Comments on: RTI²: Funding, Staffing, and Resource Allocation Policy

By: RTI²: Funding, Staffing, and Resource Allocation Policy (Part Four)

RTI²: Funding, Staffing, and Resource Allocation Policy (Part Four) — Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:44:10 +0000

[…] version of this article was originally published on the Bluff City Ed […]

By: Meghank

Meghank — Tue, 18 Feb 2014 12:54:01 +0000

“Strategies” like this are only a distraction from the far more important (and well-studied) goal of reducing class sizes in the early grades. In addiction the “screening” assessments are a perversion of true early childhood education.

In poorer schools, you know as well as I do that the percentage of kids who need lower class sizes is far higher than 15.

By: James Aycock (@firstresponses)

James Aycock (@firstresponses) — Sun, 16 Feb 2014 20:32:12 +0000

@Meghank: RTI2 is a way to get smaller groups. If you read the manual, interventions must be delivered in small groups – and the most intense interventions in very small groups.

The point about RTI2 as the solution is that it’s the mechanism for teaching kids how to read, for supporting kids who struggle. That should only be about 15% of kids.

By: bluffcityed

bluffcityed — Sat, 15 Feb 2014 18:19:29 +0000

RTI2 isn’t exclusively against those things, but it’s a way to catch up those students for whom lower class sizes in the early grades are no longer an option (middle and high school students)

By: Meghank

Meghank — Sat, 15 Feb 2014 15:46:40 +0000

You say the problem is children never learned to read early on, and the solution is “RTI2.” I think that’s ridiculous. The solution is lower class sizes in the early grades.

By: Ron Turner

Ron Turner — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 23:19:59 +0000

Sent from my iPad