Education Drivers

Multitiered System of Support

Multitiered system of support (MTSS) is a framework for organizing service delivery. At the core of MTSS is the adoption and implementation of a continuum of evidence-based interventions that result in improved academic and behavioral outcomes for all students. MTSS is a data-based decision making approach based on the frequent screening of progress for all students and intervention for students who are not making adequate progress. When employed effectively, a multi-tiered approach prevents problems, and allows earlier identification and intervention when there are issues in a more cost efficient manner than traditional approaches. Most models of MTSS have three tiers. The first tier is designed around a core curriculum that addresses and meets the needs of all students. The second tier provides additional instruction for those students needing supplementary support. The third tier offers intensive and individualized services for the students for whom less intensive support has not worked. Many educational initiatives, such as Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports, Response to Intervention, Continuous Improvement Model, and Lesson Study, Differentiated Accountability, have incorporated the core elements of MTSS into their programs.

Multitiered System of Support

Multitiered System of Support.pdf

Multitiered system of support (MTSS) is a conceptual framework for organizing service delivery to students. Forming the nucleus of MTSS are adoption and implementation of a continuum of evidence-based interventions, starting with universal academic and social interventions and leading to increasingly intensive methods to ensure improved outcomes for students not benefiting from the universal practices (Harlacher, Sakelaris, & Kattelman, 2014). As a data-based decision-making model, MTSS is constructed around frequent performance screening, research-supported instruction, and timely intervention for those not achieving proficiency. MTSS is often mistakenly seen as a set of scripted practices for teachers to ensure that students succeed. However, MTSS is not a specific practice or even a set of practices, but rather a framework for aligning an organization’s resources to address student needs in the most effective way.

MTSS architecture is most often based on three tiers of service for cost-effective mobilization of resources necessary to implement interventions aimed at promoting success for all students:

Tier 1 = Universal support. Core curriculum and practices are delivered to all students. Intervention is considered effective if about 80% of students make adequate progress. Tier 2 = Heightened support (approximately 15%). Within the core instruction, increased services and remediation using small groups or tutoring are provided to those requiring added support. Approximately 15% of students for whom universal support is inadequate should benefit from this level of intervention. Tier 3 = Intensive support (approximately 5%). Individualized or pinpointed services are provided to students who have not succeeded in tiers 1 and 2.

Some MTSS models may include special education but do not limit it to students qualifying for special education. Examples outside of special education are after-school tutoring and individualized reading intervention using a curriculum outside of core.

RtI Graphic 

Figure 1. The multitiered model is a framework based on an increasing continuum of support using evidence-based practices to improve all students’ academic and conduct outcomes (Sugai, 2013). Response to intervention (RtI), the best known multitiered approach, is illustrated here.

As a framework, MTSS is devised to accommodate the use of a wide range of curricula and practices that have been vetted through rigorous research. It is the umbrella under which many educational initiatives including positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS), response to intervention (RtI), and differentiated accountability (DA) fall. These initiatives are prime examples of models built around core elements (multitiered levels of support, evidence-based practices, universal screening and ongoing progress monitoring, data-based decision making, and fidelity of implementation) to effectively deliver and sustain interventions. A growing knowledge base now offers strong evidence to support the effectiveness of the multitiered model for improving both academic and social outcomes (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; Stoiber & Gettinger, 2016). Of the many initiatives embracing the multitiered model, the most widely known is RtI, a multitiered approach focused on helping students succeed academically (Figure 1). 

History of Multitiered System of Support

Before the advent of MTSS, the discrepancy model was commonly used to identify students with learning and emotional challenges. A framework for assessing and delivering services to students who have fallen behind peers or are behind grade level standards, the discrepancy model documents the discrepancy between a student’s aptitude and achievement, and uses this information to decide whether the student is eligible for additional support. The model was widely adopted following the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (EHA, 1975), enacted by the U.S. Congress as the legal basis for determining qualification for special education services. In the following decades, educators found the model to be inadequate and many began referring to it as the “wait to fail” model, as students often spent years failing and falling behind before being identified for vital services. These delays in the delivery of interventions proved a severe flaw in the model (Gresham, 2002).

To remediate this defect, educators began looking for models capable of eliminating delays in service delivery. Research strongly supports early intervention as a powerful strategy for remediating many academic and behavioral issues. The longer teachers wait to intervene, the more challenging it is to remediate problems (Hattie, 2009). Ultimately, MTSS emerged as an alternate to the discrepancy model, as it incorporates early intervention as an indispensable feature to overcome the weakness of the earlier model.

