Efficacy of Response-to-Intervention (RTI) Programmes in Identifying and Supporting Students with Learning Disabilities: Perspectives of Teachers in Saudi Arabia

Efficacy of Response-to-Intervention (RTI) Programmes in Identifying and Supporting Students with Learning Disabilities: Perspectives of Teachers in Saudi Arabia | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Efficacy of Response-to-Intervention (RTI) Programmes in Identifying and Supporting Students with Learning Disabilities: Perspectives of Teachers in Saudi Arabia Abdullah Ahmed Almulla, Inuusah Mahama This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7330350/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 23 Apr, 2026 Read the published version in Humanities and Social Sciences Communications → Version 1 posted 10 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study explores the efficacy of Response-to-Intervention (RTI) programmes in identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities (LDs) from the perspectives of teachers in Saudi Arabia. Using a qualitative case study approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with thirteen educators across inclusive schools. Findings reveal that while teachers intuitively apply RTI-aligned strategies such as differentiated instruction and group remediation, implementation is largely informal, lacking systematic progress monitoring, diagnostic tools, and policy guidance. Cultural stigma and limited parental involvement further hinder effective RTI execution. However, collaborative school leadership and peer learning communities emerged as enabling factors. The study is grounded in Cohen and Ball’s Instructional Capacity Framework and Cothran and Ennis’ Situated Learning Theory, highlighting that RTI efficacy is shaped by teacher knowledge, tools, and school culture. The study recommends culturally relevant RTI policies, sustained professional development, and greater family engagement to bridge the gap between theory and practice in inclusive education. Humanities/Cultural and media studies Social science/Cultural and media studies Social science/Education Humanities/Language and linguistics Social science/Language and linguistics Response-to-Intervention (RTI) Learning Disabilities (LDs) Inclusive Education Teacher Perceptions Saudi Arabia Introduction As nations worldwide have turned toward inclusive education, the demand for effective, research-based frameworks to recognize and support students with learning disabilities (LDs) has heightened in popularity and need. The increasing awareness of LDs as an educational problem worldwide has led to a resurgence of interest in understanding avenues for early identification and intervention (Sakuma et al., 2024 ). The Response-to-Intervention (RTI) framework has established itself as a key paradigm aimed primarily at early identification, timely intervention, and data-driven determination (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006 ; Weber et al., 2025 ). The RTI is a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) that provides students with increasingly intensive levels of instruction and intervention through monitoring the degree of responsiveness (Berkeley et al., 2020 ; Zhang et al., 2023 ). The RTI framework provides countries seeking equity within education systems a pre-emptive alternative conceptual framework to traditional deficit-deficit diagnostic approaches (e.g., IQ-achievement difference) by ensuring that RTI-based interventions and supports are incorporated into the general education setting (Restori et al., 2009 ; Reynolds & Shaywitz, 2009 ). There are post numerous papers worldwide that analyse the real-time issues, challenges, and success of RTI frameworks being implemented to support LD students. In Saudi Arabia, for example, there is an extensive amount of research examining RTI through supervisor, teacher, and educational leader lens. One such study, by Aljohani ( 2019 ) employed a descriptive comparative design to investigate the knowledge of RTI and challenges of implementing RTI within the experiences of 240 early elementary supervisors and 91 supervisors of learning disability students. The results showed a great deal of theoretical knowledge of RTI, but implementation was somewhat constrained due to a number of structural challenges such as, lack of training, lack of diagnostic tools, and lack of a culturally relevant RTI implementation model. These limitations showed a gap between knowledge and implementation and indicated that some level of support from those at the systemic level is needed to implement RTI in a meaningful way. Supporting this, Alwadei ( 2025 ) conducted qualitative research with 12 instructional coaches in Saudi Arabia utilizing semi-structured interviews. The results revealed concerns regarding the reliability of currently used LD identification models, and limitations associated with the IQ-achievement discrepancy model. Participants shared that RTI and Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) were more ethical and comprehensive alternatives to what is currently used, but had not been systematically implemented in schools yet. The study suggested that RTI should be implemented in stages with meaningful supports that were embedded in culturally responsive training for teachers and support staff. In a study, Weber ( 2023 ) examined RTI’s functionality and impact on improving elementary student’s reading skills, and found that although teachers found merit in RTI-aligned practices such as small-group interventions and differentiated instruction, they applied these practices informally without systemic support. They are reliant on their intuition and traditional classroom observations rather than data-driven progress monitoring. Furthermore, teachers faced factors such as large class sizes, limited time, and limited access to intervention tools. In much the same way, Melekoğlu et al. (2023), highlighted that within a broader context with implications for similar educational systems, many teachers were unaware of the RTI model as a structured model although they may have unwittingly practiced elements of RTI. Further evidence supporting this trend can be found in the work of Kenny-Chapur ( 2023 ), who pointed out that the perceptions of teachers greatly influence the success or failure of RTI systems implemented in practice. Teachers who underwent professional development were more confident and more attentive to the application of RTI. Barriers were identified and discussed in both settings that are common to education in general such as time, preparation, class size, administrative support, and collaboration between general education and special education. The conclusion was that with understood and applied principles of RTI, teachers in both contexts had nothing but support for the principles of RTI. The teachers identified that there was a need for training to be local, resources to be provided in the specific context, and the need for policy level support in order to have success attributed to RTI. The known value of RTI for identification and support of students with LD is in its preventative framework that is different from that of long-standing deficit-based frameworks, such as the IQ - achievement discrepancy formula (O'Connell, 2015). Traditionally, these models reserve a diagnosis until a child shows significant delayed performance, instead, RTI is a response process that includes screening all learners, intervening, and monitoring position of learners, and therefore providing early intervention for supports for students before they are much too far behind (Vaughn & Fletcher, 2012 ). RTI also generally includes three tiers of support that change is intensity of instruction. Tier 1 is universal instruction with screening for all students, Tier 2 is small group instruction for students who do not have adequate responses to Tier 1, and Tier 3 is intense individualized instruction and if necessary, referral to special education (Brown et al., 2014 ; Richards et al., 2007 ; Marchand-Martella et al., 2007 ).This system allows schools to reveal the distinction between students with legitimate learning disorders as opposed to just aspects related to requiring additional time or differentiated instruction (Gersten & Dimino, 2006 ). To add to this further is that adequate implementation of RTI leads to general practices that are inclusive, and there would be a smaller number of students are incorrectly referred to special education, which is a traditional problem about misidentification influenced with culture bias (Cartledge, Kea, Watson, & Oif, 2016 ). In the case of, Saudi Arabia has intended to recognize learning difficulties as a distinct classification since 1996, and it has continued with a plan to build its identification and intervention methods (Alzahraney, 2023 ; Alnaim, 2018). Although IQ-achievement discrepancy models were dominant before, Saudi scholars and policymakers have started to emphasize and advocate for an RTI shift, which aims to focus on early, continuous, and assessments within the classroom (Alwadei, 2025 ; Aljohani, 2019 ). In spite of this, studies have found that while educational supervisors are aware of RTI, there are barriers, such as teacher readiness, inconsistent implementation, and a lack of cultural contextualization are some of the issues that teachers face (Aljohani, 2019 ; Melekoğlu et al., 2023). Research indicates that the perceptions, understandings, as well as preparation teachers receive significantly affects fidelity and outcomes associated with RTI (Weber, 2023 ). For instance, in Türkiye, while many teachers express that they are not aware RTI is a formal model, they typically employ RTI features, such as differentiation instruction, formative assessment (Melekoğlu et al., 2023). When looking at the case of the United States context, RTI programs which achieve a considerable level of success are consistently associated with teacher training, professional development as well as decision making relying on data (Weber, 2023 ). Theoretical Framework In order to build understanding of how RTI is effective in relation to teachers, this study draws on Cohen and Ball's (1999) Instructional Capacity Framework with Cothran and Ennis' Situated Learning Theory related to teacher's instructional decision making. Cohen and Ball ( 1999 ) argue that instructional change is a function of the interaction of the way that teachers know, the mediation available to teachers (e.g. teaching tools), and the school organization context. When considering RTI, Cohen and Ball give us the ideas that in order to faithfully use tiered interventions, teachers will be bound by their training and access to evidenced based tools (e.g. progress monitoring tools), as well as the leadership and school organization/policies available to them. Expanding on this concept, Cothran and Ennis ( 1999 ) suggest teachers' instructional decision making is also influenced by teachers’ beliefs, professional learning communities, and the local school culture. Using Cothran and Ennis' situated learning, teachers in Saudi Arabia, although there is no formal RTI frameworks, often use similar strategies such as remediation in groups, visual supports, and differentiated tasks is evidence that they use their belief systems during that specific moment informed by their view of the needs of their individual students and the behaviour of their peers into account. In places like Saudi Arabia, where the development of systemic RTI frameworks is ongoing, the effectiveness of RTI is influenced not only by teacher training but also in how schools cultivate collaborative practice, reflective decision-making and context-based adaption. For example, if professional learning is based in collaborative practice within a school setting where their teachers speak weekly about their practice to share each others strategies or their head teachers’ comments offer encouragement to adapt RTI, their collective efficacy should be observed, regardless of whether comprehensive national documentation had been produced or even if access to tools was available. In this way, this study will conceptualize RTI success through a lens that understands the nature of the possibility of teacher agency, school structures in a responsive context. It is acknowledged that not have standardized RTI policy in Saudi Arabia diminishes the choice of full fidelity of RTI, however teacher instructional responses (when supported by school culture and ongoing professional learning) can reflect the spirit and purpose of RTI. The Study Context Despite global efforts to enhance inclusive education, the identification and support of students with learning disabilities (LDs) remain complex and inconsistently addressed, particularly in middle-income states such as Saudi Arabia. The traditional reliance on the IQ-achievement discrepancy model has long been criticized for its delay in identifying students at risk of LD and its limited utility in informing instructional practices (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006 ; Restori et al., 2009 ). In response, the Response-to-Intervention (RTI) framework was introduced as a more dynamic and equitable model, enabling educators to provide timely, evidence-based interventions and monitor students' progress in real time (Berkeley et al., 2020 ). However, its implementation and effectiveness vary widely depending on