干预-应答模式鉴别学习障碍的有效性及其调节因素:20年研究的元分析

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2016.06.09

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本研究采用元分析方法探讨在学习障碍的鉴别中兴起的干预-应答（Response to Intervention，RTI）模式鉴别学习障碍内部亚组的有效性及其调节因素。通过系统检索1996-2015年的文献，获得了34项研究，包括6127名学生的45个样本、261个效应值。元分析结果表明，RTI模式可有效区分学习障碍风险儿童的内部亚组，对干预无应答和有应答的学生在学业成就、认知技能、行为等多方面存在系统、显著和持久的差异，但仍存在个体应答状态的进一步分化。RTI模式对于学习障碍风险儿童内部变异的区分效果受到干预对象、干预层次、干预时间、应答指标选择、测量方法和切分点等因素的影响。本元分析结果不仅为认识RTI模式鉴别学习障碍的有效性提供了进一步证据，更重要的是通过系列调节效应分析，为合理实施RTI模式鉴别学习障碍提供了直接依据。

关键词: 干预-应答模式, 学习障碍鉴别, 元分析

Abstract: Learning disability is one of common neurocognitive developmental disorders among children and adolescents. The mode of Response to intervention (RTI) has been recommended to identify learning disabilities since 2004.However, the validity of the RTI model for identifying learning disabilities has been questioned. This study aimed to exam the validity of the RTI model and the moderating effects of the major variables being involved in the application of RTI model on the basis of the past two decades' of studies. Articles were obtained using keywords, i.e., "RTI(response to intervention) "and "Dyslexia" or "Dyscalculia" or "Specific learning difficulties/disorders" or "Reading disorder (s)/difficulties" or "Mathematical disorder (s)/difficulties" from Web of science, Psychoinform and CNKI. Thirty-four studies published within 1996 to 2015 met the criteria and were included into the meta-analysis, yielding 45 samples (N=6,127) and 261 weighted effect sizes (ESs). Results indicated:(1)The non-responders performed significantly poorer on academic achievement, cognitive skills and behaviors than the responders, and the ESs of all the variables were above 0.5.(2)Evidences from six longitudinal studies indicated that the gap between the groups of responders and non-responders were persistent across time on academic achievement and cognitive skills, but some responders may perform similarly to the non-responders at the follow-up assessments.(3)Moderating effects were found significant for the severity of learning difficulty, intervention tier and duration. Significantly larger ESs emerged from the studies about at-risk students, using short-term intensive Tier 2 intervention rather than from those students with severe learning difficulties, using long-term multi-tiered intervention.(4)Moderating effects were also found significant for measures and criteria of responsive status. Academic achievement rather than cognitive skills were more reliable as the indicators of responsiveness. Compared with the growth or the dual discrepancy criteria, the achievement status was more reliable in differentiating responders and non-responders. When standardized, norm-referenced instruments were used for measuring academic achievement, the 16^th percentile would be recommended as the cut-off points. And when non-standardized instruments were used, the 25^th percentile would be preferred. Findings from this meta-analysis support the RTI model valid for identifying the subgroups of at risk students for learning disabilities. Guidelines for implementing RTI model in research and practices were recommended. Future directions were also discussed.

Key words: response to intervention (RTI), identification of learning disability, meta-analysis

中图分类号:

G442

王翠翠, 徐琴芳, 陶沙. 干预-应答模式鉴别学习障碍的有效性及其调节因素:20年研究的元分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(6): 706-716.

WANG Cuicui, XU Qinfang, TAO Sha. The Validity of the RTI Model for Identifying Learning Disabilities and the Moderators: A Meta-analysis of the Past Two Decades' Studies[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(6): 706-716.

参考文献

Al Otaiba, S., & Fuchs, D. (2002). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention a review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23 (5), 300-316.

Al Otaiba, S., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Who are the young children for whom best practices in reading are ineffective? An experimental and longitudinal study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39 (5), 414-431.

Al Otaiba, S., Kim, Y. S., Wanzek, J., Petscher, Y., & Wagner, R. K. (2014). Long term effects of first grade multi-tier intervention. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 7 (3), 250-267.

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders:DSM 5. Bookpointz, US.

Amtmann, D., Abbott, R. D., & Berninger, V. W. (2008). Identifying and predicting classes of response to explicit phonological spelling instruction during independent composing. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41 (3), 218-234.

