Zachary Hirschman

How might the RtI model improve the quality of instruction of all students in an inclusive
setting?

Response to Intervention, or RtI, is a tiered system in which student academic
needs are continuously assessed and addressed by a qualified team. The objective of
the system is to improve the way public education deals with academically struggling
students. Under the previous system, students who needed further help would have to
demonstrate significant struggles over a long period of time. RtI represents a more
proactive solution in which underachieving students are identified quickly through
continuous assessment. Though RtI is not a perfect system, it represents an
improvement in education philosophy in that it emphasizes proactivity over reactivity.
Inclusive classroom practices represent a commitment to recognizing the
uniqueness of each student and applying different strategies to best teach all students
in the class. The philosophy is grounded morally in the belief that each student
deserves to be taught in accordance with the strategy that will help them learn best.
Research into whether inclusive practices improve achievement is inconclusive.
However, the benefits of the moral psychology modeled by inclusive practices cannot
be measured.
At first glance, the inclusive classroom and RtI appear to be addressing different
issues. RtI addresses achievement, whereas the inclusive classroom is geared towards
moral responsibility. Certainly, interventions can and possibly should be designed
inclusively. However, there are some significant roadblocks to uniting the two practices.
For example, the fidelity required by RtI may conflict with accommodations or
modifications made during an intervention. RtI places a strong emphasis on using
evidence-based interventions; if evidence is not collected and compiled accurately, the
whole system suffers. This ideological difference runs deeply; RtIs commitment to
evidence and measuring achievement is almost perfectly opposed to inclusions
commitment to moral education. Whereas RtI seeks to improve knowledge of content,
inclusion seeks to improve access to content.
There is likely an appropriate middle ground for teachers to subscribe to both
practices. The prudent philosophy is to adopt the proactive spirit of RtI. In teaching any
student, it is important to assess both their knowledge of and access to the content. Any
potential issues should be addressed quickly and open-mindedly. After examining and
accounting for any barriers to access, the teacher can address the issue of the students
comprehension. In an inclusive setting, it is preferable that teachers spend more
resources on removing their students barriers to access. By separating students into
tiers based on achievement, RtI can help the inclusive teacher in two ways. First, it
helps identify students having trouble accessing the material. Second, it allows for a
more streamlined differentiation of instruction amongst the different tiers. RtI and
inclusion are both important systems for teachers to understand, but integrating them
together successfully is a difficult task due to their non-mutual objectives.
Sources:

On RTI:
Hughes, Charles A., and Douglas D. Dexter. "Response To Intervention: A
Research-Based Summary." Theory Into Practice 50.1 (2011): 4-11
Montana Office of Public Instruction. http://opi.mt.gov/Programs/SchoolPrograms/RTI/

On Research into the Effectiveness of Inclusive Practices:
Pashler, H.; McDaniel, M.; Rohrer, D.; Bjork, R. (2008). "Learning styles:
Concepts and evidence". Psychological Science in the Public Interest 9: 105119