Responsiveness-to-Intervention: Definitions, Evidence, and Implications for the Learning Disabilities Construct
Article first published online: 13 JUN 2003
DOI: 10.1111/1540-5826.00072
Additional Information
How to Cite
Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L. and Young, C. L. (2003), Responsiveness-to-Intervention: Definitions, Evidence, and Implications for the Learning Disabilities Construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18: 157–171. doi: 10.1111/1540-5826.00072
Publication History
- Issue published online: 13 JUN 2003
- Article first published online: 13 JUN 2003
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Longstanding concern about how learning disabilities (LD) are defined and identified, coupled with recent efforts in Washington, DC to eliminate IQ-achievement discrepancy as an LD marker, have led to serious public discussion about alternative identification methods. The most popular of the alternatives is responsiveness-to-intervention (RTI), of which there are two basic versions: the “problem-solving” model and the “standard-protocol” approach. The authors describe both types, review empirical evidence bearing on their effectiveness and feasibility, and conclude that more needs to be understood before RTI may be viewed as a valid means of identifying students with LD.

1540-5826/asset/LDRP_left.gif?v=1&s=8858831581759d5a9710ce5758f99a919b36711d)
1540-5826/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=97173ac428be22461a5459aa48e37ef9694b4c34)