Table 1.

Comparison Dimensions for Dynamic Testing and Assessment (DT/A) and Response to Intervention (RTI)

Dimensions	DT/A	RTI
Context	Aim: To sort and place disadvantaged children for educational purposes	Aim: To revise precision of admission to special education
	Main idea: Assessment should include instruction to generate more accurate and informative data	Main idea: Appropriateness of instruction should be monitored with systematic assessment
	Accent: Assessment	Accent: Instruction
Premises	Aim: To realize learning potential	Aim: To meet age-/grade-appropriate standards
	Main ideas: Conventional assessment is inadequate for assessing learning potential and devising best educational strategies Everyone, regardless of ability level, has learning potential; everyone can benefit from DT/A by establishing the learning potential and meeting it	Main ideas: Conventional instruction is inadequate if the child does not respond to it; response should determine quality and quantity of instruction Response to instruction is domain specific
	Accent: Underachievement as compared with the child’s learning potential regardless of previous educational experience	Accent: Underachievement as compared with typically developing children of age and grade in context of adequate teaching
	Debate: Learning potential is generalizable vs. domain specific	Debate: Qualifications for entry into RTI
Main concepts	Learning potential Modifiability Gainers and nongainers	Screening Progress monitoring Responders and nonresponders
Process	Relatively unstructured, exists in multiple realizations Can be applied to any testing Can be completed in one session	Structured, tier-based Dependent on the availability of interventions and assessments Requires multiple sessions
Types of evidence	Clinical traditions and approaches, case accounts Research studies	Grass-route applications, practical illustrations of working models Research studies
Expertise requirements	Types of implementations Highly trained clinicians Highly scripted protocols Computer-based models	Types of implementations Qualified practitioners Structured frameworks (e.g., problem-solving cycles) Off-the-shelf interventions and assessments