Edutopia on Facebook
Edutopia on Twitter
Edutopia on Google+
Edutopia on Pinterest Follow Me on Pinterest
WHAT WORKS IN EDUCATION The George Lucas Educational Foundation

A recent survey found that a good number of teachers are concerned about resources -- or a lack of -- for struggling students and those with diverse learning needs. The survey got me thinking about a popular model being used in schools today to support students who are failing. It's called Response to Intervention, or RTI.

In my conversations with educators, RTI seems to be either a smashing success or a haphazard flop. Further investigation led me to this discussion in an Edutopia Group where I read teachers describe more of the RTI "hit or miss" school scenarios.

One Intervention Model

So what can make an intervention model, like RTI, successful? Before we go there, let's start with a definition. This may be an oversimplified explanation, so apologies, but I'm a big fan of keeping it simple:

RTI is a tiered-model approach for supporting struggling students and identifying possible learning and behavior needs. Here are the three tiers:

  • All students receive high-quality, instruction. This instruction is research-based and includes differentiation (tier one).
  • Then, students who are not progressing adequately in the regular, high-quality classroom are provided with some type of intervention -- an additional, smaller math or reading class, for example (tier two).
  • If a student is still struggling, then he receives one-on-one targeted intervention that speaks to his specific skill deficits (tier three).

If desired results do not occur, a formal evaluation and data from tier one, two, and three are used to determine any eligibility for special education services.

On paper, RTI is a pro-active intervention model (not a program) that offers targeted academic support to struggling students. It also curtails the practice of too many students being inappropriately referred to special education. A win-win situation, it seems. But, as many teachers will tell you, how it is rolled out is where it can get sticky.

And I agree, when Something New comes to a school, so often the devil is in fact in the details. But I'd like to take it a step further by saying, as are the angels in the implementation. Those angels are teachers and students. To start with, schools with successful intervention systems in place include teachers fully and from Day One in the decision-making process.

A Closer Look

At one public middle school, the intervention coordinator invited a teacher from each grade level to attend the RTI trainings with her. The teachers came back and shared the information (not the coordinator) with their colleagues, serving as their guides and leaders.

The coordinator also said it was important to keep the teachers from feeling overwhelmed along the way. That meant from the beginning, she involved herself completely in supporting teachers in providing quality instruction (tier one). She'd help wherever needed -- planning and co-teaching a lesson, having a discussion with a misbehaving student, or even by making photocopies.

Teachers need opportunities to sit down with their coordinator and all together look at the student data. And not just the standardized test but other data -- grades, teacher reports, and student work -- to determine the students who need additional support, and what exactly they need. At the middle school mentioned, with the teachers at the table, supplemental English and math classes were then developed for the students determined to be in need.

Knowing that the teachers who were going to teach the supplemental classes were the most qualified to develop the curriculum, the middle school coordinator advocated for the school to give the teachers the time, resources, and a place to work together.

In this situation, the coordinator functioned more as facilitator, understanding that success meant focusing on the people by first identifying students and their specific needs, then giving teachers the helm in developing strategic, quality instruction. Sadly, when it comes to schools and academic intervention, all too often the focus becomes a program. I'd like to issue a brief warning at this time: Many for-profit companies are out there selling schools "the fix it all" curriculum package. Insist that your school do plenty of research before purchasing anything.

Keeping Kids in Mind

Students need to have a stake in what they are learning. When visiting classrooms, I know kids have buy in when they say things like, our work, our ideas, our books. Here's a few ways to encourage that in students who are receiving intervention support:

Arrange a one-on-one with a child that includes reasons, rationale, and time for questions prior to the changing a his/her schedule. Don't let your school do the ol' schedule-change blitz where, for example, without warning, a child's art class is replaced abruptly with a reading class. An upset and confused child does not make for a willing learner. And they deserve better than this.

Propose that your school avoid using words like "intervention" or "remediation" when naming the supplemental classes. Go for something positive like, Math or Literacy Academy. Students already know the reasons for the class, and they certainly don't need a constant reminder with some humiliating title.

Advocate for field trips for the students who are in intervention. They can be to a local colleges, museums, or a public library.

