**Graner, P.S., Faggella-Luby, M.N., & Fritschmann, N.S. (2005). An overview of responsiveness to intervention: What practitioners ought to know. Topics in Language Disorders, 25(2), 93-105. Available for purchase at http://journals.lww.com/topicsinlanguagedisorders/pages/articleviewer.aspx?year=2005&issue=04000&article=00003&type=abstract
This article presents a short history of RTI and viewpoints of several organizations regarding RTI, draws connections to the field of learning disabilities, and illustrates example approaches to RTI. The authors conclude that RTI receives attention because it promises to alleviate many current concerns about the IQ-achievement discrepancy model and LD identification, but that at this point it still lacks a sufficient evidence base. Other worries include the need RTI will create for a reorganization of personnel and additional classroom supports, the challenge of bringing research-validated practices to scale, and the scarce funding available.
**National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE) & Council of Administrators of Special Education (CASE). (2006, May). Response to intervention: NASDSE and CASE white paper on RtI. Available at http://www.nasdse.org/Portals/0/Documents/Download%20Publications/RtIAnAdministratorsPerspective1-06.pdf
This paper provides an overview of RTI meant to provide knowledge, strategies, and technical assistance to help general and special educators implement RTI. The paper describes why national attention has focused on RTI, specifies the components of RTI, and describes the importance of creating a unified system of education which includes a strong emphasis on intervention and supports. The paper also draws on the importance of assessment, a structured problem-solving process, and flexibility in the RTI model. The paper breaks down the tiered levels of intervention necessary in RTI. Lastly, the paper discusses how responsibility, professional development, and resources tie into RTI.
National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE). (2006, May). Myths about response to intervention (RtI) implementation. Available at http://www.nasdse.org/Portals/0/Documents/Download%20Publications/Myths%20about%20RtI.pdf
This paper outlines and responds to 11 myths about RTI. The myths range from misconceptions regarding the different intervention tiers to research regarding RTI.
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (2007, January). Questions and answers on response to intervention (RTI) and early intervening services (EIS). U.S. Department of Education. Available athttp://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/,root,dynamic,QaCorner,8,
This Q&A presents non-legally binding, informal guidance based on the U.S. Department of Education’s interpretation of applicable statutory and regulatory requirements in the context of the specific facts presented. These questions and responses touch on the differences of general education versus special education, EAS and RTI funding, evaluation and eligibility determinations, service delivery models, and other general topics.
Idea Partnership. (2007). Response to intervention: Key terms and acronyms. Available at http://www.ideapartnership.org/documents/RTI_Glossary7-30-07.pdf
This glossary defines key terms and acronyms related to RTI. It also dissects and specifies important aspects of certain terms and concepts.
**This document is considered a priority reading.