The shortcomings of the discrepancy model are not limited to delayed detection of struggling students. It has many other failings (Gresham, 2001; Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003):

Overidentification of students with learning disabilities Overrepresentation of minorities in special education Too many students identified by the screening tools as at risk but who later perform satisfactorily on the criterion measure (i.e., too many false positives) Variability of identification rates across states and districts

The MTSS framework stemmed from the multitiered public health model, which began achieving remarkable successes at the turn of the 20th century. The public health model was conceptualized as a cost-effective means to improve health and quality of life through prevention and treatment of disease and other physical conditions. It was developed to address the need, imposed by limited resources, to be selective in determining where, when, and how to intervene for maximum results. The public health model proved to be both effective and efficient in appreciably reducing mortality while achieving a significant improvement in quality of life. Deaths from infectious diseases rose dramatically during the 19th century as the population shifted from rural areas to cities, but thanks to the efforts of the public health services, deaths declined markedly resulting in a sharp drop in infant and child mortality (Grove & Hetzel, 1968). The years between 1900 and 1990 saw a 29.2-year increase in life expectancy (Hoyert, Kochanek, & Murphy, 1999). The multitiered framework was so successful that it was subsequently adopted by mental health professionals and eventually embraced by educators (Muñoz, Mrazek, & Haggerty, 1996).

Multitiered System of Support Process

When employed effectively, a multitiered approach prevents problems of students falling behind, allows for earlier identification of at-risk students, and delivers results in a more cost-efficient manner than traditional approaches (Eldevik et al., 2009; Horn & Packard, 1985). MTSS interventions in education are organized from least to most demanding and exacting. This strategy inevitably results in the need to assign additional resources to support the increasingly intensive involvement of teachers and support personnel when universal, or tier 1, interventions fall short of achieving results and more individualized approaches are required at the second and third tiers. Successful MTSS implementation is a complex process requiring the coordination of resources across a school. The MTSS process involves organizing and integrating the following tasks and services: 

Gathering accurate and reliable screening data Correctly interpreting and validating data Using data to make meaningful instructional changes when a student is struggling Identifying resources and personnel with the demonstrated capacity to implement evidence-based practices Establishing and managing increasingly intensive tiers of support Evaluating the process at all tiers to ensure the system is working Redesigning curriculum and practices when initial interventions fail to remediate the problem

Essential Practice Elements of a Multitiered System of Support

The MTSS framework comprises a set of interacting practice elements: universal screening, data-based decision making and problem solving, performance feedback and progress monitoring, and system progress monitoring. These elements are combined into a package to maximize the capacity of each, as well as establish a structure in which the whole is greater than the sum of the parts (Chorpita, Becker, & Daleiden, 2007).

Universal Screening

Screening of all students is fundamental to MTSS as it is the means for identifying and predicting which students may be at risk of failing to meet educational outcomes for their grade level. These initial, typically brief assessments are supplemented with additional diagnostic testing and ongoing progress monitoring to corroborate which students are at risk and to reduce the likelihood of false positives (students identified as at risk but who later perform satisfactorily) and false negatives (students not identified as at risk but who do require support). Measures that produce too many false positives squander valuable resources by delivering services to students who are not actually in need; too many false negatives deny students who need assistance. Of the two, the greatest concern in developing effective screening tools is minimizing false negatives.

Universal screening focuses on skills that are highly predictive of future outcomes (Jenkins, Hudson, & Johnson, 2007). Ample evidence exists that valid and reliable early indicators are available to guide when and how to intervene with students. This is truer for academic measures in elementary grades than in middle school and high school. Good measures for social behavior are less well established in terms of reliability and validity. Many of these early indicators accurately predict success in subsequent lessons and subjects, test scores, grades, and graduation rates (Celio & Harvey, 2005). Reliable indicators range from expressive and receptive vocabulary, level of self-control, word reading/text fluency, ability to achieve reading competency by fourth grade, and phonological awareness.

Universal screening is typically conducted three times per school year, in fall, winter, and spring. Effective screening demands assessments that accurately, reliably, and efficiently measure student performance against standards. An instrument must demonstrate that it is reliable, valid, and practical to administer before being adopted as a universal screening tool.

Reliability. To be considered reliable, a universal screening tool must achieve similar results when different teachers use the same screening measure with the same student. Unreliable results bring into question the credibility of the assessment. Using screenings with high reliability ensures that students identified for intervention are consistently identified from one assessment to another, across time, and from one scorer to another. This increases the likelihood that the assessment method will produce stable results under standard conditions.

Validity. To be considered valid, a universal screening tool must measure what it is designed to measure. Two types of screening instruments are available to educators: direct and indirect measures. Direct measures specifically assess targeted student performance outcomes. For example, a valid direct measure can be a final test. The test is a direct measure if it requires students to specifically demonstrate knowledge required to pass the course. An example of a valid indirect measure is an office discipline referral, which does not directly measure student behavior but rather is a measure of the teacher’s behavior: sending a student to the office. As an indirect measure, an office discipline referral is a valid indicator because it correlates closely to student behavior. As such referrals are tracked in most schools, they perform well as a surrogate for a direct measure of student behavior.