contextual realities, particularly teachers’ knowledge, perceptions, and systemic readiness. In Saudi Arabia, although the Ministry of Education has taken significant steps toward improving services for students with LDs, including the recognition of LD as a formal special education category and the provision of training programs (Alwadei, 2025 ; Aldousari, 2022 ; Poch et al., 2023 ), empirical evidence points to major implementation gaps. These include inconsistencies in teacher training, lack of culturally responsive RTI models, and limited practical tools for early screening and progress monitoring (Aljohani, 2019 ). Furthermore, RTI and MTSS frameworks are not yet systematically adopted in Saudi classrooms, despite their growing advocacy (Alwadei, 2025 ). Therefore, this study, seeks to fill these gaps by examining the efficacy of RTI programmes in identifying and supporting students with LDs from the perspectives of teachers in Saudi Arabia. Through this, the research aims to uncover systemic, cultural, and pedagogical factors influencing RTI implementation and to provide actionable insights for improving inclusive education practices in both countries. Based on the forgoing, the following research questions guided the study: What are teachers’ understandings and perceptions of the Response-to-Intervention (RTI) framework in identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities in Saudi Arabia? How are RTI programmes currently implemented in schools and how effective do teachers perceive these programmes to be in supporting students with learning disabilities in Saudi Arabia? What contextual factors (challenges and enablers) influence the effective implementation of RTI in identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities in both countries? What are the similarities and differences in the implementation and perceived efficacy of RTI programmes between the educational contexts of Saudi Arabia? Methods Research Design The study adopted a qualitative case study design. This seemed the most relevant choice for this research due to the exploratory nature of the research and the aim to explore in depth how teachers live, unpack, and perceive their reality, as well as the socio-educational realities impacting the implementation of RTI in various contexts (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The qualitative case study design (Yin, 2018) allowed for the deep investigation of RTI practices (Shimizu, 2010) at a culturally distinct but educationally viable site. The choice of this design also allowed for the examination of contextual similarities and differences in Saudi Arabia so that a process of cross-case synthesis could be used to make transferable, yet actionable, insights. Each selected state (Saudi Arabia) was a bounded case encompassing public and inclusive basic schools with RTI or similar early-intervention frameworks or models being practiced or attempted. Research Participants Participants were selected using purposeful sampling from two urban areas in Saudi Arabia that were appropriate for purposeful sampling (Patton, 2015 ). These cases were chosen for their varying levels of critical infrastructure for inclusion in education, and accessible teachers who had some teaching or learning support experience, ideally with students with LDs. Thirteen participants were recruited. This included basic school teachers (either general or special educators), instructional coordinators, or learning support teachers who engaged directly with RTI processes. Each participant met the inclusion criteria in that he/she had a minimum of two years of teaching experience; had taught or assisted students identified or suspected of having an LD; and was familiar with, or had any experience with, tiered intervention, or progress monitoring. The inclusion criteria ensure that each participant brought the experiential knowledge necessary for rich qualitative reflection (Patton, 2015 ). Instrumentation Data were gathered through semi-structured interviews lasting between 45 and 60 minutes. The interviews could take place face-to-face or via secure telephone calls, depending on the availability of the participant and the permission of the institutions. The interview protocol included five central themes, including: understanding of RTI; RTI implementation practices; perceived effectiveness; context barriers/enablers; and recommendations for improvement. Probing (Rubin & Rubin, 2012 ) were used to draw deeper responses and to establish clarification. All interviews were audio recorded, with the consent of each participant, and transcribed verbatim. Field notes were also taken to record non-verbal communication, contextual observations, and retrospective reflection pieces. Establishing trustworthiness in this research included triangulation, member checking, and peer debriefing. Triangulation was used to compare the interview data with the policy documents and relevant literature. Member checking provided a way for participants to check the accuracy or validity of the transcripts and the preliminary reliability interpretations. Peer debriefing sessions with two qualitative researchers were used to confirm the methodical thematic structures and lessen researcher bias (Collins et al., 2013 ). Data Analysis Data were analysed through thematic analysis guided by Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase process (1) become familiar with the data, (2) generate initial codes, (3) search for themes, (4) review themes, (5) define and name themes, and (6) produce the report. NVivo 12 qualitative research software supported the coding, theme categorizing, and theme retrieval (Clarke & Braun, 2014 ). Ethical Considerations Ethical clearance was sought and granted from the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in Saudi Arabia. Participants were informed of the purpose of the study, its procedures, risks, and his/her right to withdraw at any time without penalty. Once the procedures were explained, written informed consent provided. Participants were assured that all data would be anonymized for confidentiality. When the findings are reported, pseudonyms will be used in place of the real names to ensure anonymity. Results This section presents and analyses the results of the study on the efficacy of Response-to-Intervention (RTI) programmes in identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities (LDs) from the perspectives of teachers in Saudi Arabia. Through thematic analysis of 21 semi-structured interviews, five overarching themes emerged: (1) Conceptual Understanding of RTI, (2) RTI Implementation Practices, (3) Perceived Effectiveness of RTI, (4) Contextual Challenges and Enablers, and (5) Recommendations for Improving RTI Implementation. Extended excerpts from the interviews are provided to substantiate each theme. Conceptual Understanding of RTI Most teachers in both contexts demonstrated a partial understanding of RTI. While they could describe certain elements such as early intervention and differentiated instruction, many lacked clarity on the tiered structure and systematic progress monitoring central to RTI. A general education teacher explained: “We use different strategies to support those children who are not doing well, like pairing them with stronger learners or giving extra homework. I didn’t know it was called RTI, but we do something similar. For instance, when I notice a student struggling with reading or basic arithmetic, I don't wait for them to fail completely before acting. I start by giving them extra attention during class, sometimes working with them one-on-one or in small groups. If that doesn’t work, I might reach out to parents or discuss the student’s progress with the school’s support staff. We try to monitor the student’s improvement over time, adjusting strategies as needed. It’s informal, but it’s what we do to help each child progress. Now that I’ve learned about RTI, I can see that what we do aligns with some of its principles, even if we don’t call it that or follow a rigid framework.” (Teacher G6) In contrast, a special education teacher showed awareness of the model’s structure: “RTI is like three levels. First, all students receive the same instruction, then those who struggle get extra help in small groups, and finally, if they still don’t improve, we do one-on-one or refer them for special education services.” (Teacher S3) However, this conceptual knowledge was uneven, even among special educators, suggesting the need for more comprehensive and systemic professional development in both countries. RTI Implementation Practices In practice, RTI implementation was inconsistent across schools and often informal. Teachers described relying on informal techniques, lacking documentation or structured assessment protocols. “When a child is not catching up, I try different methods like flashcards or oral drills to reinforce learning. It’s usually based on what I think might help the child at that moment. But we don’t really keep formal records or conduct any structured assessments. We just observe over time—watch if the child starts responding better in class, answers questions more confidently, or completes tasks with less help. It’s mostly instinctive. We rely on what we see, how the child behaves or participates. I didn’t realize these informal strategies could be part of something like RTI. We’ve never been trained to collect data or use formal progress monitoring tools.” (Teacher G2) Some teachers, while slightly more structured, still noted a lack of consistency: “We do group interventions for weak students in reading—pull them aside during class or after lessons and focus on phonics, comprehension, or vocabulary, depending on where they’re struggling. It’s something we’ve always done, just as part of trying to help them keep up. But honestly, we don’t really use any formal progress monitoring tools. There’s no structured checklist or data sheet. We rely mostly on our professional judgment—whether the child seems more confident, reads more fluently, or participates more in class discussions. It’s all very observational. I wasn’t aware that in RTI, there’s a structured way to monitor this kind of progress. What we do helps, but it’s not formalized.” (Teacher S9) Teachers from both countries highlighted the absence of universal screening tools, baseline assessments, and tier movement criteria, which are critical to the RTI process (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006 ). Perceived Effectiveness of RTI Despite the gaps in structured implementation, most teachers saw RTI-like strategies as beneficial, especially when applied early. “I had a boy who was really struggling with phonics. He couldn’t decode simple words, and it was affecting his confidence. So, we decided to give him extra attention—more reading time, targeted phonics activities, and one-on-one support for about two weeks. Interestingly, his scores improved after that. You could see he was beginning to grasp the patterns and was less anxious during reading lessons. But looking back, I can’t help but think—if we had started earlier, maybe we wouldn’t have waited so long to intervene. We often wait until it’s obvious a child is struggling before we act, instead of having something systematic in place to catch these issues earlier.” (Teacher G4) One teacher recounted: “RTI really works if you start early. I once had a second grader who struggled with writing—he had trouble holding the pencil correctly and couldn’t copy even simple words without constant prompting. We started giving him targeted sessions focused on letter formation, copying drills, and tracing activities. After a few weeks, you could see the difference. He was copying and writing words with less support and more confidence. But the problem is that not all teachers follow the system properly. Some just go back to old habits or don’t keep up with the steps. So, while RTI can be effective, it depends a lot on consistency and how seriously the process is taken by everyone involved.” (Teacher S1) This underscores that while the RTI model holds promise, its potential is not fully realized due to inconsistent implementation and inadequate support systems. Contextual Challenges and Enablers Teachers in both countries cited similar barriers, including large class sizes, insufficient training, lack of assessment tools, and absence of collaboration between general and special education staff. “Sometimes I have over 50 pupils in my class. It’s just not possible to monitor each one of them closely to see who is progressing and who is falling behind. There’s no time, no extra hands. So, I just rely on my intuition—how a child responds during lessons, their expressions, their body language, or whether they consistently fail to complete work. I wish there were more structured ways or support systems in place, but right now, we just do what we can. You can’t track everyone’s progress when the numbers are that high.” (Teacher G8) “We really need more workshops and refresher training on RTI. I first learned about it during my time at university, but that was mostly theory. Now, in the real classroom, things are different. We need practical tools—something we can actually use to identify struggling students early, monitor their progress, and adjust instruction. Without ongoing training, it’s hard to implement RTI properly. Many of us do our best with what we know, but there’s a big