Assessing Intervention Responsiveness: Conceptual and Technical Issues
Abstract
Implementing an intervention responsiveness approach to the identification of learning disabilities (LD) requires specification of procedures for the assessment process. In this article, the author uses examples in the literature to explore conceptual and technical issues associated with options for specifying three assessment components: the timing of the measurement of student response to intervention; the criterion for demarcating learning as inadequate (below which students are identified as LD); and the nature of the intervention. Then, the author summarizes research contrasting alternative assessment methods within an intervention responsiveness approach to LD identification. Conclusions are drawn, and future related work is described.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Typically, single subject designs include a baseline phase prior to implementation of intervention; this phase is then compared to postintervention trajectory.
“Typically, such designs include a baseline phase prior to implementation of intervention; this phase is then compared to postintervention trajectory [222].”
From Curriculum-Based Measurement: A Brief History of Nearly Everything from the 1970s to the Present (2013) · cites this paper as [222]
Cites
Good, R. H., Simmons, D. C., & Kame'enui, E. J. (2001) · Scientific Studies of Reading · doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0503_4 · Cited by 545 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Compton, D. L. (2004) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440290407100101 · Cited by 225 · see citing works
Self-citationShinn, M. R. (2007) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/02796015.2007.12087920 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading: Passage equivalence and probe-set development
Christ, T. J., & Ardoin, S. P. (2009) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2008.09.004 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Assessing the Instructional Level for Mathematics: A Comparison of Methods
Burns, M. K., VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Jiban, C. L. (2006) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/02796015.2006.12087975 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
The Emergence and Possible Futures of Response To Intervention
VanDerHeyden, A. M., Witt, J. C., & Barnett, D. W. (2005) · Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment · doi:10.1177/073428290502300404 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Reliability of Decision-Making Frameworks for Response to Intervention for Reading
Burns, M. K., Scholin, S. E., Kosciolek, S., & Livingston, J. (2010) · Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment · doi:10.1177/0734282909342374 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Curriculum-Based Measurement: A Brief History of Nearly Everything from the 1970s to the Present
Tindal, G. (2013) · ISRN Education · doi:10.1155/2013/958530 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
“Using one of three references, teachers can determine who is benefitting and who is not benefitting from the instructional program using (a) the normative distribution of student performance based on all those in the group or a subset of students similar to the targeted student or group, (b) a standard that correspond…”
Method
- Authors
- Fuchs, L. S.
- Affiliations
- Vanderbilt University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Fuchs, Lynn S.
- ORCID
- Fuchs, Lynn S.
- Venue
- Learning Disabilities Research & Practice
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2003-06-13
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 172-186
- ISSN
- 0938-8982 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5826
- OpenAlex
- W1971881341
- Cited by
- 236
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 19
- FWCI
- 25.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Learning Disabilities Research and Practice (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational and Psychological Assessments
- Keywords
- responsiveness to intervention, learning disabilities, identification of learning disabilities, Response to Intervention, assessment timing, comparison of assessment methods
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