Practicality. Effective screening instruments must strive to be concise and straightforward, and require a minimum of the teacher’s time to administer. Screenings that can accurately and quickly identify students who are lagging behind peers are essential when the goal is for teachers to minimize time spent on assessment and maximize time available for instruction (Hall, 2007). Screening measures should be simple enough to be implemented by the average teacher and within normal classroom routines (Jenkins, 2003). Screening measures that violate these principles risk being underused and eventually being discarded because they make the job of assessment too burdensome.

Data-Based Decision Making and Problem Solving 

Teachers make as many as a thousand decisions in the course of a day, for example, developing and adapting lessons, figuring out how to support struggling readers, and dealing with students who have behavioral challenges (Jackson, 1990). Data-based decision making is a way for education stakeholders to systematically use empirical evidence to make informed decisions about education interventions (policies, practices, and programs). In recent years, however, the evidence-based practice (EBP) movement has raised questions about the effectiveness those decisions. As a paradigm for making decisions that yield the greatest likelihood of producing positive results, EBP (defined as a process for integrating the best available evidence, professional judgment, and stakeholder values and context to increase the probability that solutions work) has been widely embraced in education (Marsh, Pane, & Hamilton, 2006).

Evidence-based decision making is preferable to opinion-based decision making because choices supported by facts and sound analysis are likely to produce superior results than those made on the basis of intuition, conventional wisdom, or anecdotal evidence (Detrich, Slocum, & Spencer, 2013). Opinion-based decision making constructed on personal likes and dislikes, beliefs, and emotion are likely to produce unpredictable results and often lead to negative outcomes for those the decisions are supposed to benefit (Cook, Tankersley, & Landrum, 2013). Given that the consequences for making poor choices in education can have significant and long-lasting impacts on society, constructing a decision-making framework on a foundation that relies on objective evidence, which predictably increases positive outcomes for students, is imperative.

  EBP 3 prong

Figure 2. The three prongs of the evidence-based problem-solving model.

Many situations in education provide relatively little, if any, strong evidence to guide decision makers and yet decisions are required. Frequently, the information is very weak, but at other times it is so convincing that reaching agreement to proceed poses no challenge. On most occasions, the evidence falls somewhere in between. The consequence is that educators often must make informed decisions based on partial or imperfect evidence. When working in a real classroom with real children, educators do not have the luxury to wait for thoroughly vetted studies to be made available. Good teaching requires making the best use of the available data as well as the teacher’s own professional experience to operate a classroom proficiently. This necessitates recognizing professional judgment as a key component of effective data-based decision making, despite its limitations. Professional judgment is constrained by the best available evidence and integrated with stakeholder values and the context in which the educator is working. Ultimately, the most important part of the process is ongoing progress monitoring to ensure that executed decisions are producing the desired results and to identify when to make timely adjustments to meet students’ needs.

 Twyman Continua of Evidence

Figure 3. Two critical features are considered in assigning the level of confidence that educators place on practices when selecting education interventions: quantity of evidence and quality of evidence. The higher a practice is on the quantity and quality scales, the greater confidence practitioners have that it will produce reliable results.

The concept of best available evidence suggests that evidence falls along a continuum from very strong evidence at one end to very weak evidence at the other end. In an evidence-based model, results of research are interpreted on continua of evidence to determine if the conclusions exceed the threshold required for making smart choices. The continuum offers a means to evaluate two fundamental factors that reflect the value of evidence for making critical decisions: the quantity of the evidence and the quality of the evidence. 

Quantity of Evidence. One variable at play when making effective data-based decisions is the quantity of evidence. A single study, regardless of its quality, does not offer conclusive evidence of the effectiveness of a practice, and thus it is essential to have multiple studies that examine the same phenomenon. Educators gain confidence by replicating findings through multiple studies conducted by independent researchers over time to show that results were not a fluke or due to error.  A single study is found at the lower end of the continuum of evidence. As studies are replicated, certainty grows. Replication leads to meta-analysis, the systematic analysis of multiple studies, found at the upper end of the continuum of evidence.

Quality of Evidence. When examining evidence supporting a particular practice, educators are interested in determining the quality, or strength, of the evidence as measured by internal validity (the degree to which the obtained results are a function of the intervention rather than some other variable). The more rigorous the experimental control, the stronger the internal validity (Cronbach & Meehl, 1955). Before choosing a practice, a practitioner must have confidence that the research supporting that practice is of sufficient quality to reasonably assume it will reliably produce the predicted effect. Educators need to know how likely it is that a practice will be worth the time and effort needed to implement it. The quality of evidence begins with non-experimental methods such as personal observations, rises with higher degrees of rigor, and culminates in the gold standard of research designs, the randomized controlled trial. 

