Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Common Core State Standards and Response to Intervention: The Importance of Assessment, Intervention, and Progress Monitoring

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Response to Intervention

Abstract

With the recent debut of the common core state standards (CCSS) , it is important to consider the potential opportunities and implications of response to intervention (RTI)/multi-tier system of supports (MTSS) and CCSS in facilitating the academic success of all students. This chapter delineates the central tenets of the CCSS and explores intersects with RTI practices. As education professionals shift to the new curriculum standards, there is a tremendous opportunity for schools to explore refining or developing an RTI infrastructure. Thus, this chapter also highlights the importance of using appropriate assessments, evidence-based intervention strategies, and progress monitoring to facilitate student achievement. To the extent that CCSS articulates a new destination for students, RTI may provide a means of getting there.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 269.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 349.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aimsweb. (2012). http://www.aimsweb.com/. Accessed 6 June 2013.

  • Alliance for Excellent Education. (2013). Common core state standards 101. http://all4ed.org/reports-factsheets/common-core-state-standards-101/. Accessed 7 July 2013.

  • Applebee, A. (2013). Common core state standards: The promise and the peril in a national palimpsest. English Journal, 103(1), 25–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Applebee, A. N., & Langer, J. A. (2011). A snapshot of writing instruction in middle schools and high schools. English Journal, 100(6), 14–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, D. W., Daly, E. J., Jones, K. M., & Lentz, F. E. (2004). Response to intervention: Empirically based special service decisions from single-case designs of increasing and decreasing intensity. The Journal of Special Education, 38, 66–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batsche, G., Elliott, J., Graden, J. L., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J. F., Prasse, D., Reschly, D. J., Schrag, J., & Tilly III, W. D. (2005). Response to intervention. Alexandria: National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binder, C. (1996). Behavioral fluency: Evolution of a new paradigm. The Behavior Analyst, 19(2), 163–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in education, 5(1), 7–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bomer, R., & Maloch, B. (2011). Relating policy to research and practice: The common core standards. Language Arts, 89(1), 38–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calkins, L., Ehrenworth, M., & Lehman, C. (2012). Pathways to the common core: Accelerating achievement. Portsmouth: Heinemann..

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P., & Jackson, K. (2011). Assessing the quality of the common core state standards for mathematics. Educational Researcher, 40(4), 183–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, D. (2011). Using the common core state standards to drive student achievement and school improvement. Teach for America’s 20th Anniversary Summit. http://www.teachforamerica.org/corps-member-and-alumni-resources/alumni-summits/20th-anniversary-summit. Accessed 6 June 2013.

  • Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Development Process. Downloaded 7.7.2014. http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/development-process/.

  • Confrey, J., Maloney, A. P., & Nguyen, K. (2010). Learning trajectories display of the common core standards for mathematics. New York: Wireless Generation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L. (2010, July 25). Common core standards: Hardly an evidence-based policy. http://larrycuban.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/common-core-standards-hardly-an-evidence-based-policy/. Accessed 7 July 2013.

  • Cutler, L., & Graham, S. (2008). Primary grade writing instruction: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deno, S. L., Burns, M. K., & Jimerson, S. R. (in press). Data-based decision-making. Handbook on RTI: The science and practice of multi-tiered systems of support (2nd ed.). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Early, D. M, Barbarin, O., Bryant, D., Burchinal, M., Chang, F., Clifford, R., Crawford, G., Weaver, W., Howes, C., Ritchie, S., Kraft-Sayre, M., Pianta, R., & Barnett, W. S. (2005). Pre-kindergarten in 11 states: NCEDL’s multi-state study of pre-kindergarten and study of statewide early education programs (SWEEP): Preliminary descriptive report. NCEDL Working Paper. http://www.fpg.unc.edu/node/4654. Accessed 6 June 2013.

  • Ediger, M. (2011). Assisting pupils in mathematics achievement (The common core standards). Journal of Instructional Psychology, 38(3), 154–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foorman, B. (2012). Finding the science of reading in the common core state standards [PowerPoint Slides]. http://fcrr.org/finding_sci_reading_ccss_ibida_20121011.pdf. Accessed 7 July 2013.

  • Gardner, D. P., Larsen, Y. W., & Baker, W. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J., & Graham, S. (2010). Teaching writing to elementary students in grades 4–6: A national survey. Elementary School Journal, 110(4), 494–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburg, H. P., Kaplan, R. G., Cannon, J., Cordero, M. I., Eisenband, J. G., Galanter, M., & Morgenlander, M. (2006). Helping early childhood educators to teach mathematics. In M. Zaslow & I. Martinez-Beck (Eds.), Critical issues in early childhood professional development (pp. 171–202). Baltimore: Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburg, H. P., Lee, J. S., & Boyd, J. S. (2008). Mathematics education for young children: What it is and how to promote it. Social Policy Report. Society for Research in Child Development, 22(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2013). Common core state standards, writing, and students with LD: Recommendations. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, New York: Guilford Press, 28(1), 28–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., MacArthur, C. A., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.). (2013). Best practices in writing instruction. Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haager, D., & Vaughn, S. (2013). Common core state standards and students with learning disabilities: introduction to the special issue. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28(1), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2008). The role of cognitive skills in economic development. Journal of Economic Literature, 46(3), 607–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2013). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausken, E. G., & Rathbun, A. (2004). Mathematics instruction in kindergarten: Classroom practices and outcomes. In American Educational Research Association meeting. San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jago, C. (2009). A history of NAEP assessment frameworks. http://www.nagb.org/content/nagb/assets/documents/who-we-are/20-anniversary/jago-frameworks-formatted.pdf. Accessed 6 Oct 2013.

