top of page
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute

Education Quarterly Reviews

ISSN 2621-5799

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
open access

Published: 08 September 2021

Implementing Response to Intervention (RtI) in a Juvenile Detention Center Using Action Research

David C. Coker

Fort Hays State University Virtual College

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
pdf download

Download Full-Text Pdf



Pages: 227-239

Keywords: Response to Intervention, Strategic Leadership, Juvenile Delinquency, Action Research, Adaptive Leadership


While proponents claimed Response to Intervention (RtI) improved student learning and prevented failure, there was an absence of research in effectiveness. Applying action research within a case study, there was an investigation into the process of reforming and improving RtI within a short-term juvenile detention center in the Midwest of the United States for students in grades 5-12. Using the conceptual framework of adaptive leadership, there was an analysis of policies and procedures, observations, interviews, and student work. RtI as a stand-alone program revealed many teachers lacked evidence-based instructional methods and alternative teachers lacked content knowledge, making implementation difficult. Within the action research method, role ambiguity caused problems with fidelity, with the need to infuse strategic leadership with action research when teachers’ sense of self and professional were challenged.


  1. Anderson, R. A., Bailey, D. E. Jr., Wu, B., Corazzini, K., McConnell, E. S., Thygeson, N. M., & Docherty, S. L. (2015). Adaptive leadership framework for chronic illness: framing a research agenda for transforming care delivery. ANS. Advances in Nursing Science, 38(2), 83-95.

  2. Avison, D. E., Lau, F., Myers, M. D., & Nielsen, P. A. (1999). Action research. Communications of the ACM, 42(1), 94-97.

  3. Badgett, K., Decman, J., & Carman, C. (2014). The influence of teacher graduate degrees on student reading achievement. AASA Journal of Scholarship & Practice, 11(1), 4-25. Retrieved from

  4. Balu, R., Zhu, P., Doolittle, F., Schiller, E., Jenkins, J., & Gersten, R. (2015). Evaluation of response to intervention practices for elementary school reading. NCEE 2016-4000. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from

  5. Bastian, K. C., & Janda, L. (2018). Does quantity affect quality? Teachers’ course preparations and effectiveness. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 11(4), 535-558.

  6. Beauchamp, G., & Kennewell, S. (2010). Interactivity in the classroom and its impact on learning. Computers & Education, 54(3), 759-766.

  7. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2013). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. Guilford Press.

  8. Borders, D. G. (2019). Assess and document professional learning’s impact. The Learning Professional, 40(6), 8-14. Retrieved from httsp://

  9. Chi, M. T., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219-243.

  10. Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H., & Vigdor, J. L. (2007). How and why do teacher credentials matter for student achievement? NBER. Retrieved from

  11. Coker, D. C. (2020a). Action research in a juvenile detention school: New processes, paradigms, and possibilities. Education Quarterly Reviews, 3(3), 411-430.

  12. Coker, D. C. (2020b). Reflections in the educational leadership internship: Bridging theory and practice. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 72-88.

  13. Coker, D. C. (2021). Noncognitive factors affecting academic achievement of juvenile delinquents. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research, 9(3), 341-368.

  14. Cook, D. A., Hamstra, S. J., Brydges, R., Zendejas, B., Szostek, J. H., Wang, A. T., ... & Hatala, R. (2013). Comparative effectiveness of instructional design features in simulation-based education: systematic review and meta-analysis. Medical Teacher, 35(1), e867-e898.

  15. Cowan, C., & Maxwell, G. (2015). Educators' perceptions of response to intervention implementation and impact on student learning. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 16. Retrieved from

  16. Danielson, L., Doolittle, J., & Bradley, R. (2007). Professional development, capacity building, and research needs: Critical issues for response to intervention implementation. School Psychology Review, 36(4), 632-637.

  17. Davis, D. S., Jones, J. S., & Samuelson, C. (2021). Is it time for a hard conversation about cueing systems and word reading in teacher education? Reading & Writing Quarterly, 37(4), 301-316.

  18. Delprino, R. P. (2013). The human side of the strategic planning process in higher education. Planning for Higher Education, 41(4), 138-154. Retrieved from

  19. Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37(1), 15-24. Retrieved from

  20. Engstrom, R. S., & Scott, D. (2020). Juvenile institutional misconduct: Examining the role of educational attainment and academic achievement. Crime & Delinquency, 66(5), 663-686.

  21. Ferguson, M. (2020). Washington view: What the NAEP reveals. Phi Delta Kappan, 101(5), 62-63.

  22. Fletcher, J. M., & Vaughn, S. (2009). Response to intervention: Preventing and remediating academic difficulties. Child Development Perspectives, 3(1), 30-37.

  23. Flores, J., & Barahona-López, K. (2021). Correctional education and the impact on educators’ lack of training. Curriculum Perspectives, 41(2), 237-244.

  24. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93-99. https://doi:10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4

  25. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2017). Critique of the national evaluation of response to intervention: A case for simpler frameworks. Exceptional Children, 83(3), 255-268.

  26. Fullan, M. (2011). Change leader: Learning to do what matters most. John Wiley & Sons.

  27. Gersten, R., Jayanthi, M., & Dimino, J. (2017). Too much, too soon? Unanswered questions from national response to intervention evaluation. Exceptional Children, 83(3), 244-254.

  28. Gettinger, M., Bryant, N. D., & Fayne, H. R. (1982). Designing spelling instruction for learning-disabled children: An emphasis on unit size, distributed practice, and training for transfer. The Journal of Special Education, 16(4), 439-448.

  29. Goodwin, B. (2000). Raising the achievement of low-performing students. McREL Policy Brief. Retrieved from

  30. Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. Routledge.

