This rubric uses descriptors of the dimensions of the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity to support teams in selecting and evaluating validated interventions for small groups or individual students. Teams may consider using data available on the National Center on Intensive Intervention Academic Tools Chart and the publishers’ websites as well as results from previous implementation efforts. Each dimension will be rated on a scale of 0– Fails to Address Standard to 3 – Addresses Standard Well. Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity: Academic Rating Rubric Related Resources Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity Resources
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
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.
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 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.
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.
The Academic Intervention Tools Chart is comprised of studies conducted on programs beyond the core curriculum that target small groups or individuals with the goal of improving academic outcomes for students whose performance is non-responsive to the core procedures. The chart displays the study’s results and ratings of the study’s quality, provides 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 academic 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 Academic Intervention or NCII.
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.
The DBI Implementation Rubric and the DBI Implementation Interview are intended to support monitoring of school-level implementation of data-based individualization (DBI). The rubric is based on the structure of the Center on Response to Intervention’s Integrity Rubric and is aligned with the essential components of DBI and the infrastructure that is necessary for successful implementation in Grades K–6. It describes levels of implementation on a 1–5 scale across DBI components. The rubric is accompanied by the DBI Implementation Interview which includes guiding questions that may be used for a self-assessment or structured interview of a school’s DBI leadership team.
Teachers often note that students struggle with the transition between core instruction and intervention in mathematics. Thus, the purpose of these curriculum crosswalks is to identify points of alignment and misalignment between commonly used mathematics intervention and core instructional materials, with a particular focus on mathematics practice standards and vocabulary. We offer recommendations for improving alignment to help students more successfully participate in math instruction across settings. Math Curriculum Crosswalk: Grade 1 Math Curriculum Crosswalk: Grade 2 Math Curriculum Crosswalk: Grade 3
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