  • Jimerson, S. R., Burns, M. K., & VanDer Heyden, A. M. (2007). Response to intervention at school: The science and practice of assessment and intervention. In Handbook of Response to Intervention (pp. 3–9). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, J. E., & Jones, A. (2012). The common core state standards: Closing the school-college gap. Trusteeship, 20(2), 16–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiuhara, S. A., Graham, S., & Hawken, L. S. (2009). Teaching writing to high school students: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, K. S. (2004). Executive summary of the NRCLD symposium on responsiveness to intervention [Brochure]. National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Layzer, J. I. (1993). Observational study of early childhood programs. Final Report. Volume I: Life in Preschool.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. O. (2011). Reach teachers now to ensure common core success. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(6), 42–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lembke, E. S., Garman, C., Deno, S. L., & Stecker, P. M. (2010). One elementary school’s implementation of response to intervention (RTI). Reading & Writing Quarterly, 26, 361–373. doi:10.1080/10573569.2010. 500266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manley, R., & Hawkins, R. J. (2013). Making the common core standards work. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musun-Miller, L., & Blevins-Knabe, B. (1998). Adults’ beliefs about children and mathematics: How important is it and how do children learn about it? Early Development and Parenting, 7(4), 191–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2006). Curriculum Focal Points for Prekindergarten through Grade 8 Mathematics: A Quest for Coherence. Reston: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards (Application of Common Core State Standards to students with disabilities). National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers, Washington, DC. http://www.corestandards.org/assets/application-to-students-with-disabilities.pdf. Accessed 6 June 2013.

  • National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, and Achieve. (2008). Benchmarking for success: Ensuring U.S. students receive a world-class education. Washington, DC: NGA, CCSSO, and Achieve, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the national mathematics advisory panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. In J. Kilpatrick, J. Swafford, & B. Findell (Eds.), Mathematics learning study committee, center for education, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newkirk, T. (2009). Holding on to good ideas in a time of bad ones: Six literacy principles worth fighting for. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newkirk, T. (2013). Speaking back to the common core. In (postscript to) Holding on to good ideas in a time of bad ones: Six literacy practices worth fighting for (2009) (pp. 1–7).

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor. (2003). Tiers of intervention in kindergarten through third grade. Paper presented at the Response-to-Intervention Symposium, December 4–5, 2003, Kansas City. www.nrcld.org/html/symposium2003.

  • Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers. (2013). Parconline.org.

    Google Scholar 

  • Picklo, D. M., & Christenson, S. L. (2005). Alternatives to retention and social promotion: The availability of instructional options. Remedial and Special Education, 26(5), 258–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, A., McMaken, J., Hwang, J., & Yang, R. (2011). Common core standards the new US intended curriculum. Educational Researcher, 40(3), 103–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, S. R., Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2013). Reaching the mountaintop: Addressing the common core standards in mathematics for students with mathematics difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28(1), 38–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renaissance Learning. (2013). Make a seamless transition to common core state standards. http://www.renlearn.com/ccss/default.aspx. Accessed 7 July 2013.

  • Russell, S. J. (2012). CCSSM: Keeping teaching and learning strong. Teaching Children’s Mathematics, 19(1), 50–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W., Houang, R., & Cogan, L. (2002). A coherent curriculum. American Educator, 26(2), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What is disciplinary literacy and why does it matter? Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 7–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective programs in elementary mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 427–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thissen, D., & Mislevy, R. J. (2000). Testing algorithms. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tienken, C. H. (2011). Common core standards: The emperor has no clothes, or evidence. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 47(2), 58–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Alsopp, D. (in press). Innovation configuration for mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanDerHeyden, A. M., Witt, J. C., & Barnett, D. W. (2005). The emergence and possible futures of response to intervention. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23, 339–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, T. (2010). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don’t teach the new survival skills our children need–and what we can do about it. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M. T., & Homcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents’ perceptions of school environment, engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American Educational Researcher, 47, 633–662. doi:10.3102/0002831209361209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, D. J., & Kingsbury, G. (1984). Application of computerized adaptive testing to educational problems. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21(4), 361–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, H. (1999). Basic skills versus conceptual understanding. American Educator, 23(3), 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA

    Shane R. Jimerson, Rachel Stein, Aaron Haddock & Reza Shahroozi

Authors
  1. Shane R. Jimerson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rachel Stein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Aaron Haddock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Reza Shahroozi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shane R. Jimerson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, Santa Barbara Gevirtz Graduate School of Education, Santa Barbara, California, USA

    Shane R. Jimerson

  2. University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA

    Matthew K. Burns

  3. Education Research & Consulting, Inc., FAIRHOPE, Alabama, USA

    Amanda M. VanDerHeyden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jimerson, S., Stein, R., Haddock, A., Shahroozi, R. (2016). Common Core State Standards and Response to Intervention: The Importance of Assessment, Intervention, and Progress Monitoring. In: Jimerson, S., Burns, M., VanDerHeyden, A. (eds) Handbook of Response to Intervention. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7568-3_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation