Efficacy of a Tier‐2 mathematics intervention and teachers' and pupils' opinions on its implementation: A pilot study

This study examined some of the factors that influence African-American and Caucasian eighth graders' performance on standardized mathematics tests. Specifically, I examined the effects of high and low achievers' beliefs and attitudes toward mathematics and perceptions of self, mathematics, teacher, school, and parents on their performance levels. I employed a two-phase design with qualitative and quantitative approaches. The qualitative phase focused on one grand-tour question: Considering the times you took standardized mathematics tests, would you please describe some of the things that affected your performance on those tests? Individual students and focus groups were the units of analysis. I interviewed four focus groups from a cross-section of three Southeastern U.S. public schools to determine their views on factors that affected their performance on standardized mathematics tests. The data were analyzed and coded using QUALPRO. The objective of the quantitative portion was to test whether students' scores on standardized mathematics tests were influenced by the self-reported factors generated from the qualitative phase as follows: (1) students' beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, and time invested in mathematics homework; (2) students' perceptions of selected characteristics of schools; (3) students' perceptions of teachers' attitudes, relationships with them, and teaching practices; and (4) students' perceptions of parents' involvement. Data for the quantitative analysis were from eighth graders' responses to questionnaires and cognitive tests of the 1988 National Education Longitudinal Study (NELS:88). Factor analysis, Pearson correlation, and multiple regression analyses were performed on this data. There was no dominant factor explaining effects on performance, but a combination of factors was found. High achievers indicated mathematics was important to their future, getting good grades was important, they had self-confidence in their ability to do mathematics, and they enjoyed doing mathematics. Low achievers felt that lack of concern and failure to work harder or to ask for help were the major factors that affected their performance. Both groups agreed that they had little to no help from their parents but their teachers were helpful. The results also implied that different factors affected the performance of high and low achievers for African-American and Caucasian students.

While implementation efforts using a Response to Intervention (RtI) model to increase reading instruction are becoming widely used, more administrators and teachers are looking to learn effective RtI practices to support learning in mathematics. This article explores some of the key elements of RtI practices in mathematics, including screening for identification of struggling learners and progress monitoring for gauging instructional effectiveness. In addition, several of the pressing needs regarding the importance of mathematics proficiency for all students are discussed. We describe some of the similarities and differences between RtI processes in reading and mathematics. The article addresses the use of diagnostic data and details the importance of “core” instructional practices that reflect the standards included in the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics standards and Common Core Mathematics standards, among others. The article concludes with a discussion of some evidence‐based interventions in mathematics, and we provide an implementation checklist to assist educators as they begin to implement RtI in mathematics. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Response to intervention (RTI) has received considerable attention as a mechanism for preventing academic and behavioral difficulties as well as identifying and teaching students with learning or behavioral difficulties. Unfortunately, despite extensive literature and discourse highlighting the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the use of RTI for special education verification (e.g., Gresham, 2002; Hale, Naglieri, Kaufman, & Kavale, 2004; Speece, Case, & Molloy, 2003), research and scholarship pertaining to the delivery of services required to appropriately implement RTI is limited. The purpose of this special issue is to provide a framework for critically evaluating the strengths and shortcomings of existing empirical contributions related to service delivery for RTI. Rationale The rationale for creating this special series was based on the need for a critical appraisal of extant knowledge. Although models for implementing interventions and monitoring student performance have been applied within educational settings (e.g., Vaughn, 2003; Walker & Shinn, 2002), more research on core components of service delivery systems (e.g., assessment and data-based decision making, intervention provision) is needed. Despite growing empirical support for academic and behavior screening and progress monitoring, additional investigations are warranted to determine the psychometric integrity and treatment utility of various RTI-appropriate assessment and data-based decision-making approaches. Research is also needed to evaluate the most effective selection, sequencing, intensity, and duration for individualized intervention. Although a handful of protocols have been developed to promote systemic change and implementation integrity, future studies are also required to determine the utility of specific practices applied within schools. Primary Objectives and Potential Effects This special issue has been designed to address some of the limitations in previous discussions by introducing researchers and practitioners to core service delivery components needed to implement RTI. The primary objectives for this issue are (a) to provide an analysis of core components and considerations related to service delivery systems required for RTI implementation, (b) to critically review the current state of the empirical research base related to the individual components, and (c) to identify necessary directions for future research to further our understanding of service delivery for RTI. To achieve the primary objectives, the special issue includes six full-length articles and two commentaries. In the first article, Glover and DiPerna (2007) provide a conceptual framework outlining five core service delivery components or considerations within RTI service delivery: (a) multitier implementation, (b) student assessment and decision making, (c) evidence-based intervention provision, (d) maintenance of procedural integrity, and (e) development and sustainability of systems level capacity. They provide an overview of the current evidence base and future research needs within each of these components. The next two articles focus on research pertaining to student interventions. Wanzek and Vaughn (2007) provide a synthesis of research on early reading interventions for students with reading difficulties or disabilities. Daly, Martens, Barnett, Witt, and Olson (2007) then focus on the individualization of RTI interventions based on student needs. The pair of articles that follow are concerned with RTI assessment and decision making. Jenkins, Hudson, and Johnson (2007) systematically critique the classification accuracy of various screening approaches for early reading difficulties. Shinn (2007) focuses on the empirical basis for using curriculum-based measurement to identify students' instructional need, response to intervention, and status with regard to specific learning disabilities. …