In a Nutshell

It's impossible to successfully move a large number of students at a school out of failure without giving teachers a voice in the intervention plan or model. Who are the experts that spend hours and hours with the specific clientele of students at a school? Teachers. In my years in this field, time and time again, I sadly see exclusion of teachers -- and students -- in big curricular decisions.

So, what's the moral here? Our schools need to stop putting so much faith in things (a process, model, or program), and start having a lot more faith in people.

Comments (18)Sign in or register to postSubscribe to comments via RSS

HoneyFernDotOrg's picture

This is great, except what happens when teachers don't have time or resources or support to plan high-quality, differentiated instruction? With such an emphasis on passing the test, there is little time for anything else.


Jessica Piper's picture

My middle school uses a model that works well for us, but it does take some time to get used to and requires grades be put in very often. Here's a quick snapshot:

~We have advisement with a group of kids...these are "our" kids that we keep up with
~Grade cards go out every 3 weeks
~Every 3 weeks, advisors put their kids into a club (if they have a's and b's in all classes), or a core lab (if they have a c or worse in any class)
~Each department divides the clubs and core labs and we use the next 3 weeks re-teaching concepts

The great part of this intervention is that kids can work themselves out of a "core lab" and into a club by raising their grades. This is a very, very condensed version of our interventions, but they really seem to work for our kiddos=)


Jan Wee's picture
Jan Wee
Director- Information & Technology Services/School District of Holmen WI

We have an interesting support system in place at our High School. Students who have need for additional targeted support are identified by educators and scheduled into "Resource" time through the referral process on a weekly basis. Our resource lead teacher team have collaborated with consultants from Infinite Campus SIS to develop a system to track and manage Resource Referrals. Students with need for extra time with specific teachers are then scheduled to tap the assistance on a need basis every week. Very much oriented to the needs of individual learners an is tracked within the SIS for assuring follow-up, communication with parents, etc.

I think it is very impressive to see educators devise a system that is built on genuine and deep caring for student needs.


Kara's picture

I do see the benefits of implementing RTI into our education system. Special education money (about 15% of it) can now be used for improving classroom instruction and installing preventative intervention programs. I'm a big fan of this movement for several reasons: First, because the best way to determine if someone has a learning problem is to offer really good teaching and if the struggling continues then you know. Second, special education programs simply haven't worked very well for most kids, and the learning disabilities label has been over applied, and those programs are getting expensive.

WB's picture

I agree that all too often teachers are left out of the decision making process of curriculum development, but sometimes this is because of the lack of time teachers have to engage in these activities. Having coordinators work with teachers during planning times is as important as having them work with students during instruction. Tracking students for individual needs is another area that coordinators can help set up for teachers. By providing both the teachers and support staff with the individual plans for students a lot of time and resources can be saved during future planning and interventions.

Todd Finley's picture
Todd Finley
Blogger and Assistant Editor (Contractor)

Rebecca -

Thank you discussing some of the core principles of RTI. You've increased my understanding of the subject.


Amanda Navajas's picture
Amanda Navajas
4th/5th grade teacher in an EFL program, Brazil

The idea is great as long as the school administrators support teachers with the program.
We all know that most of programs and incentives to help students have a powerful effect if supported by policy makers and administrators. Also, regular PLCs related to RTI practices may help teachers build both clear and a strong sense on how they should help struggling students achieve better results.

Dan Burritt's picture
Dan Burritt
retired special education teacher K-12, FIE Trainer from Eureka,ca.

RTi has potential for students but a key concept for learning is not addressed. How can true progress be made if deficient cognitive functions are not identified and mediated? If the intervention only pin points the academic skill but avoids the underlying cause only postpones future need for additional intervention. By using MLE- Mediated Learning Experience through the vehicle of FIE - Feuerstein Instrument Enrichment (icelp.org) the cognitive dysfunction such as inability or lack of ability to distinguish relevant form irrelevant, inability to focus, unplanned or impulsive and unsystematic exploratory behavior, lack or precision in gathering information, ....etc, to name a few a teacher using MLE can truly move a learner towards being an efficient and effective life long learner. Until this issue of addressing the underlying causes of the inability to learn is addressed, the learner will again require intervention. I have used MLE with Elementary, Middle school and High school learners with success. It is time for a thoughtful examination of the goals of Rti and have a frank discussion of what is learning and what are the goals for teachers. Learning to learn or raising test scores.

Sign in to comment. Not a member? Register.