1

RTI Model of Graduated & Peer-Mediated Instruction

Shuji Miller

College of Education and P-16 Integration, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley

EDCI 7354: Teaching and Learning Geometric Concepts

Dr. Hugo Leal

November 15, 2020

 2

RTI Model of Graduated & Peer-Mediated Instruction

According the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), our scores

from the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) revealed that the United States are 18th in

the world’s ranking for mathematical performance (OECD, 2010) while only 26% of 12th grade students

performed at or above proficiency level on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

(National Center for Education Statistics, 2010). Due to the demand of higher mathematical proficiency,

the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) has provided the standards in which

mathematical learning and teaching should take place, with student centered instruction and conceptual

understanding being key tenants of their pedagogy (NCTM, 2014). Geometry, a significant content

standard laid out by NCTM, is being demanded in more and more high school curriculum requisites, and

therefore, reasons to pursue this content area is becoming more apparent (Dobbins et al., 2014). There

exists a broad range of struggling students who fall below the 35th percentile in mathematics (Mazzocco,

2007 as cited in Dobbins et al., 2014), and as the demand rises, we must find intervention strategies to

support youth with mathematical difficulties. As of 2009, more than 47 out of 50 states have already

adopted and integrated a form of Response to Intervention (RTI) model to assess, monitor, and support

struggling students and students with learning disabilities (Hughes & Dexter, 2011). This synopsis

presents Dobbins et al.’s (2014) proposal of two support strategies: graduated instruction and peer-

mediated instruction, simultaneously be integrated within a Response-to-Intervention and Tier II

intervention model, to support struggling students in the area of geometry.

Response-to-Intervention Model

The Response to Intervention framework consists of a three-tiered support system in which

students from one tier transition to another when supports in the current tier are no longer sufficient for

adequate growth (Dobbins et al., 2014). On each tier, students are monitored closely using core level

assessments, grade-level benchmarks, universal screenings, and other student data to track the progression

and growth, or lack thereof, so that students receive the aid they need (Hughes & Dexter, 2011). Tier 1,

the preventative phase, is where students receive high-quality core instruction with frequent assessments
 3

and universal screening to monitor gains and deficits among students (Dobbins et al., 2014). If Tier 1

efforts show to be unproductive in assisting with student progress, then they transition into Tier II, which

provides supplemental small-group instruction in addition to the core-instruction. However, though there

is a general consensus among researchers about measuring response to Tier 1 services, there is less

agreement about response to Tier II instruction and when to begin Tier 3 instruction, which is often

associated with special education services (Hughes & Dexter, 2011).

Dobbins et al.’s proposal (2014) will focus within Tier II of this RTI framework, as empirical

research conducted by L.S. Fuchs, D. Fuchs, and K. N. Hollenbeck (2007) showed that when groups of 4-

6 students are provided with small group instructions for at least 30 minutes, 3-5 days a week

mathematical performance was significantly improved. Within these small-group instructions,

instructional strategies include explicit and systematic instruction, guided and independent practice, and

cumulative review of previously learned material (Fuchs, 2011, as cited by Dobbins et al., 2014). Small-

group instruction that promotes student discourse, collaboration, exploration, and meaningful

mathematical tasks are strategies in alignment to NCTM standards and expectations (NCTM, 2014).

Though limited research is available in regards to secondary-mathematics for intervention strategies,

Dobbins et al. (2014) proposes that two strategies, graduated instruction and peer-monitored instruction,

offer compatible and validated approaches in supporting struggling students.

Graduated Instruction

The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics emphasizes the importance of a foundation in

conceptual understanding as the basis of learning mathematics (NCTM, 2000). However, procedural

fluency is equally stressed as one of the interrelated strands of mathematical proficiency as stated by the

National Research Council (2001, as cited in NCTM, 2014). Graduated instruction, which involves

incorporating concrete manipulatives to teach concepts before abstract forms, has been found to be an

effective instructional approach for teaching procedural learning goals as well as creating conceptual

mathematical connections (Dobbins et al., 2014). Dobbins (2014) suggests using a form of graduated
 4

instruction such as Steedly, Dragoo, Arafeh, & Lake’s (2008) Concrete–Representational–Abstract

(CRA) technique to provide a graduated sequence as the progression of geometric learning.

