school administrators and teachers, which requires extensive professional development (Yell & Walker, 2010). Adequate resources need to be made available. Parents should be involved in the decision-making processes in RtI (see also Chapter Twenty-three of this review). Exemplar RtI models should be developed before RtI is fully implemented. It takes time and can be costly to implement; Batsche (2006), for example, pointed out that evidence from Iowa and Minnesota suggested that it takes 4-6 years (or more) to complete full implementation, including policy and regulatory change, staff development, and development of school/district-based procedures. Consideration must be given to in their to respond to teachers’ variability ‘capacity differences in response to (Gerber, 2005, p.215). students’ instruction’ 7.5 Research into RtI The research staus of RtI is well summarised by Madalaine & Wheldall (2009), who pointed out that is an enormous amount of support for RtI in the literature ‘there but, while it makes very good conceptual sense, there is relatively little scientific evidence about its effectiveness as yet in comparison to other models of identification and In a similar & Sanchez (2011) claimed that remediation’(p.9). vein, O’Connor know little about whether RtI reduces the severity of LD or whether it identifies ‘we students with LD more reliably than earlier (p. 123). They concluded that practices’ are unconvinced that responsiveness to carefully designed and implemented ‘We intervention is the best way to determine elibility for disability. As Kavale & Spaulding (2008) put it, RtI remains an experimental process and more research is needed. One of the problems in determining its worth is that the details for its implementation such as criteria for risk, what constitutes growth in interventions, – indicators for students no longer at risk, and the way that interventions are determined vary considerably from place to place and researcher to researcher & – (O’Connor Sanchez, 2011). However, what research has been reported is encouraging. For example, VanDerHeyden et al. (2007) found that students responded positively to RtI and that African-American students responded more quickly than other ethnic groups. They also reported a significant reduction in the rate of placement in LD programmes. Similarly positive findings have been reported by Marston (2001), who attributed RtI
school administrators and teachers, which requires extensive professional development (Yell & Walker, 2010). Adequate resources need to be made available. Parents should be involved in the decision-making processes in RtI (see also Chapter Twenty-three of this review). Exemplar RtI models should be developed before RtI is fully implemented. It takes time and can be costly to implement; Batsche (2006), for example, pointed out that evidence from Iowa and Minnesota suggested that it takes 4-6 years (or more) to complete full implementation, including policy and regulatory change, staff development, and development of school/district-based procedures. Consideration must be given to teachers’ variability in their ‘capacity to respond to differences in students’ response to instruction’ (Gerber, 2005, p.215). 7.5 Research into RtI The research staus of RtI is well summarised by Madalaine & Wheldall (2009), who pointed out that ‘there is an enormous amount of support for RtI in the literature but, while it makes very good conceptual sense, there is relatively little scientific evidence about its effectiveness as yet in comparison to other models of identification and remediation’(p.9). In a similar vein, O’Connor & Sanchez (2011) claimed that ‘we know little about whether RtI reduces the severity of LD or whether it identifies students with LD more reliably than earlier practices’ (p. 123). They concluded that ‘We are unconvinced that responsiveness to carefully designed and implemented intervention is the best way to determine elibility for disability. As Kavale & Spaulding (2008) put it, RtI remains an experimental process and more research is needed. One of the problems in determining its worth is that the details for its implementation – such as criteria for risk, what constitutes growth in interventions, indicators for students no longer at risk, and the way that interventions are determined – vary considerably from place to place and researcher to researcher (O’Connor & Sanchez, 2011). However, what research has been reported is encouraging. For example, VanDerHeyden et al. (2007) found that students responded positively to RtI and that African-American students responded more quickly than other ethnic groups. They also reported a significant reduction in the rate of placement in LD programmes. Similarly positive findings have been reported by Marston (2001), who attributed RtI