Article Preview
TopIntroduction
Response to Intervention (RtI) and Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) have gained popularity as methods for meeting the academic and behavioral needs of all students and have dominated education reform in the last decade (Fuchs & Vaughn, 2012). RtI/MTSS are considered tiered systems and began as a way to match resources to need in public health (Leavell & Clark, 1953), and more recently, within educational settings. While RtI/MTSS can be implemented across both academic and behavioral dimensions of learning, for this paper, the focus will be on the academic dimension because this is often the focus when schools first implement RtI/MTSS systems, and the following explanation of RtI/MTSS systems will include only academic examples.
Generally, primary prevention or Tier I of a RtI/MTSS system, as implemented in schools, includes assessment and instruction (e.g., core curriculum) for all students (Fuchs et al., 2003). As part of Tier I, all students are assessed (typically three times a year) using brief and direct measures of basic academic skills. These data are used to indicate which students struggle with basic skills and require some level of remediation. Students identified as struggling are then provided secondary prevention, or Tier II educational supports, which is generally characterized by small group interventions. As within Tier I, students within Tier II are also assessed, but the frequency is typically increased to approximately twice a month. If students continue to struggle given Tier II educational supports, they are provided intensive, individualized intervention at the third tier (i.e., tertiary prevention) of support, which often includes weekly assessment of the targeted skill(s). Special education is sometimes considered part of Tier III, but may also be considered as a distinct level of intensity of support (Fuchs et al., 2003; Tilly, 2008).
While many educators are familiar with “RtI” as a tiered system in place for meeting the needs of all students, educational researchers and policymakers are more frequently using “MTSS” to refer to similar systems of assessment and intervention; however, while there are similarities between the systems, the two are different. As Hurst (2014) explained, MTSS is a broader term that encompasses similar systems, such as PBIS and other systems that address individual student needs. Even though there is a subtle difference in the meaning of the two terms, many state education departments and schools are using the terms interchangeably. Such differences across states may be partly due to the Every School Succeeds Act (ESSA) not guiding the process, procedures, or implementation for RtI or MTSS; so, each state has the flexibility to determine its models for usage (Al Otaiba et al., 2019). For this paper, we will refer to these two terms as interchangeable (e.g., RtI/MTSS) as this is the current practice of many state departments and school personnel.
Commonly, RtI/MTSS systems have focused heavily on literacy but may also be implemented with a focus on basic math, or less frequently, writing skills. While these systems are often perceived as special education-focused, likely spurred by educational policy changes in the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (Gallagher & Coleman, 2009; Monetti et al., 2013), this is not the case. One of the critical elements of a quality RtI/MTSS system is the participation of those working in general education along with special education professionals (Burns & Gibbons, 2012).