Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Education Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

University of Tennessee, Knoxville

2011

Response to Intervention

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Education

Exploring The Concerns Of Teachers And Principals Implementing Response To Intervention In A Pilot Project: Where Policy And Practice Collide, Lisa Michele Bilton Dec 2011

Exploring The Concerns Of Teachers And Principals Implementing Response To Intervention In A Pilot Project: Where Policy And Practice Collide, Lisa Michele Bilton

Doctoral Dissertations

The purpose of this mixed-methods, multi-site study was to identify and explore the concerns of teachers and principals implementing a pilot Response to Intervention (RTI) model in three elementary schools in the southeast United States and to determine whether these concerns differed significantly from the beginning to the end of the first year of implementation. The Stages of Concern from the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (George, Hall, & Stiegelbauer, 2006; Hord, Rutherford, Huling, & Hall, 2004) served as the theoretical framework for the design and analysis of this study.

Between Fall 2008 and Spring 2009, 18 participants, including six administrators and …


Validation Of The Monitoring Academic Progress: Reading (Map: R): Development And Investigation Of A Group-Administered Comprehension-Based Tool For Rti, Angela Nicole Hilton-Prillhart Aug 2011

Validation Of The Monitoring Academic Progress: Reading (Map: R): Development And Investigation Of A Group-Administered Comprehension-Based Tool For Rti, Angela Nicole Hilton-Prillhart

Doctoral Dissertations

Monitoring Academic Progress: Reading (MAP: R), a silent, group-administered screener was piloted as part of a comprehensive Response to Intervention program. MAP: R along with AIMSweb© Maze and STAR reading were administered to 1,688 students in Grades 1-3. Overall alternate-form reliabilities for MAP: R resulted in moderately high stability (Grade 1 = .79, Grade 2 = .78, and Grade 3 = .75). Test-retest reliability was .90 for Grade1, .84 for Grade 2, and .89 for Grade 3. Concurrent validity, correlations for MAP: R and AIMSweb© Maze ranged from .43 to .69, with correlations for MAP: R and STAR ranging from …