RTI^2 - Position Paper - Response to Intervention in Tennessee Schools - Assignment Example

Response to Intervention in Tennessee Schools Response to Intervention in Tennessee Schools The function of any established public education system is to guide all students going through it for success after school life and in Tennessee this is no different; this is indicated by the adoption of Response to Instruction and intervention (RTI2) model. The Tennessee Department of Education describes it as a framework incorporating common core state standards accountability, assessment, and early intervention to serve all students with a common belief that all students are capable of learning.

It is a framework congruent to providing a seamless problem-solving model for addressing diverse student needs through high quality interventions and instructions tailored to student outcomes- learning rate and performance level (TN Core, 2013). It identifies students having particular learning disability thus requiring special education from students with normal abilities. It identifies such students using a three-tier approach. In this paper, I support the use of Response to Intervention in Tennessee schools.

First, I am in favor of the comprehensive resolution of the student qualification for participation in the model. The tiered instructions of the model help to minimize probability of false positives, that is, it precisely identifies the true student victims of special needs excluding those students who appear disabled when actually they are not. In this way, it will minimize the resources directed at addressing the disability problem in academics with the saved resourced being used to address other challenges facing the education sector or any other sector of the economy.

It also save the parents and families of the students who would have been wrongly identified with special learning needs from psychological suffering resulting from empathizing with their child. More so, it reduces the work load of practitioners administering the model’s assessment instructions. Second, I support Response to Intervention model because of its early intercession to the problem of special needs as this enables the school provide effective and comprehensive support to the students identified with such challenge.

I believe the science research-based and high quality interventions used are more reliable as they are thoroughly tested and approved before their adoption thereby purging risks of undesired negative effects in their usage (Fucks and Fuchs, 2005). Basing on the individual performance levels and learning rates help to address the root cause of the problem as every student has unique causes for poor academic performance and/or behavioral deficiency. The effectiveness of the model is enhanced further by continuous scrutiny of the performance and progress of the students that offers chances of reviewing the support actions being given to the students; the review is critical in this ever changing world and life.

Also, I believe involvement of the parents and families of the victim students helps in collection of corroborating information that would have not been found on their exclusion, enhances the success of the model as it extends support to home setting and informs the parents about their child’s academic performances and progression. I am aware of the challenges hindering the effective implementation of the model in schools in Tennessee such as cultural diversity, structural incongruity and culturally irresponsive practices and policies.

However, these challenges are not beyond manageable limits. They can be satisfactorily addressed by reviewing the current practices and policies to incorporate supportive elements, promotion of cultural diversity embracing projects such as sports and seminars and progressively training of the personnel engaged in its designation and implementation. In summary, I believe that the Response to intervention model is of great significance to schools in Tennessee in identifying students with special learning needs.

It will address the challenge before it is too late. It will significantly save resources used in addressing the problem as it identifies only students actually having disabilities in general learning. Therefore, if correctly implement, it will contribute to tremendous results in schools in Tennessee. ReferencesBarnett, D., Daly, E., Jones, K., and Lentz, F. (2004). Response to Intervention: Empirically based special service decisions from single-case designs of increasing and decreasing intensity.

Journal of special Education, 38: 66-79.Fucks, D. and Fuchs, L. (2005). Responsiveness-to-intervention: A blueprint for Practitioners Policymakers and Parents. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(1): 57-61.TN Core (2013). RTI2 Framework 2013: Response to Instruction and Intervention Framework. [Tennessee Department of Education].