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).
Search
Resource Type
DBI Process
Subject
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
Student Population
Audience
Search
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.
In this webinar, Dr. Sarah Powell an Associate Professor in the Department of Special Education at the University of Texas at Austin highlights freely available tools and resources that can help educators consider a scope and sequence for math skills, assessment and intervention practices, instructional delivery, concepts and procedures for whole and rational numbers, intensification considerations, and more. The webinar reviews the content available from the Intensive Intervention Math Course Content. The course content consists of eight modules covering a range of math related topics. Each module includes video lessons, activities, knowledge checks, practice-based opportunities, coaching materials and other resources.
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.
This series of videos provides brief instructional examples for supporting students who need intensive instruction in the area of fractions. Within college- and career-ready standards fractions are typically taught in Grades 3-5. Developing an understanding of fractions as numbers includes part/whole relationship, number on the number line, equivalent fractions, whole numbers as fractions, and comparing fractions These videos may be used as these concepts are introduced, or with students in higher grade levels who continue to struggle with the concepts. Special education teachers, math interventionists, and others working with struggling students may find these videos helpful.
Teams are a vital part of an effective multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) across both academics and behavior as well as special education. Making connections across the across the various teams used in MTSS and special education can be challenging. This resource from NCII and the PBIS Center, provides information about how DBI can support IEP implementation and provides a table with key considerations for teams working across the MTSS system.
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).
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:
This white paper summarizes the proceedings of a summit that was focused on integrating research knowledge on promising approaches into intensive intervention and implementation to improve academic outcomes for students with disabilities who have severe and persistent learning need. In addition, it includes responses from three participants representing perspectives from policy (David Chard, Wheelock College), research (Nathan Clemens, University of Texas at Austin), and practice (Steve Goodman, Michigan Integrated Behavior and Learning Support Initiative).