Response to Intervention and Language Diversity

I was eager to read the Mesmer and Mesmer article about Response to Intervention. Since discussing RTI in our Special Ed course last summer, I've been interested in learning more about how it works. The Mesmer article was clear and concise; most helpful was the vignette about Mark, the second grade student with reading difficulties. This section helped me see the roles of the various professionals involved, including the classroom teacher. It is very clear that RTI cannot be successful without a team working together to ensure the success of the child. In fact, the number of hours the team in the article spent working with Mark -- just one child! -- seems a bit overwhelming (although clearly worth the time if the child is able to progress more efficiently).

What still confuses me somewhat is the question of "scientific" or "research-based" intervention. Mesmer states that "interventions should be based on practices that have produced verifiable results through research studies" (second page). My first question is whether it is up to individual teachers to know current research about effective interventions; if not, who is responsible for disseminating that information? (It seems to be in the same category as "best practices" -- who determines what those are? Teachers speak of them as if they are in a canon somewhere. Am I missing something?) Mesmer's concern (last page) that publishers and companies will use the term "scientifically based" seems to me to be a valid one. Clearly, teachers need to be aware of what current, quality research studies are saying about effective interventions, particularly since RTI is a relatively new field.

The chapter by Lisa Delpit, "Language Diversity and Learning," seemed to throw another complication into the picture, although a student's home language or dialect seems critical to consider when identifying a student for RTI. I truly hope I don't react like some of the teachers she mentions in this chapter! The negative reactions of white adults to the black child's story (p. 55) seem to have been based on their perceptions of what it takes to be successful in school, rather than any malicious intent, but serve to highlight the creativity and openness and humility that we middle-class, white teachers need to employ in order to serve our students well.

I was particularly struck by the fact that children have established their group identity by the age of eight or nine (p. 52). Delpit says that it is critical for teachers to "recognize that the linguistic form a student brings to school is intimately connected with loved ones, community, and personal identity. To suggest that this form is 'wrong' or, even worse, ignorant, is to suggest that something is wrong with the student and his or her family. On the other hand, it is equally important to understand that students who do not have access to the politically popular dialect form in this country, that is, Standard English, are less likely to succeed economically than their peers who do. How can both realities be embraced?" To me, this suggests both awareness and caution when identifying students for special services. An aware and educated teacher may be able to tease apart home dialects from difficulty reading and recommend RTI when truly necessary.