The 2017 Supreme Court decision Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District highlighted the importance of monitoring students’ progress toward appropriately challenging individualized educational program (IEP) annual goals and making changes to students’ educational programs when needed. In this guide, we explain how educators can establish IEP goals that are measurable, ambitious, and appropriate in light of the student's circumstances.
Error message
The page you requested does not exist. For your convenience, a search was performed using the words in the page you tried to access.
Search
Resource Type
DBI Process
Subject
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
Student Population
Audience
Search
Diagnostic tools provide data to assist educators in designing individualized instruction and intensifying intervention for students who do not respond to validated intervention programs. Diagnostic tools can be either informal, which are easy-to-use tools that can be administered with little training, or standardized, which must be delivered in a standard way by trained staff. Teams may find it helpful to initially consider using more informal and easily accessible diagnostic tools and data to avoid loss of instructional time. Standardized diagnostic tools, which require more time to administer and interpret, may be required for students who continually demonstrate a lack of response or who require special education.
These professional learning training materials are intended to assist district or school teams involved in initial planning or implementation of data-based individualization (DBI) as a framework for providing intensive intervention in academics and behavior. The modules listed below provide an overview of the DBI process and more in-depth exploration of the various components of DBI.
On May 8, 2019, Drs. Mitch Yell, David Bateman, Tessie Bailey and Teri Marx presented Recommendations and Resources for Preparing Educators in the Endrew Era. In this webinar, Drs. Yell and Bateman draw on their recent article Free Appropriate Public Education and Endrew F. v. Douglas County School System (2017): Implications for Personnel Preparation in Teacher Education and Special Education. They provide an overview of Endrew’s impact on individualized instruction for students with disabilities and share six recommendations for preparing educators to meet the clarified requirements under Endrew. Drs. Tessie Bailey and Teri Marx, experts from the National Center on Intensive Intervention, illustrate how NCII resources and technical assistance supports can assist states, local agencies, and educators to address these recommendations and improve design and delivery of individualized instruction in academics and behavior.
The DBI process builds on a validated intervention program. This may also be called an evidence-based standard-protocol intervention or a Tier 2 intervention.
The Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Malone, 2017) can be used to select or evaluate an intervention platform used as the validated intervention platform or the foundation of the DBI process. It can also be used to guide the adaptation of intensification of an intervention during the intervention adaptation step of the DBI process. The Taxonomy includes the following dimensions:
When a student fails to respond to a validated intervention, teams need to identify why the student is not responding to determine how to adapt the intervention. Diagnostic data can assist teams in this process. They may be used to understand a student’s specific skill deficits and strengths or to identify the environmental events that predict and maintain the student’s problem behavior.