Andrade, O. V. C. D. A., Andrade, P. E., & Capellini, S. A. (2015). Collective screening tools for early identification of dyslexia. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1581-1581.

Bach, S., Richardson, U., Brandeis, D., Martin, E., & Brem, S. (2013). Print-specific multimodal brain activation in kindergarten improves prediction of reading skills in second grade. Neuroimage, 82, 605-615.

Barth, A. E., Denton, C. A., Stuebing, K. K., Fletcher, J. M., Cirino, P. T., Francis, D. J., & Vaughn, S. (2010). A test of the cerebellar hypothesis of dyslexia in adequate and inadequate responders to reading intervention. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 16 (3), 526-536.

Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Vermeulen, K., Ogier, S., Brooksher, R., Zook, D., & Lemos, Z. (2002). Comparison of faster and slower responders to early intervention in reading:Differentiating features of their language profiles. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25 (1), 59-76.

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2014). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons.

Burns, M. K., Appleton, J. J., & Stehouwer, J. D. (2005). Meta-analytic review of responsiveness-to-intervention research:Examining field-based and research-implemented models. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23 (4), 381-394.

Butterworth, B., & Kovas, Y. (2013). Understanding neurocognitive developmental disorders can improve education for all. Science, 340 (6130), 300-305.

Case L., Speece, D. L. & Molly D E. (2003). The validity of a response-to-instruction paradigm to identify reading disabilities:A longitudinal analysis of individual differences and contextual factors. School Psychology Review, 32 (4), 557-582.

Case, L., Speece, D., Silverman, R., Schatschneider, C., Montanaro, E., & Ritchey, K. (2014). Immediate and long term effects of tier 2 reading instruction for first-grade students with a high probability of reading failure. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 7 (1), 28-53.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale:Earlbaum, USA.

Compton, D. L. (2000). Modeling the response of normally achieving and at-risk first grade children to word reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 50 (1), 53-84.

Compton, D. L., Gilbert, J. K., Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Cho, E.,... & Bouton, B. (2012). Accelerating chronically unresponsive children to tier 3 instruction what level of data is necessary to ensure selection accuracy? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45 (3), 204-216.

Davis, N., Barquero, L., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Gore, J. C., & Anderson, A. W. (2011). Functional correlates of children's responsiveness to intervention. Developmental Neuropsychology, 36 (3), 288-301.

Denton, C. A., Tolar, T. D., Fletcher, J. M., Barth, A. E., Vaughn, S., & Francis, D. J. (2013). Effects of tier 3 intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties and characteristics of inadequate responders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105 (3), 633-648.

Denton, C. A., Wexler, J., Vaughn, S., & Bryan, D. (2008). Intervention provided to linguistically diverse middle school students with severe reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23 (2), 79-89.

Dion, E., Roux, C., Landry, D., Fuchs, D., Wehby, J., & Dupéré, V. (2011). Improving attention and preventing reading difficulties among low-income first-graders:A randomized study. Prevention Science, 12 (1), 70-79.

Ellis, P. D. (2010). The essential guide to effect sizes:Statistical power, meta-analysis, and the interpretation of research results. Cambridge University Press.

Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Morris, R. D., & Lyon, G. R. (2005). Evidence-based assessment of learning disabilities in children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 34 (3), 506-522.

Fletcher, J. M., Stuebing, K. K., Barth, A. E., Denton, C. A., Cirino, P. T., Francis, D. J., & Vaughn, S. (2011). Cognitive correlates of inadequate response to reading intervention. School Psychology Review, 40 (1), 3-22.

Fletcher, J. M., & Vaughn, S. (2009). Response to intervention:Preventing and remediating academic difficulties. Child Development Perspectives, 3 (1), 30-37.

Frijters, J. C., Lovett, M. W., Steinbach, K. A., Wolf, M., Sevcik, R. A., & Morris, R. D. (2011). Neurocognitive predictors of reading outcomes for children with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44 (2), 150-166.

Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, L. S., Bryant, V. J., Hamlett, C. L., & Lambert, W. (2012). First-grade cognitive abilities as long-term predictors of reading comprehension and disability status. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45 (3), 217-231.

Fuchs, D., & Deshler, D. D. (2007). What we need to know about responsiveness to intervention (and shouldn't be afraid to ask). Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22 (2), 129-136.

Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention:Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18 (3), 157-171.

Fuchs, L.S., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Paulsen, K., Bryant, J. D., & Hamlett, C. L. (2005). The prevention, identification, and cognitive determinants of math difficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97 (3), 493-513.

Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Compton, D. L. (2013). Intervention effects for students with comorbid forms of learning disability understanding the needs of non-responders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46 (6), 534-548.

Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Prentice, K. (2004). Responsiveness to mathematical problem-solving instruction comparing students at risk of mathematics disability with and without risk of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37 (4), 293-306.

Gold, A. B., Ewing-Cobbs, L., Cirino, P., Fuchs, L. S., Stuebing, K. K., & Fletcher, J. M. (2013).

Cognitive and behavioral attention in children with math difficulties. Child Neuropsychology, 19 (4), 420-437.

Greenwood, C. R., Bradfield, T., Kaminski, R., Linas, M., Carta, J. J., & Nylander, D. (2011). The Response to Intervention (RTI) approach in early childhood. Focus on Exceptional Children, 43 (9), 1-22.

Greulich, L., Al Otaiba, S., Schatschneider, C., Wanzek, J., Ortiz, M., & Wagner, R. K. (2014). Understanding inadequate response to first-grade multi-tier intervention nomothetic and ideographic perspectives. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37 (4), 204-217.

Hale, J. B., Alfonso, V., Berninger, B., Bracken, B.,Christo, C., Clark, E., Yalof, J., (2010). Critical issues in response-to-intervention, comprehensive evaluation, and specific learning disabilities identification and intervention:An expert white paper consensus. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33, 223-236.

Hedges, L., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical models for meta-analysis. New York:Academic Press. Hedges, LV, & Pigott, TD (2001). The power of statistical tests in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 6, 203-217.

Ito, T. A., Miller, N., & Pollock, V. E. (1996). Alcohol and aggression:a meta-analysis on the moderating effects of inhibitory cues, triggering events, and self-focused attention. Psychological Bulletin, 120 (1), 60-82.

Johnson, E., Mellard, D. F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M. A. (2006). Responsiveness to Intervention (RTI):How to Do It.[RTI Manual]. National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

Lipka, O., & Siegel, L. S. (2010). The improvement of reading skills of L1 and ESL children using a Response to Intervention (RTI) Model. Psicothema, 22 (4), 963-969.

Lundahl, B., Risser, H. J., & Lovejoy, M. C. (2006). A meta-analysis of parent training:Moderators and follow-up effects. Clinical Psychology review, 26 (1), 86-104.

Lyon, G. R. (1995). Toward a definition of dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 45 (1), 1-27.

Melby-Lervåg, M., Lyster, S. A. H., & Hulme, C. (2012). Phonological skills and their role in learning to read:a meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 138 (2), 322-352.

Molfese, P. J., Fletcher, J. M., & Denton, C. A. (2013). Adequate versus inadequate response to reading intervention:an event-related potentials assessment. Developmental Neuropsychology, 38 (8), 534-549.

National Reading Panel (US), National Institute of Child Health, & Human Development (US). (2000). Report of the national reading panel:Teaching children to read:An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction:Reports of the subgroups. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.

O'Connor, R. E., Bocian, K. M., Beach, K. D., Sanchez, V., & Flynn, L. J. (2013). Special education in a 4-year Response to Intervention (RTI) Environment:Characteristics of students with learning disability and grade of identification. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28 (3), 98-112.

O'Connor, R. E., Fulmer, D., Harty, K. R., & Bell, K. M. (2005). Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third grade changes in teaching and student outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38 (5), 440-455.

O'Connor, R. E., Harty, K. R., & Fulmer, D. (2005). Tiers of intervention in kindergarten through third grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38 (6), 532-538.

Reynolds, C.R., & Shaywitz, S.E. (2009a). Response to Intervention:Ready or not? Or from wait-to-fail to watch-them-fail. School Psychology Quarterly, 24 (2), 130-145.

Reynolds, C.R., & Shaywitz, S. E. (2009b) Response to Intervention:Prevention and remediation, perhaps. Diagnosis, no. Child Development Perspectives, 3 (1), 44-47.

Rezaie, R., Simos, P. G., Fletcher, J. M., Cirino, P. T., Vaughn, S., & Papanicolaou, A. C. (2011a). Engagement of temporal lobe regions predicts response to educational interventions in adolescent struggling readers. Developmental Neuropsychology, 36 (7), 869-888.

