Page 20: References & Additional Resources
To cite this module, please use the following:
The IRIS Center. (2007). RTI: Considerations for school leaders. Retrieved from https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/rti-leaders
Alig, P., & Middling, T. (2006, October). Using response to intervention for Washington’s students. PowerPoint presentation for the Office of Superintendent of Public Administration (OSPI)/ Washington School Administrators (WASA) Special Education Administrators Conference, Tacoma, WA.
Batsche, G. M. (2006, January 25). Problem-solving and response to intervention: Implications for state and district policies and practices. Retrieved July 23,
2007, from http://casecec.org/powerpoints/rti/CASE%20Dr.%20George%20Batsche%201-25-2006.ppt
Batsche, G., Elliott, J., Graden, J. L., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J. F., Prasse, D., et al. (2006). Response to intervention policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Inc.
Bell, M. (n.d.). Reading teachers play key role in successful response to intervention approaches. International Reading Association [Online]. Retrieved November 3, 2006, from http://www.reading.org/downloads/resources/IDEA_RTI_teachers_role.pdf
Bergeson, T. (2006).Using response to intervention (RTI) for Washington’s students. Special Education, Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI). Retrieved July 23, 2007, from http://www.k12.wa.us/specialed/pubdocs/rti/rti.pdf
Byrnes, M. A., & Baxter, J. C. (2006). The principal’s leadership counts! Milwaukee, WI: American Society for Quality Press.
Center for Educational Networking (August 2006). NASDE explains response to intervention. FOCUS on Results [Online]. Retrieved November 2, 2006, from
Cunningham, W. G., & Cordeiro, P. A. (2006). Educational leadership: A problem-based approach. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Council of Administrators of Special Education (CASE) [Online]. (2006). Response to intervention. Retrieved August 31, 2006, from http://www.casecec.org/rti.htm
Dunklee, D. R. (2000). If you want to lead, not just manage. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
Dyer, K. M., & Carothers, J. (2000). The intuitive principal. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
Elliott, J., & Batsche, G. (n.d.). Response to intervention (RTI): Administrative considerations. Retrieved August 24, 2006, from http://www4.scoe.net/rti/
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2007). RTI: How do you know it’s working? PowerPoint presentation for the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) Annual Convention and Expo, Louisville, KY.
Goodman, S., McGlinchey, M., & Schallmo, K. (2006, August 15). Reaching all students: Through school-wide models of reading and behavior support. PowerPoint presentation for the Michigan Department of Education Reading First Conference.
Herman, J., & the Tennessee Intervention Group. (2006). Tennessee Reading First intervention guide. Nashville, TN: Reading First in Tennessee Program, Tennessee Department of Education.
The Achievement Alliance [Online]. (n.d.). It’s being done: M. Hall Stanton Elementary School – Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Retrieved July 23, 2007, from www.achievementalliance.org/files/stanton.pdf
Johnson, E., & Mellard, D. F. (2006). Getting started with SLD determination: After IDEA reauthorization. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D. F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M. A. (2006). Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.
Marion, R. L. (1991). Communicating with culturally diverse parents of exceptional children. Reston, VA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Handicapped and Gifted Children. (ERIC No. ED333619)
McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Mellard, D. (2005). Understanding responsiveness to intervention in learning disabilities determination. National Research Center on Learning Disabilities [Online]. Retrieved November 3, 2006, from http://www.rti4success.org/pdf/mellard.pdf
National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities. (June 2005). Responsiveness to intervention and learning disabilities. Retrieved November 3, 2006, from http://www.ldanatl.org/pdf/rti2005.pdf
Ogonosky, A. (2006). CBM/RTI – Making it work Part II. Retrieved July 23, 3007, from http://www.aspaonline.not/pdf/arkansas%20cbm%20RTI%20%June%202006%20handouts.pdf
OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports. (n.d.). School-wide PBS. Retrieved December 1, 2006, from http://www.pbis.org/schoolwide.htm#StepsInvolved
No longer available.
