The Integration of Common Core and Response to Intervention: Supporting Vulnerable Readers in a Time of Sophisticated Standards

References

• Ainsworth, L. (2012). Connecting Common Core State Standards with common formative assessments. In L. Ainsworth, D. C. Briggs, M. D. Wiggs, L. Besser, & L. Almeida (Eds.), Navigating assessment and collaboration with the Common Core State Standards (pp. 1–32). Englewood, CO: Lead and Learn Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alberti, S. (2012/2013). Making the shifts. Educational Leadership, 70(4), 24–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaver, J., & Carter, M. (2011). Developmental reading assessment (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, B. (2011). Structures for supporting all learners. In D. B. Reeves, M. D. Wiggs, C. J. Lassiter, T. D. Piercy, S. Ventura, & B. Bell (Eds.), Navigating implementation of the Common Core State Standards (pp. 111–126). Englewood, CO: Lead and Learn Press.
   Google Scholar
• Besser, L. (2012). Leveraging data teams and professional learning communities for success on the Common Core. In L. Ainsworth, D. C. Briggs, M. D. Wiggs, L. Besser, & L. Almeida (Eds.), Navigating assessment and collaboration with the Common Core State Standards (pp. 53–79). Englewood, CO: Lead and Learn Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bidwell, A. (2014, February 27). The history of Common Core State Standards. U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/news/special-reports/articles/2014/02/27/the-history-of-common-core-state-standards
   Google Scholar
• Bomer, R. (1999). Conferring with struggling readers: The test of our craft, courage, and hope. New Advocate, 12(1), 21–38.
   Google Scholar
• Bos, C. S., Anders, P. L., Filip, D., & Jaffe, L. E. (1989). The effects of an interactive instructional strategy for enhancing reading comprehension and content area learning for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(6), 384–390.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brozo, W. G. (2009/2010). Response to Intervention or responsive instruction? Challenges and possibilities of Response to Intervention for adolescent literacy. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 53(4), 277–281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brozo, W. G. (2011). RtI and the adolescent reader: Responsive literacy instruction in secondary schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bunch, G. C., Kibler, A., & Pimentel, S. (2013, May). Realizing opportunities for English learners in the Common Core English language arts and disciplinary literacy standards. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Burris, C. C., & Garrity, D. T. (2012). Opening the Common Core: How to bring all students to college and career readiness. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, D., & Pimentel, S. (2012). Revised publishers' criteria for the Common Core State Standards in English language arts and literacy, grades 3–12. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Publishers_Criteria_for_3-12.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Common Core's big test. (2015, November 16). Education Week. Retrieved from www.edweek.org/ew/section/multimedia/map-common-core-2015-test-results.html#wn
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, J. (2012). Aligning your curriculum to the Common Core State Standards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, P. (1990). The Names Test: A quick assessment of decoding ability. The Reading Teacher, 44(2), 124–129.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorn, L. J., & Henderson, S. C. (2010). A comprehensive assessment system as a Response to Intervention process. In P. H. Johnston (Ed.), RtI in literacy: Responsive and comprehensive (pp. 133–153). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Dove, M. G., & Honigsfeld, A. (2013). Common Core for the not-so-common learner: English language arts strategies, grades K–5. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2013). Common Core English language arts in a PLC at work: Grades 3–5. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Fountas, I., & Pinnell, G. S. (2011). Benchmark assessment system (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Franco, M., & Unrath, K. (2014). Carpe diem: Seizing the Common Core with visual thinking strategies in the visual arts classroom. Art Education, 67(1), 28–32.
   Google Scholar
• Frankel, K. K., Jaeger, E. L., & Pearson, P. D. (2013). Embracing complexity: Integrating reading, writing, and learning in intervention settings. In E. Ortlieb & E. H. Cheek, Jr. (Eds.), School-based interventions for struggling readers, K–8 (pp. 3–20). Bingley, England: Emerald Group.
   Google Scholar
• Frankel, K. K., Pearson, P. D., & Nair, M. (2010). Reading comprehension and reading disability. In A. McGill-Franzen & R. L. Allington (Eds.), Handbook of reading disability research (pp. 219–231). London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• 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), 151–171.