gap between understanding the concept and applying it effectively in overcrowded, under-resourced classrooms.” (Teacher S6) Cultural stigma surrounding learning disabilities also emerged, where parents resist special education referrals: ““Parents often think that if you say a child has learning difficulties, it means the child is mad or mentally unstable. So, they resist any attempt to formally assess their children. They’re afraid of the label and the shame it might bring to the family. Even when we suspect a child is struggling seriously, it becomes hard to take the next step, like doing a proper evaluation or involving specialists. Sometimes, parents would rather we just keep quiet or continue teaching the child like everyone else, even if they’re not making progress. This attitude really gets in the way of early intervention and support.” (Teacher G5) However, some teachers mentioned supportive school leaders and peer collaboration as enabling factors. “ In our school, the head really encourages collaboration. We meet weekly as teachers to share strategies and talk about what’s working or not with students who are struggling. It’s not formal RTI training, but those discussions have helped us a lot. Sometimes a colleague suggests a new approach, like using visual cues for reading or breaking tasks down more. Then we try it in our own classes. That kind of support and sharing has made a real difference—we’re more confident trying new things and responding early to learning issues .” (Teacher S11) Recommendations for Improving RTI Implementation Participants emphasized the need for structured RTI policies, culturally responsive professional development, access to diagnostic tools, and a collaborative approach. “We need clear policy documents that explain RTI in our own context. Right now, it’s all very vague. Teachers don’t know exactly how to move from Tier One to Tier Two—what steps to follow, what kind of evidence to collect, or how long to intervene before making a referral. There’s confusion about what to document and how to justify a referral. Without structured national or district-level guidelines, everyone does what they think is right. But RTI isn’t supposed to be guesswork. We need standardized procedures that are realistic for our schools, with clear timelines, examples, and tools.” (Teacher S2) “We should start training teachers in RTI right from college—make it part of the teacher education curriculum in a practical way, not just theory. Then, once we’re on the job, there should be continuous professional development to build on that foundation. RTI isn’t something you learn once and forget; it requires ongoing support to implement well. Also, we really need to involve parents more. Many of them still think intervention means punishment or that their child is being singled out for something bad. We have to help them understand that RTI is about support, not blame—that it's a way to help their child succeed before problems become bigger. Without their cooperation, it’s hard to make lasting progress.” (Teacher G10) Discussion The results of the study indicate important considerations for how RTI is conceived, executed, and understood by teachers in Saudi Arabia, including both what is possible and challenges to identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities (LDs). In this study, it appears as though teachers had a partial understanding of RTI which reflects previous studies in the Saudi context. Many teachers attempted aspects of RTI including tiered levels of intervention, and preventative goals, while others were implementing other aspects (such as differing instructional interventions) without formally acknowledging or knowing they were using RTI, and this similarly reflects findings in Aljohani's (2019) study. Those researchers articulated their findings by stating that as teachers and supervisors become aware of RTI in theory, practical knowledge is still fragmented due somewhat to limited professional development, as well as lack of systemic national implementation of RTI. The informal practice of RTI ideas such as prevention and differentiated instruction, shows a potential foundation of readiness of teachers, who could benefit more from formalized support systems and training. The way participants described supporting students who struggle by using best practices such as pairing students, completing oral drills, and providing extra time for reading very much reflects the notion of intuition and professional judgement. While this is admirable, informal elements of implementation limits the effectiveness of RTI as a diagnostic tool. Teachers were also unlikely to use formalized procedures, tools, baseline assessments or progress monitoring instruments, which are some of the features that enhance RTI, (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006 ; Berkeley et al., 2020 ). Weber ( 2023 ) corroborates this, as he noted that without systemic systems, teachers will resort to instinct-driven (and often unreliable) practices making outcomes difficult to assess. However, the study found that teachers did see improvement when interventions had been implemented during the early intervention phase. One participant reflected confidently on the small-scale nature of the implementation, when they utilized direct phonics sessions in a two-week series stating they had observable advancements on their literacy development. This was a strong affirmation of the RTI logic, and it can provide a potential benefit to students at risk of LDs through early, individualized support (Vaughn & Fletcher, 2012 ). Without systemic protocols, however, the ability to sustain and scale those positive benefits has tremendous limitations. Even when teachers acknowledged RTI-like practices as productive, their work was consistently hindered, predominantly by systemic barriers. The participants pointed to large class sizes, shortage of time, insufficient resources and collaboration with specialists. These systemic barriers are evident in global literature about the factors causing limitations towards RTI fidelity (Zhang et al., 2023 ; Richards et al., 2007 ). Typically, the impact observed in this fragmented system can be institutionalized, but it is not evident, as the absence of a district-level policy framework and implementation platform continues to create barriers for both teaching and learning (Alwadei, 2025 ). The impediment of stigma was also clearly articulated by participants in discussions about principled parent resistance toward assessment processes (and referrals to special education), particularly in the context of the LD. As one participant stated, the parental beliefs often lead parents to treat LD identification as “madness,” thereby discouraging their engagement in early intervention. This correlates to the claims made by Alnaim ( 2016 ), who posited that sociocultural beliefs may discourage early identification and distract families from full engagement, highlighting the importance of community-based awareness and increased parental awareness campaigns. On the other hand, the research identified enablers too. School leaders, using collaborative practices such as weekly strategy meetings, and allowing teachers to experiment, can fill some of the systemic gapping occurring in schools. This aligns with five principles of Cothran and Ennis' (1999) situated learning theory in which teacher decision-making is influenced by local culture, leadership and peer-forging connections. When schools provided shared curriculum problem-solving opportunities, teachers were able demonstrate a higher level of collective efficacy, notwithstanding any formal policy (Cohen & Ball, 1999 ). Further, the study's results coincide with Cohen and Ball's (1999) Instructional Capacity Framework, and Cothran and Ennis' (1999) Situated Learning Theory. Cohen and Ball identified that instructional improvement occurred in the interaction between three key elements: teacher knowledge, instructional tools, and organizational context. Under this study, teacher knowledge was only partially true regarding RTI; there were no diagnostic tools, and there was no policy to provide support to teachers in how to implement RTI. Cothran and Ennis' perspective can help explain how teachers compensated for this lack of knowledge and tools. Teachers were able to use their shared professional beliefs, peer-based support, and school culture as their basis for action in the absence of structures. The collaborative process among teachers, suggestions from school heads, and adaptive reflection of their actions provide teachers with opportunities to meet the needs of learners based on site-based situated responses despite systemic gaps. Overall, these two theoretical frameworks suggest that the efficacy of RTI does not solely rest upon a policy, but instead the ecosystem of the social-actors, tools, and structures collectively constitute and delineate the nature of the learning environment. Conclusion Although teachers in Saudi Arabia are engaging with RTI principles intuitively and resourcefully, the realization of the RTI potential across all public schools is hindered by limited systemic support, unclear policy direction, and culturally-relevant professional development opportunities. Teacher-based localized training; schools have to be equipped with the necessary tools and structures; and culture-free narratives that do not stigmatize are a starting point, specific to ensure that RTI is effective in identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities. Suggestions for Policy and Practice The Ministry of Education should adopt and issue clear, organized, and culturally congruent RTI policy documents defining tier movement protocols, documentation procedures for tiered intervention, referral processes for students unable to be served by school personnel, and timelines for specialized assessment and service delivery in each tier. Teacher education experiences should include RTI as a core module in pre-service education. This module should stress the principle of RTI applying practice in applicable classroom settings. In-service professional development for in-service teachers should include time allocated for results to be analysed using periodic time allocation or an equivalent experience. To help bridge the transition from informally applying RTI practices to formally applying RTI practices, schools should have access to suitable screening instruments, templates for Tiered intervention, and accessible documentation software for planning and recording students' progress through tiers. Study Limitations The study was conducted with a small number of participants within two urban centres in Saudi Arabia, which may not be representative of the breadth of educational experiences within the far-reaching educational systems including rural or poorest experiences. The study is anecdotal, and the findings are qualitatively based on the most significant perceptions of teachers' experiences related to RTI and should not be generalized and statistically generalized. The data were gathered and produced using semi-structured interviews and due to the socially desirable responses practice observed by the authors, when documenting data may also have been minimized when referring to professional practices, when its intentions were intended to be in good faith and without judgment. While member checking and peer debriefing were conducted, the study was based solely on teachers' voices and not the perspectives from the perspectives of the schools' administrators, students or parents’ perspectives in schools. There may have been an opportunity for a more substantive understanding of the systemic enabling factors and barriers for continuing RTI practices in Saudi Arabia. Declarations Ethical Approval This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia (Reference Number: KFU-REC-2025-034). Ethical approval was obtained on 12 January 2025. The study was conducted in full compliance with the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association, 2013), ensuring the protection of participants’ rights, safety, and well-being. Informed Consent All participants were provided with a detailed information sheet describing the study’s purpose, procedures, risks, benefits, and their rights, including the right to withdraw at any time without penalty. