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.
Search
Resource Type
DBI Process
Subject
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
Student Population
Audience
Search
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.
This training module, includes four sections that (a) provide an overview of administering common general outcome measures for progress monitoring in reading and mathematics, (b) review graphed progress monitoring data, and (c) provide guidance on identifying what type of skills the intervention should target to be most effective in reading and mathematics.
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.
This is part 4 of the module, “Informal Academic Diagnostic Assessment: Using Data to Guide Intensive Instruction.” This part of the module is intended to provide participants with guidance for identifying skills to target in reading and math interventions.
This is part 3 of the larger module, “Informal Academic Diagnostic Assessment: Using Data to Guide Intensive Instruction.” This part is intended to provide participants with an introduction to error analysis of curriculum-based measures for the purpose of identifying skill deficits and providing examples of error analysis in reading and mathematics. Part 4, “Identifying Target Skills,” will further link these skill deficits to intervention.
This is part 1 of the larger module, “Informal Academic Diagnostic Assessment: Using Data to Guide Intensive Instruction.” This part is intended to provide an overview of common general outcome measures (GOM) used for progress monitoring in reading and mathematics, with guidance on selecting an appropriate measure.
This training module demonstrates how academic progress monitoring fits into the Data-Based Individualization (DBI) process by (a) providing approaches and tools for academic progress monitoring and (b) showing how to use progress monitoring data to set ambitious goals, make instructional decisions, and plan programs for individual students with intensive needs.
In this video, Dr. Sharon Vaughn, Senior Advisor to the National Center on Intensive Intervention and the Executive Director of The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, discusses intensive academic interventions and supplies up to date information about the status of research studies on the subject.
In this video, Michelle Hosp, Associate Professor in the College of Education at the University of Massachusetts Amherst discusses why your progress monitoring tool may not directly focus on the skills that you are teaching.