RTI Service Delivery Model for Students with ADHD
This paper develops a Response to Intervention (RTI) service delivery model for a fictional special education student diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). It outlines the student's eligibility for accommodations under an Individual Education Plan (IEP), justifies the selection of assessment instruments including the Woodcock Johnson III Tests of Achievement and the Oral and Written Language Scales, and explains the roles of multidisciplinary teams, cultural considerations, and key stakeholders. The paper emphasizes that effective RTI planning requires coordinated, multi-tiered support addressing cognitive, emotional, and social dimensions of a student's development.
- Introduction to RTI Planning: Introduces RTI and fictional student Justin
- Eligibility Criteria for Special Education Services: Justin's ADHD diagnosis and IEP eligibility
- Assessment Tools and Justification: Woodcock Johnson III and OWLS instrument selection
- The Role of a Multidisciplinary Team: Team coordination across cognitive and social domains
- Cultural Considerations in the Service Delivery Model: Cultural flexibility and equitable service delivery
- Stakeholders in the RTI Model: Teachers, parents, psychologists, and tutors as stakeholders
- Conclusion: Summary of multi-tiered RTI model components
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds its claims in specific, cited research to justify the validity and reliability of its chosen assessment instruments, lending credibility to the recommendations.
- It applies abstract RTI concepts concretely by building the model around a specific fictional student, making the framework easy to follow and practically oriented.
- The inclusion of cultural considerations and stakeholder roles reflects a holistic understanding of special education planning that goes beyond academic performance alone.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates applied synthesis: it pulls together legal entitlements (IEP accommodations), psychometric research (reliability and validity data for assessment tools), and team-based service coordination into a single coherent model. Rather than treating each element in isolation, the author shows how they interact to serve one student's needs — a hallmark of applied special education writing.
Structure breakdown
The paper follows a logical build-up: it opens by establishing the RTI concept, moves through eligibility and assessment tool selection with research support, then broadens outward to address team composition, cultural flexibility, and stakeholder responsibilities before concluding with a summary of the model's key components. Each section functions as a distinct layer of the service delivery plan.
Introduction to RTI Planning
Delivering adequate resources to children with learning differences is not a haphazard undertaking. On the contrary, it requires a predetermined plan and the coordinated combination of several different entities in order to achieve success. A Response to Intervention (RTI) plan is necessary to adequately combine a variety of resources and approaches to supporting a student with his or her particular learning difference. RTI plans involve service delivery on multiple levels to account for the critical phases of development in students' lives, including not just their cognitive development but their emotional and social development as well. These plans require sufficient coordination of resources in a streamlined approach so that the student is ultimately able to benefit from them. This paper creates a service delivery model for a fictional special education student named Justin. Justin appears generally congenial and has been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). He has demonstrated some academic proficiency and would likely benefit from a multi-tiered plan to address his learning difference.
Eligibility Criteria for Special Education Services
Justin is eligible to receive services for students with learning differences — as well as a variety of accommodations — based on his diagnosis of ADHD. Students who can demonstrate that they have a clinically identified learning difference (formerly referred to as a learning disability) are permitted certain accommodations in the classroom. These students frequently have access to additional resources and accommodations outside the classroom to aid in their learning as well. According to Justin's background file, on April 11, 2005, Justin received a referral for ADHD based on a formal assessment. Such a referral means that Justin should have an Individual Education Plan (IEP) and that he is eligible for accommodations to counteract the effects of ADHD and enable him to access the same quality of education available to students without such a diagnosis. Justin is entitled to these accommodations because he has been formally diagnosed with a learning disorder by a licensed practitioner in the field.
References
Bergin, E., & Logan, A. (2013). An Individual Education Plan for pupils with special education needs: How inclusive is the process for the pupil? Reach, 26(2), 79–91.
Harrison, G. L., Ogle, K. C., & Keilty, M. (2011). The reliability of the OWLS Written Expression Scale with ESL kindergarten students. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 26(4), 319–328.
de Apodaca, R., Gentling, D., Steinhaus, J., & Rosenberg, E. (2015). Parental involvement as a mediator of academic performance among special education middle school students. The School Community Journal, 25(2), 35–54.
Navarro, F. H. (2010). The Woodcock-Johnson tests of cognitive ability. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235995920_The_Woodcock-Johnson_Tests_of_Cognitive_Ability_Third_Edition
Stanley, S. L. G. (2015). The advocacy efforts of African-American mothers of children with disabilities in rural special education: Considerations for school professionals. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 34(4), 3–17.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.