While implementation efforts using a Response to Intervention (RtI) model to increase reading instruction are becoming widely used, more administrators and teachers are looking to learn effective RtI practices to support learning in mathematics. This article explores some of the key elements of RtI practices in mathematics, including screening for identification of struggling learners and progress monitoring for gauging instructional effectiveness. In addition, several of the pressing needs regarding the importance of mathematics proficiency for all students are discussed. We describe some of the similarities and differences between RtI processes in reading and mathematics.

No abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the use of three early numeracy measures to monitor the mathematics progress of students across time. One hundred and seven kindergarten and Grade 1 students were administered quantity discrimination, number identification, and missing-number measures once each month for 7 months. Alternate form reliability was adequate for instructional decision making, whereas criterion validity coefficients comparing the early numeracy measures to teacher judgment of student proficiency in mathematics and students' performance on a district-administered standardized test were lower than those observed in previous research. We used hierarchical linear modeling at each grade level to examine the ability of the three measures to model growth across time. All measures produced growth rates that were significant across time, for each grade level, with linear growth observed for the Number Identification measure only.

The technical adequacy of curriculum-based measures in the form of short and simple vocabulary-matching probes to predict students’ performance and progress in science at the secondary level was investigated. Participants were 198 seventh-grade students from 10 science classrooms. Curriculum-based measurements (CBM) were 5-min vocabulary-matching probes administered once weekly over a period of 14 weeks. Criterion measures were knowledge pre- and posttests, the science subtest of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS), and course grades. Alternate-form reliability coefficients ranged from r = .64 to .84. Coefficients increased over time and by combining scores across probes. Correlations between scores on the vocabulary-matching and criterion measures ranged from r = .55 to .76. The estimated mean group growth rate on the vocabulary-matching measure was .63 correct matches per week, which was significantly different from zero. The measures produced significant interindividual differences in growth rates, and growth on the measures was related to performance on the ITBS, course grades, and pre–post gains on the knowledge test. Results provide initial support for the technical adequacy of vocabulary-matching as an indicator of performance and progress in science.

Special education and mathematics teachers are under pressure to respond to the needs of an increasingly diverse range of students in mathematics. One way for them to meet the instructional needs of struggling learners is through collaboration where, ideally, the knowledge one teacher brings can address the gaps of the other. However, the differing perspectives and approaches they bring to the collaborative effort may also impede it. The purpose of this article is to describe a sampling of the recent research within both the mathematics and special education fields. This is done to enable collaborating teachers to create an effective learning environment for students who struggle in mathematics. Fifty recent studies focused on struggling learners in mathematics, were identified, and then analyzed to highlight the similarities and differences between the educational fields. C 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.