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants between 15 January 2025 and 10 February 2025 prior to data collection. Participant anonymity and confidentiality were strictly maintained throughout the study, with pseudonyms used in reporting. Consent for publication Not applicable Competing interests Not applicable Declaration of Interest The authors of this paper had no interest in declaring in as much as idea conceptualization and conducting of this paper is concerned. Funding Not applicable Author Contribution A.A.A. developed the research idea and design, carried out the fieldwork in Saudi Arabia, facilitated the recruitment of participants, and did the first stage of data transcription and translation, He also led the contextual and policy analysis for Saudi Arabia, and initially drafted the background and results sections of the paper. I.M. was instrumental in developing the research design, directly helped shape the theoretical framework, and organized and carried out the thematic data analysis with NVivo. He critically reviewed and co-authored the discussion and implications sections, managed all APA 7th referencing, and was responsible for final proof reading, formatting and submission. Both authors were equally involved in interpreting the findings, reviewed and approved the final manuscript, and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Acknowledgement The authors duly acknowledge and appreciate the use of Quillbot, ChatGPT 4.o, Claud AI, and Gemini in proofreading the work and identifying redundant statements and phrases. Data Availability The data used for this study is available but cannot be shared publicly due to ethical reasons. However, it can be released upon an official request made to the authors of this study. References Aldousari AL (2022) Perspectives of General Education and Special Education Teachers in Saudi Arabia toward Special Education Services Provided to Students with Learning Disabilities. Washington State University Aljohani BH (2019) The knowledge of response to intervention (RTI) model among early elementary levels supervisors and learning disabilities supervisors and the obstacles to its applications in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. J Educ Pract 10:26, 40–47. 10.7176/JEP Alnaim F (2016) Identification strategies in the Saudi Learning Disabilities Programme: Primary Teachers' Perspectives. The University of Manchester (United Kingdom) Alwadei H (2025) Enhancing learning disability identification in Saudi Arabia. J Arts Literature Humanit Social Sci 120:388–403 Alzahraney TS (2023) Labelling is not the issue: The benefits of labelling children with learning disabilities when response to intervention is implemented. Int J Special Educ 38(1):1–15 Berkeley S, Scanlon D, Bailey TR, Sutton JC, Sacco DM (2020) A snapshot of RTI implementation a decade later: New picture, same story. J Learn Disabil 53(5):332–342 Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol 3(2):77–101 Brown R, Steege MW, Bickford R (2014) Responsive assessment and instruction practices. Academic assessment and intervention. Routledge, pp 161–178 Cartledge G, Kea CD, Watson M, Oif A (2016) Special education disproportionality: A review of response to intervention and culturally relevant pedagogy. Multiple Voices Ethnically Diverse Except Learners 16(1):29–49 Clarke V, Braun V (2014) Thematic analysis. Encyclopedia of critical psychology. Springer, New York, NY, pp 1947–1952 Cohen DK, Ball DL (1999) Instruction, capacity, and improvement. Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) Research Report Series Collins KM, Onwuegbuzie AJ, Johnson RB, Frels RK (2013) Practice note: Using debriefing interviews to promote authenticity and transparency in mixed research. Int J Multiple Res Approaches 7(2):271–284 Cothran DJ, Ennis CD (1999) Alone in a crowd: Meeting students’ needs for relevance and connection in Urban High School Physical Education. J Teach Phys Educ 18(3):234–247 Fuchs LS, Fuchs D (2006) Identifying learning disabilities with RTI. Perspectives 32(1):39–43 Gersten R, Dimino JA (2006) RTI (response to intervention): Rethinking special education for students with reading difficulties (yet again). Reading Res Q 41(1):99–108 Kenny-Chapur AM (2023) An analysis of teachers’ perceptions of the response to intervention (RTI) program in One North East Suburban School. St. John's University (New York) Marchand-Martella NE, Ruby SF, Martella RC (2007) Intensifying Reading Instruction for Students within a Three-Tier Model: Standard-Protocol and Problem Solving Approaches within a Response-to-Intervention (RTI) System. Teach Except Child Plus 3(5):n5 Melekoglu MA, Ak AS, Kaya S, Ballıoğlu M (2023) Response to Intervention: What do Elementary School Teachers of Students with Specific Learning Disabilities in Inclusive Classrooms in Türkiye Know? Psycho-Educational Res Reviews 12(1):151–170 O’Connell BL (2015) Personality differences between RTI-oriented and neuropsychological assessment-oriented school psychologists. Indiana University of Pennsylvania Patton MQ (2015) Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage Poch AL, Alzahrani D, Aljuwayhir J, Alnahari M (2023) Educating students with learning difficulties in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Intervention School Clin 58(4):287–292 Restori AF, Katz GS, Lee HB (2009) A critique of the IQ/achievement discrepancy model for identifying specific learning disabilities. Europe’s J Psychol 5(4):128–145 Reynolds CR, Shaywitz SE (2009) Response to Intervention: Ready or not? Or, from wait-to-fail to watch-them-fail. School Psychol Q 24(2):130 Richards C, Pavri S, Golez F, Canges R, Murphy J (2007) Response to intervention: Building the capacity of teachers to serve students with learning difficulties. Issues Teacher Educ 16(2):55–64 Rubin A, Bellamy J (2012) Practitioner's guide to using research for evidence-based practice. Wiley Sakuma Y, Miller ML, Babalis DS, Baker A, Reddi M, Anjum A, Taddese H (2024) Shining a spotlight on the inclusion of disabled participants in clinical trials: a mixed methods study. Trials 25(1):281 Vaughn S, Fletcher JM (2012) Response to intervention with secondary school students with reading difficulties. J Learn Disabil 45(3):244–256 Weber CL, Boswell C, Behrens WA (2025) Recognizing learning and developmental differences. Exploring critical issues in gifted education. Routledge, pp 33–62 Weber NM (2023) The role and effectiveness of response to intervention to improve elementary students’ reading skills and abilities. Education Theses and Dissertations, 17. http://hdl.handle.net/10950/4473 Zhang J, Martella RC, Kang S, Yenioglu BY (2023) Response to Intervention (RTI)/Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS): A Nationwide Analysis. J Educational Leadersh Policy Stud 7(1):n1 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 23 Apr, 2026 Read the published version in Humanities and Social Sciences Communications → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 30 Dec, 2025 Reviews received at journal 31 Oct, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 15 Oct, 2025 Reviews received at journal 29 Sep, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 26 Sep, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 23 Sep, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 23 Sep, 2025 Editor invited by journal 16 Sep, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 01 Sep, 2025 First submitted to journal 01 Sep, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7330350","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":524266443,"identity":"c08ac7c8-84f7-4947-b418-334233a8b790","order_by":0,"name":"Abdullah Ahmed Almulla","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"King Faisal University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Abdullah","middleName":"Ahmed","lastName":"Almulla","suffix":""},{"id":524266444,"identity":"48e08252-2882-4d1e-b99b-e240c52f7b06","order_by":1,"name":"Inuusah Mahama","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Education","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Inuusah","middleName":"","lastName":"Mahama","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-08-08 22:23:11","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7330350/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7330350/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-07376-9","type":"published","date":"2026-04-23T15:58:41+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":92887943,"identity":"e81a9118-aa7d-4da0-935b-7d51f4f87eed","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-06 17:02:08","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":41971,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AlmullaRTIPaper.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7330350/v1/012bd554d398aa12d26b56b7.docx"},{"id":92887945,"identity":"fba3f203-858f-49f9-8ce6-34fe6a9e3003","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-06 17:02:08","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":4751,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"2155e534e83145dbb85da9762cb7f71a.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7330350/v1/7cfa883f09e7c7bb8f5c7c06.json"},{"id":92887947,"identity":"42b980b1-e34c-420a-8277-f1edf2b1bc89","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-06 17:02:08","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":84530,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"2155e534e83145dbb85da9762cb7f71a1enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7330350/v1/3f913cb11092b5bbbba3628f.xml"},{"id":92888623,"identity":"2b19422b-f776-4c11-9b81-ccd692337d8e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-06 17:18:08","extension":"xml","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":82229,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"2155e534e83145dbb85da9762cb7f71a1structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7330350/v1/1657ce911dfef51ced506bf8.xml"},{"id":92887948,"identity":"451cd26a-843a-4a02-8128-ae99733ce091","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-06 17:02:08","extension":"html","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":89510,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7330350/v1/a649b89844f7e52fb33cfc31.html"},{"id":107928670,"identity":"e67be197-7faf-4ad8-901a-94b003dfbfd7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-27 16:11:53","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":228583,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7330350/v1/5710b3c2-78de-443f-ac6b-d5896610fbdc.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Efficacy of Response-to-Intervention (RTI) Programmes in Identifying and Supporting Students with Learning Disabilities: Perspectives of Teachers in Saudi Arabia","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eAs nations worldwide have turned toward inclusive education, the demand for effective, research-based frameworks to recognize and support students with learning disabilities (LDs) has heightened in popularity and need. The increasing awareness of LDs as an educational problem worldwide has led to a resurgence of interest in understanding avenues for early identification and intervention (Sakuma et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The Response-to-Intervention (RTI) framework has established itself as a key paradigm aimed primarily at early identification, timely intervention, and data-driven determination (Fuchs \u0026amp; Fuchs, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Weber et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). The RTI is a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) that provides students with increasingly intensive levels of instruction and intervention through monitoring the degree of responsiveness (Berkeley et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The RTI framework provides countries seeking equity within education systems a pre-emptive alternative conceptual framework to traditional deficit-deficit diagnostic approaches (e.g., IQ-achievement difference) by ensuring that RTI-based interventions and supports are incorporated into the general education setting (Restori et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Reynolds \u0026amp; Shaywitz, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). There are post numerous papers worldwide that analyse the real-time issues, challenges, and success of RTI frameworks being implemented to support LD students. In Saudi Arabia, for example, there is an extensive amount of research examining RTI through supervisor, teacher, and educational leader lens. One such study, by Aljohani (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) employed a descriptive comparative design to investigate the knowledge of RTI and challenges of implementing RTI within the experiences of 240 early elementary supervisors and 91 supervisors of learning disability students. The results showed a great deal of theoretical knowledge of RTI, but implementation was somewhat constrained due to a number of structural challenges such as, lack of training, lack of diagnostic tools, and lack of a culturally relevant RTI implementation model. These limitations showed a gap between knowledge and implementation and indicated that some level of support from those at the systemic level is needed to implement RTI in a meaningful way.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSupporting this, Alwadei (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) conducted qualitative research with 12 instructional coaches in Saudi Arabia utilizing semi-structured interviews. The results revealed concerns regarding the reliability of currently used LD identification models, and limitations associated with the IQ-achievement discrepancy model. Participants shared that RTI and Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) were more ethical and comprehensive alternatives to what is currently used, but had not been systematically implemented in schools yet. The study suggested that RTI should be implemented in stages with meaningful supports that were embedded in culturally responsive training for teachers and support staff.