Running Head: USE OF COLLABORATION AND RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

Use of Collaboration and Response to Intervention

Name
Institution

USE OF COLLABORATION AND RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

How Does The Use Of Collaboration And Tier 1 Through 3 Known As Intervention Used By
Teachers, An Effective Way To Improve The Learning Experience For Children With
Disabilities Within The Classroom?
Cahill, S. M., McGuire, B., Krumdick, N. D., & Lee, M. M. (2014). National Survey of
Occupational Therapy Practitioners involvement in Response to Intervention. American
Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68(6), e234-40. doi:10.5014/ajot.2014.010116
Cahill and her counterparts aimed to look into the role of occupational therapists in
Response to Intervention in schools by assessing their preparedness and involvement level. The
authors used email to conduct a survey on 1000 practitioners that were randomly selected from
the American Occupational Therapy Associations Early Intervention and School Systems
Special Interest Section. The authors established from 77.6 percent of the respondents that their
school districts implemented Response to Intervention. Additionally, 66.3 percent of the
participants stated that inadequate resources inhibited their involvement in Response to
Intervention and 67 percent cited the need for guidelines, which stipulate what the district
expects from practitioners would increase participation. Lastly, the majority of respondents
called for continuing learning and education citing the need for a workload model. The authors
concluded the importance of occupational therapists working together with teachers in order to
support students in the Response to Intervention framework.
Hill, D. R., King, S. A., Lemons, C. J., & Partanen, J. N. (2012). Fidelity of implementation and
instructional alignment in Response to Intervention research. Learning Disabilities
Research & Practice, 27(3), 116-124.

USE OF COLLABORATION AND RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

The authors of this article conducted a review that strived to look into the effectiveness of
Tier 2 intervention in elementary reading with the RTI framework in the implementation fidelity
and instruction alignment between tiers. The authors review drew conclusions from 22 empirical
studies. The results of the reviewed literature established the monitoring of implementation
fidelity at Tier 2 whereas although instruction alignment between intervention tiers is apparent, it
is never indicated explicitly. The authors identified research gaps in the empirical studies such as
failure of reporting on intervention fidelity in Tier 1, which can limit the assumptions of the
efficiency of Tier 2 intervention. The limitations of the study included not broadening their
search to encompass other grades or subject areas and linking students outcomes to measures of
alignment or fidelity. The authors concluded that inadequate information on Tier 1 teaching
indicates that the assessment of Tier 2 efficiency is done outside the RTI framework.
Jeremy, S. & Felicia. C. (2013). Special education policy, Response to Intervention, and the
socialization of youth. Theory into Practice, 52(3), 180-189.
Jeremy and Felicia discussed the policy of special education pertaining to Response to
Intervention. The findings of their study target learners within the k-12 education with learning
disabilities facing special education placement. The authors posit that RTI is a framework, which
helps attain the objectives of both the No Child Left Behind and Individual with Disabilities
Education Improvement Act. Additionally, their discussion is drawn from an extensive range of
academic resources that suggest positive outcomes linked to RTI. They also cite the advantages
of the RTIs conceptual pillars such as high-quality teaching, systematic screening, researchbased interventions, as well as progress monitoring. The article also reviews RTI features,
namely, Tier 1, 2, and 3 and evaluates the eligibility processes of special education for youth
socialization. The authors conclude that the focus of Response to Intervention on results for all

USE OF COLLABORATION AND RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

students suggests that the responsibility of special education students rests in both special
education and general education.
Lane, K. L., Menzies, H. M., Ennis, R. P., & Bezdek, J. (2013). School-wide systems to promote
positive behaviors and facilitate instruction. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, (1),
6.
Lane and the colleagues article aimed to discuss the school-wide systems that improve
teaching and encourage positive behaviors. Their discussion is based on a review of various
academic resources that support that their analysis. In particular, they give an overview of multilayered systems, namely Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3. They also discuss screening and academic
tools relating to instruction, and give the role of teachers shifts in the management and
instruction, which influence the performance of the learners. The authors give a synopsis of some
of the research-based teachers, which teachers can use, namely whole-class and individualized
strategies. Conclusively, the authors give recommendations that teachers can use to support
special education students to encourage social and academic success. They assert that tiered
support models can provide teachers with a data-informed tool, which ensures equal access for
all students to supports, especially when valid and reliable screening tools feasibly and
accurately determine responsiveness. Thus, the authors recommend the designing,
implementation, and evaluate of multi-layered support systems with reference to school and
district needs. They also suggest screening tools to be reviewed, adopted, and implemented in
accordance with data collected from different sources that link learners to required supports.
Lastly, they suggest that teachers seek opportunities for professional development in order to
learn, execute, and assess individualized and whole-class supports.

USE OF COLLABORATION AND RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

Skinner, C. H., McCleary, D. F., Skolits, G. L., Poncy, B. C., & Cates, G. L. (2013). Emerging
opportunities for school psychologists to enhance our remediation procedure evidence
base as we apply Response to Intervention. Psychology In The Schools, 50(3), 272-289.
Skinner and his co-researchers assert that RTI success depends on the ability of
instructors to use efficient and effective remedial procedures. The authors based their study on a
review of extensive literature. Their discussion suggests that school psychologists can contribute
and improve remedial-process quality during RTI implementation process. The authors article
describes and analyzes how an extensive RTI implementation can permit psychologists to work
together with others to create and implement effective remedial as well as research design
processes. Conclusively, the researchers posit that development of such strategies is beneficial
because they can hinder use of procedures that cannot used in educational settings. The evidence
from the article indicate that use of RTI information to compare and validate remedial processes
allows psychologists and trainers focus on processes, which increase learning within a short
duration of time.
Swanson, E., Solis, M., Ciullo, S., & McKenna, J. W. (2012). Special education teachers
perceptions and instructional practices in Response to Intervention
implementation. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35(2), 115-126.
doi:10.1177/0731948711432510
The researchers study aimed to examine the opinions and teaching practices of special education
instructors in grade 3-5 in districts using RTI framework. The authors conducted interviews and
focus groups to establish the perceptions of teachers towards RTI. They also used observation to
evaluate teachers instruction in reading and mathematics. The results from the interviews and
focus group suggested that RTI makes it easy to identify the needs of the students earlier on,

USE OF COLLABORATION AND RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

which allows quick provision of targeted services. The respondents also indicated that RTI
increases the opportunities of collaborating with colleagues, particularly through data review and
problem-solving meetings. Lastly, special education instructors have opportunities of consulting
with others regarding the right instruction. Data from the observation of teachers in Tier 1, 2, 3
reading classes suggested that RTI increases comprehension, word phonics, vocabulary, and
developed fluency. In mathematics instruction, RTI increased their problem-solving skills. A
major research limitation was the usage of a single district, which could generalize the results.
The authors concluded by stating that the information gained from the study could aid inform
policy and procedure development for other school districts.
Vaughn, S., Zumeta, R., Wanzek, J., Cook, B., & Klingner, J. K. (2014). Intensive interventions
for students with learning disabilities in the RTI era: Position statement of the Division
for Learning Disabilities Council for Exceptional Children. Learning Disabilities
Research & Practice, 29(3), 90-92. doi:10.1111/ldrp.12039
Vaughn and the counterparts discuss the need for rigorous interventions for learners with
learning disabilities. Their article is based on a review of literature citing key materials that call
for the need for intensive interventions. For example, they cite Response to Intervention reforms
as an effective structure, which can deliver teaching to students with learning disabilities. They
posit that learners with learning disabilities require intensive, personalized interventions, which
are based on available data. The researchers argue that majority of students with learning
disabilities do not receive the academic success they require. Thus, they suggest the need to
intensive, individualized interventions supported by valid evidence. They also suggest the need
to make changes to the traditional teaching delivery methods and provision of support and

USE OF COLLABORATION AND RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

training to the personnel to allow for effective implementation. Conclusively, the authors posit
that intensive, personalized interventions must take place at the intensive tiers of RTI.
Werts, M. G., Carpenter, E. S., & Fewell, C. (2014). Barriers and Benefits to Response to
Intervention: Perceptions of Special Education Teachers. Rural Special Education
Quarterly, 33(2), 3-11.
The researchers carried out research on special education instructors in order to establish
their opinions on the RTI process benefits and barriers. They surveyed 221 teachers using
questionnaires who gave the hindrances to RTI successful implementation, which included
knowledge gaps, inadequate resources, and faculty attitudes. Benefits of RTI included improved
teaching fuelled by use of data and assessment, early intervention, as well as the use of
individualized/differentiated teaching. A key limitation of the study included lack of elaboration
in the responses provided in the questionnaires, which limited the analysis to investigators
interpretation. Conclusively, the authors suggested future research to look into the weight of
perceptions against actual practices. They also suggested that use of a diverse and extensive and
sample would be informative.

References

USE OF COLLABORATION AND RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

Cahill, S. M., McGuire, B., Krumdick, N. D., & Lee, M. M. (2014). National Survey of
Occupational Therapy Practitioners involvement in Response to Intervention. American
Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68(6), e234-40. doi:10.5014/ajot.2014.010116
Jeremy, S. & Felicia. C. (2013). Special education policy, Response to Intervention, and the
socialization of youth. Theory into Practice, 52(3), 180-189.
Lane, K. L., Menzies, H. M., Ennis, R. P., & Bezdek, J. (2013). School-wide systems to promote
positive behaviors and facilitate instruction. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, (1),
6.
Skinner, C. H., McCleary, D. F., Skolits, G. L., Poncy, B. C., & Cates, G. L. (2013). Emerging
opportunities for school psychologists to enhance our remediation procedure evidence
base as we apply Response to Intervention. Psychology In The Schools, 50(3), 272-289.
Swanson, E., Solis, M., Ciullo, S., & McKenna, J. W. (2012). Special education teachers
perceptions and instructional practices in Response to Intervention
implementation. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35(2), 115-126.
doi:10.1177/0731948711432510
Vaughn, S., Zumeta, R., Wanzek, J., Cook, B., & Klingner, J. K. (2014). Intensive interventions
for students with learning disabilities in the RTI era: Position statement of the Division
for Learning Disabilities Council for Exceptional Children. Learning Disabilities
Research & Practice, 29(3), 90-92. doi:10.1111/ldrp.12039
Werts, M. G., Carpenter, E. S., & Fewell, C. (2014). Barriers and Benefits to Response to
Intervention: Perceptions of Special Education Teachers. Rural Special Education
Quarterly, 33(2), 3-11.

USE OF COLLABORATION AND RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION