Skip to main content

Gift of Time Myth Busted RTI Response to Intervention

Submitted by an LD OnLine user on

I am so very, very exctied about RTI, Response to Invention. I have always hated that 15 point discrepance, FAIL FIRST before we will help mentality.

The new International Dyslexia newsletter just came out with an excellent article on Responsiveness to Intervention. I AM SO happy to see this come about. Currently I’m trying to be a pilot school in my state.

http://www.jimwrightonline.com/php/rti/rti_wire.php click on RTI_WIRE is one link to click on.

Whose read the article called Perspecitives from last week’s IDA newsletter?
Whose implementing RTI?

Hey, I’ve felt they system is so wrong and have not known what to do about it being “just a teacher” in the system. Now I see a possible solution.

Too many kids get though without true intervention.

Teachers even hold back on tutoring during a referral at times to ensure the kid has “FAILED ENOUGH”. Now, how stupid are we?

Kids don’t need more time even though teachers still believe this myth. Early intervention is the key. Help anyone who is failing, not just those with a certain group of characteristics. Do it now, not later. Do it with research based materials……..AHHHHHHHHHHHH…….This is the answer I am looking for………I am so hopful even though it will take YEARS because change is so darn hard.

Google RTI. It is not the next flavor of the month. I feel this is the future. I hope and pray that this is the future.

Research has told us what to do. Schools are doing it. Now we just need to duplicate the success.

RTI is a ton of work……..no quick fixes here…..but I’m ready to sign up even if I have to move to general ed since it is general ed change as well as special ed. Appantly general ed has to buy in or there is no hope.

Michelle AZ

Submitted by Janis on Sat, 03/04/2006 - 12:44 AM

Permalink

Hey, Michelle! You know you’ll get a big “Amen” to that from me! I do think the change will be slow, especially since the federal regs to the IDEA 2004 law are not even out yet! (And then the state regs will be written.)

I love the IDA Perspectives. They have excellent articles every time. I am supposed to go to my state IDA conference next Friday. Can’t be as much fun as we had in Denver, though!

Janis

Submitted by Sue on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 12:04 AM

Permalink

There are, actually, some good arguments for giving some students more time.

HOWEVER, they would apply to students not in our SCHOOLS, where the rest of the class keeps moving and leaves the folks who need more time in the wreckage on the side of the road. If you’re homeschooling, though, sometimes a student is ‘way more ready to learn to read in, say, another six months. (THey usually don’t have those phonemic awareness clues that it’s a deeper problem, I would imagine, though I don’t know of any research to bear that out.)

I only bring it up because someone *might* give some of those good arguments and we need to be ready with the answers.

Submitted by always_wondering on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 12:26 PM

Permalink

Unfortunately, when a child is given more time, they are usually subjected to sitting in the same instruction as the more advanced students. This developmental time should be spent working on bolstering skills that are emerging instead of sitting by and floundering.

My friend’s school uses the individual reading instruction approach. The children who are struggling are pulled out for individual help. These children are not expected to have learning disabilities because there were no other signs, just “late bloomers” on the reading curve. It seems to work well for their school and my friend’s child.

When my child was in elementary school, I forced them to pull him out because he couldn’t read. He was great at looking at the picture and telling you what was going on (which usually closely matched the sentnece. The mistakes he made were then chalked up to some miscueing - not the fact that he just guessed.) He was put in a group of lower level readers where they did plays to act out books because these children just “didn’t like to read”. There was no indivudal practice with reading, nor did the school teach any phonics past the first letter sound.

These are two schools in the same district. Amazing how the approaches are so different and produce much different results.

Back to Top