This training module, Using the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity to Select, Design, and Intensify Intervention, 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 intervention programs to best meet students’ needs and intensify or adapt those interventions when students or groups of students do not adequately respond. At the end of the training participants will be able to:
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
Event Type
Search
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:
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.
All behavior serves a purpose or function—typically to access or avoid something. Thus, it is important to figure out the function of a student’s behavior to develop a plan with likelihood for success. To help determine function, school teams should start by collecting data on the A, B, Cs of behavior: Antecedent (A): anything that happens immediately before the behavior occurs Behavior (B): the action a student demonstrates that can be clearly defined and measured Consequence (C): any event (positive or negative) that occurs after a student demonstrates a behavior Once the function is determined, strategies or interventions can be put into place.
NCII developed this resource to help educators better understand the purpose of and considerations surrounding behavior screening in schools. Educators can use the information on this resource in conjunction with the Behavior Screening Tools Chart to (a) design a screening process for their school and (b) select or evaluate screening tools.
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.
An effective and efficient data system is essential for successful implementation of a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS). However, prior to selecting an appropriate system, schools and districts must identify what its staff and community need and what resources the district or school has to support an MTSS data system. This two-step tool can help teams to consider both what their needs are and to evaluate available tools against those needs. Step 1 can help your team systematically identify and document your MTSS data system needs and current context and step 2 focuses on selecting and evaluating a data system for conducting screening and progress monitoring within a tiered system of support based on the identified needs and context from step 1
Assessment is an essential part of the data-based individualization (DBI) process and a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS). Without technically sound assessment, which provides accurate, meaningful information, a teacher has no objective method for determining what a student needs or how to intensify instruction to meet those needs. The close connection between assessment and intervention is at the foundation of the DBI process. This connection is what drives teacher decision making. With the right assessment tools and guidance on how to use them, teachers can make sound, data-based decisions about who needs intensive intervention, when to make instructional changes, and what skills to focus on. In the tables below, find resources to support the selection and evaluation of screening, progress monitoring and diagnostic assessments.
This webinar challenges current thinking about how to set appropriately ambitious and measurable behavioral goals in light of the 2017 Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District decision by the United States Supreme Court. Dr. Teri A. Marx from the National Center on Intensive Intervention and the PROGRESS Center, as well as Dr. Faith G. Miller from the University of Minnesota—Twin Cities, share how to set ambitious behavioral goals for students by using a valid, reliable progress monitoring measure, and how to write measurable and realistic goals focused on the replacement behavior.
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.