Support from leaders is essential for effective DBI implementation. This resource illustrates how DBI can help principals and local level administrators leverage existing resources, integrate supports for academics and behavior, define Tier 3, align special education and MTSS, establish effective data meetings, and improve outcomes for students who are at-risk for poor learning outcomes. In addition, the resource shares strategies and resources available to support implementation
Part 2 of the two part series about UCF's project bridges highlights challenges and successes the program has faced when trying to build the skills and competencies of educators to implement intensive intervention.
In this article, Drs. Mary Little, Cynthia Pearl and Dena Slanda share lessons and strategies to support teachers in developing the skills and competencies to implement intensive intervention.
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:
NCII presented a special session at the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) 2016 Annual Convention. Presenters included Drs. Laura Berry Kuchle, Christopher Lemons, Chris Riley-Tillman, and Lou Danielson. The session (1) shared the importance of intensive intervention, (2) described data-based individualization (DBI), a process for adapting academic and behavioral interventions to meet individual needs, (3) described tools to evaluate implementation of key components of DBI, (4) discussed implementation patterns in NCII’s partner schools and lessons learned from NCII's technical assistance with schools and districts, and (5) shared resources available from NCII.
This updated training module provides a rationale for intensive intervention and an overview of data-based individualization (DBI), NCII’s approach to providing intensive intervention. DBI is a research-based process for individualizing validated interventions through the systematic use of assessment data to determine when and how to intensify intervention. Two case studies, one academic and one behavioral, are used to illustrate the process and highlight considerations for implementation.
NCII in collaboration with the National Center on Systemic Improvement (NCSI) presented a panel session at the 2015 OSEP Leadership Conference. Presenters included Dr. Sarah Arden, Dr. Rebecca Zumeta Edmonds, Dr. Teri Marx and Rhode Island Department of Education's David Sienko. The session included an interactive discussion around the collaboration occurring between the NCII and the State of Rhode Island with regard to the development and implementation of their State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP) to support outcomes for students with disabilities.
The purpose of this document is to provide an overview of the Center’s accomplishments and to highlight a set of lessons learned from the 26 schools that implemented intensive intervention while receiving technical support from the Center.
NCII presented a Strand at CEC 2014 Convention and Expo focused on intensive intervention. The Strand Using Intensive Intervention to Meet the Academic and Behavior Needs of Struggling Learners provided participants with an overview of how principles of intensive intervention may be applied to students with severe and persistent learning needs across reading, mathematics, and behavior. The Strand included three content-oriented sessions focused on reading, mathematics, and behavior and one panel session covering common implementation issues associated with provision of intensive services
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).