Wiedemann-Steiner syndrome (WSS) is a rare genetic disorder caused by heterozygous variants in KMT2A. To date, the cognitive profile associated with WSS remains largely unknown, although emergent case series implicate increased risk of non-verbal reasoning and visual processing deficits. This study examines the academic and learning concerns associated with WSS based on a parent-report screening measure. A total of 25 parents of children/adults with a molecularly-confirmed diagnosis of WSS (mean age=12.85years, SD=7.82) completed the Colorado Learning Difficulties Questionnaire (CLDQ), a parent-screening measure of learning and academic difficulties. Parent ratings were compared to those from a normative community sample to determine focal areas in Math, Reading and Spatial skills that may be weaker within this clinical population. On average, parent ratings on the Math (mean Z=-3.08, SD=0.87) and Spatial scales (mean Z=-2.52, SD=0.85) were significantly more elevated than that of Reading (mean Z=-1.31, SD=1.46) (Wilcoxon sign rank test Z<-3.83, P<0.001), reflecting relatively more challenges observed in these areas. Distribution of parent ratings in Math items largely reflect a positively skewed distribution with most endorsing over three standard deviations below a community sample. In contrast, distributions of parent ratings in Reading and Spatial domains were more symmetric but flat. Ratings for Reading items yielded much larger variance than the other two domains, reflecting a wider range of performance variability. Parent ratings on the CLDQ suggest more difficulties with Math and Spatial skills among those with WSS within group and relative to a community sample. Study results are consistent with recent case reports on the neuropsychological profile associated with WSS and with Kabuki syndrome, which is caused by variants in the related gene KMT2D. Findings lend support for overlapping cognitive patterns across syndromes, implicating potential common disease pathogenesis.

When the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) was reauthorized in 2004, Response to Intervention (RTI) was introduced as a new option to diagnose students as having a Specific Learning Disability (SLD), in addition to the traditional discrepancy model. States were now permitted to choose whether to use the discrepancy model or RTI for diagnosis of a SLD. If they chose the latter, they were permitted to design their own RTI process and school districts, in turn, were permitted to customize their State's RTI process to fit their particular district's needs. Typically, RTI was designed as a three-tiered triangle that included instructional strategies and assessment strategies at each tier, increasing supports as the triangle is ascended. Once the top third tier is reached, the student would be referred for an evaluation for specialized instruction and related services for a suspected learning disability. This RTI approach to diagnose and assist students with SLD became so popular, districts began to modify and apply this diagnostic process to determine whether students with other learning difficulties might benefit from a similar targeted review of instruction. These modified RTI processes are referenced herein as "RTI." The wide variations in the various states' approaches to the traditional RTI, the districts' customized RTI processes, and this newly modified "RTI" approach resulted in inconsistencies in instructional strategies and assessment strategies identified within the three-tiered triangle and the tier-to-tier transition points between the different tier levels. This quantitative study compared strategies commonly identified within each tier by several leading "RTI" authorities and arranged them, by level, in a Summary Triangle (ST). Kindergarten through fifth-grade teachers were asked in a nationally distributed digital survey to place each strategy within the "RTI" triangle tiers, and their responses were matched to the ST tiers. Most teachers' instructional strategies choices aligned with the ST but not the assessment strategies choices. To assure students with disabilities are timely identified, evaluated, and served, recommendations are made for teacher pre-service and in-service professional development to assure instruction and assessment strategy alignment. Keywords: Response to Intervention, RTI, Assessment Strategies, Instructional Strategies.

