such as educator positions, years employed as educators, and grade levels served. Determining the mean, mode, Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 19 and median for these questions was not relevant for this study. An inductive reasoning was applied to the information gathered. The 3-item scale allowed for ease of organization in the summation of current RTI practices and determining RTI knowledge and experience. The comments allowed for identifying how RTI is used at various school sites. The literature reviews provided background information on practices and perceptions of RTI. Our research group formed our conclusions based on literature reviews and our survey research. Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 20Presentation of FindingsWhen viewing the results we compared the responses of elementary school teachers to middle school teachers and then the responses of general education teachers to special education teachers. When comparing the survey responses in this manner an interesting trend became apparent. Elementary teachers were not only more aware of RTI and the process but the use of RTI was also more prevalent in elementary schools than middle schools. When comparing special education teacher responses to general education teachers similar trends were present. Special education teachers were more familiar and more likely to use RTI than general education teachers.I am familiar with the Response to Intervention (RTI) process. What is your position? General Special Response Answer Options Response Count Education Education Percent Yes 25 8 76.7% 33 No 9 1 23.3% 10 answered question 43 skipped question 1I am familiar with the Response to Intervention (RTI) process. What population do you serve? Response Response Answer Options Elementary MIddle School Percent Count Yes 35 9 75.9% 44 No 6 8 24.1% 14 answered question 58 skipped question 2 Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 21Limitations of the DesignIt is always wise to briefly and humbly present the flaws in your own design, rather than leaving that task to others. For example, the study might have been limited by constraints of time and resources, or critical information was not accessible.The biggest limitation that affected our research was time. The time constraints include the length of our quarter in this class and giving ourselves enough time to put our project together. Also, some of our group member’s school sites and/or districts went on spring break during our study. These limitations gave us a small sample size of participants who were able to complete our survey. Another limitation from our survey was that much of the middle school population that answered the survey did not know much, if anything, about RTI. If we had more time after we received our survey results we could have been able to send it to more elementary level teachers in order to get a better understanding of how their schools use the RTI process.ConclusionThe purpose of our study was to determine how prevalence RTI was amongst schools, and how it was being used. RTI According to our research we concluded that RTI needed more specific training in order implement the process effectively. After reviewing 60 surveys, results showed that educators were more knowledgeable of the RTI process in elementary schools vs middle and high school. RTI was also practiced more in elementary schools. The survey’s demonstrated that the correlation between special education and general education teachers is that special education teachers were more familiar with the RTI process. One of the survey questions asked, “My school uses BOTH RTI and the discrepancy model to determine eligibility for special education?” 48.1% of elementary and middle school teachers said they were not sure, this Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 22 response suggested that most teachers did not know the inventions that were conducted in their schools. The survey that was conducted illustrated that RTI was implemented in the early stages of education, such as elementary schools, however in the middle schools the RTI process was not implemented and therefore teachers did not know what the RTI process was. Recommendations for Further ResearchSince the results of our survey showed that RTI is more prevalent at the elementary school level, it is recommended that further research be conducted in elementary schools that are effectively using the RTI process. This research could help to determine the level of involvement at each tier. Survey questions could specifically address the steps such as identification of at-risk students, progress monitoring, and specific interventions. Another suggestion for future research would be to conduct survey within an entire school district instead of sample schools in different districts. This could give a more complete picture of RTI within a school district. Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 23ReferencesAl-Natour, M., AlKhamra, H., & Al-Amadi, Y. (2008). Current Practices and Obstacles. International Journal Of Special Education, 23(2), 68-74Brown, E. (2011). Response to intervention: Are schools prepared to implement? ProQuest LLC.Hughes, C., & Dexter, D. (2011). Response to intervention: A research-based summary. Theory into practice, 50, 4-11. doi: 00405841.2011.534909Moors, A., Snyder, A., & Robbins, J. (n.d.). Integrating frequency-based mathematic instruction with a multi-level assessment system to enhance response to intervention frameworks. The Behavior Analyst Today, 11(4), 226-244.Stuart, S. , Rinaldi, C. , & Higgins-Averill, O. (2011). Agents of change: Voices of teachers on response to intervention. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 7(2), 53-732)Tran, L., Sanchez, T., Arellano, B., & Swanson, H. (2011). A Meta-Analysis of the RTI Literature for Children at Risk for Reading Disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(3), 283-295.White, R. B., Polly, D., & Audette, R. H. (2012). A Case Analysis of an Elementary School's Implementation of Response to Intervention. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 26(1), 73-90. Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 24Appendix A Demographic Information in PercentagesGender Position Held Years in Position Population Served Male General Education 0-2 years Elementary School Teacher 20% 71.4% 5% 68.3% Female Special Education 3-5 years Middle School Teacher80% 18.4% 15% 31.7% Administrator 6-10 years High School6.1% 10% 0% Psychologist 10+ years4.1% 70% Other11% Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 25Appendix B Survey Questions1. What is your gender? Male Female2. What is your position? General Education Teacher Special Education Teacher AdministratorPsychologist Other ______3. How many years have you been an educator? 0-2 3-5 6-10 10+4. What population do you serve? Elementary Middle School High School5. I am familiar with the Response to Intervention (RTI) process. Yes No Not Sure6. My school uses the RTI process to identify learning disabled students. Yes No Not Sure7. There is an RTI team at my school site. Yes No Not Sure8. I have been a part of an RTI team. Yes No Not Sure9. RTI team members identify students’ areas of weakness. Yes No Not Sure10. My school uses a tiered RTI approach. Yes No Not SureIf yes, please explain: ______11. Students are regularly monitored throughout RTI process. Yes No Not Sure12. Students benefit from the RTI process. Yes No Not Sure Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 2613. If students are unsuccessful, new interventions are made. Yes No Not Sure 14. Who provides intervention to students? ______15. Where does intervention take place? Mark all that applyIn the classroom Before School After school Other ______16. Struggling students are properly identified. Yes No Not Sure17. Struggling students are properly identified as students needing special education services. Yes No Not Sure18. My school uses RTI to determine special education eligibility. Yes No Not Sure19. My school uses the discrepancy model to determine special Yes No Not Sure education eligibility.20. My school uses BOTH RTI and the discrepancy model to determine special education eligibility. Yes No Not Sure21. Additional comments on RTI: ______Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 27 Response to Intervention: A Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions 28

Response To Intervention: A Survey Of Attitudes And Perceptions

Details

Download

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

Support