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. Teams may consider using data available on the National Center on Intensive Intervention Academic Tools Chart and the publishers’ websites as well as results from previous implementation efforts. Each dimension will be rated on a scale of 0– Fails to Address Standard to 3 – Addresses Standard Well. Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity: Academic Rating Rubric Related Resources Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity Resources
This guide is a set of strategies and key practices with the ultimate goal of supporting students with the most intensive behavioral needs, their families, and educators in their transitions back to school during and following the global pandemic in a manner that prioritizes their health and safety, social and emotional needs, and behavioral and academic growth.
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.
In this article, Dr. Carrie Thomas Beck from the Oregon Department of Education discusses the dyslexia law in Oregon, the role of intensive intervention in Oregon’s dyslexia initiative, and provides advice for states defining their dyslexia frameworks.
In this article, Dr. Jennifer Ledford shares information about single-case design research and how it relates to intensive intervention as well as resources from the Council for Exceptional Children Division for Research (CEC DR).
What is an evidence-based practice? How do I know if evidence shows that a practice will be right for my students? Many practitioners ask these critical questions every day as they are faced with making decisions regarding how to best meet the needs of their students.
This webinar, presented by Laura Magnuson, a technical assistance provider for NCII, provides an overview of the rationale and purpose for secondary or Tier 2 interventions.
This webinar presented by Dr. Allison Gruner Gandhi, reviews the NCII tools chart on academic interventions, and how practitioners can use these charts to gather information about, and ultimately select, interventions that meet their needs.
How do you know if an intervention, program, or practice is likely to be effective with a particular subgroup of students? What resources are there to help school, district, and State leaders identify and select evidence-based practices (EBPs)? EBPs play an increasingly prominent role in Federal education policy. In both State Systemic Improvement Plans (SSIPs) and provisions in the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), States are being asked to implement practices and programs that have evidence of effectiveness.
An effective and efficient data system is essential for successful implementation of a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS). However, prior to selecting an appropriate system, schools and districts must identify what its staff and community need and what resources the district or school has to support an MTSS data system. This two-step tool can help teams to consider both what their needs are and to evaluate available tools against those needs. Step 1 can help your team systematically identify and document your MTSS data system needs and current context and step 2 focuses on selecting and evaluating a data system for conducting screening and progress monitoring within a tiered system of support based on the identified needs and context from step 1