Dear Jules,
RtI is SUPPOSED to "catch" kids who are not doing well and provide intensive classroom-based interventions (usually instructional, not behavioral)that will help the child accelerate learning to become "like peers" (and not coincidentally meet NCLB standards.)
The idea is not bad in itself as I said, if used with kids who are not responding to the general curriculum in the regular classroom but do not have major DSM diagnosis's. It has one very good point: for kids who are "marginal" for SpEd qualification, it prevents a long evaluation process followed by no qualification and the SD saying, "sorry, your kid isn't 'bad enough' YET for us to do anything." This is also known as "waiting to fail" sufficiently for Sp Ed qualification. (You need this background and if you have it, I apologize but some reading this post will not.)
RtI was dreamed up by hard-core behaviorists who believe that ALL children should be instructed as follows:
Collect baseline data on whatever is about to be taught
Provide targeted, high quality instruction
Collect post instruction data and GRAPH it.
If instruction is working the graph will go UP. It's that simple. If instruction is not working, the graph will be flat or go down in extreme cases. If this happens, TRY SOMETHING ELSE.
When a child is "targeted" for RtI, then the above process should be done very frequently in order to know if the child is "responding to intervention." If the child is, then great--the child catches up and an expensive, time consuming, and potentially stigmatizing evaluation is avoided. If the child does not respond a full CSE should be initiated.
What is happening is schools are refusing to evaluate because they say, "We are using RtI." First, this is not legal...RtI data may be used as PART OF a CSE, but not as a full CSE substitute. Second, if a school actually IS doing RtI with a given student, they should have LOTS OF GRAPHICAL DATA for pre- and post-interventions. If they do not, then they are not doing RtI, they are just stalling.
IF a parent requests an evaluation in the way this board recommends, parent to parent, then the 60 day time-line starts. The Feds specifically denied the RtI folks' request that if RtI were being done, time-lines should be suspended. The SD may TRY RtI but they are still bound to the 60 day time limit. This is why I think even IF a school wants to do RtI, a CSE should be requested. If the child respond BEAUTIFULLY to RtI after 30 days, then the request can be withdrawn. If the request was never made, you cannot get those 30 days of a child's life back.
The problem with RtI even when it is not being abused, is there are no guidelines for "how long" a child should be in RtI before something more intensive is initiated. Children only have one life, and one school year to lose for each year they are alive. Common sense suggests that if RtI does not work in 6 to 8 weeks, then a referral for a CSE is necessary (because THAT is how one gets Sp Ed services.) I have students working with children beginning their second RtI year...that is clearly not serving the best interests of the child :rolleyes:. When my students ask if I think the child should be evaluated, I say yes, but it still does not happen unless the parent is knowledgeable and most parents do not understand how RtI interacts with IDEA and NCLB.
When RtI is misused, it is just another way to say "NO" to special needs children. If a SD is legitimately and competently using RtI, then they will have data on the child in question. If not, they are either incompetent, or trying to deny services.
I hope this clarifies...sometimes I make things worse
Martie
