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.
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
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.
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
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.
English learners (ELs), as defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, are individuals enrolled in school between the ages of 3 and 21 whose native language is not English. Although ELs are categorized under a single, homogeneous label, they represent a diverse population of students with wide-ranging cultural experiences, native and second-language proficiencies, and varying degrees of subject matter knowledge (Vaughn et al., 2019). Delivering intensive intervention for ELs involves consistent attention to students’ language development, culture, and academic and behavioral needs throughout the DBI process. Supporting ELs with intensive needs depends on an educator’s
In this video, Dr. Rolland O’Connor, Professor in the Graduate School of Education at the University of California Riverside a member of the NCII Academic Intervention Technical Review Committee, addresses the implications of early reading research for understanding late-emerging reading disabilities, working with students learning English, and preparing teachers to have a strong grounding in the stages of reading development.
These five screening one-page documents provide a brief overview of each of the NCII screening standards. They include a definition and information on why that particular standard is important for understanding the quality of screening tools.
The Academic Screening Tools Chart is comprised of evidence-based screening tools that can be used to identify students at risk for poor academic outcomes, including students who require intensive intervention. The chart displays ratings on technical rigor in the areas of classification accuracy, reliability, and validity, and provides information on the representativeness of the sample, whether a bias analysis was conducted, and key usability features. The chart is intended to assist educators and families in becoming informed consumers who can select academic screening tools 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 Academic Screening or NCII.
This resource developed by Sarah Thorud, Elementary Reading Specialist from Clatskanie School District in Oregon focuses on implementing screening and progress monitoring virtually. It includes guiding questions and considerations for implementation, video examples, and a sample sign-up sheet for screening and progress monitoring students virtually.
In this video, Cathy Kea, Professor of Special Education at North Carolina A&T State University, discusses how we can better serve racially, ethnically, and linguistically diverse students who have persistent learning and behavior problems.