Challenges to Data-Based Decision Making

The broad adoption of the EBP model of data-based decision making by school systems in the early 21st century set high expectations. It seemed reasonable that with the implementation of best practices informed by research, educators would make great strides observable as improvements in student performance. However, progress has been lackluster, as test scores remain stubbornly flat (NCES, 2015). Such discouraging results pose these challenging questions: Is there something fundamentally wrong with the EBP model of data-based decision making? What accounts for the lack of progress?

The vexing problems facing most school systems consist of many components and are convoluted and frequently confounding. Implementing EBP requires the cooperation and commitment of staff at all levels of a school system. Interventions are not executed in isolation. They appear in the context of an existing system that must be acknowledged. Any new evidence-based practice must acknowledge and address a multitude of staff concerns including consistency with the school’s philosophy of education and current practices, and being achievable with available resources. The evidence-based practice must be capable of mitigating forces that are inevitably present and actively resist change. Unfortunately, all too often new practices are introduced without laying the necessary groundwork for implementing and sustaining the changes.

Perplexing and challenging problems like this have been called “wicked problems.” A wicked problem is a social or cultural problem that is difficult to solve, as it comprises a labyrinth of entangled factors that influence each other (Rittel & Webber, 1973). Implementing an evidence-based practice happens in the real world, where those charged with implementation must work with incomplete or contradictory data, rapidly changing boundaries and requirements, logistical impediments that arise in training large numbers of people, objections from significant segments of the workforce invested in maintaining the status quo, the economic cost of implementing solutions, and interconnected systems impacted by change. Acquiring and sustaining the school’s commitment to implement interventions over many years pose additional challenges. Wicked problems rarely have simple solutions and are highly susceptible to generating unintended consequence.

On their own, evidence-based practices aren’t enough to solve wicked problems. Without the development and nourishment of supporting systems, evidence-based practices are as likely to fail as non-evidence-based practices (Farley et al., 2009). Once a practice with a strong research base is introduced, itis best sustained when the practice is embedded and becomes an integral part of a systemwide endeavor. This type of change involves arranging key contingencies that reinforce and maintain critical implementation factors. They include gaining the buy-in and commitment of staff before implementation, eliminating irrelevant or ineffectual practices to lighten the workload of staff, clarifying expectations for personnel, designing and applying effective training methods, and adopting systematic and regular performance monitoring to ensure treatment integrity and desired outcomes (Fixsen, Blase, Horner, & Sugai, 2009: Fixsen, Blase, Naoom, & Wallace, 2009). The adoption of systematic and regular performance monitoring, which requires many of the same efforts needed to implement the new practice, could be considered an innovation in its own right.

The best way to tackle the challenges of implementation is with a framework that acts as the foundation for unifying and supporting complementary practices that promote a common vision and mission (Gresham, 2007). MTSS provides administrators and teachers with a universal platform to effectively and efficiently actualize the six stages of implementation identified in implementation science: exploration and adoption, program installation, initial implementation, full operation, innovation, and sustainability (Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, & Friedman, 2005). By embracing this model, schools can more effectively and efficiently communicate, align, and integrate interventions that will work and last. MTSS provides strategies for overcoming obstacles and issues triggered when implementing change in schools. The MTSS framework accommodates key strategies to more productively manage implementation of an evidence-based practice: adopting interventions that directly target key school and student goals and objectives, selecting interventions compatible with student and staff values, ensuring that staff are adequately trained to execute the practice, choosing a practice that is a good fit for the school’s culture and does not conflict with existing practices, providing clear and objective protocols and procedures needed to take the practice to scale, ensuring systems and resources are available that promote treatment integrity, and establishing long-range plans for sustaining the practice (Fixsen et al., 2005).

For MTSS to produce exemplary outcomes requires a coordinated effort across a school. It is not sufficient to have a few of the school staff committed to the new practice. Effective leadership must create and nurture the right organizational climate if it is to establish common values, a common vision, and a common language that are embraced and broadly supported by a significant majority of school personnel. Positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS) has enshrined this approach into its policies by mandating buy-in from 80% or more of the staff before agreeing to enter a school (Turnbull, et al., 2002). Relying on a single champion often leads to failure when staff actively resist the change. Being overly dependent on one or just a few individuals also creates an unstable environment in which efforts can easily be undone as a consequence of the high turnover rate in school systems (Robinson, Lloyd, & Rowe, 2008). The potential for such problems suggests the need to rethink how initiatives are managed and led. The path forward is to adopt approaches that involve multiple levels of the school system (superintendents, principals, teachers, and parents) and to build redundancy into the system with a leadership model of support such as distributed leadership. Leadership vacuums created by high staff turnover can be emolliated by a shift away from the autocratic leadership, or heroic leadership, model (heavily reliant on a single individual) toward an approach that shares and delegates responsibilities, activities, and functions of leadership across the workforce (Marturano & Gosling, 2008). MTSS provides the necessary structure for increasing staff engagement and spreading out leadership.

