Search

This article describes how a purposeful sample of 62 elementary schools from 17 states implemented a Response to Intervention (RtI) framework for reading. School informants answered surveys and were interviewed about differentiated instruction in Tier 1, screening/benchmarking, where Tier 2 interventions were located, typical group size and the minutes/day of intervention in Tiers 2 and 3 groups, and how students with individualized educational programs (IEPs) in reading were served in the school’s RtI model. Schools reported using differentiated instruction in Tier 1, favored curriculum-based measures for screening/benchmarking and progress monitoring, reported more intensive interventions and more progress monitoring in Tier 3, and used a wide variety of models for serving students with IEPs within the schools’ RtI models.

Using data from the Special Education Elementary Longitudinal Study (SRI International, 2002), this study estimated reading growth trajectories in a nationally representative sample of 3,421 students with disabilities ages 7 to 17 representing 11 federal disability categories. Reading achievement in all disability categories increased with age, but the rate of growth decreased with age. Average reading achievement differed by disability category. Students with speech or visual impairments performed highest; students with multiple disabilities or intellectual disabilities performed lowest. Although growth over time was comparable across disability categories, students with speech or hearing impairments or autism improved more slowly than students with learning disabilities. Gender, racial and ethnic, and socioeconomic differences were observed. Implications for accountability policies are discussed.

This article considers possible reasons that research knowledge is not used more extensively in special education practice and suggests issues to be addressed in solving this problem. We contrast research knowledge and practice knowledge and describe factors that moderate the influence of research on practice, in both general and special education. These factors include teacher knowledge and learning, teacher attitudes and beliefs, and context. We conclude by considering various issues and alternatives for reconceptualizing the relationship between research and practice in special education.

The Collaborative Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), the MTA, is the first child multisite cooperative agreement treatment study of children conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health, Rockville, Md. It examines the long-term effectiveness of medication vs behavioral treatment vs both for treatment of ADHD and compares state-of-the-art treatment with routine community care. In a parallel-groups design, 576 children (age, 7-9 years) with ADHD (96 at each site) are thoroughly assessed and randomized to 4 conditions: (1) medication alone, (2) psychosocial treatment alone, (3) the combination of both, (4) or community comparison. The first 3 groups are treated for 14 months and all are reassessed periodically for 24 months. Designers met the following challenges: framing clinically relevant primary questions; defining the target population; choice, intensity, and integration and combination of treatments for fair comparisons; combining scientific controls and standardization with clinical flexibility; and implementing a controlled clinical trial in a nonclinical setting (school) controlled by others. Innovative solutions included extensive decision algorithms and manualized adaptations of treatments to specific needs.