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
Search
Resource Type
DBI Process
Subject
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
Student Population
Audience
Event Type
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.
In this webinar, held February 19, 2019, Drs. Rebecca Zumeta Edmonds, Sarah Powell, and Devin Kearns, 1) reviewed the evidence-base behind explicit instruction for students with disabilities and 2) highlighted recently released course content that is designed to help educators learn how to deliver explicit instruction and review their current practices.
NCII, through a collaboration with the University of Connecticut, developed a set of course modules focused on developing educators’ skills in using explicit instruction. These course modules are designed to support faculty and professional development providers with instructing pre-service and in-service educators who are developing and/or refining their implementation of explicit instruction.
These two modules from the IRIS Center introduce users to progress monitoring in reading and mathematics. Progress monitoring is a type of formative assessment in which student learning is evaluated to provide useful feedback about performance to both learners and teachers. Because the overall progress monitoring process is almost identical for any subject area, the content in the two modules is very similar.
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.
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
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.
Norms for oral reading fluency (ORF) can be used to help educators make decisions about which students might need intervention in reading and to help monitor students’ progress once instruction has begun. This paper describes the origins of the widely used curriculum-based measure of ORF and how the creation and use of ORF norms has evolved over time. Using data from three widely-used commercially available ORF assessments (DIBELS, DIBELS Next, and easyCBM), a new set of compiled ORF norms for grade 1-6 are presented here along with an analysis of how they differ from the norms created in 2006.
