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.
Search
Resource Type
DBI Process
Subject
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
Student Population
Audience
Event Type
Search
This collection highlights a sampling of articles focused on intensive intervention and data-based individualization (DBI). Although there is a wealth of research on key components of the DBI process (e.g., progress monitoring, validated intervention programs), this list is not intended to include articles that focus on specific steps in the DBI process, nor is it an exhaustive review of all available literature. In the list below, we highlight seminal research on DBI and articles published since 2011, when NCII was first funded.
In this video, Dr. Chris Lemons shares considerations for implementing DBI to support students with intellectual and developmental disabilities. In this short video, he shares what we know, areas we need to understand better, research that is underway, and places to learn more.
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 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.
In this Voices From the Field piece, the National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII) speaks to Cyndi Caniglia, PhD, an assistant professor in the Department of Education at Whitworth University in Spokane, Washington about how she has meaningfully integrated the NCII Features of Explicit Instruction Course Content into her coursework.
Although instructional and intervention practices that work for monolingual students often benefit English learners (ELs), there are additional considerations when assessing, instructing, or providing intervention to ELs that account for the nature of English acquisition. The National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII) and the National Center for Systemic Improvement (NCSI) have compiled freely-available resources to support educators and educational organizations serving ELs. This list includes resources related to instruction, multitiered system of supports, special education, implementation supports, and partnering with families.
This Voices from the Field piece highlights how North Carolina, Oregon, Washington, and Texas have raised awareness, visibility, and statewide knowledge of data-based individualization (DBI) at statewide conferences through keynote speakers, workshops, breakout sessions, and facilitated team time.
This fourteen minute video shares Wyoming’s journey in building the capacity of educators to implement data-based individualization (DBI) to improve academic and behavior outcomes for students with disabilities as part of their state systemic improvement plan (SSIP). Wyoming administrators, teachers, parents and students from Laramie County School District # 1 and preschool sites share how DBI implementation impacted teacher efficacy, team meetings, quality of services, student confidence, and state and local collaboration.
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.