The Academic Intervention Taxonomy Briefs provide educators with information they can use to evaluate the appropriateness of academic interventions available on the academic intervention tools chart for a specific student or group of students who require intervention. The information included in the briefs is organized along the seven dimensions of the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity
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
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.
The Behavioral Intervention Tools Chart is comprised of studies conducted on programs beyond the core procedures (e.g., school-wide, basic classroom organization and management) that target small groups or individual students with social, emotional, or behavioral problems whose performance is non-responsive to the core procedures. The chart displays the study’s results and ratings of the study’s quality, information on the program administration, and whether additional research has been conducted on the program. The chart is intended to assist educators and families in becoming informed consumers who can select behavioral intervention programs that address their specific needs. The presence of a particular program on the chart does not constitute endorsement and should not be viewed as a recommendation from either the TRC on Behavioral Intervention or NCII.
The DBI process builds on a validated intervention program. This may also be called an evidence-based standard-protocol intervention or a Tier 2 intervention.
In this video, Ralph P. Ferretti, Professor of Education and Psychological & Brain Sciences at the University of Delaware explain why it is important to consider both the study quality and the study results when determining the evidence base of an intervention.
In this Voices from the Field video, Jill Pentimoni, Ph.D. from NCII and the University of Notre Dame and Jade Wexler, Ph.D. from the University of Maryland discuss how they used the tools charts in a graduate class to help prepare and inform students about the technical criteria used to review tools on the academic intervention tools chart. Dr. Wexler also shares how she has used the charts within undergraduate courses.
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.