The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Identifying Students at Risk, Monitoring Performance, and Determining Eligibility Within Response to Intervention: Research on Educational Need and Benefit From Academic Intervention
Abstract
The new Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (2004) offers local education agencies the choice of using a student's response to intervention (RTI) as a major component to determine eligibility for special education under the category of specific learning disabilities (SLD). Using a RTI model, it is not expected that different students will be identified as SLD than those identified historically. For more than 25 years, accumulated evidence has strongly suggested that most students labeled SLD have been those students with severe educational needs (i.e., have performance discrepancies compared to students in their own communities), regardless of the stated eligibility criterion (e.g., ability–achievement discrepancies). What is unique about RTI is that educational need is a necessary but not sufficient requirement for SLD identification. Students also must not be responding to high-quality general education instruction (i.e., receiving educational benefit). This article first explores the scientific evidence for operationalizing the educational need component using curriculum-based measurement. Second, the use of curriculum-based measurement to assess RTI is presented not only within a special education eligibility process, but also for universal screening and progress monitoring for all students within a three-tier problem-solving model. The article concludes with important research questions within RTI.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“An attempt to address variable and inaccurate diagnostic practices occurred with the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA, via a specific “disproportionality amendment” and the incorporation of a new choice of diagnostic model, Response to Intervention (RTI) (Bradley, Danielson, and Doolittle 2007; Harris-Murri, King, and Rostenberg 2006; Shinn 2007).”
From Disproportionality and Learning Disabilities: Parsing Apart Race, Socioeconomic Status, and Language (2011) · cites this paper as Shinn 2007
Citations
Cites
Curriculum-Based Measurement: The Emerging Alternative
Deno, S. L. (1985) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440298505200303 · Cited by 1,667
Developments in Curriculum-Based Measurement
Deno, S. L. (2003) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/00224669030370030801 · Cited by 653
The Validity of Informal Reading Comprehension Measures
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/074193258800900206 · Cited by 490
Identifying Valid Measures of Reading
Deno, S. L., Mirkin, P. K., & Chiang, B. (1982) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440298204900105 · Cited by 457
Formative Evaluation of Academic Progress: How Much Growth Can We Expect?
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Walz, L., & Germann, G. (1993) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/02796015.1993.12085636 · Cited by 442
Paradigmatic Distinctions between Instructionally Relevant Measurement Models
Fuchs, L., & Deno, S. (1991) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440299105700603 · Cited by 424
Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement
Shinn, M. R. (1998) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 386
Self-citationAssessing Intervention Responsiveness: Conceptual and Technical Issues
Fuchs, L. S. (2003) · Learning Disabilities Research & Practice · doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00073 · Cited by 236
Formative Evaluation of Individual Student Programs: A New Role for School Psychologists
Deno, S. L. (1986) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/02796015.1986.12085239 · Cited by 235
Treatment Validity as a Unifying Construct for Identifying Learning Disabilities
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Speece, D. L. (2002) · Learning Disability Quarterly · doi:10.2307/1511189 · Cited by 178
Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1999) · School Psychology Review · Cited by 149
A Logical and Empirical Analysis of Current Practice in Classifying Students as Handicapped
Ysseldyke, J. E., Algozzine, B., & Epps, S. (1983) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440298305000207 · Cited by 122
Implementing Curriculum-Based Measurement in Special and Regular Education Settings
Marston, D., & Magnusson, D. (1985) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440298505200307 · Cited by 110
What Is Scientifically-Based Research on Progress Monitoring?.
Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2001) · Cited by 80
Reliability and Validity of Curriculum-Based Informal Reading Inventories
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Deno, S. L. (1982) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.2307/747536 · Cited by 76
Differentiating Mildly Handicapped, Low-Achieving, and Regular Education Students
Shinn, M. R., & Marston, D. (1985) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/074193258500600207 · Cited by 73
Self-citationKavale, K. A. (1994) · Learning Disabilities Research and Practice · Cited by 71
Shinn, M. R., Ysseldyke, J. E., Deno, S. L., & Tindal, G. A. (1986) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/002221948601900906 · Cited by 69
Self-citationIdentifying children with learning disabilities: When is a discrepancy severe?
Algozzine, B., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Shinn, M. R. (1982) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-4405(82)90020-6 · Cited by 50
Self-citationShinn, M. R., Powell‐Smith, K. A., Good, R. H., & Baker, S. (1997) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440299706400105 · Cited by 37
Self-citationShapiro, E. S., Angello, L. M., & Eckert, T. L. (2004) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/02796015.2004.12086246 · Cited by 34
Characteristics of LD Students in Iowa: An Empirical Investigation
Cone, T. E., Wilson, L. R., Bradley, C., & Reese, J. H. (1985) · Learning Disability Quarterly · doi:10.2307/1510895 · Cited by 26
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Disproportionality and Learning Disabilities: Parsing Apart Race, Socioeconomic Status, and Language
Shifrer, D., Muller, C., & Callahan, R. (2011) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/0022219410374236 · Cited by 241
“Although both a criticism and a supplement for the three more traditional models—the ability-achievement discrepancy, low-achievement, and intraindividual discrepancy models—a specific intent of RTI is to reduce disproportionality.”
MethodResultInfluentialKurth, J. A., & Mastergeorge, A. M. (2009) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/0022466908329825 · Cited by 227
Ardoin, S. P., Christ, T. J., Morena, L. S., Cormier, D. C., & Klingbeil, D. A. (2012) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2012.09.004 · Cited by 201
Fidelity of implementation framework: A critical need for response to intervention models
Keller‐Margulis, M. A. (2012) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.21602 · Cited by 108
Introduction to the special issue: Current research in Cattell–Horn–Carroll–based assessment
Newton, J. H., & McGrew, K. S. (2010) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.20495 · Cited by 99
Metadata
- Authors
- Shinn, M. R.
- Affiliations
- National Louis University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Shinn, Mark R.
- Venue
- School Psychology Review
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-12-01
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 601-617
- ISSN
- 0279-6015 (ISSN-L)
- 2372-966X
- OpenAlex
- W187514376
- Cited by
- 148
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 12.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- School Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Improvement
- Keywords
- Response to Intervention, specific learning disabilities, special education eligibility, curriculum-based measurement, educational benefits, at-risk students, progress monitoring, universal screening, ability-achievement discrepancy, Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