National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE) and the Council of Administrators of Special Education (CASE). (2006 May). Response to intervention. Retrieved November 15, 2011, from http://www.nasdse.org/Projects/ResponsetoInterventionRtIProject/tabid/411/Default.aspx
Tennessee Department of Education, Division of Special Education. (2006). Indicators of school readiness for response to intervention (RtI) implementation: Self assessment. Nashville, TN: Tennessee Department of Education, Division of Special Education.
Tilly, D. (2006). The what’s and whyfores of doing a 3-tier model. Heartland AEA 11. PowerPoint presentation for the Utah State Innovation Conference.
University of Oregon OSEP Center on Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports. (2004). School-wide positive behavior support implementers’ blueprint and self-assessment. Retrieved July 23, 2007, from http://www.pbis.org/pbis_resource_detail_page.aspx?Type=4&PBIS_ResourceID=713
U.S. Department of Education. (2006). Federal regulations on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 2004. Federal Register: Rules and Regulations (34 CFR Parts 300 and 301 – Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities and Preschool Grants for Children With Disabilities; Final Rule), 71(156), p. 46810.
U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. (2002). A new era: Revitalizing special education for children and their families. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. (2005). Students ages 6 through 21 served under IDEA, Part B, by disability category and state: 2004. Retrieved on June 28, 2007, from https://www.ideadata.org/tables28th/ar_1-3.htm
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. (2007). Building the legacy: IDEA 2004. Retrieved on March 20, 2007, from
Wright, J. (2006). Response-to-intervention school readiness survey. RTI WIRE. Retrieved August 24, 2006, from http://www.jimwrightonline.com/php/rti/rti_wire.php
Burdette, P. (2007, April). Response to intervention as it relates to early intervening services: Recommendations. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.
This report from the National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE) seeks to clarify and further explain the legislative and policy history related to RTI and EIS, as well as to summarize the recommendations and concerns of RTI and EIS policy forum contributors.
Burns, M. K., Egan, A. M., Kunkel, A. K., McComas, J, Peterson, M. M., Rahn, N. L., & Wilson, J. (2013). Training for generalization and maintenance in RtI implementation: Front-loaded for sustainability. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28(2), 81–88. Retrieved on May 24, 2013, from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ldrp.12009/full
One of the challenges of effective RTI implementation is the ability of instructors and school personnel to sustain the approach over a span of years. In this article, the authors examine a number of possible solutions to the problem, including an emphasis on training multiple exemplars, a training style that takes into account a wide variety of common classroom circumstances, and a focus on the procedures most likely to lead to sustained implementation.
Byrd, E. S. (2011). Educating and involving parents in the response to intervention process: The school’s important role. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 43(3), pp. 32–39. Retrieved on August 2, 2011, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7749/is_201101/ai_n56828481/
This informative article lays out the basics of the response to intervention approach and makes a detailed case for schools to enlist parental involvement in the process. Featured are notes on ways to address parents in a way that is helpful and informative without being overwhelming, various strategies for educating parents about RTI and what it entails, and thoughts on creating a support group. A brief list of studies related to parental involvement is included.
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. National Implementation Research Network. Retrieved November 15, 2011, from http://ctndisseminationlibrary.org/PDF/nirnmonograph.pdf
The document summarizes the findings from the literature on implementing practices or programs in any domain. The review confirms that systematic implementation is essential to evidenced-based practices and programs and puts forth a number of recommendations.
Fullan, M., Cuttress, C., & Kilcher, A. (2005). 8 forces for leaders of change. National Staff Development Council, 26(4), 54–64.
This article addresses the question of how to lead policymakers to accept change, and how to react when implemented changes fail. It describes eight key drivers to creating effective and lasting change in schools and their communities.
Hill, D. R., King, S. A., Lemons, C. J., & Partanen, J. N. (2012). Fidelity of implementation and instructional alignment in response to intervention research. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 27(3), 116–124.
This review of current research seeks to evaluate the extent to which studies of reading inventions monitored fidelity of implementation between RTI tiers. A data-filled evaluation of the studies indicated is supplemented by a discussion of the various outcomes and a suggestion for future research efforts.
Hoover, J. J., & Love, E. (2011). Supporting school-based response to intervention: A practitioner’s model. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 43(3), pp. 40–48.