It is common for organizations to shortchange the implementation process and underestimate its importance. Successful implementation takes time. All new initiatives should be considered works in progress, and full implementation should only be considered achieved when the practice becomes routine and the staff describes it as a part of the school’s culture. Full implementation takes up to 5 years. This can be problematic considering that the average life of a school reform initiative in the United States is 18 to 48 months (Latham, 1988). Further confounding this picture is research that finds initiatives produce small effects (on average, 0.25) until the fifth year, with the real benefits appearing by the seventh year and beyond (Borman, Hewes, Overman, & Brown, 2003). MTSS provides the organizational structure essential for sustaining practices so they can reach maturity and produce maximum effects. The National Implementation Network (NIRN) provides educators with an array of resources to support effective implementation. The NIRN hexagon tool is an example of a planning instrument designed to assist in selecting the best practices for a particular school during the exploration stage of implementation.

 Implementation Hexagon

Figure 4. The National Implementation Network hexagon tool is a data-based decision-making instrument for negotiating the complexity of elements that must be addressed to effectively solve problems in education.

Performance Feedback and Progress Monitoring

Feedback has long been touted as a useful method for improving performance in sports and business, and it is difficult to overstate the important role it plays in MTSS in education. Feedback enables students to understand what is being taught and gives them clear guidance on how to improve their performance. Classroom teachers depend heavily on both formal and informal feedback as a teaching technique each day. Research has found that the effective use of feedback is more consistently correlated with student achievement than all other teaching practices, regardless of student age, socioeconomic status, or race (Bellon, Bellon, & Blank, 1991).

Progress monitoring (also known as formative assessment, ongoing assessment, and rapid assessment) is at the core of feedback and a foundation practice of MTSS. It is among the most powerful means for schools to measure performance so that staff can receive frequent and ongoing feedback on the effects of interventions. Effective progress monitoring, which includes universal screening, makes it possible for educators to know if students are learning, progressing toward agreed-upon outcomes, and benefiting from the school’s curriculum and teachers’ instructional methods. Progress monitoring is vital in ensuring not only that evidence-based practices are implemented as designed, but that treatment integrity is maintained (Hallfors & Godette, 2002).

MTSS is firmly rooted in the tradition of monitoring student performance, but monitoring only student performance is not sufficient. Effective MTSS monitors the progress of a range of systems that must be in place and functioning as designed if student achievement is to be maximized. Research on continuous improvement recognizes frequent monitoring at multiple levels of education services (Rummler & Brache, 1990). These include formative assessment of student performance; instruction delivery and treatment integrity; scrutiny of support systems to ensure the availability of resources; and data tracking of key indicators (input, process, and outcomes) (Wayman, Midgley, & Stringfield, 2006).

Student Progress Monitoring

Fuch's Formative Assessment 

Figure 5. Fuchs and Fuchs (1986) meta-analysis of the effects of progress monitoring on the achievement of students with special needs established an effect size of 0.90.

Although summative assessment, an appraisal of learning at the end of an instructional unit or at a specific point in time, is an important tool for monitoring the overall effectiveness of a school or classroom, it is no substitute for progress monitoring. Summative assessment occurs only once or twice a year whereas progress monitoring is frequent and ongoing, beginning with universal screening and proceeding with regular assessments throughout the school year.

Progress monitoring provides essential data for teachers to identify which students are potentially at risk of falling behind standards. This information is necessary to maximize the educational experience for all students and not just those who are struggling. It provides teachers with insight into how and when to improve instructional strategies and curriculum so that vast majority of students, whether high or low performers, succeed academically. Without progress monitoring, teachers and administrators operate in the dark. They are like drivers asked to wear blindfolds—they don’t know where they are going and have no knowledge of where they have been. Progress monitoring offers an effective alternative to driving blind by providing both teachers and students with objective and timely information about performance with respect to specific academic goals. It also offers insight on how to make adjustments to overcome obstacles during the year.

In the absence of systematic progress monitoring, high-performing students most often get by but are not challenged to excel, and low-performing students are consigned to unremitting failure and given no motivation to be engaged. Data on the national level reveal decades of flat student achievement and large numbers of students failing to attain acceptable levels of proficiency, suggesting the need for frequent progress monitoring in addition to summative assessments (NAEP, 2015; OECD, 2017).

Research supports the systematic implementation of progress monitoring as a potent approach to improving student outcomes. A meta-analysis conducted by Fuchs and Fuchs (1986) established an effect size of 0.26 for the impact of progress monitoring (formative assessment) on student achievement of special needs students compared with similar students whose progress was not monitored on a regular basis. The study authors further found the impact of monitoring student progress was significantly enhanced when the data were collected at least weekly and teachers interacted with that data by graphing and then analyzing it using set rules, a procedure that increased the overall effect size to 0.90.

