Abstracts and Information: Empirical Articles on Response to Intervention

Researchers at the Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute conducted a literature review to identify articles that address features of Response to Intervention (RTI) in school-aged populations.

The 14 empirical articles on this page were included in the research synthesis, and served as the research base regarding the efficacy of RTI.  Click on the citations below to access information about each article, including background information, purpose, population, research design and results.

To read the full research synthesis and recommendations, click here to download the PDF of  "Recognition and Response: An Early Intervening System for Young Children At-Risk for Learning Disabilities."

• Burns, M. K., & Senesac, B. V. (2005). Comparison of dual discrepancy criteria to assess response to intervention. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 393-406.

• Case, L. P., Speece, D. L., & Molloy, D. E. (2003). The validity of a response-to-instruction paradigm to identify reading disabilities: A longitudinal analysis of individual differences and contextual factors. School Psychology Review, 32, 557-582.

• Coyne, M. D., Kame’enui, E. J., Simmons, D. C., & Harn, B. A. (2004). Beginning reading instruction as inoculation or insulin: First-grade reading performance of strong responders to kindergarten intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(2), 90-104.

• Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Prentice, K. (2005). Responsiveness to mathematical problem-solving instruction: Comparing students at risk of mathematics disability with and without risk of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(4), 293-306.

• Fuchs, L. S., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Paulsen, K., Bryant, J. D., & Hamlett, C. L. (2005). The prevention, identification, and cognitive determinants of math difficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(3), 493-513.

• McMaster, K. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Compton, D. L. (2005). Responding to nonresponders: An experimental field trial of identification and intervention methods. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 445-463.

• O’Connor, R.E., Harty, K. R., & Fulmer, D. (2005). Tiers of intervention in kindergarten through third grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(6), 532-538.

• O’Connor, R. (2000). Increasing the intensity of intervention in kindergarten and first grade. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(1), 43-54.

• O’Connor, R. E., Fulmer, D., Harty, K. R., & Bell, K. M. (2005). Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third grade: Changes in teaching and student outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(5).

• Speece, D. L. & Case, L. P. (2001). Classification in context: An alternative approach to identifying early reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 735-749.

• Torgesen, J. K., & Davis, C. (1996). Individual difference variables that predict response to training in phonological awareness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 63, 1-21.

• Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Rose, E., Lindamood, P., Conway, T., & Garvan, C. (1999). Preventing reading failure in young children with phonological processing disabilities: Group and individual responses to instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 579-593.

• Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., & Hickman, P. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69(4), 391-409.

• Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Sipay, E. R., Small, S. G., Pratt, A., Chen, R., & Denckla, M. B. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 601-638.