This is the first of two articles on implementing a prereferral intervention model as the first step in the special education services delivery system. A description of the model and rationale for it are provided. In the follow-up article, which will appear in the April issue of Exceptional Children, implementation of the model and its effects on consultation, testing, and placement practices are described.
This is the second of two articles on the implementation of a prereferral intervention model. The first article provided a rationale and description of the prereferral intervention model as the first phase in the special education services delivery system. In this article, the implementation of the model is described and data are presented on consultation, referral, testing, and placement rates before, during, and after implementation. Issues in implementation, including school system variables and barriers to implementing a consultation model, are also discussed.
The major purpose of the Minnesota institute was to study the assessment of LD children. Included in the scope of the research were investigations of the characteristics of children referred for psychoeducational evaluation, characteristics of those found eligible for placement in special education, methods of planning instructional interventions, evaluations of the extent to which children profited from instruction, and evaluations of the effectiveness of specific instructional programs.
School personnel routinely collect a variety of information in order to make decisions concerning a student's eligibility for special services. Such decisions are typically made at placement team meetings in which individuals are expected to reach consensus as a group on the basis of assessment results. Twenty videotapes of placement team meetings were analyzed relative to the kinds of data presented. The relationship between the final decision and the amount of information presented was positive: greater likelihood of identification was evident at meetings in which more information was presented. Little relationship existed between the type of information presented and applicability to various currently popular identification criteria. Eighty-three percent of the statements made at the meetings were considered irrelevant. The data provide little evidence to suggest that teams use specific, formal criteria when making eligibility decisions or that assessment results are used for purposes other than minimal professional credibility.
Response to intervention (RtI) provides tiered levels of supports to all students and allows for increasingly more intensive and individualized instruction. Similarly, universal design for learning (UDL) addresses needs of students by proactively planning for instructional, environmental, and technology supports to allow all students to effectively access and engage in instruction. Although these two frameworks are widely accepted as structures for supporting students with diverse learning needs, the relationship between them has not been adequately developed. This article describes how an ecological RtI framework that integrates scientifically based instructional strategies, proactive instructional design, and purposeful technology use can provide a more seamless support system for all students.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.