한국 중재반응모형 연구 분석: 단계별 중재구성요소와 비반응 정의를 중심으로 = A Literature Review of Response-to-Intervention(RTI) in South Korea: Analyses of Intervention Components and Definitions of Non-Response

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics of interventions and definitions of response/non-response by reviewing research of Response-to-Intervention (RTI) in Korea. Eighteen studies were reviewed for this study. First, the intervention components and the ways to define non-response were investigated in Tiers 1, 2 and 3 by academic subjects. Second, the prevalence of children at risk for learning disabilities and those identified as having learning disabilities were investigated. The findings indicated that the RTI model was mainly used for mathematics. In Tier 1, large-group instruction was applied in general education classrooms. Small-group instruction was implemented after school in Tier 2 and one-on-one instruction was used in special education classrooms in Tier 3. In terms of teaching strategies, information about teaching methods was not reported in Tier 1. In Tier 2, direct instruction and teaching strategies applied Bruner’s EIS theory were frequently used in math and a peer-assisted learning strategy was often used in reading. In Tier 3, students received special education. Instruction duration varied regardless of academic subjects and Tiers. To screen non-responders to the interventions, final benchmark method was applied in Tier 1 and dual discrepancy approach was used in Tier 2. The results showed that the RTI model was effective for decreasing the prevalence of learning disabilities. Lastly, discussion and suggestions for future research were provided

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구에서는 국내 중재반응모형 연구들을 개괄 및 분석해보고, 중재반응모형의 특징과 우리나라에 모형 정착을 위한 시사점을 살펴보고자 하였다. 문헌선정 기준에 따라 중재반응모형을 사용한 실험 연구 18편이 분석 대상으로 선정되었다. 먼저, 선정된 연구들의 일반적인 특성을 살펴보았다. 그리고 과목별, 중재 단계별로 중재구성요소들의 특징을 분석하고, 반응과 비반응을 어떻게 정의하고 있는지 살펴보았다. 또한, 중재반응모형을 통하여 선별된 위험군 혹은 학습장애 학생의 출현율을 살펴보았다. 분석 결과, 단계별로는 Tier 1 에서는 일반학급에서 대집단 교수가 제공되었고, Tier 2 에서는 방과 후에 소집단 교수가 이루어졌고, Tier 3 에서는 주로 특수학급에서 일대일 교수가 이루어진 것으로 나타났다. 교수전략을 살펴보면, Tier 1 에서는 교수방법에 대한 정보를 제시하지 않았고, Tier 2 에서는 수학교과의 경우 직접교수와 EIS 전략을, 읽기교과에서는 또래교수를 주로 사용한 것으로 나타났다. Tier 3 에서는 Tier 2에서 사용한 교수전략에 특수교육 접근을 취한 것으로 확인되었다. 중재기간은 교과나 교수 단계와 관계없이 다양하게 나타났다. 비반응자를 선별하기 위하여 Tier 1 에서는 최종 기준점수 준거를 사용하였고, Tier 2 에서는 이중불일치 접근을 사용하였다. 또한, 중재반응모형은 학습장애 출현율을 낮추는 데 효과적인 것으로 나타났다. 끝으로 이러한 연구결과를 중심으로 한 논의와 함께 후속연구에 대한 방향을 제안하였다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 이대식, "한국형 중재-반응(RTI) 접근법의 조건" 한국특수교육학회 44 (44): 343-369, 2009
• 2 김용욱, "학교기반 중재반응모델의 구성체제에 관한 연구-학습장애 전문가 및 현장교사 설문조사를 중심으로" 한국학습장애학회 7 (7): 95-119, 2010
• 3 나경은, "질적지표에 의거한 학습장애 학생을 위한 수학중재연구 분석" 한국학습장애학회 7 (7): 145-173, 2010
• 4 이예다나, "중재반응모형에서의 증거기반교수를 위한 읽기중재 효과 메타분석" 한국학습장애학회 7 (7): 119-143, 2010
• 5 김용욱, "중재반응(RTI) 연구의 읽기 중재 요소 고찰" 한국특수교육문제연구소 10 (10): 151-174, 2009
• 6 이윤숙, "중재반응 실행연구의 국내·외 동향 비교연구" 한국통합교육학회 7 (7): 47-71, 2012
• 7 서유진, "중재반응 모델 실행을 위한 초등수학 중재연구의 실제 분석" 한국특수교육문제연구소 11 (11): 207-246, 2010
• 8 김용욱, "수학 영역에 있어 중재반응모델의 중재 요소에 대한 고찰" 한국특수교육문제연구소 9 (9): 279-302, 2008
• 9 강옥려, "미국의 학습장애 진단 및 판별절차에 관한 고찰" 한국학습장애학회 5 (5): 107-133, 2008
• 10 김동일, "기초학습기능 수행평가 체제: 읽기검사" 학지사 2000
• 11 고혜정, "국내 학습장애 작문중재연구 분석: 글의 내용 향상과 길이 증가에 미치는 효과" 한국특수교육학회 47 (47): 165-187, 2013
• 12 김우리, "국내 학습장애 읽기이해 중재의 효과분석" 한국학습장애학회 9 (9): 179-203, 2012
• 13 Werts, M. G., "What special education directors say about RTI" 32 (32): 245-254, 2009
• 14 Ferri, B. A., "Undermining inclusion? A critical reading of response to intervention(RTI)" 16 (16): 863-880, 2011
• 15 Fuchs, L. S., "Treatment validity as a unifying construct for identifying learning disabilities" 25 (25): 33-45, 2002
• 16 Bruner, J. S., "Toward a theory of instruction" Belkapp Press 1966
