The Promise of resPonse To inTervenTion The Promise of response to intervention Evaluating Current Science and Practice Edited by Todd A. Glover ShAron vAuGhn T G P he uilford ress new York london © 2010 The Guilford Press A Division of Guilford Publications, Inc. 72 Spring Street, New York, NY 10012 www.guilford.com All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher. Printed in the United States of America This book is printed on acid-free paper. Last digit is print number: 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The promise of response to intervention : evaluating current science and practice / edited by Todd A. Glover, Sharon Vaughn. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-60623-562-1 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Remedial teaching. 2. School failure—Prevention. I. Glover, Todd A. II. Vaughn, Sharon, 1952– LB1029.R4P76 2010 372.43—dc22 2009052909 About the editors Todd A. Glover, PhD, is Research Assistant Professor at the Nebraska Center for Research on Children, Youth, Families and Schools at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln. His research focuses on response to intervention (RTI), academic and behavioral interventions and assessments for students at risk, and methods for integrating empirical evidence and practice. Dr. Glover is the principal or co-principal investigator of several ongoing grant projects funded by the United States Department of Education’s Institute of Educa- tion Sciences and the Nebraska Department of Education, including a state RTI consortium, postdoctoral training program, and various research stud- ies investigating service delivery and professional development for RTI. Sharon Vaughn, PhD, is the H. E. Hartfelder/Southland Corporation Regents Chair in Human Development and Executive Director of the Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk at the University of Texas at Aus- tin. She is the principal investigator or co-principal investigator of numer- ous research grants funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the Institute of Education Sciences, and the Texas Education Agency. v Contributors Lynanne Black, PhD, Department of Educational and School Psychology, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, Pennsylvania Karen Blase, PhD, FPG, Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina Christina H. Boice, MA, School Psychology Program, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota Matthew K. Burns, PhD, School Psychology Program, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota Theodore J. Christ, PhD, School Psychology Program, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota Ben Clarke, PhD, Instructional Research Group, Los Alamitos, California, and Pacific Institutes for Research, Eugene, Oregon Susan De La Paz, PhD, Department of Special Education, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, Maryland Carolyn A. Denton, PhD, Children’s Learning Institute, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas Christine Espin, PhD, Department of Education and Child Studies, University of Leiden, Leiden, The Netherlands, and Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota Dean Fixsen, PhD, FPG, Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina Russell Gersten, PhD, Instructional Research Group, Los Alamitos, California vii viii Contributors Todd A. Glover, PhD, Nebraska Center for Research on Children, Youth, Families and Schools, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska John M. Hintze, PhD, Department of Student Development and Pupil Personnel Services, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts Robert H. Horner, PhD, Special Education Department, University of Oregon, Eugene, Eugene, Oregon Tanya Ihlo, PhD, Nebraska Center for Research on Children, Youth, Families and Schools, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska Joseph F. Kovaleski, DEd, Program in School Psychology, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, Pennsylvania Amanda M. Marcotte, PhD, Department of Student Development and Pupil Personnel Services, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts Kristen L. McMaster, PhD, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota Melissa Nantais, PhD, School Psychology Department, University of Detroit Mercy, Detroit, Michigan Rebecca Newman-Gonchar, PhD, Instructional Research Group, Los Alamitos, California Deborah Reed, PhD, Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas George Sugai, PhD, Educational Psychology Department, Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut Isadora Szadokierski, MA, School Psychology Program, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota Sharon Vaughn, PhD, Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas Jeanne Wanzek, PhD, School of Teacher Education, Florida Center for Reading Research, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida Preface T eachers confront considerable challenges in supporting stu- dents in their classrooms. Given unique learning and behavioral concerns, competing time demands, and a wide range of political and cultural influ- ences, the provision of equitable educational opportunities for all children and adolescents requires skillful attention to the appropriate use of new strategies and resources. Although traditional models for the delivery of instruction support select students, educators have continued to press for novel approaches to meet a wider range of individuals’ needs. Given its potential to impact school outcomes for numerous students, educators have recently focused significant attention on a response-to- intervention (RTI) model for guiding their work in schools. Within an RTI framework, school personnel set strong standards for achievement and work together to use student data to inform the implementation of research- based instruction and intervention to maximize opportunities for students’ success. Assessment tools are used to make decisions about the effectiveness of instruction and students’ need for and response to scientifically based intervention, and practices are implemented for all students based on clearly identified instructional goals. Because the impact of RTI is contingent upon the quality of its imple- mentation, critical consideration of which specific RTI processes and prac- tices optimize student success is needed. By continuing to investigate aspects of an RTI model, researchers are better able to identify which components are necessary and vital for promoting student success. By integrating prac- tices identified as optimally effective within classrooms, school stakeholders increase opportunities for positive outcomes. ix