In this Voices from the Field post, we archive the presentations from day 2 of the NCII 10-year celebration of the implementation of intensive intervention. On this day, panelists shared stories focused on preparing in-service and pre-service educators and leaders to implement intensive intervention.
Search
Resource Type
DBI Process
Subject
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
Student Population
Audience
Search
In this Voices from the Field piece, we talk to Dr. Chrissy Brown, a recent National Center for Leadership in Intensive Intervention (NCLII) scholar. Dr. Brown discusses the NCLII program and how it has guided her in preparing educators to implement intensive interventions.
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.
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.
In this article, Drs. Ketterlin Geller, Lembke, and Powell discuss how they are supporting educators to implement (1) the process of data-based individualization (DBI), (2) the principles of explicit and systematic instruction, and (3) key components of algebra readiness as part of Project STAIR (Supporting Teaching of Algebra: Individual Readiness).
In this video, Amy McKenna, a special educator in Bristol Warren Regional School District shares her experience with data-based individualization (DBI). Amy discusses how she learned about DBI, the impact her use of the DBI process had on students she worked with, and how DBI helped changed her practice as a special educator.
Data-based individualization (DBI) is a research-based process for individualizing and intensifying interventions through the systematic use of assessment data, validated interventions, and research-based adaptation strategies. The DBI process includes five iterative steps:
The purpose of this document is to provide an overview of the Center’s accomplishments and to highlight a set of lessons learned from the 26 schools that implemented intensive intervention while receiving technical support from the Center.
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.
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.