Providing more explicit instruction, captured within the comprehensiveness domain of the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity, is critical within intensive intervention. The Recognizing Effective Special Education Teachers (RESET) project, funded by U.S. Department of Education Institute for Education Sciences (IES) and led by Evelyn Johnson at Boise State University, developed a series of rubrics based on evidence-based practices for students with high incidence disabilities. One set of rubrics focuses on explicit instruction. Based on the main ideas of Explicit Instruction, the Explicit Instruction Rubric was designed for use by supervisors and administrators to reliably evaluate explicit instructional practice, to provide specific, accurate, and actionable feedback to special education teachers about the quality of their explicit instruction, and ultimately, improve the outcomes for students with disabilities.
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 training module introduces the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity and describes how it supports the DBI process by helping provide explicit guidance on how to select and evaluate validated reading intervention programs to best meet students’ needs and intensify or adapt those interventions when students or groups of students do not adequately respond.
This training module introduces the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity and describes how it supports the DBI process by helping provide explicit guidance on how to select and evaluate validated mathematics intervention programs to best meet students’ needs and intensify or adapt those interventions when students or groups of students do not adequately respond.
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.
This training module introduces the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity and describes how it supports the DBI process by helping provide explicit guidance on how to select and evaluate validated behavior intervention programs to best meet students’ needs and intensify or adapt those interventions when students or groups of students do not adequately respond.
This module focuses primarily on selecting evidence-based interventions that align with the functions of behavior for students with severe and persistent learning and behavior needs. The emphasis of this training will include four main content areas: (a) relating assessment to function, (b) selecting evidence-based interventions that align with functions of behavior, (c) linking assessment and monitoring, and (d) connecting data with the evidence-based interventions selected. The overarching goal is to connect concepts and theories in behavior and begin planning how intensive intervention can be put into practice to support students with intensive behavioral needs.
This module discusses approaches to intensifying academic interventions for students with severe and persistent learning needs. The module describes how intensification fits into DBI process and introduces four categories of intensification practices. It uses examples to illustrate concepts and provides activities to support development of teams’ understanding of these practices, and how they might be used to design effective individualized programs for students with intensive needs.
This module serves as an introduction to important concepts and processes for implementing functional behavior assessment (FBA), including behavior basics such as reinforcement and punishment. Throughout this module, participants will discuss both real world and school based examples to become familiar with the FBA process and develop a deeper understanding and awareness of the functions of the behavior. Key topics include (a) defining FBAs in the context of DBI; (b) basic concepts in behavior, including antecedents, behaviors, and consequences; (c) levels of FBAs; and (d) considerations and procedures for conducting FBAs.
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.