It is notable that simply collecting student performance data had a statistically significant impact on student achievement. Collecting the data without any other intervention produced a 0.26 effect size. This result indicates that the regular act of monitoring performance triggers a change in how teachers are teaching, which in turn significantly impacts student achievement. When the teachers were required to interact with the data through graphing, the impact on student achievement was enhanced dramatically. Graphing increased the effect size to 0.70. Finally, analyzing the data according to set rules boosted the effect size to 0.90. Rules for evaluating the data required the practitioners to analyze student performance at regular intervals and to introduce changes to the instructional program as the data indicated.

Despite these impressive effects, it is important to examine obstacles that must be addressed if teachers are to effectively utilize ongoing progress monitoring consistently. Objections to progress monitoring include the following: It requires too much effort and time, it takes time away from instruction, creating assessments are a challenge, and interpreting the data is difficult (Bennett, 2011). The solution to most of these objections can be found in implementation science. Effective implementation of a progress monitoring system relies on execution: planning; obtaining buy-in (listening to concerns and developing accommodations); involving staff in implementing the system; providing effective training (including coaching); offering ongoing support; using the data; and monitoring implementation. Packages such as Curriculum-Based Measurement, DIBELS, and AIMSweb are good examples of progress monitoring packages available to assist teachers (Hintze, and Silberglitt, 2005; Riedel, 2007; Wayman, Wallace, Wiley, Tichá, & Espin, 2007). 

Performance feedback and progress monitoring can be summarized as follows:

Progress monitoring offers critical performance information for teachers as well as students.  Performance feedback is not for grading or formal teacher evaluation, but is used for continuous improvement. Progress monitoring is designed to guide teachers and students in trying new approaches when progress is impeded. Progress monitoring is a guidepost for a teacher to ascertain the level of support that a student needs.

System Progress Monitoring

As is the case with any systemwide intervention, MTSS requires that the intervention be regularly monitored. Research suggests that fidelity begins to degrade shortly after training. The key to avoiding this drift is through ongoing monitoring of essential components of the system along with the use of critical outcome measures.

School systems are most often judged by performance outcomes: graduation rates, dropout rates, and standardized test scores. The decades between 1960 and 1980 saw the performance of American students plateau at levels that increasingly troubled parents, educators, and education policy makers. By 1981, the secretary of education, Terrel Bell, empowered the National Commission on Excellence in Education to review the performance of American schools. The commission produced the report A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Education Reform. Its five recommendations urged (a) the teaching of “new basics” consisting of 4 years of English, 3 years of mathematics, 3 years of science, 3 years of social studies, and half a year of computer science in high school; (b) the adoption of more rigorous and measurable standards; (c) extending the school year to make more time for learning the new basics; (d) using enhanced preparation and professionalization to improve teaching; and (e) adding accountability to education (Gardner, 1983).

Attempts to implement these reforms over the next 20 years produced few tangible results. As a result, in 2001, with bipartisan support, No Child Left Behind became law, increasing pressure on schools to improve student performance (NCLB, 2002). NCLB’s remedy was to establish an infrastructure to hold schools and teachers accountable for key outcome measures. The law was designed to remediate decades of inadequate student standardized test scores by promoting highly qualified teachers, making access to funding contingent on raising standardized test scores, and closing chronically failing schools. As a part of the accountability requirements, schools that persistently underperformed had to follow a set of prescribed improvement actions. School improvement was measured through an adequate yearly progress (AYP) reporting system, and schools were mandated to reach AYP proficiency in reading and mathematics by 2014. Despite the massive resources committed to NCLB, overall test scores showed only small gains and failing schools continued to flounder. By 2014, it became clear that NCLB was not producing the desired results. Instead of all schools achieving proficiency as mandated, the majority of schools in the nation were failing to meet expectations. Ultimately, the remedy was to avoid the embarrassment of a systemwide failure by lowering standards and granting waivers to schools (U.S. Department of Education, 2017).

This resounding failure provokes the question, why didn’t more than 30 years of effort to hold schools accountable for key outcome measures produce so little for the billions of dollars invested? One answer to this question can be found in how organizations in other fields have been successful in producing desired results. An examination of thriving health care and commercial organizations reveals that they not only focus on outcomes, but also place a premium on monitoring processes essential to producing desired outcomes. Achieving positive results alone is insufficient if the those results are to be repeatable. Consistent and sustainable performance thrives when the process is effectively managed (i.e., identifying the best practices, training staff in those practices, and then monitoring the staff to be sure they are implementing the practices as designed).

