RTI对特殊学习障碍学生及时识别的影响。

IF 0.5 Q4 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
T. Hudson, R. G. McKenzie
{"title":"RTI对特殊学习障碍学生及时识别的影响。","authors":"T. Hudson, R. G. McKenzie","doi":"10.18666/LDMJ-2016-V21-I2-7722","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Response to Intervention (RTI) has become the gateway to identification for many students with specific learning disabilities. Those include students in the 17 states that require RTI as the source of eligibility data as well as many students in the 33 states that allow districts to choose RTI among other options (e.g., discrepancy). There is concern that the use of RTI may infringe on due-process protections and child-find responsibilities. Specifically, the number of days students must remain in RTI may delay their referral for comprehensive evaluation and, hence, potential eligibility for special education. In the present study, the authors surveyed District Directors of Special Education in selected states to determine whether guidelines or policies were present to govern referrals for a comprehensive evaluation and how long a student may remain in RTI tiers before referral or eligibility determination. The extent to which districts permit individual schools to enact their own policies was also investigated. Results indicate that (a) RTI is often used to identify specific learning disabilities without clear guidelines, (b) many aspects of RTI are implemented without being communicated within state and district administrative levels, and (c) RTI is the required specific learning disability assessment determinant in a significant percentage of districts in states that allow that choice. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.","PeriodicalId":42442,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"31 1","pages":"46-58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of RTI on Timely Identification of Students with Specific Learning Disabilities.\",\"authors\":\"T. Hudson, R. G. McKenzie\",\"doi\":\"10.18666/LDMJ-2016-V21-I2-7722\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Response to Intervention (RTI) has become the gateway to identification for many students with specific learning disabilities. Those include students in the 17 states that require RTI as the source of eligibility data as well as many students in the 33 states that allow districts to choose RTI among other options (e.g., discrepancy). There is concern that the use of RTI may infringe on due-process protections and child-find responsibilities. Specifically, the number of days students must remain in RTI may delay their referral for comprehensive evaluation and, hence, potential eligibility for special education. In the present study, the authors surveyed District Directors of Special Education in selected states to determine whether guidelines or policies were present to govern referrals for a comprehensive evaluation and how long a student may remain in RTI tiers before referral or eligibility determination. The extent to which districts permit individual schools to enact their own policies was also investigated. Results indicate that (a) RTI is often used to identify specific learning disabilities without clear guidelines, (b) many aspects of RTI are implemented without being communicated within state and district administrative levels, and (c) RTI is the required specific learning disability assessment determinant in a significant percentage of districts in states that allow that choice. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"46-58\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2016-V21-I2-7722\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2016-V21-I2-7722","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

反应干预(RTI)已成为许多特殊学习障碍学生识别的门户。其中包括要求RTI作为资格数据来源的17个州的学生,以及允许地区在其他选项(例如差异)中选择RTI的33个州的许多学生。有人担心,RTI的使用可能会侵犯正当程序保护和儿童寻找责任。具体来说,学生必须留在RTI的天数可能会延迟他们的转诊进行全面评估,因此,潜在的特殊教育资格。在本研究中,作者调查了选定州的特殊教育地区主任,以确定是否存在指导方针或政策来管理转介进行全面评估,以及在转介或资格确定之前,学生可以在RTI级别停留多久。地区允许个别学校制定自己的政策的程度也进行了调查。结果表明:(a) RTI经常被用于识别没有明确指导方针的特殊学习障碍,(b) RTI的许多方面在实施时没有在州和地区行政层面进行沟通,(c)在允许这种选择的州的很大一部分地区,RTI是必要的特殊学习障碍评估决定因素。讨论了对未来研究和实践的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Impact of RTI on Timely Identification of Students with Specific Learning Disabilities.
Response to Intervention (RTI) has become the gateway to identification for many students with specific learning disabilities. Those include students in the 17 states that require RTI as the source of eligibility data as well as many students in the 33 states that allow districts to choose RTI among other options (e.g., discrepancy). There is concern that the use of RTI may infringe on due-process protections and child-find responsibilities. Specifically, the number of days students must remain in RTI may delay their referral for comprehensive evaluation and, hence, potential eligibility for special education. In the present study, the authors surveyed District Directors of Special Education in selected states to determine whether guidelines or policies were present to govern referrals for a comprehensive evaluation and how long a student may remain in RTI tiers before referral or eligibility determination. The extent to which districts permit individual schools to enact their own policies was also investigated. Results indicate that (a) RTI is often used to identify specific learning disabilities without clear guidelines, (b) many aspects of RTI are implemented without being communicated within state and district administrative levels, and (c) RTI is the required specific learning disability assessment determinant in a significant percentage of districts in states that allow that choice. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
6.20%
发文量
4
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信