  31. Heifetz, R. A., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world.Harvard Business Press.

  32. Hempenstall, K. (2017). The three-cueing system in reading: Will it ever go away? National Institution for Direct Instruction Blog, 29. Retrieved from

  33. Hendricks, E. L., & Fuchs, D. (2020). Are individual differences in response to intervention influenced by the methods and measures used to define response? Implications for identifying children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(6), 428-443.


  35. Hite, J. E., & McGahey, J. T. (2015). Implementation and effectiveness of the response to intervention (RTI) program. Georgia School Counselors Association Journal, 22, 28-40. Retrieved from

  36. Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., & Torgesen, J. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices. IES Practice Guide. NCEE 2008-4027. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from

  37. Katsiyannis, A., Ryan, J. B., Zhang, D., & Spann, A. (2008). Juvenile delinquency and recidivism: The impact of academic achievement. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 24(2), 177-196.

  38. Kozlowski, S. W., & Bell, B. S. (2006). Disentangling achievement orientation and goal setting: Effects on self-regulatory processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4), 900-916.

  39. Kranzler, J. H., Yaraghchi, M., Matthews, K., & Otero-Valles, L. (2020). Does the response-to-intervention model fundamentally alter the traditional conceptualization of specific learning disability? Contemporary School Psychology, 24(1), 80-88.

  40. Krug, D., Davis, T. B., & Glover, J. A. (1990). Massed versus distributed repeated reading: A case of forgetting helping recall? Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(2), 366.

  41. Kulkarni, T., Sullivan, A. L., & Kim, J. (2020). Externalizing behavior problems and low academic achievement: Does a causal relation exist? Educational Psychology Review, 1-22.

  42. Lennie, J. (2006). Increasing the rigour and trustworthiness of participatory evaluations: learnings from the field. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 6(1), 27-35.

  43. Lin, C. H., Chiang, M. C., Knowlton, B. J., Iacoboni, M., Udompholkul, P., & Wu, A. D. (2013). Interleaved practice enhances skill learning and the functional connectivity of fronto‐parietal networks. Human Brain Mapping, 34(7), 1542-1558.

  44. Macomber, D., Skiba, T., Blackmon, J., Esposito, E., Hart, L., Mambrino, E., ... & Grigorenko, E. L. (2010). Education in juvenile detention facilities in the state of Connecticut: A glance at the system. Journal of Correctional Education (Glen Mills, Pa.), 61(3), 223-261. Retrieved from

  45. Manfra, M. M. (2019). Action research and systematic, intentional change in teaching practice. Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 163-196.

  46. Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. ASCD.

  47. Mather, N., Bos, C., & Babur, N. (2001). Perceptions and knowledge of preservice and inservice teachers about early literacy instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(5), 472-482.

  48. McDaniel, S., Heil, K. M., Houchins, D. E., & Duchaine, E. L. (2011). A guide to implementing response to intervention in long-term residential juvenile justice schools. Journal of Correctional Education, 51-68. Retrieved from

  49. McInerney, M., & Elledge, A. (2013). Using a response to intervention framework to improve student learning: A pocket guide for state and district leaders. Implementing ESEA flexibility plans. American Institutes for Research. Retrieved from

  50. Mintzberg, H. (1994). Rethinking strategic planning part I: Pitfalls and fallacies. Long Range Planning, 27(3), 12-21.

  51. Norton, L. (2018). Action research in teaching and learning: A practical guide to conducting pedagogical research in universities. Routledge.

  52. Pederson, C. A., Fite, P. J., Weigand, P. D., Myers, H., & Housman, L. (2020). Implementation of a behavioral intervention in a juvenile detention center: do individual characteristics matter? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 64(1), 83-99.

  53. Pitelis, C. N., & Wagner, J. D. (2019). Strategic shared leadership and organizational dynamic capabilities. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(2), 233-242.

  54. Rau, M. A., Aleven, V., & Rummel, N. (2015). Successful learning with multiple graphical representations and self-explanation prompts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 30-46.

  55. Sagor, R. (2000). Guiding school improvement with action research. ASCD.

  56. Savage, J., & Ellis, S. K. (2019). Academic achievement, school attachment, and school problems in the differential etiology of violence. Journal of Developmental and Life-course Criminology, 5(2), 243-265.

  57. Schmoker, M. (2010, September 27). When pedagogic fads trump priorities. Mike Schmoker. Retrieved from

  58. Schmoker, M. (2019). Focusing on the essentials. Educational Leadership, 77(1), 30-35. Retrieved from

  59. Schunk, D. H. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 71-86.

  60. Shanahan, T. (2020). Limiting children to books they can already read: Why it reduces their opportunity to learn. American Educator, 44(2), 13-17;39.

  61. Smale-Jacobse, A. E., Meijer, A., Helms-Lorenz, M., & Maulana, R. (2019). Differentiated instruction in secondary education: A systematic review of research evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2366.

  62. Snow, P. C., Sanger, D. D., Caire, L. M., Eadie, P. A., & Dinslage, T. (2015). Improving communication outcomes for young offenders: a proposed response to intervention framework. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 50(1), 1-13.

  63. Sparks, S. (2015). Study: RTI practice falls short of promise. Education Week, 35(12), 1. Retrieved from

  64. Susman, G. I., & Evered, R. D. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 582-603.

  65. Taylor, K., & Rohrer, D. (2010). The effects of interleaved practice. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24(6), 837-848.

  66. Thomas, E. R., Conoyer, S. J., & Lembke, E. S. (2020). Districtwide evaluation of RTI implementation: Success, challenges, and self‐efficacy. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 35(3), 118-125.

  67. Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage Publications.

  68. Zwiers, J., O'Hara, S., & Pritchard, R. (2015). Conversing to fortify literacy, language, and learning. MinneTESOL Journal, 2015 (Spring/Summer 2015). Retrieved from

bottom of page