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn a study, Weber (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) examined RTI\u0026rsquo;s functionality and impact on improving elementary student\u0026rsquo;s reading skills, and found that although teachers found merit in RTI-aligned practices such as small-group interventions and differentiated instruction, they applied these practices informally without systemic support. They are reliant on their intuition and traditional classroom observations rather than data-driven progress monitoring. Furthermore, teachers faced factors such as large class sizes, limited time, and limited access to intervention tools.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn much the same way, Melekoğlu et al. (2023), highlighted that within a broader context with implications for similar educational systems, many teachers were unaware of the RTI model as a structured model although they may have unwittingly practiced elements of RTI. Further evidence supporting this trend can be found in the work of Kenny-Chapur (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), who pointed out that the perceptions of teachers greatly influence the success or failure of RTI systems implemented in practice. Teachers who underwent professional development were more confident and more attentive to the application of RTI. Barriers were identified and discussed in both settings that are common to education in general such as time, preparation, class size, administrative support, and collaboration between general education and special education. The conclusion was that with understood and applied principles of RTI, teachers in both contexts had nothing but support for the principles of RTI. The teachers identified that there was a need for training to be local, resources to be provided in the specific context, and the need for policy level support in order to have success attributed to RTI.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe known value of RTI for identification and support of students with LD is in its preventative framework that is different from that of long-standing deficit-based frameworks, such as the IQ - achievement discrepancy formula (O'Connell, 2015). Traditionally, these models reserve a diagnosis until a child shows significant delayed performance, instead, RTI is a response process that includes screening all learners, intervening, and monitoring position of learners, and therefore providing early intervention for supports for students before they are much too far behind (Vaughn \u0026amp; Fletcher, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). RTI also generally includes three tiers of support that change is intensity of instruction. Tier 1 is universal instruction with screening for all students, Tier 2 is small group instruction for students who do not have adequate responses to Tier 1, and Tier 3 is intense individualized instruction and if necessary, referral to special education (Brown et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Richards et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Marchand-Martella et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e).This system allows schools to reveal the distinction between students with legitimate learning disorders as opposed to just aspects related to requiring additional time or differentiated instruction (Gersten \u0026amp; Dimino, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). To add to this further is that adequate implementation of RTI leads to general practices that are inclusive, and there would be a smaller number of students are incorrectly referred to special education, which is a traditional problem about misidentification influenced with culture bias (Cartledge, Kea, Watson, \u0026amp; Oif, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). In the case of, Saudi Arabia has intended to recognize learning difficulties as a distinct classification since 1996, and it has continued with a plan to build its identification and intervention methods (Alzahraney, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Alnaim, 2018). Although IQ-achievement discrepancy models were dominant before, Saudi scholars and policymakers have started to emphasize and advocate for an RTI shift, which aims to focus on early, continuous, and assessments within the classroom (Alwadei, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Aljohani, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In spite of this, studies have found that while educational supervisors are aware of RTI, there are barriers, such as teacher readiness, inconsistent implementation, and a lack of cultural contextualization are some of the issues that teachers face (Aljohani, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Melekoğlu et al., 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResearch indicates that the perceptions, understandings, as well as preparation teachers receive significantly affects fidelity and outcomes associated with RTI (Weber, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, in T\u0026uuml;rkiye, while many teachers express that they are not aware RTI is a formal model, they typically employ RTI features, such as differentiation instruction, formative assessment (Melekoğlu et al., 2023). When looking at the case of the United States context, RTI programs which achieve a considerable level of success are consistently associated with teacher training, professional development as well as decision making relying on data (Weber, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eTheoretical Framework\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn order to build understanding of how RTI is effective in relation to teachers, this study draws on Cohen and Ball's (1999) Instructional Capacity Framework with Cothran and Ennis' Situated Learning Theory related to teacher's instructional decision making. Cohen and Ball (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e) argue that instructional change is a function of the interaction of the way that teachers know, the mediation available to teachers (e.g. teaching tools), and the school organization context. When considering RTI, Cohen and Ball give us the ideas that in order to faithfully use tiered interventions, teachers will be bound by their training and access to evidenced based tools (e.g. progress monitoring tools), as well as the leadership and school organization/policies available to them.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eExpanding on this concept, Cothran and Ennis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e) suggest teachers' instructional decision making is also influenced by teachers\u0026rsquo; beliefs, professional learning communities, and the local school culture. Using Cothran and Ennis' situated learning, teachers in Saudi Arabia, although there is no formal RTI frameworks, often use similar strategies such as remediation in groups, visual supports, and differentiated tasks is evidence that they use their belief systems during that specific moment informed by their view of the needs of their individual students and the behaviour of their peers into account.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn places like Saudi Arabia, where the development of systemic RTI frameworks is ongoing, the effectiveness of RTI is influenced not only by teacher training but also in how schools cultivate collaborative practice, reflective decision-making and context-based adaption. For example, if professional learning is based in collaborative practice within a school setting where their teachers speak weekly about their practice to share each others strategies or their head teachers\u0026rsquo; comments offer encouragement to adapt RTI, their collective efficacy should be observed, regardless of whether comprehensive national documentation had been produced or even if access to tools was available.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this way, this study will conceptualize RTI success through a lens that understands the nature of the possibility of teacher agency, school structures in a responsive context. It is acknowledged that not have standardized RTI policy in Saudi Arabia diminishes the choice of full fidelity of RTI, however teacher instructional responses (when supported by school culture and ongoing professional learning) can reflect the spirit and purpose of RTI.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eThe Study Context\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite global efforts to enhance inclusive education, the identification and support of students with learning disabilities (LDs) remain complex and inconsistently addressed, particularly in middle-income states such as Saudi Arabia. The traditional reliance on the IQ-achievement discrepancy model has long been criticized for its delay in identifying students at risk of LD and its limited utility in informing instructional practices (Fuchs \u0026amp; Fuchs, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Restori et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). In response, the Response-to-Intervention (RTI) framework was introduced as a more dynamic and equitable model, enabling educators to provide timely, evidence-based interventions and monitor students' progress in real time (Berkeley et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). However, its implementation and effectiveness vary widely depending on contextual realities, particularly teachers\u0026rsquo; knowledge, perceptions, and systemic readiness.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn Saudi Arabia, although the Ministry of Education has taken significant steps toward improving services for students with LDs, including the recognition of LD as a formal special education category and the provision of training programs (Alwadei, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Aldousari, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Poch et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), empirical evidence points to major implementation gaps. These include inconsistencies in teacher training, lack of culturally responsive RTI models, and limited practical tools for early screening and progress monitoring (Aljohani, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, RTI and MTSS frameworks are not yet systematically adopted in Saudi classrooms, despite their growing advocacy (Alwadei, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, this study, seeks to fill these gaps by examining the efficacy of RTI programmes in identifying and supporting students with LDs from the perspectives of teachers in Saudi Arabia. Through this, the research aims to uncover systemic, cultural, and pedagogical factors influencing RTI implementation and to provide actionable insights for improving inclusive education practices in both countries. Based on the forgoing, the following research questions guided the study:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhat are teachers\u0026rsquo; understandings and perceptions of the Response-to-Intervention (RTI) framework in identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities in Saudi Arabia?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eHow are RTI programmes currently implemented in schools and how effective do teachers perceive these programmes to be in supporting students with learning disabilities in Saudi Arabia?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhat contextual factors (challenges and enablers) influence the effective implementation of RTI in identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities in both countries?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhat are the similarities and differences in the implementation and perceived efficacy of RTI programmes between the educational contexts of Saudi Arabia?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResearch Design\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study adopted a qualitative case study design. This seemed the most relevant choice for this research due to the exploratory nature of the research and the aim to explore in depth how teachers live, unpack, and perceive their reality, as well as the socio-educational realities impacting the implementation of RTI in various contexts (Creswell \u0026amp; Poth, 2018; Merriam \u0026amp; Tisdell, 2016). The qualitative case study design (Yin, 2018) allowed for the deep investigation of RTI practices (Shimizu, 2010) at a culturally distinct but educationally viable site. The choice of this design also allowed for the examination of contextual similarities and differences in Saudi Arabia so that a process of cross-case synthesis could be used to make transferable, yet actionable, insights. Each selected state (Saudi Arabia) was a bounded case encompassing public and inclusive basic schools with RTI or similar early-intervention frameworks or models being practiced or attempted.