   Google Scholar
• Glover, T. A., & Vaughn, S. (Eds.). (2010). The promise of Response to Intervention: Evaluating current science and practice. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greenstein, L. (2013). Formative assessment and the Common Core: Blending the best in assessment. Voices From the Middle, 21(2), 36–42.
   Google Scholar
• Haager, D., Klingner, J., & Vaughn, S. (Eds.). (2007). Evidence-based reading practices for Response to Intervention. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Halladay, J. L., & Moses, L. (2013). Using the Common Core standards to meet the needs of diverse learners: Challenges and opportunities. New England Reading Association Journal, 49(1), 33–44.
   Google Scholar
• Hasselbring, T. S., & Goin, L. I. (2004). Literacy instruction for older struggling readers: What is the role of technology? Reading and Writing Quarterly, 20(2), 123–144.
   Google Scholar
• Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• International Reading Association. (n.d.). Literacy implementation guidance for the ELA Common Core State Standards. Retrieved from http://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/ela-common-core-state-standards-guidance.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jaeger, E. L. (2012). Understanding and supporting vulnerable readers: An ecological systems perspective. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3640482)
   Google Scholar
• Jaeger, E. L. (2015). Literacy and vulnerability: Shame or growth for readers who struggle. Talking Points, 26(2), 17–25.
   Google Scholar
• Jaeger, E. L. (2016a). Implementation of a Common Core–based curriculum in a fourth grade literacy classroom: An exploratory study. Manuscript submitted for publication.
   Google Scholar
• Jaeger, E. L. (2016b). Intensity of focus, richness of content: Crafting Tier 2 Response to Intervention in an era of the Common Core. The Reading Teacher, 70(2), 179–188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaeger, E. L. (2016c). Re-mediation in a tutoring context. Manuscript submitted for publication.
   Google Scholar
• Jimerson, S. R., Burns, M. K., & VanDerHeyden, A. M. (Eds.). (2007). Handbook of Response to Intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, P. H. (Ed.). (2010). RtI in literacy: Responsive and comprehensive. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, P. H. (2011). Response to Intervention in literacy: Problems and possibilities. Elementary School Journal, 111(4), 511–534.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston, P., & Allington, R. (1991). Remediation. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, Volume 2 (pp. 984–1012). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Kendall, J. (2011). Understanding Common Core State Standards. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
   Google Scholar
• Larson, L. (2013). From print texts to e-books: The changing nature of literacy. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 49(4), 168–173.
   Google Scholar
• Lassiter, C. J. (2011). Meeting the challenge of rigorous expectations in the Common Core. In D. B. Reeves, M. D. Wiggs, C. J. Lassiter, T. D. Piercy, S. Ventura, & B. Bell (Eds.), Navigating implementation of the Common Core State Standards (pp. 89–109). Englewood, CO: Lead and Learn Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lent, R. C., & Gilmore, B. (2013). Common Core CPR: What about the adolescents who struggle … or just don't care? Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• Machek, G. R., & Nelson, J. M. (2010). School psychologists' perceptions regarding the practice of identifying reading disabilities: Cognitive assessment and Response to Intervention considerations. Psychology in the Schools, 47(3), 230–245. doi:10.1002/pits.20467
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manley, R. J., & Hawkins, R. J. (2013). Making the Common Core standards work: Using professional development to build world-class schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• McCown, M. A., & Thomason, G. B. (2014). Informational text comprehension: Its challenges and how collaborative strategic reading can help. Reading Improvement, 51(2), 237–253.
   Google Scholar
• McGill-Franzen, A., & Smith, K. (2013). RtI and the Common Core. In S. B. Neuman & L. B. Gambrell (Eds.), Quality reading instruction in the age of Common Core standards (pp. 107–119). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• McLaughlin, M., & Overturf, B. J. (2013). The Common Core: Teaching K–5 students to meet the reading standards. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Mesmer, E. M., & Mesmer, H. A. E. (2008). Response to Intervention (RTI): What teachers of reading need to know. The Reading Teacher, 62(4), 280–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for education reform. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of the Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/wp-content/uploads/ELA_Standards1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Neuman, S. B., & Gambrell, L. B. (2013). Challenges and opportunities in the implementation of Common Core State Standards. In S. B. Neuman & L. B. Gambrell (Eds.), Quality reading instruction in the age of Common Core standards (pp. 1–12). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• New York State Education Department. (2015). State education department releases spring 2015 grades 3–8 assessment results [Press release]. Retrieved from http://www.nysed.gov/news/2015/state-education-department-releases-spring-2015-grades-3-8-assessment-results
   Google Scholar
• Papola-Ellis, A. L. (2014). Text complexity: The importance of building the right staircase. Reading Horizons, 53(2), 1–27.