The CRA sequence is constructed of a three-part sequence: concrete, representational, and

abstract. The concrete stage involves the manipulation of materials and physical models such as

geometric shapes and manipulatives to both display and solve geometric problems (Dobbins et al., 2014).

Concrete models have not only been shown to increase motivation and engagement in mathematical tasks

but allow students to visualize and physically understand mathematical properties to form tangible

conceptual connections for deeper mathematical understanding (NCTM, 2014). The representational

stage incorporates pictorial representations such as figures, shapes, drawings, etc., to substitute the

concrete manipulatives to explore mathematical properties and phenomena (Dobbins et al., 2014).

The final abstract stage uses symbols, numbers, and notations as its form of representation, to allow

students to engage in a more formal method of mathematics. Each progression is dependent upon the

understanding of success of the previous phase, and teachers should assess success of the current phase

before providing learning opportunities in the next (NCTM, 2000).

The CRA sequence has been shown to be effective with students in the retention and transfer of a

variety of mathematical concept areas across multiple grade levels, achievement levels, and instructional

groupings such as whole group, small group, or one-on-one instruction (Dobbins et al., 2014). In

geometric learning specifically, efficacy of the CRA technique has been supported by researchers such as

Cass, Cates, Smith, and Jackson (2003) for teaching problem-solving areas of perimeter and area to

students in middle and high school grades (as cited in Dobbins, et al., 2014). Forming connections across

a variety of representations such as physical models, figures, tables, graphs, and symbolic notation and

equations is stressed by NCTM as one of the key Mathematics Teaching Practices (NCTM, 2014).

Therefore, this CRA approach can be suggested as a tool in the RTI framework as an effective method for

integrating and supporting the understanding of conceptual and procedural mathematical knowledge

(Dobbins, et al., 2014).

 5

Peer-Mediated Instruction

The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics encourages the use of small interactive groups

in the learning of mathematics because it fosters peer collaboration, active and social discourse of ideas,

opportunities for explanation and justifications, and effective use of questioning and response (NCTM,

2000). Dobbins et al. (2014) states that these same components comprise peer-mediated instruction and

should be an element integrated within the RTI framework. Peer Assisted Learning Strategies (PALS) is

a form of peer-mediated instruction that has received substantial support in improving achievement levels

of students in mathematics. Typically used as a supplement to core instruction approximately 2-3 days a

week, PALS utilizes a tutor and tutee approach where peers have opportunities in both roles to model

procedural steps, ask questions to promote conceptual understanding, and provide immediate feedback to

support each other’s learning (Fuchs, Fuchs, Mathes, & Martinez, 2002, as cited in Dobbins et al., 2014).

Studies such as ones conducted by Allsop (1997), and Calhoon and Fuchs (2003) showed that

students who participate in a form of peer-mediated instruction partnered with regular curriculum based

instruction perform significantly higher than students without it (as cited by Dobbins et al., 2014).

Students in peer-mediated instruction are required to monitor their peers’ and their own engagement and

behaviors because they are provided with explicit roles and responsibilities that outline their tutoring

relationship as they engage in student discourse (Dobbins et al., 2014; NCTM, 2014). Self-monitoring

promotes metacognitive strategies of reflection and evaluations that help a students’ ability to plan and

assess mathematical approaches, but also offers immediate feedback on their progress. As a form of

progress monitoring, a key element of the RTI model supported by the National Center on Response to

Intervention and the National Center for Student Progress Monitoring, students and educators can use

peer and self-monitoring to assess academic competence, track academic development, and improvement

in student achievement (Hughes & Dexter, 2011)

An Integrated Application

Though Dobbins et al., (2014) acknowledges the need for more research on the combined efforts

of graduated instruction and peer-mediated instruction, he still suggests that these two tools be integrated
 6

in Tier II intervention for maximum student benefit and support. Both approaches are in alignment to

NCTM’s (2000) principles for learning and teaching mathematics: Equity, Curriculum, Teaching,

Learning, and Assessment. Specifically, the integration of these approaches will provide support and

feedback for all students (Equity); coherent and focused instruction that reveal areas in need of assistance

(Curriculum and Teaching); opportunities to engage in geometric learning through an appropriately

sequenced progression towards conceptual and procedural fluency (Principle 4: Learning); and essential

assessment data to track progress and make decisions about intervention and future tasks (Assessment)

(NCTM, 2000).

