In this Voices from the Field piece, the National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII) talks with Kaylan Connally from the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) to learn more about the Advancing Inclusive Principal Leadership (AIPL) State Initiative, which is a collaborative state effort to create and implement principal leadership plans focused on improving outcomes for every student, especially those with disabilities. She shares how the AIPL initiative can help states refine principal development supports to include an intentional focus on supporting the academic and social success of students with disabilities, including those in need of intensive intervention.
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
During fall 2020, educators provided virtual, in-person, and hybrid intervention with an ongoing need to engage with and support parents and families. Although the context and environment may have changed, the focus on providing high-quality interventions with validated practices, monitoring student progress, and adapting and intensifying supports based on student data as outlined in the data-based individualization (DBI) process continues to be applicable across virtual, in-person, or hybrid models. This document presents considerations for implementing DBI in light of COVID-19 with an emphasis on delivery in virtual settings.
This guide is a set of strategies and key practices with the ultimate goal of supporting students with the most intensive behavioral needs, their families, and educators in their transitions back to school during and following the global pandemic in a manner that prioritizes their health and safety, social and emotional needs, and behavioral and academic growth.
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.
NCII, through a collaboration with the University of Connecticut, developed a set of course modules focused on developing educators’ skills in using explicit instruction. These course modules are designed to support faculty and professional development providers with instructing pre-service and in-service educators who are developing and/or refining their implementation of explicit instruction.
Washington's Intensive Intervention Implementation Story To best support this work at the local level, state agency staff at OSPI undertook a year of internal skill-building work related to their personal knowledge related to intensive intervention in academics and behavior. Once a foundation was built, OSPI, NCII, and the Central Valley School District (CVSD) partnered to conduct a two-year (2018-2019 and 2019-2020) training series focused on implementation of data-based individualization (DBI) across the district. The training series began with CVSD district leaders coordinating with schools to construct teams of educators who would attend the training series. Teams from eight participating elementary schools included multidisciplinary staff representative of building principals, school psychologists, special education teachers, interventionists, reading specialists, and general education teachers.
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 Behavior Progress Monitoring Tools Chart is comprised of evidence-based progress monitoring tools that can be used to assess students’ social, emotional or behavioral performance, to quantify a student rate of improvement or responsiveness to instruction, and to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction. The chart displays ratings on technical rigor of performance level standards (reliability and validity) and growth standards (sensitivity and decision rules) and provides information on the 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 behavior progress monitoring tools that address their specific needs. The presence of a particular tool on the chart does not constitute endorsement and should not be viewed as a recommendation from either the TRC on Behavior Progress Monitoring or NCII.
The Behavior Screening Tools Chart is comprised of evidence-based screening tools that can be used to identify students in need of behavioral 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 behavior screening tools that address their specific needs. The presence of a particular tool on the chart does not constitute endorsement and should not be viewed as a recommendation from either the TRC on Behavior Screening or NCII.
The Academic Progress Monitoring Tools Chart is comprised of evidence-based progress monitoring tools that can be used to assess students’ academic performance, to quantify a student rate of improvement or responsiveness to instruction, and to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction. The chart displays ratings on technical rigor of performance level standards (reliability and validity) and growth standards (sensitivity, alternate forms, and decision rules) and provides information on the 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 progress monitoring tools that address their specific needs. The presence of a particular tool on the chart does not constitute endorsement and should not be viewed as a recommendation from either the TRC on Academic Progress Monitoring or NCII.