   Google Scholar
• Pearson, P. D. (2013). Research foundations of the Common Core State Standards in English language arts. In S. Neuman & L. Gambrell (Eds.), Quality reading instruction in the age of Common Core State Standards (pp. 237–262). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Pearson, P. D., & Hiebert, E. H. (2013). Understanding the Common Core State Standards. In L. M. Morrow, T. Shanahan, & K. K. Wixson (Eds.), Teaching with the Common Core standards for English language arts, PreK–2 (pp. 1–21). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pearson, P. D., Raphael, T. E., Benson, V. L., & Madda, C. L. (2007). Balance in comprehensive literacy instruction: Then and now. In L. B. Gambrell, L. M. Morrow, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Best practices in literacy instruction (3rd ed., pp. 30–54). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ravitch, D. (2013, January 27). Exploring the origins of the Common Core [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://dianeravitch.net/2013/01/27/13491
   Google Scholar
• Robb, L. (2013). New angles on differentiating reading instruction: Five best practices that deserve a new chapter in the Common Core era. New England Reading Association Journal, 49(1), 13–21.
   Google Scholar
• Saunders, A. F., Spooner, F., Browder, D., Wakeman, S., & Lee, A. (2013). Teaching the Common Core in English language arts to students with severe disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 46(2), 22–33.
   Google Scholar
• Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. (2002). On babies and bathwater: Addressing the problems of identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 25(3), 155–168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• See, B. H., Gorard, S., & Siddiqui, N. (2015). Best practice in conducting RCTs: Lessons learnt from an independent evaluation of the Response-to-Intervention programme. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 47, 83–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw, L. J. (2014). Breaking with tradition: Multimodal literacy learning. New England Reading Association Journal, 50(1), 19–26.
   Google Scholar
• Siegel, L. S. (1989). IQ is irrelevant to the definition of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(8), 469–478, 486.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, M. W., Appleman, D., & Wilhelm, J. D. (2014). Uncommon core: Where the authors of the standards go wrong about instruction—and how you can get it right. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• Snider, V. E. (1989). Reading comprehension performance of adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12(2), 87–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanovich, K. E. (1999). The sociopsychometrics of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32(4), 350–361.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoehr, J., Banks, M., & Allen, L. (2011). PLCs, DI, and RtI: A tapestry for school change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• van Kraayenoord, C. E. (2010). Response to Intervention: New ways and wariness. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(3), 363–376.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaughn, S., Capin, P., Roberts, G. J., & Walker, M. A. (2016). RtI in the Common Core classroom: A framework for instruction and assessment. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., & Lyon, G. R. (2000). Differentiating between difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: More evidence against the IQ-achievement discrepancy definition of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(3), 223–238.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wertz, J. A. (2014). Bitstrips and storybird: Writing development in a blended literacy camp. Voices From the Middle, 21(4), 24–32.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox, K. C., Jeffery, J. V., & Gardner-Bixler, A. (2016). Writing to the Common Core: Teachers' responses to changes in standards and assessments for writing in elementary schools. Reading and Writing, 29(5), 903–928.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilder, A. A., & Williams, J. P. (2001). Students with severe learning disabilities can learn higher order comprehension skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 268–278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wixson, K. K., & Lipson, M. Y. (2012). Relations between the CCSS and RtI in literacy and language. The Reading Teacher, 65(6), 387–391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwiers, J., O'Hara, S., & Pritchard, R. (2014). Common Core standards in diverse classrooms: Essential practices for developing academic language and disciplinary literacy. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
   Google Scholar