An Examination of the Relationship Between Professional Development and Core Beliefs Within the Context of a Response to Intervention Model

The reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 made the use of Response to Intervention an acceptable method to determine eligibility for Specific Learning Disabilities. Consistent with other systemic change, RtI implementation requires change as well. One significant change relates to the development of professional practice. The beliefs that educators possess are thought to play a critical role in successful implementation of new practices. As core beliefs influence educators' commitment to new initiatives, this factor should be considered when planning for professional development. Although professional development is a critical component of RtI, there is little proof that it influences educators' beliefs. Also, the educational and experience level of teachers may influence the interaction between beliefs and professional development. Therefore, evidence is necessary to help determine the effectiveness of RtI professional development. The purpose of this quantitative multiple regression was to examine the relationship between participation in professional development, educational levels, teaching experience, and RtI core beliefs of teachers. All 3200 teachers from a public school district in south Florida were utilized to collect data through a single-stage sampling procedure. Only educational level's semi-partial correlation ( r = .12, p < .01) accounted for a statistically significant amount of unique variance (r2 = .01). Results indicated that the participation in professional development correlation (r = -0.07, p > .05) and the semi-partial correlation (r = 04, p > .05) for the number of years of teaching experience were not significant. However, the regression model indicated that the interaction of the three variables is significantly related to RtI core beliefs. Although the variables predict RtI core beliefs, the model accounted for only 2% of the variance. Opportunities for future research include exploring other formats of professional development and the addition of qualitative data.