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.
Search
Resource Type
DBI Process
Subject
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
Student Population
Audience
Search
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.
Successful implementation of a multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) and, specifically, intensive intervention through the data-based individualization (DBI) process, demands the collection and analysis of data. As teams consider data collection, challenges may occur with assessment administration, scoring, and data entry (Taylor, 2009). This resource reviews three data collection and entry challenges and strategies to ensure data about risk status and responsiveness accurately represent student performance and minimize measurement errors.
The purpose of this guide is to provide an overview of behavioral progress monitoring and goal setting to inform data-driven decision making within tiered support models and individualized education programs (IEPs).
This two page handout defines the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity through guiding questions and highlights when the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity can be used within the data-based individualization (DBI) process. Teams can use the dimensions to evaluate a current intervention, select a new intervention and intensify interventions when students do not respond.
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.
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.
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.
The Behavior Progress Monitoring Tools Chart is comprised of evidence-based progress monitoring tools that can be used to assess students’ social, emotional or behavioral 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 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 behavior 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 Behavior Progress Monitoring or NCII.