The purpose of this implementation guide from the National Center for Systemic Improvement is to help practitioners systematically implement effective coaching practices. This guide outlines key questions to consider when using coaching as a pathway toward improving teaching and learning. Further, the guide specifies actions that should be taken to appropriately structure the system in which coaching occurs. Consideration of these questions and completion of these actions may help coaching achieve its intended goals and become a sustainable component of the learning environment.
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
Progress monitoring, a key component of a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS), occurs throughout the data-based individualization (DBI) process to assess responsiveness to the validated intervention platform, as well as adaptations to the intervention. Prior to delivering the validated intervention platform, intervention teams should develop a progress monitoring plan that outlines the progress monitoring tool, student goal, and frequency of data collection and review. During delivery of the validated and adapted intervention, educators should collect and graph frequent progress monitoring data.
Fidelity refers to how closely prescribed procedures are followed and, in the context of schools, the degree to which educators implement programs, assessments, and implementation plans the way they were intended. When we implement interventions and assessments with fidelity, intervention teams can make more accurate decisions about an individual student’s progress and future intervention needs. In addition, fidelity of implementation to the data-based individualization (DBI) process as a whole and across multiple students in a school, helps to ensure that staff have the necessary resources and processes in place to support strong implementation for individual students. The following tools assess and support fidelity of DBI implementation at the school, interventionist, and student levels.
In this video, Dr. Chris Riley-Tillman, a Professor at the University of Missouri and NCII Senior Advisor, discusses the important considerations when selecting behavioral progress monitoring tools.
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.
Using multiple data sources, the teacher or team makes a decision to adapt the intervention program to better meet the student’s individual needs. The teacher or team outlines these adaptations in an individual student plan. The plan may include adaptation strategies along several dimensions. These strategies may include quantitative changes, such as providing more opportunities for a student to respond by increasing the length or frequency of the intervention, or decreasing the size of the intervention group.
The purpose of this document is to provide an overview of the Center’s accomplishments and to highlight a set of lessons learned from the 26 schools that implemented intensive intervention while receiving technical support from the Center.
The purpose of this module is to introduce schools interested in implementing intensive intervention to the infrastructure needed to implement data-based individualization (DBI). The module includes presentation slides with integrated activities and handouts to help teams determine their readiness and develop an action plan for implementation.
The purpose of this document is to increase the capacity of practitioners and educational leaders to support a broad range of learners who need more literacy supports to become skilled readers and writers by identifying a set of essential practices that are research-supported and should be the focus of professional development. These practices for intensifying literacy instruction apply to those learners with severe and persistent reading and writing challenges who have not responded when provided with instruction aligned with state academic standards, regardless of disability status.
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.