In this video, Dr. Steve Goodman, Director of Michigan's Integrated Behavior and Learning Support Initiative, discusses considerations for ensuring that intensive interventions are implemented with fidelity.
Search
Resource Type
DBI Process
Subject
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
Student Population
Audience
Event Type
Search
In this video, Dr. Luann Purcell, Chief Executive Officer of the Council of Administrators of Special Education and NCII Advisor, discusses how special educators can work collaboratively with general education teachers and staff to support students with persistent and severe learning and/or behavioral needs.
In this video, Dr. Evelyn Johnson, Associate Professor at Boise State University, discusses how data can be used to support eligibility decisions for students with disabilities.
In this video, Mary Randel, a doctoral candidate in Special Education at Michigan State University & NCII Coach for the Swartz Creek School District, addresses the importance of ensuring that students with disabilities have access to supports across the tiers of a tiered frameworks, especially intensive intervention.
These two self-paced modules address the four practices coaches can use to improve teaching and student learning. Module 1 addresses the four practices coaches can use to improve teaching and student learning. These practices include observation, modeling, providing performance feedback, and using alliance-building strategies. Module 2 addresses how to measure the fidelity of coaching practice to increase the impact it has on teaching and learning. We strongly recommend watching both modules to fully enhance the coaching of teachers. Module 1: Effective Practices for Coaches Module 2: Measuring the Fidelity of Coaching
Providing more explicit instruction, captured within the comprehensiveness domain of the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity, is critical within intensive intervention. The Recognizing Effective Special Education Teachers (RESET) project, funded by U.S. Department of Education Institute for Education Sciences (IES) and led by Evelyn Johnson at Boise State University, developed a series of rubrics based on evidence-based practices for students with high incidence disabilities. One set of rubrics focuses on explicit instruction. Based on the main ideas of Explicit Instruction, the Explicit Instruction Rubric was designed for use by supervisors and administrators to reliably evaluate explicit instructional practice, to provide specific, accurate, and actionable feedback to special education teachers about the quality of their explicit instruction, and ultimately, improve the outcomes for students with disabilities.
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 worksheet and rubric can be used to collect information about the fidelity of coaching so that this information can be used by coaches and other educators to continuously improve upon how coaching occurs.
The MTSS Fidelity of Implementation Rubric and Summary Sheet are for use by individuals responsible for monitoring the school-level fidelity of MTSS implementation.
Many students who require intensive intervention also are students with disabilities. Thus, when used school-wide, data-based individualization (DBI) can help school teams design and implement a prereferral process and high-quality special education services. Furthermore, DBI also provides schools with a validated approach for identifying and supporting students with severe and persistent learning and behavior problems, including students who may require special education. This is because the data collected through the DBI process can assist teams in assessing the need for specialized instruction, which is one of two requirements for determining eligibility for special education. In addition, data collected through the DBI process can support special education teachers in more accurately developing present levels, goals, and specialized instruction and support that will be included in the initial IEP.