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.
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 NCII tools charts include a large amount of information and the “best” tool is not going to be the same for everyone. Users should review all the elements of the charts before making decisions. This user guide reviews a series of recommended steps that users should consider when making decisions.
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. DBI is the technical term for what many good teachers do naturally through the problem solving process: frequently review student data and make changes to their teaching based on what works for students. DBI, however, makes this process systematic, explicit, and tailored to meet the needs of individual students through a multi-step process that gradually intensifies instruction and support.
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.
This report reviews the reach of the NCII tools charts on SEA websites and within SEA policy to support identification and implementation of evidence-based interventions and assessment tools.
In this video, Drs. Mitch Yell and Tessie Bailey share information about the 2017 Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. They highlight implications for writing a student's IEP and discuss the importance of setting setting ambitious IEP goals to ensure that students make progress in light of their individual circumstances.
When a student fails to respond to a validated intervention, teams need to identify why the student is not responding to determine how to adapt the intervention. Diagnostic data can assist teams in this process. They may be used to understand a student’s specific skill deficits and strengths or to identify the environmental events that predict and maintain the student’s problem behavior.
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:
In this Voices from the Field, the National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII) talks with Richard Carter, PhD, an assistant professor in the Department of Counseling, Leadership, Advocacy, and Design at the University of Wyoming. Dr. Carter teaches Mild and Moderate Disabilities, Assessment in Special Education, and Collaboration and is working to develop a micro-credentialing system for educators in the state. Dr. Carter discusses how he has integrated NCII’s data-based individualization (DBI) resources within his education preparation efforts
In this article, Dr. Carrie Thomas Beck from the Oregon Department of Education discusses the dyslexia law in Oregon, the role of intensive intervention in Oregon’s dyslexia initiative, and provides advice for states defining their dyslexia frameworks.