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

Abstract

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, ...

Response-to-intervention (RTI) as a model to facilitate inclusion for students with learning and behaviour problems

“…He or she has to acknowledge the existing beliefs and practices in the school; show a coherent picture of a valuable RTI model; clarify possible role changes (see below); and discuss stakeholders' perception of costs and benefits of inclusion (Denton, Vaughn, and Fletcher 2003;Le Fevre and Richardson 2002). The following important information may reduce resistance to change: School staff already working in inclusion and RTI see significantly fewer problems in implementation than staff who have not yet started (Avramidis and Norwich 2002;Machek and Nelson 2010). School staff should form several specific service teams (e.g.…”

Professional Practice Issues in the Assessment of Cognitive Functioning for Educational Applications

“…Similar to the empirical approaches of Naglieri (2011) and Flanagan and colleagues (2002;Flanagan, Ortiz, & Alfonso, 2007Flanagan et al, 2013, Hale and Fiorello (2004) provide an empirically sound approach for identifying children with SLD and other disorders entitled the Concordance-Discordance Model (C-DM) of SLD identification. In the Hale (2006) model, children who do not respond to interventions should be given a comprehensive evaluation in all areas of suspected disability, consistent with expert consensus , school psychology practitioners (Machek & Nelson, 2010), and U.S. Supreme Court decisions (Dixon, Eusebio, Turton, Wright, & Hale, 2011).…”

School Psychologists’ Willingness to Implement RtI: The Role of Philosophical and Practical Readiness

“…Treatment acceptability has been considered to be essential for the success of a given treatment because it can predict treatment integrity, effectiveness, maintenance, and future use (Elliott 1988). Several studies have been conducted to assess levels of acceptability among school psychologists regarding different educational practices (Chafouleas, Riley-Tillman, and Eckert 2003;Machek and Nelson 2010;O'Donnell andMiller 2011). O'Donnell andMiller (2011) found that greater exposure to RtI was associated with higher acceptability ratings for RtI, as well as lower ratings for the IQ-achievement discrepancy model.…”