{"title":"解决平等而不关注种族和种族主义的困境","authors":"Michael O'neill","doi":"10.1080/00131725.2022.1997524","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper provides an analysis of one state’s Response to Intervention (RTI) model, bringing to light two predicaments that plague efforts to address disproportionality and support learning: 1) That RTI may continue to perpetuate disproportionality, both in the model’s tiers of support as well as in the placement of students in special education, and 2) That RTI relies on quality instruction but provides little leverage to intervene on that instruction.","PeriodicalId":46482,"journal":{"name":"EDUCATIONAL FORUM","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Predicaments of Addressing Equity without Attending to Race and Racism\",\"authors\":\"Michael O'neill\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00131725.2022.1997524\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This paper provides an analysis of one state’s Response to Intervention (RTI) model, bringing to light two predicaments that plague efforts to address disproportionality and support learning: 1) That RTI may continue to perpetuate disproportionality, both in the model’s tiers of support as well as in the placement of students in special education, and 2) That RTI relies on quality instruction but provides little leverage to intervene on that instruction.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EDUCATIONAL FORUM\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EDUCATIONAL FORUM\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2022.1997524\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EDUCATIONAL FORUM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2022.1997524","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Predicaments of Addressing Equity without Attending to Race and Racism
Abstract This paper provides an analysis of one state’s Response to Intervention (RTI) model, bringing to light two predicaments that plague efforts to address disproportionality and support learning: 1) That RTI may continue to perpetuate disproportionality, both in the model’s tiers of support as well as in the placement of students in special education, and 2) That RTI relies on quality instruction but provides little leverage to intervene on that instruction.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
