Professional Development for High School Teachers on the Implementation of Response to Intervention. Lolita M. Jones-Smith, 2015: Applied Dissertation, Nova Southeastern University, Abraham S. Fischler College of Education. ERIC Descriptors: Professional Development, Response to Intervention, Attendance, Achievement, Teacher Perception
The primary purposes of the study were to develop a response to intervention (RTI) professional development plan and to determine if implementation of the professional development plan changed educators’ perceptions on RTI from preimplementation to postimplementation. Since the inception of (RTI) in 2008 in the researcher’s school district, substantive, consistent, professional development initiatives for certified staff were minimally provided.The participants in the quantitative part of the study were a convenience sample of 50 educators at 1 high school in Georgia. These educators were certified regular education teachers who were content-area teachers, certified special education teachers who were content-area teachers, and department heads. The participants in the qualitative part of the study were a purposive sample of 5 department heads at the high school.
Data were collected for all participants with the Revised Survey of Teacher Perception of the RTI Process to respond to 5research questions. The intervention was the RTI professional development. The treatment period for the intervention was 10 weeks or 10 hours of training. There were 10 professional development training sessions based on a formalized and widely used RTI training curriculum by Windram, Bollman, and Johnson (2012).
The study used a convergent parallel mixed-methods approach. Quantitative data (preimplementation and postimplementation) were collected from 50 educators. Qualitative data (postimplementation only) were collected from 5 department heads. Pre- and postimplementation means, standard deviations, and effect sizes were calculated for each of the quantitative research questions. The inferential statistical model was the one-tailed t test for paired samples. Data analysis for the qualitative Research Question 4 followed a modified version of the constant comparative qualitative data-analysis procedures.
Findings for Question 1 showed the RTI professional development positively changed (1.64) educators’ perceptions of RTI related to students’ attendance and achievement, while for Research Question 2 the RTI professional development positively changed (1.94) educators’ perceptions related to the documentation of RTI procedures. Findings for Research Question 3 showed RTI professional development positively changed (3.00) educators’ perceptions of RTI related to involvement and support for RTI. Results for Research Question 4 revealed the department heads had different recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the RTI process and had mixed feelings on RTI’s effectiveness to improve the achievement of students. Findings for Research Question 5 revealed the qualitative data from the 5 department heads did not confirm the quantitative data from the 50 educators.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:nova.edu/oai:nsuworks.nova.edu:fse_etd-1080 |
| Date | 31 December 2015 |
| Creators | Jones-Smith, Dr. Lolita |
| Publisher | NSUWorks |
| Source Sets | Nova Southeastern University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | campusdissertation |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | Theses and Dissertations |
| Rights | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ |
Page generated in 0.0027 seconds