Last semester, I was placed in a first grade classroom for EDU 211. My CT was very open to my questions, and even shared some personal background information with me about the students. She shared that a few of the students in the class were underperforming in reading, and were placed on a tier II support level. Because of this, they were pulled out once a day for reading enrichment with a reading specialist. There were two students, MT and MH, that were on tier III support for reading. My CT shared that these students were also candidates for retainment. These two students had contrasting situations in regards to their parent involvement. MT's parents were completely opposed to any extra support, or services. They were in denial that MT could potentially have a disability, and were very frustrated by the efforts made by my CT and his kindergarten teacher. MH's parents, on the other hand, were fully supportive, and were actually pushing for MH to receive services. MH was referred for an evaluation a few days before I completed my fieldwork hours.
I think the two contrasting parent situations are very interesting, and show how much impact parents have on their child's education.
I found this article from TheEducatorsRoom.com that shares the results of a survey done by readers. The survey was informal, but still received 98 responses.
The survey, first, asked various questions about the reader, including profession and the age group they served. The readers ranged from paraprofessionals, to higher up administrators, serving children from elementary aged, up to high school. There were also smaller percentages of school psychologists, academic coaches, and specialized subject teachers who responded.
The survey then asked a series of questions about the RTI model and their personal experience with it. These questions included if their particular school had an RTI model in place, whether their school had specific time carved out for RTI, and if their school district provided behavior RTI. I was surprised to see that 35.7% of the reported schools had "sort of" an RTI system in place. I feel like this should be a black or white type of thing. I am unsure of what this grey area of RTI looks like, and how helpful it could be in schools. I am wondering if this "sort of" answer has anything to do with the consistency of the program, or if the parameters of the system in place are loosely based off of the RTI model.
The next section of the article talked about the data used for tier III support. From the 98 responses, 24 different data points and collections were used across the survey. Some of the data collected included weekly monitoring, benchmark scores, state tests, and other locally produced tests. This has me wondering about the differences in tier III across schools. Does a tier III student at one school look different than a tier III student at another school? And how do services transfer if a student were to transfer to a different school?
The last section I want to discuss in this article is about overall opinions and attitudes towards the RTI model. The statistic that really stood out to me here was that 65% of responses about overall opinions towards the RTI model were negative. Most of these comments were rooted in frustration or feelings of inadequacy. I think this negativity could stem from not having a strong, consistent RTI model put into place. From a teacher's perspective, it must feel extremely frustrating to know which students need additional academic support, but not have the resources, staffing, or program structure to ensure that those students receive what they need. Other responses to this open-ended question included some tips for improving the RTI model. These responses included a need for more staffing, resources, and more time to meet with small groups, or individual students. All of these needs are understandable, as all of them would help constitute a successful RTI system for students.
This article also made me think about the debate of pull-out versus push-in. Pull-out is great because the students can learn in a different, probably more quiet, classroom. A change in environment could help the students focus, and learn. A push-in promotes cohesiveness between the general education teacher, and the special education teacher, paraprofessional, or specialist that could come in to work with students on tier II or III. While I have only been in a classroom that uses pull-out, I really like the idea of push-in. The only qualms I have about it is when I think about the general classroom environment being too distracting, but that is purely situational. Push-in allows the students to stay in their general education classroom, while having the chance to work with a different educator, and potentially not miss as much whole group learning as they would if they were being pulled-out.
This article from TheEducatorsRoom.com caused me to delve deeper into my thinking about the RTI system. From real responses to this survey, I quickly learned the strengths and weaknesses of this model, and ways it could improve as a whole. I was surprised about the lack of consistency from reader to reader and the amount of frustration (though, understandable) built up about this system. In my field placement, I will take this information and be especially cognizant of the system used within the school, its effectiveness, and how it could improve.
I really admire the RTI model's goal of preventing disability misidentification among students, something that could really change the course of their life. I hope this conversation regarding the RTI model, and what parts need improvement, occurs throughout all schools, as a consistent, well-staffed, system can help so many struggling students. When I am an educator, I will do my very best to advocate for my students by pushing for a strong and supportive system that will help them access the appropriate services, and succeed in school.
Article: https://theeducatorsroom.com/teachers-talk-rti-educators-room-survey-results/
Comments
Post a Comment