The CRA approach of graduated instruction models a structure that provides a comprehensible

learning sequence that fosters the learning of geometry while peer-mediated instruction can offer high

levels of guided practice and discourse through meaningful mathematical experiences to boost

mathematical exposure and learning (Dobbins et al., 2014; NCTM, 2014). Progress monitoring is key

throughout the entirety of this process, and should be done regularly and frequently as the RTI framework

advises, to ensure that adequate support, growth, and achievement are being tracked for decision making

about a student’s development (Hughes & Dexter, 2011). Curriculum-based measures, items, and

benchmarks in alignment to district and NCTM’s standards and principles can help to provide a detailed

analysis of student performance so teachers can utilize it for remediation of difficulty areas for each and

every student (Dobbins et al., 2014).

As teachers work to integrate both remediation models within the RTI and Tier II framework,

both proven approaches can function cohesively as a support system to help geometry students. The RTI

and Tier II approach allows educators to monitor and identify struggling students to provide the

supplemental exposure to meaningful mathematical experiences (Dobbins et al., 2014). The CRA

approach allows students to visualize geometric concepts using physical manipulatives, which in turn lays

down the foundation to better understand abstract concepts as they progress in geometric learning

(NCTM, 2014). Incorporating peer-mediation as an approach to encourage collaboration, discourse, and

metacognitive practices will vastly improve mathematical learning as research has shown (Calhoon &
 7

Fuchs, 2003 as cited in Dobbins et al., 2014). With both approaches cohesively aligning to the

Mathematical Teaching Practices and Standards for Mathematical Practices as advocated by NCTM

(2014), an assimilation of both models will be beneficial for all students in the learning of geometry.

Conclusion

The Response-to-Intervention and Tier II model is used across the nation to identify and support

struggling students (Hughes & Dexter, 2011) as a tool to help remedy a growing national mathematical

deficit as indicated by national reports such as the PISA and NAEP (Dobbins et al., 2014; National Center

for Education Statistics, 2010; OECD, 2010). The RTI and Tier II framework incorporates methods of

high-level core instruction, supplemental instructional strategies, learning opportunities, and frequent

progress monitoring to offer remediation for mathematically struggling individuals (Hughes & Dexter,

2011; Dobbins et al., 2014). Dobbins et al.’s (2014), suggestion of incorporating strategies of graduated

instruction and peer-mediated instruction offers opportunities for students to engage in a sequenced

instructional model that promotes both conceptual and procedural understanding through increased

exposure and opportunities for mathematical discourse and metacognitive practices. The CRA approach

of graduated instruction offers students a method of interacting with geometric learning in a manner that

forms a concrete and visual foundation to assist them in learning geometry before progressing to

advanced abstract concepts (Dobbins et al., 2014; NCTM, 2014). Meanwhile, peer-mediated instruction

offers students opportunities to engage in peer-discourse and collaboration, as well as self-monitoring

practices of reflection and evaluation (Dobbins et al., 2014). Therefore, integrating both strategies within

the RTI and Tier II models can provide students with a focused and coherent supplement to core

instruction within a small group setting, fostering vast improvements in academic growth and success for

all struggling geometric students.

 8

References

Dobbins, A., Gagnon, J. C., & Ulrich, T. (2014). Teaching geometry to students with math difficulties

using graduated and peer-mediated instruction in a response-to-intervention model. Preventing

School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 58(1), 17-25.

Hughes, C. A., & Dexter, D. D. (2011). Response to intervention: A research-based summary. Theory

into practice, 50(1), 4-11.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). The nation’s report card: Grade 12 reading and

mathematics 2009 national and pilot state results (NCES 2011–455). Washington, DC: Institute

of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school

mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2014). Principles to actions:

Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: Author.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). PISA 2009 results: What students

know and can do (Vol. 1). Paris, France: Author.