Responsiveness to Intervention

Response to Intervention (RTI) is a framework that may lead to better teaching and learning through its integration of instruction, intervention, and assessment. An increasing number of states are moving forward with RTI initiatives across grades K-12. The research base for RTI, however, is currently limited to elementary settings. Although this research can inform implementation in the middle grades, the differences in school structure and operations at these levels mean RTI at the middle level will probably look different than it does at the elementary level. This article provides an overview of RTI, focusing, particularly, on how RTI is consistent with many of the characteristics of successful middle schools (National Middle School Association, 2010), and describes in detail the experience and outcomes of RTI implementation in one middle school where the second author serves as principal. The article concludes with a discussion of lessons learned and implications for other middle schools considering RTI implementation. RTI and the middle school concept RTI is most commonly depicted as a three-tiered model of service delivery (see Figure 1), in which Tier 1 represents the general instructional program, Tier 2 represents a level of intervention for students identified as at risk for poor learning outcomes, and Tier 3 typically represents special education. This model is based on a preventive sciences approach and illustrates RTI's focus on meeting the needs of all students through a school-wide process that integrates instruction, intervention, and assessment. The alignment of these processes promotes a stronger, more cohesive program of instruction that, ultimately, can result in higher student achievement (Mellard & Johnson, 2008). RTI is not a one-dimensional approach to improving student outcomes. Rather, it provides an umbrella structure under which numerous evidence-based practices can be employed to improve student learning. RTI is a valuable model because of its potential for building the capacity of schools to meet the learning needs of an increasingly diverse student population. As described in the literature (see e.g., Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; Johnson, Mellard, Fuchs & McKnight, 2006), RTI contains the following critical features: * High-quality, evidence-based classroom instruction * Universal screening of academics and behavior * Progress monitoring of student performance * Implementation of research-based interventions at all tiers * Fidelity checks on implementation To date, scant research on RTI models at the middle school level exists. The need for successful models of RTI implementation at this level is great, because the middle grades represent a crucial point in a student's academic career, laying the foundation for successful completion of high school (Morris, Ehren, & Lenz, 1991). Middle grades students are confronted with a demanding curriculum no longer focused on the acquisition of basic skills; rather, they must rely on those basic skills for acquiring content knowledge (Deshler, Hock, & Catts, 2006; Deshler & Schumaker, 2006; Swanson, 2001). Intervention models such as RTI can lead to improved outcomes for all students through the provision of a multifaceted support system for students who struggle with the demands of the curriculum. RTI can be especially effective at the middle level because the RTI framework is consistent with many of the characteristics of successful schools for young adolescents (National Middle School Association, 2010). In particular, RTI promotes and supports * Diverse teaching strategies. * Safe environments. * Use of assessment. * Multifaceted support systems. * Collaborative leadership. * Shared vision. RTI promotes diverse teaching strategies Because RTI stems from the preventive sciences, in which effective instruction and early intervention are seen as essential to reducing the number of students who struggle in or leave school, it focuses on developing a strong Tier 1 general education program. …

The Response to Intervention (RTI) model is an early detection and intervention system at three levels (classroom intervention by the teacher, by specialists in small groups and individual) to identify signs of Learning Disorder (LD). LD is a neurodevelopmental disorder that is characterized by persistent difficulties in reading, writing and/or math skills. In the United States the model is used and presents statistically significant results, but in Brazil there is little research and investment about it. It is common to use it to identify signs of LD, but there are no studies with consistent evidence on improvement results outside the United States. The objective is to systematically review the literature on the RTI model for the identification and intervention of signs and symptoms of LD; identify the study site, method used, assessment and intervention instruments, and results; identify methodological gaps and make suggestions for future studies; provide guidelines for possible applications in Brazil. Hypotheses: RTI indicates signs of disorders other than LD; there are variations in the assessment and intervention instruments; there is a shortage of Brazilian studies. For this, articles published in PubMed, Scielo and Google Scholar, from 2005 to 2022, will be selected, with the descriptors “RTI” or “Resposta à Intervenção", “E”, “Transtorno específico de Aprendizagem” and in English “Response to Intervention" and "AND", "Specific learning disorder". Duplicates will be removed. The review will be carried out by a Psychology evaluator and a Pedagogy evaluator. Screening will be carried out through the reading of abstracts, controlled clinical studies, randomized or not, with control groups; in Elementary Education of public schools; with N≥30. A new screening will be done based on compliance with ethical assumptions. There will be a critical analysis of the methods, results, suggestions for future studies and applications in Brazil.

No AccessPerspectives on Augmentative and Alternative CommunicationCoordinator’s Column1 Dec 2009From the Coordinator Amy Goldman Amy Goldman Google Scholar More articles by this author https://doi.org/10.1044/aac18.4.111 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationTrack Citations ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In "From the Coordinator." Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18(4), p. 111 Additional Resources FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 18Issue 4December 2009Pages: 111-111 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in issue: Dec 1, 2009 Metrics Topicsasha-topicsleader-topicsasha-article-typesasha-sigsCopyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2009 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationPDF DownloadLoading ...