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eResearch Participants\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants were selected using purposeful sampling from two urban areas in Saudi Arabia that were appropriate for purposeful sampling (Patton, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). These cases were chosen for their varying levels of critical infrastructure for inclusion in education, and accessible teachers who had some teaching or learning support experience, ideally with students with LDs. Thirteen participants were recruited. This included basic school teachers (either general or special educators), instructional coordinators, or learning support teachers who engaged directly with RTI processes. Each participant met the inclusion criteria in that he/she had a minimum of two years of teaching experience; had taught or assisted students identified or suspected of having an LD; and was familiar with, or had any experience with, tiered intervention, or progress monitoring. The inclusion criteria ensure that each participant brought the experiential knowledge necessary for rich qualitative reflection (Patton, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eInstrumentation\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eData were gathered through semi-structured interviews lasting between 45 and 60 minutes. The interviews could take place face-to-face or via secure telephone calls, depending on the availability of the participant and the permission of the institutions. The interview protocol included five central themes, including: understanding of RTI; RTI implementation practices; perceived effectiveness; context barriers/enablers; and recommendations for improvement. Probing (Rubin \u0026amp; Rubin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) were used to draw deeper responses and to establish clarification. All interviews were audio recorded, with the consent of each participant, and transcribed verbatim. Field notes were also taken to record non-verbal communication, contextual observations, and retrospective reflection pieces. Establishing trustworthiness in this research included triangulation, member checking, and peer debriefing. Triangulation was used to compare the interview data with the policy documents and relevant literature. Member checking provided a way for participants to check the accuracy or validity of the transcripts and the preliminary reliability interpretations. Peer debriefing sessions with two qualitative researchers were used to confirm the methodical thematic structures and lessen researcher bias (Collins et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eData were analysed through thematic analysis guided by Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase process (1) become familiar with the data, (2) generate initial codes, (3) search for themes, (4) review themes, (5) define and name themes, and (6) produce the report. NVivo 12 qualitative research software supported the coding, theme categorizing, and theme retrieval (Clarke \u0026amp; Braun, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eEthical Considerations\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEthical clearance was sought and granted from the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in Saudi Arabia. Participants were informed of the purpose of the study, its procedures, risks, and his/her right to withdraw at any time without penalty. Once the procedures were explained, written informed consent provided. Participants were assured that all data would be anonymized for confidentiality. When the findings are reported, pseudonyms will be used in place of the real names to ensure anonymity.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis section presents and analyses the results of the study on the efficacy of Response-to-Intervention (RTI) programmes in identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities (LDs) from the perspectives of teachers in Saudi Arabia. Through thematic analysis of 21 semi-structured interviews, five overarching themes emerged: (1) Conceptual Understanding of RTI, (2) RTI Implementation Practices, (3) Perceived Effectiveness of RTI, (4) Contextual Challenges and Enablers, and (5) Recommendations for Improving RTI Implementation. Extended excerpts from the interviews are provided to substantiate each theme.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConceptual Understanding of RTI\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eMost teachers in both contexts demonstrated a partial understanding of RTI. While they could describe certain elements such as early intervention and differentiated instruction, many lacked clarity on the tiered structure and systematic progress monitoring central to RTI.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA general education teacher explained:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;We use different strategies to support those children who are not doing well, like pairing them with stronger learners or giving extra homework. I didn\u0026rsquo;t know it was called RTI, but we do something similar. For instance, when I notice a student struggling with reading or basic arithmetic, I don't wait for them to fail completely before acting. I start by giving them extra attention during class, sometimes working with them one-on-one or in small groups. If that doesn\u0026rsquo;t work, I might reach out to parents or discuss the student\u0026rsquo;s progress with the school\u0026rsquo;s support staff. We try to monitor the student\u0026rsquo;s improvement over time, adjusting strategies as needed. It\u0026rsquo;s informal, but it\u0026rsquo;s what we do to help each child progress. Now that I\u0026rsquo;ve learned about RTI, I can see that what we do aligns with some of its principles, even if we don\u0026rsquo;t call it that or follow a rigid framework.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (Teacher G6)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, a special education teacher showed awareness of the model\u0026rsquo;s structure:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;RTI is like three levels. First, all students receive the same instruction, then those who struggle get extra help in small groups, and finally, if they still don\u0026rsquo;t improve, we do one-on-one or refer them for special education services.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (Teacher S3)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHowever, this conceptual knowledge was uneven, even among special educators, suggesting the need for more comprehensive and systemic professional development in both countries.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eRTI Implementation Practices\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn practice, RTI implementation was inconsistent across schools and often informal. Teachers described relying on informal techniques, lacking documentation or structured assessment protocols.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;When a child is not catching up, I try different methods like flashcards or oral drills to reinforce learning. It\u0026rsquo;s usually based on what I think might help the child at that moment. But we don\u0026rsquo;t really keep formal records or conduct any structured assessments. We just observe over time\u0026mdash;watch if the child starts responding better in class, answers questions more confidently, or completes tasks with less help. It\u0026rsquo;s mostly instinctive. We rely on what we see, how the child behaves or participates. I didn\u0026rsquo;t realize these informal strategies could be part of something like RTI. We\u0026rsquo;ve never been trained to collect data or use formal progress monitoring tools.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (Teacher G2)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSome teachers, while slightly more structured, still noted a lack of consistency:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;We do group interventions for weak students in reading\u0026mdash;pull them aside during class or after lessons and focus on phonics, comprehension, or vocabulary, depending on where they\u0026rsquo;re struggling. It\u0026rsquo;s something we\u0026rsquo;ve always done, just as part of trying to help them keep up. But honestly, we don\u0026rsquo;t really use any formal progress monitoring tools. There\u0026rsquo;s no structured checklist or data sheet. We rely mostly on our professional judgment\u0026mdash;whether the child seems more confident, reads more fluently, or participates more in class discussions. It\u0026rsquo;s all very observational. I wasn\u0026rsquo;t aware that in RTI, there\u0026rsquo;s a structured way to monitor this kind of progress. What we do helps, but it\u0026rsquo;s not formalized.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (Teacher S9)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers from both countries highlighted the absence of universal screening tools, baseline assessments, and tier movement criteria, which are critical to the RTI process (Fuchs \u0026amp; Fuchs, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003ePerceived Effectiveness of RTI\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite the gaps in structured implementation, most teachers saw RTI-like strategies as beneficial, especially when applied early.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;I had a boy who was really struggling with phonics. He couldn\u0026rsquo;t decode simple words, and it was affecting his confidence. So, we decided to give him extra attention\u0026mdash;more reading time, targeted phonics activities, and one-on-one support for about two weeks. Interestingly, his scores improved after that. You could see he was beginning to grasp the patterns and was less anxious during reading lessons. But looking back, I can\u0026rsquo;t help but think\u0026mdash;if we had started earlier, maybe we wouldn\u0026rsquo;t have waited so long to intervene. We often wait until it\u0026rsquo;s obvious a child is struggling before we act, instead of having something systematic in place to catch these issues earlier.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (Teacher G4)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne teacher recounted:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;RTI really works if you start early. I once had a second grader who struggled with writing\u0026mdash;he had trouble holding the pencil correctly and couldn\u0026rsquo;t copy even simple words without constant prompting. We started giving him targeted sessions focused on letter formation, copying drills, and tracing activities. After a few weeks, you could see the difference. He was copying and writing words with less support and more confidence. But the problem is that not all teachers follow the system properly. Some just go back to old habits or don\u0026rsquo;t keep up with the steps. So, while RTI can be effective, it depends a lot on consistency and how seriously the process is taken by everyone involved.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (Teacher S1)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis underscores that while the RTI model holds promise, its potential is not fully realized due to inconsistent implementation and inadequate support systems.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eContextual Challenges and Enablers\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers in both countries cited similar barriers, including large class sizes, insufficient training, lack of assessment tools, and absence of collaboration between general and special education staff.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Sometimes I have over 50 pupils in my class. It\u0026rsquo;s just not possible to monitor each one of them closely to see who is progressing and who is falling behind. There\u0026rsquo;s no time, no extra hands. So, I just rely on my intuition\u0026mdash;how a child responds during lessons, their expressions, their body language, or whether they consistently fail to complete work. I wish there were more structured ways or support systems in place, but right now, we just do what we can. You can\u0026rsquo;t track everyone\u0026rsquo;s progress when the numbers are that high.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (Teacher G8)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;We really need more workshops and refresher training on RTI. I first learned about it during my time at university, but that was mostly theory. Now, in the real classroom, things are different. We need practical tools\u0026mdash;something we can actually use to identify struggling students early, monitor their progress, and adjust instruction. Without ongoing training, it\u0026rsquo;s hard to implement RTI properly. Many of us do our best with what we know, but there\u0026rsquo;s a big gap between understanding the concept and applying it effectively in overcrowded, under-resourced classrooms.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (Teacher S6)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCultural stigma surrounding learning disabilities also emerged, where parents resist special education referrals:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;\u0026ldquo;Parents often think that if you say a child has learning difficulties, it means the child is mad or mentally unstable. So, they resist any attempt to formally assess their children. They\u0026rsquo;re afraid of the label and the shame it might bring to the family. Even when we suspect a child is struggling seriously, it becomes hard to take the next step, like doing a proper evaluation or involving specialists. Sometimes, parents would rather we just keep quiet or continue teaching the child like everyone else, even if they\u0026rsquo;re not making progress. This attitude really gets in the way of early intervention and support.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (Teacher G5)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHowever, some teachers mentioned supportive school leaders and peer collaboration as enabling factors.