Batsche, Kavale, and Kovaleski (this issue) have done an outstanding job of summarizing arguments for and against the use of response-to-intervention (RTI) procedures for identifying learning disabilities. In this response, we raise issues relevant to the concept of learning disabilities, the nature of problems associated with standard discrepancy-based identification procedures, and how RTI will ultimately be operationalized across a variety of academic domains. We express cautious optimism that RTI procedures will continue to be developed carefully and methodically and will ultimately lead to better methods for identifying and treating learning disabilities.