Is Response Intervention effective in Autistic Children Case Study

Is Response Intervention effective in Autistic Children - Case Study Example Response to Intervention in Autistic Children Response-to-Intervention is a popular object of present day research. Much has been said about the benefits and principles of RTI models for children with special needs. Psychologists welcome the implementation of RTI models and principles for exceptional children, including those with autism. Unfortunately, the effects of RTI on autistic children and their behaviors remain unclear. This paper reports the results of RTI usage in children with autism. A brief review of literature is performed. Methods and results of the intervention are discussed. The goal of the study is to see whether RTI can be successfully applied to enhance emotional stability and behaviors in children and adolescents with autism. Literature Review Response-to-Intervention (RTI) is a popular object of present day research. RTI is claimed to be an innovative approach to delivering learning and psychological/ emotional services in schools (Barnes & Harlacher, 2008). RTI is fairly regarded as a relevant, proactive response to the emotional and behavioral difficulties faced by school children in their striving to meet at least the basic learning objectives (Barnes & Harlacher, 2008). ... According to Barnes and Harlacher (2008), RTI relies on the five main principles. First, the model is both proactive and preventative (Barnes & Harlacher, 2008). Second, RTI ensures a strategic emotional and instructional fit between the student, student’s needs, and the curriculum and instruction (Barnes & Harlacher, 2008). Third, RTI builds on data-based decision-making and is problem-solving-oriented (Barnes & Harlacher, 2008). Fourth, RTI relies on the use of effective instructional practices; and fifth, it is a systems-level approach (Barnes & Harlacher, 2008). To a large extent, the use of RTI does not merely allow identifying students with special learning needs but creates the basis for improving their learning outcomes (Barnes & Harlacher, 2008). Barnes and Harlacher (2008) specify that the principal features of RTI are (1) multiple tiers; (2) a complex system of assessment; (3) a sophisticated protocol; and (4) evidence-based instruction. Here, the complex relationsh ip between features and principles of RTI becomes evident. Multiple tiers reflect and reinforce the proactive nature of the model and create a foundation for achieving the instructional match between the student, student’s needs, and instruction/ curriculum. The assessment system inherent in the RTI is integrally linked to the model’s problem solving orientation. The protocol as the third most important feature of RTI is inseparable from the principle of effective practices, whereas evidence-based instructions and practices support the systems-level character of RTI (Barnes & Harlacher, 2008). The current state of literature offers arguments to defend and expand the use of RTI in various instructional situations. Barnett, VanDerHeyden and Witt (2007) list a set of arguments and