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eIn our school, the head really encourages collaboration. We meet weekly as teachers to share strategies and talk about what\u0026rsquo;s working or not with students who are struggling. It\u0026rsquo;s not formal RTI training, but those discussions have helped us a lot. Sometimes a colleague suggests a new approach, like using visual cues for reading or breaking tasks down more. Then we try it in our own classes. That kind of support and sharing has made a real difference\u0026mdash;we\u0026rsquo;re more confident trying new things and responding early to learning issues\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo; (Teacher S11)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eRecommendations for Improving RTI Implementation\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants emphasized the need for structured RTI policies, culturally responsive professional development, access to diagnostic tools, and a collaborative approach.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;We need clear policy documents that explain RTI in our own context. Right now, it\u0026rsquo;s all very vague. Teachers don\u0026rsquo;t know exactly how to move from Tier One to Tier Two\u0026mdash;what steps to follow, what kind of evidence to collect, or how long to intervene before making a referral. There\u0026rsquo;s confusion about what to document and how to justify a referral. Without structured national or district-level guidelines, everyone does what they think is right. But RTI isn\u0026rsquo;t supposed to be guesswork. We need standardized procedures that are realistic for our schools, with clear timelines, examples, and tools.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (Teacher S2)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;We should start training teachers in RTI right from college\u0026mdash;make it part of the teacher education curriculum in a practical way, not just theory. Then, once we\u0026rsquo;re on the job, there should be continuous professional development to build on that foundation. RTI isn\u0026rsquo;t something you learn once and forget; it requires ongoing support to implement well. Also, we really need to involve parents more. Many of them still think intervention means punishment or that their child is being singled out for something bad. We have to help them understand that RTI is about support, not blame\u0026mdash;that it's a way to help their child succeed before problems become bigger. Without their cooperation, it\u0026rsquo;s hard to make lasting progress.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (Teacher G10)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results of the study indicate important considerations for how RTI is conceived, executed, and understood by teachers in Saudi Arabia, including both what is possible and challenges to identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities (LDs). In this study, it appears as though teachers had a partial understanding of RTI which reflects previous studies in the Saudi context. Many teachers attempted aspects of RTI including tiered levels of intervention, and preventative goals, while others were implementing other aspects (such as differing instructional interventions) without formally acknowledging or knowing they were using RTI, and this similarly reflects findings in Aljohani's (2019) study. Those researchers articulated their findings by stating that as teachers and supervisors become aware of RTI in theory, practical knowledge is still fragmented due somewhat to limited professional development, as well as lack of systemic national implementation of RTI. The informal practice of RTI ideas such as prevention and differentiated instruction, shows a potential foundation of readiness of teachers, who could benefit more from formalized support systems and training. The way participants described supporting students who struggle by using best practices such as pairing students, completing oral drills, and providing extra time for reading very much reflects the notion of intuition and professional judgement. While this is admirable, informal elements of implementation limits the effectiveness of RTI as a diagnostic tool. Teachers were also unlikely to use formalized procedures, tools, baseline assessments or progress monitoring instruments, which are some of the features that enhance RTI, (Fuchs \u0026amp; Fuchs, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Berkeley et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Weber (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) corroborates this, as he noted that without systemic systems, teachers will resort to instinct-driven (and often unreliable) practices making outcomes difficult to assess. However, the study found that teachers did see improvement when interventions had been implemented during the early intervention phase. One participant reflected confidently on the small-scale nature of the implementation, when they utilized direct phonics sessions in a two-week series stating they had observable advancements on their literacy development. This was a strong affirmation of the RTI logic, and it can provide a potential benefit to students at risk of LDs through early, individualized support (Vaughn \u0026amp; Fletcher, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Without systemic protocols, however, the ability to sustain and scale those positive benefits has tremendous limitations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEven when teachers acknowledged RTI-like practices as productive, their work was consistently hindered, predominantly by systemic barriers. The participants pointed to large class sizes, shortage of time, insufficient resources and collaboration with specialists. These systemic barriers are evident in global literature about the factors causing limitations towards RTI fidelity (Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Richards et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). Typically, the impact observed in this fragmented system can be institutionalized, but it is not evident, as the absence of a district-level policy framework and implementation platform continues to create barriers for both teaching and learning (Alwadei, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe impediment of stigma was also clearly articulated by participants in discussions about principled parent resistance toward assessment processes (and referrals to special education), particularly in the context of the LD. As one participant stated, the parental beliefs often lead parents to treat LD identification as \u0026ldquo;madness,\u0026rdquo; thereby discouraging their engagement in early intervention. This correlates to the claims made by Alnaim (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), who posited that sociocultural beliefs may discourage early identification and distract families from full engagement, highlighting the importance of community-based awareness and increased parental awareness campaigns. On the other hand, the research identified enablers too. School leaders, using collaborative practices such as weekly strategy meetings, and allowing teachers to experiment, can fill some of the systemic gapping occurring in schools. This aligns with five principles of Cothran and Ennis' (1999) situated learning theory in which teacher decision-making is influenced by local culture, leadership and peer-forging connections. When schools provided shared curriculum problem-solving opportunities, teachers were able demonstrate a higher level of collective efficacy, notwithstanding any formal policy (Cohen \u0026amp; Ball, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurther, the study's results coincide with Cohen and Ball's (1999) Instructional Capacity Framework, and Cothran and Ennis' (1999) Situated Learning Theory. Cohen and Ball identified that instructional improvement occurred in the interaction between three key elements: teacher knowledge, instructional tools, and organizational context. Under this study, teacher knowledge was only partially true regarding RTI; there were no diagnostic tools, and there was no policy to provide support to teachers in how to implement RTI.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCothran and Ennis' perspective can help explain how teachers compensated for this lack of knowledge and tools. Teachers were able to use their shared professional beliefs, peer-based support, and school culture as their basis for action in the absence of structures. The collaborative process among teachers, suggestions from school heads, and adaptive reflection of their actions provide teachers with opportunities to meet the needs of learners based on site-based situated responses despite systemic gaps. Overall, these two theoretical frameworks suggest that the efficacy of RTI does not solely rest upon a policy, but instead the ecosystem of the social-actors, tools, and structures collectively constitute and delineate the nature of the learning environment.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eAlthough teachers in Saudi Arabia are engaging with RTI principles intuitively and resourcefully, the realization of the RTI potential across all public schools is hindered by limited systemic support, unclear policy direction, and culturally-relevant professional development opportunities. Teacher-based localized training; schools have to be equipped with the necessary tools and structures; and culture-free narratives that do not stigmatize are a starting point, specific to ensure that RTI is effective in identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSuggestions for Policy and Practice\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Ministry of Education should adopt and issue clear, organized, and culturally congruent RTI policy documents defining tier movement protocols, documentation procedures for tiered intervention, referral processes for students unable to be served by school personnel, and timelines for specialized assessment and service delivery in each tier. Teacher education experiences should include RTI as a core module in pre-service education. This module should stress the principle of RTI applying practice in applicable classroom settings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn-service professional development for in-service teachers should include time allocated for results to be analysed using periodic time allocation or an equivalent experience. To help bridge the transition from informally applying RTI practices to formally applying RTI practices, schools should have access to suitable screening instruments, templates for Tiered intervention, and accessible documentation software for planning and recording students' progress through tiers.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eStudy Limitations\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study was conducted with a small number of participants within two urban centres in Saudi Arabia, which may not be representative of the breadth of educational experiences within the far-reaching educational systems including rural or poorest experiences. The study is anecdotal, and the findings are qualitatively based on the most\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003esignificant perceptions of teachers' experiences related to RTI and should not be generalized and statistically generalized.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe data were gathered and produced using semi-structured interviews and due to the socially desirable responses practice observed by the authors, when documenting data may also have been minimized when referring to professional practices, when its intentions were intended to be in good faith and without judgment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e While member checking and peer debriefing were conducted, the study was based solely on teachers' voices and not the perspectives from the perspectives of the schools' administrators, students or parents\u0026rsquo; perspectives in schools. There may have been an opportunity for a more substantive understanding of the systemic enabling factors and barriers for continuing RTI practices in Saudi Arabia.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eEthical Approval\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia (Reference Number: KFU-REC-2025-034). Ethical approval was obtained on 12 January 2025. The study was conducted in full compliance with the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association, 2013), ensuring the protection of participants\u0026rsquo; rights, safety, and well-being.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eInformed Consent\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll participants were provided with a detailed information sheet describing the study\u0026rsquo;s purpose, procedures, risks, benefits, and their rights, including the right to withdraw at any time without penalty. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants between 15 January 2025 and 10 February 2025 prior to data collection. Participant anonymity and confidentiality were strictly maintained throughout the study, with pseudonyms used in reporting.