2003Learning Disabilities Research and PracticeRequires access

Responsiveness–to–Intervention: Definitions, Evidence, and Implications for the Learning Disabilities Construct

Douglas Fuchs, Devery R. Mock, Paul L. Morgan, Caresa L. Young

Open publisher page 873 citations

Abstract

Longstanding concern about how learning disabilities (LD) are defined and identified, coupled with recent efforts in Washington, DC to eliminate IQ–achievement discrepancy as an LD marker, have led to serious public discussion about alternative identification methods. The most popular of the alternatives is responsiveness–to–intervention (RTI), of which there are two basic versions: the “problem–solving” model and the “standard–protocol” approach. The authors describe both types, review empirical evidence bearing on their effectiveness and feasibility, and conclude that more needs to be understood before RTI may be viewed as a valid means of identifying students with LD.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Longstanding concern about how learning disabilities (LD) are defined and identified, coupled with recent efforts in Washington, DC to eliminate IQ–achievement discrepancy as an LD marker, have led to serious public discussion about alternative identification methods. The most popular of the alternatives is responsiveness–to–intervention (RTI), of which there are two basic versions: the “problem–solving” model and the “standard–protocol” approach. The authors describe both types, review empirical evidence bearing on their effectiveness and feasibility, and conclude that more needs to be understood before RTI may be viewed as a valid means of identifying students with LD.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 873 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Longstanding concern about how learning disabilities (LD) are defined and identified, coupled with recent efforts in Washington, DC to eliminate IQ–achievement discrepancy as an LD marker, have led to serious public discussion about alternative identification methods. The most popular of the alternatives is responsiveness–to–intervention (RTI), of which there are two basic versions: the “problem–solving” model and the “standard–protocol” approach. The authors describe both types, review empirical evidence bearing on their effectiveness and feasibility, and conclude that more needs to be understood before RTI may be viewed as a valid means of identifying students with LD.

Key concepts: Learning disability, Psychology, Intervention (counseling), Construct (python library), Response to intervention, Academic achievement, Identification (biology), Developmental psychology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Responsiveness–to–Intervention: Definitions, Evidence, and Implications for the Learning Disabilities Construct — Research Paper | ScholarLens