Within a multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS), intensive intervention, also known as Tier 3, is designed to support students with the most severe and persistent learning and/or behavior difficulties. This document highlights some common misconceptions about intensive academic and behavior interventions that experts from the Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports and NCII have observed in supporting the implementation of intensive intervention within the context of MTSS.
During fall 2020, educators provided virtual, in-person, and hybrid intervention with an ongoing need to engage with and support parents and families. Although the context and environment may have changed, the focus on providing high-quality interventions with validated practices, monitoring student progress, and adapting and intensifying supports based on student data as outlined in the data-based individualization (DBI) process continues to be applicable across virtual, in-person, or hybrid models. This document presents considerations for implementing DBI in light of COVID-19 with an emphasis on delivery in virtual settings.
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.
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.
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.
Progress monitoring is an essential part of a multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) and, specifically, the data-based individualization (DBI) process. It allows educators and administrators to understand whether students are responding to intervention and if adaptations are needed. In addition, these data are often used to set high-quality academic and behavioral goals within the individualized education program (IEP) for students with disabilities. With the closure of schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic, educators and administrators need to rethink how they collect and analyze progress monitoring data in a virtual setting. This collection of frequently asked questions is intended to provide a starting place for consideration.
The purpose of this guide is to provide an overview of behavioral progress monitoring and goal setting to inform data-driven decision making within tiered support models and individualized education programs (IEPs).
This collection highlights a sampling of recent research focused on intensive intervention and data-based individualization (DBI). As different terms are used to describe intensive intervention, a search using EBSCO focused on articles that used the following related terms: intensive intervention, precision teaching, experimental teaching, clinical teaching, data-based individualization (when in the context of providing individualized instruction), and data-based program modification. Hand searches of the following journals were also conducted: Exceptional Children, Journal of Special Education, Journal of Special Education Leadership, Journal of Learning Disabilities, Learning Disability Quarterly, Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, Teaching Exceptional Children, Journal of Positive Behavior Support, Behavior Disorders, Remedial and Special Education, Assessment for Effective Intervention, and Journal of Educational Psychology.
The 2017 Supreme Court decision Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District highlighted the importance of monitoring students’ progress toward appropriately challenging individualized educational program (IEP) annual goals and making changes to students’ educational programs when needed. In this guide, we explain how educators can establish IEP goals that are measurable, ambitious, and appropriate in light of the student's circumstances.
The Behavior Progress Monitoring Tools Chart is comprised of evidence-based progress monitoring tools that can be used to assess students’ social, emotional or behavioral performance, to quantify a student rate of improvement or responsiveness to instruction, and to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction. The chart displays ratings on technical rigor of performance level standards (reliability and validity) and growth standards (sensitivity and decision rules) and provides information on the whether a bias analysis was conducted, and key usability features. The chart is intended to assist educators and families in becoming informed consumers who can select behavior progress monitoring tools that address their specific needs. The presence of a particular tool on the chart does not constitute endorsement and should not be viewed as a recommendation from either the TRC on Behavior Progress Monitoring or NCII.