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eDeclaration of Interest\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors of this paper had no interest in declaring in as much as idea conceptualization and conducting of this paper is concerned.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA.A.A. developed the research idea and design, carried out the fieldwork in Saudi Arabia, facilitated the recruitment of participants, and did the first stage of data transcription and translation, He also led the contextual and policy analysis for Saudi Arabia, and initially drafted the background and results sections of the paper. I.M. was instrumental in developing the research design, directly helped shape the theoretical framework, and organized and carried out the thematic data analysis with NVivo. He critically reviewed and co-authored the discussion and implications sections, managed all APA 7th referencing, and was responsible for final proof reading, formatting and submission. Both authors were equally involved in interpreting the findings, reviewed and approved the final manuscript, and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors duly acknowledge and appreciate the use of Quillbot, ChatGPT 4.o, Claud AI, and Gemini in proofreading the work and identifying redundant statements and phrases.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data used for this study is available but cannot be shared publicly due to ethical reasons. However, it can be released upon an official request made to the authors of this study.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAldousari AL (2022) Perspectives of General Education and Special Education Teachers in Saudi Arabia toward Special Education Services Provided to Students with Learning Disabilities. Washington State University\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAljohani BH (2019) The knowledge of response to intervention (RTI) model among early elementary levels supervisors and learning disabilities supervisors and the obstacles to its applications in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. J Educ Pract 10:26, 40\u0026ndash;47. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.7176/JEP\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.7176/JEP\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlnaim F (2016) Identification strategies in the Saudi Learning Disabilities Programme: Primary Teachers' Perspectives. The University of Manchester (United Kingdom)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlwadei H (2025) Enhancing learning disability identification in Saudi Arabia. J Arts Literature Humanit Social Sci 120:388\u0026ndash;403\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlzahraney TS (2023) Labelling is not the issue: The benefits of labelling children with learning disabilities when response to intervention is implemented. Int J Special Educ 38(1):1\u0026ndash;15\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBerkeley S, Scanlon D, Bailey TR, Sutton JC, Sacco DM (2020) A snapshot of RTI implementation a decade later: New picture, same story. J Learn Disabil 53(5):332\u0026ndash;342\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBraun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol 3(2):77\u0026ndash;101\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrown R, Steege MW, Bickford R (2014) Responsive assessment and instruction practices. Academic assessment and intervention. Routledge, pp 161\u0026ndash;178\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCartledge G, Kea CD, Watson M, Oif A (2016) Special education disproportionality: A review of response to intervention and culturally relevant pedagogy. Multiple Voices Ethnically Diverse Except Learners 16(1):29\u0026ndash;49\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eClarke V, Braun V (2014) Thematic analysis. Encyclopedia of critical psychology. Springer, New York, NY, pp 1947\u0026ndash;1952\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCohen DK, Ball DL (1999) Instruction, capacity, and improvement. Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) Research Report Series\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCollins KM, Onwuegbuzie AJ, Johnson RB, Frels RK (2013) Practice note: Using debriefing interviews to promote authenticity and transparency in mixed research. Int J Multiple Res Approaches 7(2):271\u0026ndash;284\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCothran DJ, Ennis CD (1999) Alone in a crowd: Meeting students\u0026rsquo; needs for relevance and connection in Urban High School Physical Education. J Teach Phys Educ 18(3):234\u0026ndash;247\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFuchs LS, Fuchs D (2006) Identifying learning disabilities with RTI. Perspectives 32(1):39\u0026ndash;43\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGersten R, Dimino JA (2006) RTI (response to intervention): Rethinking special education for students with reading difficulties (yet again). Reading Res Q 41(1):99\u0026ndash;108\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKenny-Chapur AM (2023) An analysis of teachers\u0026rsquo; perceptions of the response to intervention (RTI) program in One North East Suburban School. St. John's University (New York)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMarchand-Martella NE, Ruby SF, Martella RC (2007) Intensifying Reading Instruction for Students within a Three-Tier Model: Standard-Protocol and Problem Solving Approaches within a Response-to-Intervention (RTI) System. Teach Except Child Plus 3(5):n5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMelekoglu MA, Ak AS, Kaya S, Ballıoğlu M (2023) Response to Intervention: What do Elementary School Teachers of Students with Specific Learning Disabilities in Inclusive Classrooms in T\u0026uuml;rkiye Know? Psycho-Educational Res Reviews 12(1):151\u0026ndash;170\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eO\u0026rsquo;Connell BL (2015) Personality differences between RTI-oriented and neuropsychological assessment-oriented school psychologists. Indiana University of Pennsylvania\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePatton MQ (2015) Qualitative research \u0026amp; evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePoch AL, Alzahrani D, Aljuwayhir J, Alnahari M (2023) Educating students with learning difficulties in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Intervention School Clin 58(4):287\u0026ndash;292\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRestori AF, Katz GS, Lee HB (2009) A critique of the IQ/achievement discrepancy model for identifying specific learning disabilities. Europe\u0026rsquo;s J Psychol 5(4):128\u0026ndash;145\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eReynolds CR, Shaywitz SE (2009) Response to Intervention: Ready or not? Or, from wait-to-fail to watch-them-fail. School Psychol Q 24(2):130\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRichards C, Pavri S, Golez F, Canges R, Murphy J (2007) Response to intervention: Building the capacity of teachers to serve students with learning difficulties. Issues Teacher Educ 16(2):55\u0026ndash;64\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRubin A, Bellamy J (2012) Practitioner's guide to using research for evidence-based practice. Wiley\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSakuma Y, Miller ML, Babalis DS, Baker A, Reddi M, Anjum A, Taddese H (2024) Shining a spotlight on the inclusion of disabled participants in clinical trials: a mixed methods study. Trials 25(1):281\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVaughn S, Fletcher JM (2012) Response to intervention with secondary school students with reading difficulties. J Learn Disabil 45(3):244\u0026ndash;256\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWeber CL, Boswell C, Behrens WA (2025) Recognizing learning and developmental differences. Exploring critical issues in gifted education. Routledge, pp 33\u0026ndash;62\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWeber NM (2023) The role and effectiveness of response to intervention to improve elementary students\u0026rsquo; reading skills and abilities. \u003cem\u003eEducation Theses and Dissertations, 17.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://hdl.handle.net/10950/4473\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://hdl.handle.net/10950/4473\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang J, Martella RC, Kang S, Yenioglu BY (2023) Response to Intervention (RTI)/Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS): A Nationwide Analysis. J Educational Leadersh Policy Stud 7(1):n1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"humanities-and-social-sciences-communications","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"palcomms","sideBox":"Learn more about [Humanities \u0026 Social Sciences Communications](http://www.nature.com/palcomms/)","snPcode":"41599","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/41599/3","title":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Nature AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Response-to-Intervention (RTI), Learning Disabilities (LDs), Inclusive Education, Teacher Perceptions, Saudi Arabia","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7330350/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7330350/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study explores the efficacy of Response-to-Intervention (RTI) programmes in identifying and supporting students with learning disabilities (LDs) from the perspectives of teachers in Saudi Arabia. Using a qualitative case study approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with thirteen educators across inclusive schools. Findings reveal that while teachers intuitively apply RTI-aligned strategies such as differentiated instruction and group remediation, implementation is largely informal, lacking systematic progress monitoring, diagnostic tools, and policy guidance. Cultural stigma and limited parental involvement further hinder effective RTI execution. However, collaborative school leadership and peer learning communities emerged as enabling factors. The study is grounded in Cohen and Ball\u0026rsquo;s Instructional Capacity Framework and Cothran and Ennis\u0026rsquo; Situated Learning Theory, highlighting that RTI efficacy is shaped by teacher knowledge, tools, and school culture. The study recommends culturally relevant RTI policies, sustained professional development, and greater family engagement to bridge the gap between theory and practice in inclusive education.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Efficacy of Response-to-Intervention (RTI) Programmes in Identifying and Supporting Students with Learning Disabilities: Perspectives of Teachers in Saudi Arabia","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-10-06 17:02:03","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7330350/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-12-30T14:48:10+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-10-31T14:03:16+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"40973265276870190544639544771792310321","date":"2025-10-15T09:54:03+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-09-29T14:02:39+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"300107809739392817415222752431332193717","date":"2025-09-26T07:01:30+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-09-23T12:26:38+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-09-23T12:25:46+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-09-16T06:32:57+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-09-01T20:18:37+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","date":"2025-09-01T20:15:39+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"humanities-and-social-sciences-communications","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"palcomms","sideBox":"Learn more about [Humanities \u0026 Social Sciences Communications](http://www.nature.com/palcomms/)","snPcode":"41599","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/41599/3","title":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Nature AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"3978c2ad-2f46-4fd2-9507-098df86f4c7d","owner":[],"postedDate":"October 6th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[{"id":55724737,"name":"Humanities/Cultural and media studies"},{"id":55724738,"name":"Social science/Cultural and media studies"},{"id":55724739,"name":"Social science/Education"},{"id":55724740,"name":"Humanities/Language and linguistics"},{"id":55724741,"name":"Social science/Language and linguistics"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-27T16:09:46+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-7330350","link":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-07376-9","journal":{"identity":"humanities-and-social-sciences-communications","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications"},"publishedOn":"2026-04-23 15:58:41","publishedOnDateReadable":"April 23rd, 2026"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-10-06 17:02:03","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1057/s41599-026-07376-9","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-07376-9","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7330350","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7330350","identity":"rs-7330350","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}