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

Kavale, Kenneth A.; Holdnack, James A.; Mostert, Mark P.

doi:10.2307/4126970

Cited by 65 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 67 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Instead of basing conclusions on subtests alone, Hale and Fiorello's (2004) CHT model suggests that the intellectual measure should be used as a screening test for processing strengths and weaknesses, and hypotheses about subtest performance should be verified or refuted using additional measures and data sources. This will not only allow for determination of whether a child has the prerequisite deficit in the basic psychological processes required for the LD definition Kavale, Holdnack, & Mostert, 2005) but also helps practitioners develop targeted interventions after a child does not respond to typical interventions. The following case study illustrates the CHT assessment-intervention model for a child with a reading disability.…”

Section: Reading Disability Subtypesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive hypothesis testing and response to intervention for children with reading problems

Fiorello

Hale

Snyder

2006

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response to intervention (RTI) must be combined with comprehensive cognitive assessment to identify children with learning disabilities. This article presents the Cognitive Hypothesis Testing (CHT) model for integrating RTI and comprehensive evaluation practices in the identification of children with reading disabilities. The CHT model utilizes a scientific method approach for interpreting cognitive and neuropsychological processes together with evaluation of ecological and treatment validity data to develop targeted interventions for students who do not respond to standard academic interventions. A case study highlights how CHT practices can lead to effective interventions for a child who did not respond to a phonologically based reading intervention. In addition, discriminant analyses of 128 children with reading disabilities revealed the presence of Global, Phonemic, Fluency-Comprehension, and Orthographic subtypes. Results suggest subtypes show disparate cognitive profiles that differentially impact their reading achievement, supporting our contention that individual assessment of cognitive processing strengths and weaknesses is not only necessary for identifying children with reading disabilities but also can lead to individualized interventions designed to meet their unique learning needs.

show abstract

Section: Reading Disability Subtypesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive hypothesis testing and response to intervention for children with reading problems

Fiorello

Hale

Snyder

2006

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Next, data would be interpreted though interindividual academic-ability analyses, interindividual cognitive-ability analyses, integrated-ability analysis to document that academic deficits are related to cognitive deficits, and an evaluation of the degree to which cognitive deficits interfere with academic functioning (Kavale et al, 2003). Thus, a child would be identified as LD if an academic deficit was deemed related to a cognitive deficit.…”

Section: Child-centered Deficitmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The discrepancy model also has been largely discredited in research due to failure to differentiate low achievement from LD (Fletcher et al, 1998), inconsistent implementation (Haight, Patriarca, & Burns, 2002), and a lack of treatment validity (Aaron, 1997). Therefore, it is not surprising that many alternative models have recently been suggested (Gresham, 2001;Kavale, Holdnack, & Mostert, 2003;Peterson & Shinn, 2002;Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003). Previous diagnostic models tended to rely heavily on an assumption that disorders were caused by underlying cognitive disabilities or neuropsychological characteristics (Reschly, 1996).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of ecological validity of learning disabilities diagnostic models

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this article is to examine models designed for the determination of a learning disability and compare them to specific criteria to determine whether the given diagnostic process is ecological in nature. The traditional child-centered deficit model (CCD), Relative Achievement Discrepancy model (RAD), and Responsiveness to Intervention model (RTI) were evaluated against the following three questions: (a) Does the environmental context of the assessment adequately represent the real-life situation? (b) Are the assessment stimuli relevant to the daily classroom activity? (c) Are the student behavior and/or required response natural and representative of the construct being assessed? The results of this examination suggested that the RTI has the most potential for ecological validity, but currently falls short. Suggestions for future research are included.

show abstract

“…Despite these potential benefits, the RTI approach has also been criticized for its potential shortcomings (Kavale, 2005;Kavale, Holdnack, & Mostert, 2005). Mastropieri and Scruggs (2005) questioned the feasibility of the RTI approach, arguing that current school personnel do not have the knowledge or the skills to implement such a model.…”

Section: An Alternative Approach To Rd Identificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

School psychologists' perceptions regarding the practice of identifying reading disabilities: Cognitive assessment and response to intervention considerations

Machek

Nelson

2010

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study surveyed a national sample of school psychologists with respect to the identification of reading disabilities (RD). It covers school psychologists' opinions regarding perceived benefits of the use of cognitive assessment in RD identification, both within and outside of an IQ -achievement discrepancy model. The survey also solicited opinions about the nature of RD, particularly conceptions of general slow learners (and readers) versus those evidencing a discrepancy. Results related to school psychologists' concerns about job security, should IQ testing be reduced, are presented. Furthermore, the perceived benefits of a Response to Intervention (RTI) model, how school psychologists see themselves contributing to an RTI effort, as well as possible hurdles to RTI implementation are covered. Measurement of these perceptions may be beneficial in informing current and future service delivery models for RD identification as well as possible training needs of currently practicing school psychologists. Finally, the current work represents an effort to measure assessment acceptability for RD identification techniques. C 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.The latest reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA, 2004) has strongly impacted researchers, policy makers, and practitioners alike, particularly regarding the identification of specific learning disabilities (SLDs). By (a) stating that an IQachievement discrepancy model must no longer be required, and (b) encouraging consideration of a Response to Intervention (RTI) model, the reauthorization has evoked debate surrounding the issue of defining SLDs.Among SLDs, reading disabilities (RDs) have garnered the most attention having to do with operational definitions (i.e., how they are measured and identified), likely due to the high prevalence of RDs diagnostically (Lerner, 1989) and as a general referral concern (Bramlett, Murphy, Johnson, Wallingsford, & Hall, 2002;. Of the SLDs, RDs have also been the most researched and their identification process the most highly debated via published opinions, although the latter outweighs the former (Speece & Hines, 2007). For these reasons, the current study focuses specifically on RDs. Criticism Regarding Use of Intelligence Measures in RD IdentificationThe two main areas of concern when it comes to the role of cognitive testing in RD determinations include (a) questions about the utility of operationalizing the construct of RD as an ability-achievement discrepancy and (b) the usefulness of IQ test results in informing about the nature of RD (regardless of their use within a discrepancy model). Criticisms of the discrepancy approach include (a) the contention of the process as a wait-to-fail model because severe discrepancies between reading achievement and IQ manifest well after the formative years of early reading skills attainment (Fletcher et al., 1998); (b) questionable reliability due to discrepancy formulas being applied differently from one local educational agency to another, ...

show abstract

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

Cited by 65 publications

References 67 publications

Cognitive hypothesis testing and response to intervention for children with reading problems

Cognitive hypothesis testing and response to intervention for children with reading problems

Comparison of ecological validity of learning disabilities diagnostic models

School psychologists' perceptions regarding the practice of identifying reading disabilities: Cognitive assessment and response to intervention considerations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About