In this Voices from the Field post, Emma Shanahan reflects on her experiences with progress monitoring and data-based decision making as a teacher and shares findings from her recent research on DBI professional development.
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
This IRIS Star Legacy Module, first in a series of two, overviews data-based individualization and provides information about adaptations for intensifying and individualizing instruction. Developed in collaboration with the IRIS Center and the CEEDAR Center, this resource is designed for individuals who will be implementing intensive interventions (e.g., special education teachers, reading specialists, interventionists).
These two modules from the IRIS Center introduce users to progress monitoring in reading and mathematics. Progress monitoring is a type of formative assessment in which student learning is evaluated to provide useful feedback about performance to both learners and teachers. Because the overall progress monitoring process is almost identical for any subject area, the content in the two modules is very similar.
In this video, Dr. Devin Kearns, an Assistant Professor of Special Education in the Department of Education Psychology at the Near School of Education at the University of Connecticut and NCII Trainer & Coach, discusses considerations for progress monitoring.
In Module 6 of the Intensive Intervention in Mathematics Course Content we focus on whole number concepts and computation. In Modules 4 and 5, we emphasized important instructional delivery methods and strategies to include when providing instruction within intensive intervention. Modules 6 and 7 focus on important concepts and procedures for whole numbers (Module 6) and rational numbers (Module 7) teachers may find important for being able to explain mathematics to students.
It is important that the instructional practices and interventions delivered within a school’s multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) be grounded in evidence. However, the “practice” that happens within each tier is different; therefore, the type of evidence that is required for each tier also must be different. A useful way to think about evidence-based practices in MTSS is to think about levels of evidence that vary and correspond to the different levels of intervention intensity at each tier. In the tables below, find resources to support the selection and evaluation of Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 or intensive interventions.
This is part 2 of the module, “Informal Academic Diagnostic Assessment: Using Data to Guide Intensive Instruction.” This part includes examples of graphed data and is intended to provide participants with guidance for reviewing progress monitoring data to determine if the instructional plan is working or if a change is needed.
Data-based individualization (DBI) is a research-based process for individualizing and intensifying interventions through the systematic use of assessment data, validated interventions, and research-based adaptation strategies. This document introduces and describes the DBI process and how it can be used to support students who require intensive intervention in academics and/or behavior.
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:
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.