This article examines the efforts of a trio of schools to implement the response to intervention model and how each of them fared. The authors break down what they consider key elements to successful implementation and consider the various roadblocks to that success that schools are likely to encounter during the process. The article concludes with further thoughts for practitioners.
Hoover, J. J., & Patton, J. R. (2008). The role of special educators in a multitiered instructional system. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43(4), 195–202.
In this article, the authors examine the emergence of the multitiered educational model designed to accommodate all learners, including those with disabilities, to the greatest possible degree. Included are detailed discussions of multilevel instructional programming and the response to intervention approach, as well as a consideration of five skills the authors feel special educators should possess.
Knoff, H. M. (2009). Implementing response-to-intervention at the school, district, and state levels: Functional assessment, data-based problem solving, and evidence-based academic and behavioral interventions. Little Rock, AZ: Project ACHIEVE Press.
This book length-treatment of the challenges and considerations that accompany RTI implementation at a variety of institutional levels contains information about functional assessments, the three essential components of professional development, and thoughts about the effective delivery of interventions to students, among many other topics. A comprehensive appendix follows, including useful Action Planning forms, sample RTI action plans, and evaluation sheets.
Kurns, S., & Tilly, W. D. (2008). Response to intervention: Blueprints for implementation: School building level edition. Retrieved on July 3, 2008, from http://www.nasdse.org/Portals/0/SCHOOL.pdf
This joint publication of the National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE) and Council of Administrators of Special Education (CASE)—one in a three-part series—outlines a step-by-step blueprint for RTI implementation, including available resources (with links to Websites and online materials) and expert “Wisdom from the Field.” A “School Building Level Self Assessment” workbook is also included. The rest of the series is available in pdf format from http://www.nasdse.org/.
Mellard, D. F., McKnight, M. A., & Deshler, D. D. (2007). The ABCs of RTI elementary school reading: A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: The National Research Center on
This informative and helpful work treats of a variety of topics related to RTI practices, including progress monitoring, tiered instruction, and fidelity of implementation. Each section features a number of suggested questions for the parents of children involved in the RTI process, and the packet culminates in a workbook designed to help parents to address similar concerns.
National Association of School Psychologists, et al. (2006, November). New roles in response to intervention: Creating success for schools and children. Retrieved on February 10, 2009, from http://www.nasponline.org/advocacy/New%20Roles%20in%20RTI.pdf
This collaboration spearheaded by the National Association of School Psychologists and involving the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC), Learning Disabilities Association of America (LDA), and National Education Association (NEA), among many others, represents an attempt to create a coherent vision of RTI implementation from a host of different perspectives. Self-describedly diverse in its viewpoints, the resulting document includes insights on such topics as “New Roles for Speech-Language Pathologists,” “The Role of Reading Specialists in the RTI Process,” and “New Roles for Social Workers,” to name but a few. A shared bibliography is included.
National Association of State Directors of Special Education, The. (2006). Response to Intervention: A joint paper by the National Association of State Directors of Special Education and the Council of Administrators of Special Education. Alexandria, VA.
This paper reviews various aspects of RTI, such as its importance, assessment procedures, problem solving process, tiered levels of intervention, and professional development. Included also is a list of myths about RTI implementation.
Pingle, R. L. & Cox, E. P. (2007). Leadership practices of elementary school principals. Academic Leadership: The Online Journal, 4(2), 1–5. November 15, 2011, from
Relying on reports from principals and teachers, this research paper examines the leadership practices of principals from both academically successful and unsuccessful schools, and finds no significant difference between them. The analysis of the teachers’ report, however, does find statistically significant differences between the schools’ practices. The synopsis of the paper emphasizes the importance of the role of college preparation programs in helping principals to recognize and evaluate their leadership behaviors.
Prasse, D. P. (2006). Legal supports for problem-solving systems. Remedial and Special Education, 27(1), 7–15.
A useful summary of decades of federal law related to special education, this article provides a detailed overview of the legislative evolution of the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (1997 and 2004) and the response to intervention approach. Further topics include a look at the impetus behind reform efforts and a glimpse forward at what lies in store for the field.