• 17 Glover, T. A., "The promise of response to intervention" The Guilford Press 2010
• 18 Fuchs, L. S., "The prevention, identification, and cognitive determinants of math difficulty" 97 (97): 493-513, 2005
• 19 Bryant, D. P., "The effects of tier 2 intervention on the mathematics performance of first-grade students who are at risk for mathematics difficulties" 31 (31): 47-63, 2008
• 20 Wanzek, J., "Students demonstrating persistent low response to reading intervention : Three case studies" 24 (24): 151-163, 2009
• 21 Kazdin, A. E., "Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings" Oxford University Press 1982
• 22 Vaughn, S., "Secondary interventions in reading : Providing additional instruction for students at risk" 39 (39): 40-46, 2007
• 23 Fuchs, D., "Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definition, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct" 18 (18): 157-171, 2003
• 24 O’Conner, R. E., "Responsiveness of students with language difficulties to early intervention in reading" 43 (43): 220-235, 2010
• 25 Grosche, M., "Response-to-intervention(RTI) as a model to facilitate inclusion for students with learning and behaviour problems" 28 (28): 254-269, 2013
• 26 Brown-Chidsey, R., "Response to intervention: Principles and strategies for effective practice" The Guilford Press 2010
• 27 Vaughn, S., "Response to intervention with secondary school students with reading difficulties" 45 (45): 244-256, 2012
• 28 Vaughn, S., "Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction : The promise and potential problems" 18 (18): 137-146, 2003
• 29 이대식, "RTI와 학습장애, 어떻게 봐야 하나?: 국내 학습장애 이론과 실제에의 시사점" 한국통합교육학회 3 (3): 25-48, 2008
• 30 Marston, D., "Problem-solving model for decision making with high-incidence disabilities : The Minneapolis experience" 18 (18): 187-200, 2003
• 31 Foorman, B. R., "Primary prevention in classroom reading instruction" 39 (39): 24-30, 2007
• 32 Burns, M. K., "Meta-analytic review of responsiveness-to-intervention research : Examining field-based and research-implemented models" 23 (23): 381-394, 2005
• 33 Ribera, D. M., "Mathematics instruction for students with special needs" 28 : 71-86, 1992
• 34 Fuchs, D., "Making “secondary intervention” work in a three-tier responsiveness-to-intervention model: Finding from the first grade longitudinal reading study of the national research center on learning disabilities" 21 (21): 413-436, 2008
• 35 Hallahan, D. P., "Learning Disabilities: Foundations, Characteristics, and Effective Teaching" Pearson Education 2005
• 36 Kavale, K. A., "Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice" Erlbaum 369-426, 2002
• 37 Hallahan, D. P., "Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice" Erlbaum 1-67, 2002
• 38 Fletcher, J. M., "Handbook of learning disabilities" Guilford Press 33-50, 2013
• 39 Fuchs, D., "Handbook of learning disabilities" Guilford Press 526-544, 2013
• 40 Haager, D., "Evidence-based reading practices for response to intervention" Paul H. Brooks Publishing 2007
• 41 Simmons, D. C., "Effects of supplemental reading interventions in authentic context : A comparison of kindergarteners’ response" 77 (77): 207-228, 2011
• 42 Wright, J., "Curriculum-based measurement workshop participant packer" Syracuse City School District, Pupil Services Office 2001
• 43 Batsche, G. M., "Competing views : A dialogue on response to intervention" 32 (32): 6-19, 2006
• 44 Davis, G. N., "Children at Risk for Reading Failure" 39 (39): 32-37, 2007
• 45 Denton, C. A., "An evaluation of intensive intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties" 39 (39): 447-466, 2006
• 46 Tran, L., "A Meta analysis of the RTI literature for children at risk for reading disabilities" 44 (44): 283-296, 2011