Compare methods
Review your selected methods side by side; rows that differ are highlighted.
| Response to Intervention× | Educational Growth Curve Modeling× | |
|---|---|---|
| Field | Education | Education |
| Family≠ | Process / pipeline | Regression model |
| Year of origin≠ | 2006 | 1987 |
| Originator≠ | Special education / school psychology field (Deno; Fuchs & Fuchs; Vaughn) | Anthony Bryk & Stephen Raudenbush; Judith Singer & John Willett |
| Type≠ | Tiered framework for screening, intervention, and learning-disability identification | Longitudinal multilevel model of individual change |
| Seminal source≠ | Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99. DOI ↗ | Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (2003). Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis: Modeling Change and Event Occurrence. Oxford University Press. ISBN: 9780195152968 |
| Aliases≠ | RTI, RtI, Multi-Tiered System of Supports, MTSS | Latent Growth Curve Modeling in Education, Multilevel Growth Models for Achievement, Individual Growth Trajectory Analysis, Learning Trajectory Modeling |
| Related | 4 | 4 |
| Summary≠ | Response to intervention (RTI) is a multi-tiered framework for preventing academic failure and identifying students with learning disabilities by their responsiveness to high-quality instruction. All students are screened and taught with evidence-based core instruction; those who fall behind receive progressively more intensive intervention while their progress is closely monitored. Students who fail to respond even to intensive, well-implemented intervention are flagged as needing further evaluation. RTI reframes disability identification from a static test discrepancy to a dynamic question of who does not respond to good teaching. | Educational growth curve modeling is a longitudinal multilevel technique for describing and explaining how individual students change over time on an outcome such as reading or mathematics achievement. Building on the hierarchical linear models framework formalized by Bryk and Raudenbush (1987) and the applied longitudinal treatment of Singer and Willett (2003), it fits each student a personal trajectory — an intercept and one or more slopes — and then models how those personal growth parameters vary across students and relate to learner characteristics, classrooms, and schools. |
| ScholarGateDataset ↗ |
|
|