Responsiveness to Intervention and the Identification of Specific Learning Disability: A Critique and Alternative Proposal

The role of school psychologists with training in neuropsychology is examined within the context of multitiered models of service delivery and educational reform policies. An expanded role is suggested that builds on expertise in the assessment of neurodevelopmental disorders and extends to broader tiers through consultation practice. Changes in federal legislation to allow more flexible approaches toward assessment are viewed as a catalyst toward the integration of neuropsychological practice in school‐based practice. As a set of priorities, recommendations are made for reforming assessment practice in schools, linking neuropsychological test results to academic treatment outcomes, and developing consultation practice with parents and teachers for early identification purposes and to integrate school‐based services with community mental health services. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Section: The Changing Practice Of Psychology In the Schoolsmentioning

confidence: 70%

Section: The Changing Practice Of Psychology In the Schoolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

School neuropsychology consultation in neurodevelopmental disorders

Decker

2008

“…At a 2003 NRCLD symposium, Mastropieri (2003) carefully examined RTI claims and reported the absence of a "solid research base" regarding optimal instructional methods and curricular materials across grade levels and academic subjects, with most efforts directed only at word reading (Kavale, Holdnack, Mostert, & Schmied, 2003). Scruggs and Mastropieri (2003) argued that RTI models (a) do not address the multifaceted nature of SLD or current conceptualizations of the disorder; (b) have not identified the best methods for SLD identification, or those that will reduce SLD overidentification; and (c) lack methods and measures with verifiable technical adequacy.…”

Section: Rti Limitations and Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation of IDEA: Integrating response to intervention and cognitive assessment methods

Hale

Kaufman

Naglieri

et al. 2006

Self Cite

106

105

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) was reauthorized by the U.S. Congress in 2004, yet ongoing regulatory efforts are required to determine its operationalization and implementation. Of particular concern to school psychologists and others involved in the educational process are the guidelines for identification of children with specific learning disabilities (SLD). Two seemingly opposite camps have been arguing for either a response-tointervention (RTI) approach for SLD identification or a methodology that includes comprehensive evaluations for SLD identification and intervention purposes. In this article, the authors propose a resolution to these critical issues by emphasizing a multitiered approach to serving children with learning problems-one that begins with RTI, but then provides for comprehensive evaluation of cognitive processes if RTI methods are not successful in ameliorating the child's learning difficulties. If a child fails to respond to intervention and demonstrates a deficit in the basic psychological processes following comprehensive evaluation, both the definitional criteria for SLD and the method for determining SLD eligibility will be addressed. This methodology incorporates the best aspects of both the RTI and comprehensive evaluation perspectives to forge a balanced practice model that ensures diagnostic accuracy and optimizes educational outcomes for children with SLD. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.As this article is being written, events are unfolding that could profoundly shape the future of school psychology. Passed by Congress in 2004, the reauthorized Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) includes language that must be operationalized to reflect the intent of the law. Implementation will be equally challenging because this language must be examined within the context of sound school psychology and special education science and practice. Seemingly opposing factions have called for either a response-to-intervention (RTI) approach or one that includes comprehensive evaluation of basic psychological processes prior to classification of children with specific learning disabilities (SLD). These apparently disparate approaches should not necessarily lead to a politicized professional schism. Instead, both positions should be scrutinized for their individual merits and limitations, with the result being a model that incorporates the best tenets of both perspectives in a balanced practice model that maximizes SLD diagnostic accuracy and optimizes educational outcomes for this heterogeneous and enigmatic population.Both the RTI and comprehensive assessment positions help address long-standing problems surrounding accurate identification of children with SLD. Whether the approach is a standard protocol or a more flexible problem-solving model (see Fuchs, Mock, Morgan, & Young, 2003), the RTI methods advocated by proponents are a welcome and long-awaited addition to the field. The use of research-based instruction, regular student progress mo...

“…Currently, many educators use the discrepancy model as the primary criterion to support identification of SLD (Kavale, Holdnack, & Mostert, 2005). This model identifies SLD by demonstrating a severe discrepancy between performance on norm-referenced IQ tests, indicating adequate cognitive ability to learn, and norm-referenced achievement tests, indicating learning has not been achieved as cognitively expected.…”

Section: Norm-referenced Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considerations in the identification, assessment, and intervention process for deaf and hard of hearing students with reading difficulties

Gilbertson

Ferre

2008

Problematic assessment and intervention issues present substantial challenges when making educational decisions for deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH) students who are experiencing reading difficulties. These students present a diverse set of language acquisition skills, hearing ability, and orientation to early school learning activities that are different from the hearing student population. Given the importance of selecting assessment approaches that lead to effective interventions for D/HH students, three assessment procedures for identification of at-risk children and learning disabilities within the D/HH population are examined. Assessments reviewed are teacher referral, norm-referenced testing, and student response to intervention. Challenges to each process and the need for additional assessment and empirically validated treatment options are discussed. Finally, a case example is presented to illustrate a framework that may help school psychologists promote early identification of learning problems and outline interventions that meets a D/HH child's unique needs by focusing on reading outcomes in the curriculum. C 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.