In this video, Dr. Joe Wehby, Senior Advisor to the National Center for Intensive Intervention and Associate Professor in the Vanderbilt University Department of Special Education, addresses this question around research on intensive behavioral interventions.
Search
Resource Type
DBI Process
Subject
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
Student Population
Audience
Search
In this video, Dr. Sharon Vaughn, Senior Advisor to the National Center on Intensive Intervention and the Executive Director of The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, discusses the importance of intensive interventions in academics and behavior.
Module 5 begins a series of modules on the topic of explicit instruction. Explicit instruction is about modeling and practicing to help students reach academic goals. Throughout the module, educators will learn how selecting an important objective and learning outcomes, designing structured instructional experiences, explaining directly, modeling the skills being taught and providing scaffolded practice to achieve mastery can be used within the DBI framework to support instruction.
Module 7 is the third in a set of four course modules focused on explicit instruction. This module focuses on providing immediate specific feedback and maintaining a brisk pace. Throughout the module, educators will learn how eliciting providing immediate specific feedback and maintaining a brisk pace support instruction within the DBI framework.
This video from the REL Midwest features Michigan educators discussing how districts can accelerate reading growth for young learners. Educators and leaders from Chippewa Hills School District, specifically discuss the use of data-based individualization (DBI).
The purpose of this document is to increase the capacity of practitioners and educational leaders to support a broad range of learners who need more literacy supports to become skilled readers and writers by identifying a set of essential practices that are research-supported and should be the focus of professional development. These practices for intensifying literacy instruction apply to those learners with severe and persistent reading and writing challenges who have not responded when provided with instruction aligned with state academic standards, regardless of disability status.
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.
The Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Malone, 2017) can be used to select or evaluate an intervention platform used as the validated intervention platform or the foundation of the DBI process. It can also be used to guide the adaptation of intensification of an intervention during the intervention adaptation step of the DBI process. The Taxonomy includes the following dimensions:
Module 8 is the fourth module in a set of four course modules focused on explicit instruction. This module reviews explicit instruction and the supporting practices. It includes a number of opportunities to view and evaluate lesson examples, apply what was learned, and self-reflect.
Diagnostic tools provide data to assist educators in designing individualized instruction and intensifying intervention for students who do not respond to validated intervention programs. Diagnostic tools can be either informal, which are easy-to-use tools that can be administered with little training, or standardized, which must be delivered in a standard way by trained staff. Teams may find it helpful to initially consider using more informal and easily accessible diagnostic tools and data to avoid loss of instructional time. Standardized diagnostic tools, which require more time to administer and interpret, may be required for students who continually demonstrate a lack of response or who require special education.