Rezaie, R., Simos, P. G., Fletcher, J. M., Cirino, P. T., Vaughn, S., & Papanicolaou, A. C. (2011b). Temporo-parietal brain activity as a longitudinal predictor of response to educational interventions among middle school struggling readers. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 17 (5), 875-885.

Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (Eds.). (2006). Publication bias in meta-analysis:Prevention, assessment and adjustments. John Wiley & Sons.

Scarborough, H. S. (1998). Predicting the future achievement of second graders with reading disabilities:Contributions of phonemic awareness, verbal memory, rapid naming, and IQ. Annals of Dyslexia, 48 (1), 115-136.

Scheltinga, F., van der Leij, A., & Struiksma, C. (2010). Predictors of response to intervention of word reading fluency in Dutch. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43 (3), 212-228.

Shaywitz, S. E. (1998). Dyslexia. New England Journal of Medicine, 338 (5), 307-312.

Speece, D. L., & Walker, C. Y. (2007). What are the issues in Response to Intervention research? Haager, Diane (Ed); Klingner, Janette (Ed); Vaughn, Sharon (Ed), Evidence-based reading practices for response to intervention (pp. 287-301).US:Paul H Brookes Publishing.

Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology:A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69 (1), 21-51.

Toste, J. R., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Gilbert, J. K., Cho, E.,... & Bouton, B. D. (2014). Understanding unresponsiveness to tier 2 reading intervention:Exploring the classification and profiles of adequate and inadequate responders in first grade. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37 (4), 192-203.

Tran, L., Sanchez, T., Arellano, B., & Swanson, H. L. (2011). A meta-analysis of the RTI literature for children at risk for reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44 (3), 283-295.

Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., & Hic km an, P. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69 (4), 391-409.

Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Sipay, E. R., Small, S. G., Pratt, A., Chen, R., & Denckla, M. B. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers:Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88 (4), 601-638.

Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Small, S., & Fanuele, D. P. (2006). Response to Intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between children with and without reading disabilities:Evidence for the role of kindergarten and first-grade interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39 (2), 157-169.

Wolf, M., & Bowers, P. G. (1999). The double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91 (3), 415-438.

刘云英, 陶沙. (2007). 阅读困难诊断标准与模式的"后智力-成就差异" 趋势. 北京师范大学学报:社会科学版, (5), 13-21.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

[1]	谢和平, 王燕青, 王福兴, 周宗奎, 邓素娥, 段朝辉. 记忆的生成绘图效应及其边界条件：一项元分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(1): 29-43.
[2]	牛湘, 冉光明. 同伴关系与幼儿问题行为关系的三水平元分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(4): 473-487.
[3]	程阳春, 黄瑾. 近似数量系统与数学能力的关系:一项元分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(3): 379-390.
[4]	高峰, 白学军, 章鹏, 曹海波. 中国青少年父母教养方式与自杀意念的元分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(1): 97-108.
[5]	谢云天, 史滋福, 尹霖, 兰洛. 中国父母教养方式与儿童学业成绩关系的元分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(3): 366-379.
[6]	牛凯宁, 李梅, 张向葵. 青少年友谊质量和主观幸福感的关系:一项元分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(3): 407-418.
[7]	颜志强, 苏彦捷. 认知共情和情绪共情的发展差异:元分析初探[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(1): 1-9.
[8]	辛素飞, 岳阳明, 辛自强. 1996至2016年中国老年人心理健康变迁的横断历史研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(6): 753-761.
[9]	雷丽丽, 冉光明, 张琪, 米倩文, 陈旭. 父母教养方式与幼儿焦虑关系的三水平元分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(3): 329-340.
[10]	李松, 冉光明, 张琪, 胡天强. 中国背景下自我效能感与心理健康的元分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(6): 759-768.
[11]	周丽, 王福兴, 谢和平, 陈佳雪, 辛亮, 赵庆柏. 积极的情绪能否促进多媒体学习?基于元分析的视角[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(6): 697-709.
[12]	辛素飞, 王一鑫. 中国大学生成就动机变迁的横断历史研究:1999~2014[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(3): 288-294.
[13]	辛素飞, 岳阳明, 辛自强, 林崇德. 1996至2015年中国老年人社会支持的变迁:一项横断历史研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2018, 34(6): 672-681.
[14]	颜志强, 苏彦捷. 共情的性别差异:来自元分析的证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2018, 34(2): 129-136.
[15]	田园, 明桦, 黄四林, 孙铃. 2004至2013年中国大学生人格变迁的横断历史研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2017, 33(1): 30-36.