In this video, Dr. Devin Kearns, an Assistant Professor of Special Education in the Department of Education Psychology at the Neag School of Education at the University of Connecticut and NCII Trainer & Coach, discusses importance of consistency when selecting, administering, and scoring progress monitoring tools.
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
Teams are a vital part of an effective multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) across both academics and behavior as well as special education. Making connections across the across the various teams used in MTSS and special education can be challenging. This resource from NCII and the PBIS Center, provides information about how DBI can support IEP implementation and provides a table with key considerations for teams working across the MTSS system.
This worksheet and rubric can be used to collect information about the fidelity of coaching so that this information can be used by coaches and other educators to continuously improve upon how coaching occurs.
This question bank includes questions that teams can use to develop a hypothesis about why an individual or group of students may not be responding to an intervention. The hypothesis should help guide intervention planning and selection of intensification strategies using the Intervention Intensification Strategy Checklist. When developing a hypothesis, teams should consider the intervention design, fidelity of implementation, and learner needs. Intervention fidelity data collected using the Student Intervention Implementation Log and informal diagnostic data may help teams answer the questions included in the question bank.
Successful implementation of a multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) and, specifically, intensive intervention through the data-based individualization (DBI) process, demands the collection and analysis of data. As teams consider data collection, challenges may occur with assessment administration, scoring, and data entry (Taylor, 2009). This resource reviews three data collection and entry challenges and strategies to ensure data about risk status and responsiveness accurately represent student performance and minimize measurement errors.
In this video, Rob Horner, Professor of Special Education at the University of Oregon and co-Director of OSEP Technical Assistance Center on PBIS and the OSEP Research and Demonstration Center on School-wide Behavior Support, discusses how data systems can be used within the context of intensive intervention.
This tool is designed to help educators collect and graph academic progress monitoring data across multiple measures as a part of the data-based individualization (DBI) process. This tool allows educators to store data for multiple students (across multiple measures), graph student progress, and set individualized goals for a student on specific measures.
This webinar describes contextual factors that can support or impede the implementation of intensive intervention.
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.
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.