This tool is designed to help educators collect and graph academic progress monitoring data across multiple measures as a part of the data-based individualization (DBI) process. This tool allows educators to store data for multiple students (across multiple measures), graph student progress, and set individualized goals for a student on specific measures.
Search
Resource Type
DBI Process
Subject
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
Student Population
Audience
Search
This presentation provides an overview of the Direct Behavior Rating (DBR). DBR is a method for collecting data on student behavior that merges a rating scale approach and direct observation. The presentation describes: (a) considerations before using the DBR, (b) completing the DBR and (c) using the DBR to monitor progress and evaluate behavior.
This report from Jobs for the Future and Authored by Sharon Vaughn, Lou Danielson, Rebecca Zumeta Edmonds, and Lynn Holdheide, 1) reviews previous efforts to promote better educational outcomes for students with disabilities, 2) describes research-based instructional strategies that can support them and other struggling learners, and 3) shares the kinds of policies and local resources needed to ensure that all young people have meaningful opportunities to learn deeply and become truly prepared to succeed in college, careers, and civic life.
This brief illustrates considerations for implementing data-based individualization (DBI) with ELs that accounts for their unique academic, social, behavioral, linguistic, and cultural experiences, assets, and needs.
Fidelity refers to how closely prescribed procedures are followed and, in the context of schools, the degree to which educators implement programs, assessments, and implementation plans the way they were intended. When we implement interventions and assessments with fidelity, intervention teams can make more accurate decisions about an individual student’s progress and future intervention needs. In addition, fidelity of implementation to the data-based individualization (DBI) process as a whole and across multiple students in a school, helps to ensure that staff have the necessary resources and processes in place to support strong implementation for individual students. The following tools assess and support fidelity of DBI implementation at the school, interventionist, and student levels.
This webinar shares 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.
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.
Research indicates that for successful implementation to occur, it is important to look at not only what is being implemented but how it is implemented. Implementing DBI often necessitates that educators make school-wide instructional adaptations, engage in systematic data analysis, and conduct individualized student-level decisions at levels that task the bandwidth of resources, staffing, and budgets of many schools. Assessing readiness from multiple stakeholders with different perspectives prior to implementation allows educators across many levels (schools, districts, and states) to prioritize areas for their initial efforts and then slowly use the momentum to build capacity toward full implementation. In this section, find training materials, lessons learned from those who have implemented DBI, and tools to assess your initial readiness and build capacity to implement intensive intervention.
The 2017 Supreme Court decision Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District highlighted the importance of monitoring students’ progress toward appropriately challenging individualized educational program (IEP) annual goals and making changes to students’ educational programs when needed. In this guide, we explain how educators can establish IEP goals that are measurable, ambitious, and appropriate in light of the student's circumstances.
Successful implementation of intensive intervention using data-based individualization (DBI) is more likely to occur in schools that have a well-functioning tiered system of support, commonly called a multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS), response to intervention (RTI), or positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS), depending on your location and area of focus. Intensive intervention is considered the most intense level of intervention and also may be known as Tier 3.
![center product](/themes/custom/sass_boot/images/center_product.png)