RESPONSE TO EARLY READING INTERVENTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF LEARNING DISABLITIY

项目2.早期阅读干预的反应与学习困难的识别 2004年对IDEA的重新授权将学生对教学的反应（RTI）作为一个要素， 学习障碍的识别在美国学校的实践。在项目2中，我们力求 解决RTI模型实施过程中必须填补的知识空白，特别是 关于（a）应测量响应的指令的确切性质和（B） 在单词水平阅读，阅读流畅性， 和理解。我们的目标是系统地研究与RTI和学生成绩相关的变量 在1-2年级提供的多层次阅读干预中。我们提出三个具体目标。具体目标1将 确定2种竞争性干预措施中RTI的结局和长期后果的差异 一年级学生的模型：（a）从行为咨询中得出的问题解决模型，其中 任课教师提供个性化的转诊前干预，以及（B）标准的补充方案 在阅读干预研究的基础上，在课堂外进行干预。具体目标2将 确定RTI在（a）个性化干预（特殊教育标准）方面的有效性， (b)标准化的干预与全面的，连续的阅读计划，都提供给学生 对1级干预反应不足。具体目标3将确定各种影响 学生特征、教师特征、干预实施特征对学生的影响 对这次干预的回应。为了实现这些目标，我们提出了一项纵向研究（1-2年）， 随访）的三个一年级队列（每年176名学生，共528名）在两个网站（休斯顿，奥斯汀）。 有阅读困难风险的一年级学生将被随机分配接受20周的问题解决 或标准化的协议干预。RTI不符合多项标准的学生将 参加为期30周的2级高强度三级干预，比较（a） 个体化和（B）标准化强化干预。建议的研究将提高我们的 理解与阅读和阅读相关的分类、定义和治疗有关的实践 ID，并使我们的学校实施实用，有效的RTI模型。将大幅 告知与身份证识别相关的过程和有身份证的学生的教学决策 在RTI模型中识别。

Project 2. Response to Early Reading Intervention and the Identification of Learning Disabilities The 2004 reauthorization of IDEA brings the use of student response to instruction (RTI) as an element in the identification of learning disabilities (IDs) into practice in American schools. In Project 2, we seek to address gaps in knowledge that must be filled as RTI models are implemented, particularly questions pertaining to (a) the precise nature of the instruction to which response should be measured and (b) the long-term implications of response to this instruction in terms of IDs in word-level reading, reading fluency, and comprehension. Our objective is to systematically study variables related to RTI and student outcomes in multi-tiered reading intervention provided in Grades 1-2. We propose 3 specific aims. Specific Aim 1 will determine differences in outcomes and long-range consequences of RTI within 2 competing intervention models for students in Grade 1: (a) a problem-solving model derived from behavioral consultation in which classroom teachers provide individualized prereferral interventions and (b) a standard protocol supplemental intervention provided outside the classroom and based on reading intervention research. Specific Aim 2 will determine the effectiveness of RTI in (a) individualized intervention (the standard in special education) and (b) standardized intervention with a comprehensive, sequential reading program, both provided to students with inadequate response to Grade 1 intervention. Specific Aim 3 will determine the impact of various student characteristics, teacher characteristics, and intervention implementation characteristics on student response to this intervention. To address these aims, we propose a longitudinal study (with 1-2 years of follow-up) of three Grade 1 cohorts (176 students per year, 528 total) across two sites (Houston, Austin). First graders at-risk for reading difficulty will be randomly assigned to receive 20 weeks of either problemsolving or standardized protocol intervention. Students whose RTI fails to meet multiple criteria will participate in 30 weeks of highly intensive Tier III intervention in Grade 2, comparing the effectiveness of (a) individualized and (b) standardized intensive intervention. The proposed research will enhance our understanding of the practices related to classification, definition, and treatment of reading and readingrelated IDs and enable the implementation of practical, valid RTI models in our schools. It will significantly inform both processes related to identification of IDs and instructional decisions for students with IDs identified within a RTI model.