The purpose of this study is to determine students' academic difficulties in learning a statistics and probability course. The study sample consisted of 24 instructors (male and female) in the Humanities track in the Department of Basic Sciences in the Common First Year (CFY) at King Saud University (KSU).The results showed that students in the Humanities track faced several academic difficulties in learning statistics and probability and these difficulties were concentrated in the lessons of permutation, combination, probability and random variables. The results indicated that all the difficulties that instructors surveyed occurred at a high or very high level and that no single difficulty was located at the medium or lower levels. The results indicated that, from the point of view of the instructors, there were no statistically significant differences in the level of students' academic difficulties in learning statistics and probability related to the type of instructor (male or female), the instructor's experience in the CFY (less than five years, over or equal to five years), and specialization (statistics, mathematics). Keywords : Students' Difficulties, Mathematics' Difficulties, Statistics and Probability. DOI : 10.7176/JEP/10-9-05 Publication date :March 31 st 2019

Response to intervention (RTI) is a framework in which interventions are implemented mostly in general education classes to resolve academic difficulties and help to mitigate contextual variables (i.e., lack of instruction, socio economic status, cultural differences, etc.) as an explanation for academic failure. The implementation of evidence-based interventions is very important to the RTI framework. There is limited research regarding RTI and evidence-based interventions in mathematics and young students. For math interventions to be successful in an RTI framework, comprehensive math interventions have to incorporate computation fluency, problem solving, and the use of visual representational simultaneously. Moreover, early instruction in math skills sets the foundation for developing higher order math skills. Therefore, this manuscript reviews the literature regarding math interventions that would apply to early childhood students and are conducive to the RTI model.

Response to Intervention (RtI) is a multitiered system of support, designed to improve student learning outcomes and early identification of struggling students. Much attention has been paid to RtI for literacy at the elementary level, but less on RtI for mathematics at the secondary level. The current case study examines one high school's implementation of an RtI program in mathematics. The main results included the inconsistent rate of growth across students in the RtI mathematics classes and the lack of a statistically significant relationship between tier status and rate of improvement; the inconsistent implementation of a general theorized RtI for mathematics model; and the perceived greatest benefit by students of the Tier 2 math class appeared to be the two certified mathematics teachers.

Difficulties in learning mathematics can be experienced by students with any level of ability from any circle or group. With the students' learning difficulties in mathematics, the question arises why this can happen and as educators, what is the teacher's perception of learning difficulties in mathematics. The purpose of this study was to describe Teacher's Perception of Students' Mathematics Learning Difficulties. This research used a descriptive qualitative approach with non-test data collection techniques through questionnaires and interviews. The results showed that: (i) the mathematics teacher's perception of the dominant causes of learning difficulties revealed psychological causes, including low interest or motivation and understanding of basic concepts as the cause of students' mathematics learning difficulties; (ii) the mathematics teacher's perception of the symptoms that are indicators of learning difficulties in mathematics, the most widely disclosed is the low ability of students to complete the tasks given by the teacher; (iii) the teacher's perception of the method used to investigate the existence of difficulties in learning mathematics, the most commonly done is through observation, interviews and documentation by looking at the results of tests or assignments of each student; (iv) the teacher's perception of examples of difficulties experienced by students in learning mathematics, which is widely revealed in the competency standard for understanding the properties of arithmetic operations and their use in problem solving being taught; and (v) teachers' perceptions of the efforts made to overcome students' mathematics learning difficulties vary according to their respective experiences. There are only a few teachers who do group guidance and individual guidance.

This study aims to find out how teachers diagnose to determine students’ learning difficulties, especially in Mathematics in Elementary Schools. There are four aspects discussed in this study, including the teachers’ perception of students’ learning difficulties, teachers’ practice in connection with diagnosing students’ learning difficulties, teachers’ actions in response to the results of the diagnosis, parties involved regarding students’ learning difficulties. The research method used was descriptive qualitative with 13 teachers as the subject selected by purposive sampling. The data were obtained through interviews with classroom teachers, both from private and public schools, especially in North Borneo. The findings in this study show that the teachers use various ways to diagnose and overcome students’ learning difficulties. There are 3 ways that teachers do to diagnose learning difficulties in Mathematics, including tests, observations and interviews. While the ways to overcome them are to do remedial, provide tutoring individually, provide additional hours for students who have learning difficulties in Mathematics and involve students in learning. The method used has been effective, proofed by changes in students’ understanding and improvement in students’ learning outcomes. This study offers elementary school teachers ways that can be carried out to diagnose and overcome students’ learning difficulties in Mathematics.

Promising findings from controlled research studies often fail to be transferred to and implemented in schools successfully. This problem is particularly apparent when considering implementation of evidence‐based practices related to complex systems such as response to intervention (RTI) and other multitiered intervention frameworks in mathematics. This article addresses the challenges schools face when implementing intensive intervention in mathematics with a data‐based individualization (DBI) framework. Preliminary findings from the first year of a formative evaluation study that addressed school‐based implementation of DBI include (a) factors that impacted readiness for DBI, (b) the application of DBI at school sites, and (c) the importance of ongoing coaching and consultation. We then discuss practical implications for schools and districts when planning for intensive intervention in mathematics.