Prewett, S., Mellard, D. F., Deshler, D. D., Allen, J., Alexander, R., & Stern, A. (2012). Response to intervention in middle schools: Practices and outcomes. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 27(3), 136–147.
This broad-based examination of the response to intervention model among middle-school students includes data points on a variety of issues related to successful implementation, including school culture and student diversity. A detailed discussion of the field methods involved, as well as thoughts regarding future research, are included.
Michigan Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services. Michigan’s Integrated Behavior and Learning Support Initiative (MiBLSi).
MiBLSi is a project that develops support systems and sustained implementation of a data-driven, problem solving model in elementary schools to help students become better readers. MiBLSi also promotes students’ social skills.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
This book presents an imaginative approach to change for the leaders of any organizations, including those having to do with education and business. Fullan describes current ideas and theories to accomplish goals and become an effective leader.
National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Inc. (2004). Response to Intervention (RTI) Project. Retrieved June 4, 2007, from
This page of NASDSE’s Website provides many links to information about RTI, including a downloadable overview of RTI, a PowerPoint presentation on RTI, a paper addressing myths about RTI, a how-to guide to implementing RTI, and information on how to order conference DVDs.
National Center on Response to Intervention http://www.rti4success.org/
This site––created by the American Institutes for Research in cooperation with researchers from the University of Kansas and Vanderbilt University and funded by OSEP––serves as a veritable treasure house of information regarding the RTI approach. Major topics include “Knowledge production,” Expert trainings,” and “Information dissemination.” The center’s self-described mission is “to provide technical assistance to states and districts and building the capacity of states to assist districts in implementing proven models for RTI/ EIS.”
National Center on Student Progress Monitoring http://www.studentprogress.org/
The National Center on Student Progress Monitoring is a national technical assistance and dissemination center funded by the Office of Special Education programs (OSEP). It provides assistance to states and districts who are interested in implementing progress monitoring in grades K-5.
Oregon Department of Education. (2005, May 19). Action planning: District-guided team action planning. Retrieved from http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=315
This document from a conference of the Oregon Department of Education helps brainstorm a plan to initiation implementing RTI in schools. The document provides a timeline of procedures, data-collection information, program-plan information, and implementation checks.
RTI Action Network http://www.rtinetwork.org/
A program of the National Center for Learning Disabilities, the Website of the RTI Action Network offers a plentitude of advice, support, and resources for the effective design and implementation of the response to intervention approach. From the very first steps of RTI development, through the evaluation and refinement of implemented plans, the RTI Action Network is a place where school leaders and instructors can look for models, support, and assistance. Besides its wealth of information and links, the Website allows visitors to connect with one another to share their own experiences and advice on RTI implementation and beyond.
RTI Wire. (2007). Retrieved from http://www.jimwrightonline.com/php/rti/rti_wire.php
This Website gives a brief description of Response to Intervention and how to effectively put RTI into practice in schools. It also lists a number of free resources that can be downloaded from the Internet.
Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. (1992). Facilitative leadership: The imperative for change. Retrieved January 22, 2007, from http://www.sedl.org/change/facilitate/leaders.html#theneed
This document explores the various forms, characteristics, and sources of leadership and the ways though which leadership helps to facilitate change. It defines leadership functionally and offers a framework through which change can be carried out.
United States Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. (n.d.) Tool kit on teaching and assessing students with disabilities: Responsiveness to intervention in the SLD determination process. Retrieved on June 11, 2008, from http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/toolkit/ta_responsiveness_intervention.asp
This site offers an overview of the Response to Intervention model, with an emphasis on identifying students who have specific learning disabilities as outlined in IDEA ’04. Information in terminology, differences in intervention at the various tiers, and the determination of responsiveness is also available.
Utah Personal Development Center. (2006, June 12–14). Heartland AEA—13 guiding questions for RTI implementation. Retrieved on November 15, 2011, from
This handout from a conference of the Utah Personnel Development Center poses a number of questions and then details the steps to answer them on three levels of RTI implementation: core, supplemental, and intensive.