Comparing Tier 1 reading instruction with Tier 3 or special education intervention through an observational snapshot of school-implemented response to intervention across Grades 1–5

Author:

Al Otaiba StephanieORCID,Stewart JenniferORCID,van Dijk WilhelminaORCID,Conner CarlinORCID,Freudenthal Dayna RussellORCID,Rivas Brenna,Yovanoff Paul,Allor JillORCID

Abstract

AbstractThere is limited research about Tier 3 interventions provided during typical school Response to Intervention (RTI) implementation. As part of a larger RTI exploration study designed to focus on students with the most intensive reading needs, our goal was to contrast their Tier 1 core reading instruction with their Tier 3 intervention. Schools identified participating students as receiving Tier 3 or special education for reading. We aimed to provide a snapshot of differences in Tier 1 and intensive interventions delivered to 264 students from 32 elementary schools. Our research team used the Instructional Content Emphasis-Revised (ICE-R; Edmond & Briggs, 2003) to observe differences in group size and the amounts and types of curricular content (e.g., code vs. meaning-focused) students received during both tiers. We explored whether these patterns were consistent across Grades 1–5 and if they differed in relation to students’ disability (reading disability vs. other disability vs. no disability). We also examined whether the Tier 3 observation data was consistent with administrators’ reports about RTI implementation within their school. Across the grades, we found significantly more small-group than whole-class instruction during Tier 3 than in Tier 1. We observed significantly lower proportions of code-focused instruction than meaning-focused instruction, particularly during Tier 1. Generally, code-focused instruction decreased across the grades in both tiers. Although we found a trend suggesting students with reading disabilities may have received higher proportions of code-focused instruction than other students, this was not significant after multiple comparisons. We discuss some similarities and differences between our observations and administrator data. We discuss implications, limitations, and directions for future research.

Funder

Southern Methodist University

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3