Pioneers in the field of performance management such as William Deming, Tom Gilbert, and Geary Rummler laid down the fundamental tenets of a continuous improvement process that helped propel Japanese and American industries after the Second World War. Their systems approach placed great value on managing and monitoring both outcomes and processes, which needed to work in tandem to produce exemplary results (Deming, 1966; Gilbert, 1978). It is not difficult to see how that approach can be employed in schools. If key educational goals are to be achieved, all school systems must be viewed as interlocking and supporting one another. Holding principals and teachers accountable won’t lead to the desired outcomes unless evidence-based instructional practices are adopted across the school, teachers are trained to use the practices in the classroom, and the teachers are monitored to ensure that treatment integrity is maintained. Placing pressure on school personnel without making sure that the best processes are in place results in frustration and staff escaping the situation (primarily by quitting). Effective systems focus attention on process: selection of best practices, training in the skills known to produce the best results, and creation of feedback loops to keep everyone apprised of how they are doing with respect to the agreed-upon outcomes. As important as it is to monitor student outcomes, for the best results it is equally necessary to sample the process (Gilbert, 1978).

Often, schools do not look at the totality of their organization as an integrated unit that must work together to ensure that all students succeed. Platitudes such as No Child Left Behind and Every Student Succeeds are doomed to failure if outcomes and processes are not attended to and monitored regularly.   

 Gilbert and

Figure 6. Continuous improvement model.

A simplified diagram (Figure 6) provides an overview of the four components of a continuous improvement model for education.

Input: This includes an evidence-based curriculum directly tied to outcomes, teacher training on how to implement the curriculum, resources made available to implement the curriculum, and student assessments before instruction to ensure that instruction is tailored to each student’s level of competency. Performance: Teachers provide sufficient instruction in accordance with MTSS. Outcomes: Objective outcomes are identified. Feedback loop: All three areas (input, performance, and outcomes) must be monitored. They are measured and sampled on a systematic basis to ensure that the system is performing as designed and that personnel receive feedback in a timely manner so they have the opportunity to adapt and make improvements.

Summary

The multitiered system of support provides a framework for schools to organize and manage education services. The goal of MTSS is more effective coordination and alignment of a school’s services to maximize student achievement against standards. MTSS accomplishes this by focusing on the use of explicit instruction practices: well-designed core instruction, differentiated instruction, and individualized interventions as needed. MTSS is not a practice but rather a framework designed to apportion and support an array of practices (universal screening, data-based decision making and problem solving, performance feedback and progress monitoring, and system progress monitoring) to solve many education outcomes. Borrowed from the public health model, MTSS was conceptualized to remedy failings in the discrepancy that led to unacceptable delays in delivering interventions. MTSS allocates and provides services in a timely and cost-effective manner. At its heart is a three-tiered system of support: Tier 1 provides universal support; tier 2, heightened support; and tier 3, intensive support. Tiers 2 and 3 are designed to capture students who are falling behind despite universal support. MTSS is based on strong evidence that early identification of student performance and proper instruction are highly effective and essential if schools are to better educate students. MTSS relies on three essential strategies: (a) monitoring performance through universal screening, ongoing student progress monitoring, and frequent monitoring of key MTSS systems; (b) employing data-based decision making; and (c) using the best available evidence when selecting interventions. Research reveals that combining practices and strategies within a single framework is a powerful method for achieving efficient and effective results for students (Chard, Harn, & Sugai, 2008). 

Citations

Bellon, J. J., Bellon, E. C., & Blank, M. A. (1991). Teaching from a research knowledge base: A development and renewal process (Facsimile ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 

Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5–25.

Borman, G. D., Hewes, G. M., Overman, L. T., & Brown, S. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 73(2), 125–230.

Celio, M. B., & Harvey, J. (2005). Buried treasure: Developing a management guide from mountains of school data. Seattle, WA: University of Washington, Center on Reinventing Public Education.

Chard, D. J., Harn, B. A., Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., Simmons, D. C., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2008). Core features of multi-tiered systems of reading and behavioral support. In C. R. Greenwood, T. R. Kratochwill, & M. Clemens (Eds.), Schoolwide prevention models: Lessons learned in elementary schools (pp. 31–58). New York, NY: Guildford Press.

Chorpita, B. F., Becker, K. D., & Daleiden, E. L.. (2007). Understanding the common elements of evidence-based practice: Misconceptions and clinical examples. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry46(5), 647–652.

Cook, B. G., Tankersley, M., & Landrum, T. J. (Eds.). (2013). Evidence-based practices in learning and behavioral disabilities: The search for effective instruction (Vol. 26). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.

Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological bulletin, 52(4), 281–302.

Deming, W. E. (1966). Some theory of sampling. North Chelmsford, MA: Courier Corporation.

Detrich, R., Slocum, T. A., & Spencer, T. D. (2013). Evidence-based education and best available evidence: Decision-making under conditions of uncertainty. In B. G. Cook, M. Tankersley, & T. J. Landrum (Eds.), Evidence-based practices in learning and behavioral disabilities: The search for effective instruction (Vol. 26, pp. 21–44.). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing. 

Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (EHA), Pub. L. No. 94-142, 89 Stat. 773 (1975). (Codified as amended at 20 U.S.C. §§1400–1461, 1982).

Eldevik, S., Hastings, R. P., Hughes, J. C., Jahr, E., Eikeseth, S., & Cross, S. (2009). Meta-analysis of early intensive behavioral intervention for children with autism. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 38(3), 439–450.

Farley, A. J., Feaster, D., Schapmire, T. J., D’Ambrosio, J. G., Bruce, L. E., Oak, C. S., & Sar, B. K. (2009). The challenges of implementing evidence based practice: Ethical considerations in practice, education, policy, and research. Social Work and Society, 7(2), 246–259.

Fixsen, D. L., Blase, K. A., Horner, R., & Sugai, G. (2009). Readiness for change. Chapel Hill, NC: FPG Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Fixsen, D. L., Blase, K. A., Naoom, S. F., & Wallace, F. (2009). Core implementation components. Research on Social Work Practice, 19, 531­–540.

Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: a synthesis of the literature (FMHI Publication #231). Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, National Implementation Research Network.

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1986). Effects of systematic formative evaluation: A meta-analysis. Exceptional children, 53(3), 199–208.

Fuchs, D. & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly 41(1), 93–99.

Gardner, D. P. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. An open letter to the American people. A report to the nation and the secretary of education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Gilbert, T. F. (1978). Human competence: Engineering worthy performance. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Gresham, F. (August, 2001). Responsiveness to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. Executive summary. Paper presented at the 2001 Learning Disabilities Summit: Building a Foundation for the Future, Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED458755.pdf

Gresham, F. M. (2002). Responsiveness to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. In R. Bradley, L. Danielson, & D. P. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 467–519). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Gresham, F. (2007). Evolution of the response-to-intervention concept: Empirical foundations and recent developments. In S. B. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 10–24). New York, NY: Springer.

Grove, R. D., & Hetzel, A. M. (1968). Vital statistics rates in the United States, 1940-1960 (Public Health Services Publication 1677). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

Hall, S. L. (Ed.). (2007). Implementing response to intervention: A principal's guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Hallfors, D., & Godette, D. (2002). Will the “principles of effectiveness” improve prevention practice? Early findings from a diffusion study. Health Education Research, 17(4), 461–470.

Harlacher J., Sakelaris T., Kattelman N. (2014) Practitioner’s guide to curriculum-based evaluation in reading. New York, NY: Springer.

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.

Hintze, J. M., & Silberglitt, B. (2005). A longitudinal examination of the diagnostic accuracy and predictive validity of R-CBM and high-stakes testing. School Psychology Review, 34(3), 372–386.

Horn, W. F., & Packard, T. (1985). Early identification of learning problems: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(5), 597–607.

Hoyert, D. L., Kochanek, K. D., & Murphy, S. L. (1999). Deaths: final data for 1997. Hyattsville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, CDC, National Center for Health Statistics.

Jackson, P. W. (1990). Life in classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Jenkins, J. R. (2003, December). Candidate measures for screening at-risk students. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities (NRCLD) Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO. Retrieved from http://www.nrcld.org/symposium2003/jenkins/index. html.

Jenkins, J. R., Hudson, R. F., & Johnson, E. S. (2007). Screening for at-risk readers in a response to intervention framework. School Psychology Review, 36(4), 582–600. 

Latham, G. I. (1988). The birth and death cycles of educational innovations. Principal, 68(1), 41–44.

Marsh, J. A., Pane, J. F., & Hamilton, L. S. (2006). Making sense of data-driven decision making in education: Evidence from recent RAND research. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.

Marturano, A., & Gosling J. (Eds.). (2008). Leadership: The key concepts. London, UK: Routledge.

Muñoz, R. F., Mrazek, P. J., & Haggerty, R. J. (1996). Institute of Medicine report on prevention of mental disorders: Summary and commentary. American Psychologist, 51(11), 1116–1122.

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2015). NAEP Data Explorer. [Data file]. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nde/)

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115, Stat. 1425. (2002).

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2017). Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) data. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/

Riedel, B. W. (2007). The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban first‐grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(4), 546–567.

Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.

Robinson, V. M., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674.

Rummler, G. A., & Brache, A. P. (1990). Improving performance: How to manage the white space on the organization chart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Stoiber K. C., & Gettinger M. (2016) Multi-tiered systems of support and evidence-based practices. In S. B. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 121–141). New York, NY: Springer.

Sugai, G. (2013). Role of Leadership and culture in PBIS Implementation [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://www.pbis.org/common/cms/files/pbisresources/PBIS_Implementation_leadership_braiding_apr_11_2013_HAND.pdf

Turnbull, A., Bohanon, H., Griggs, P., Wickham, D., Sailor, W., Freeman, R., ... & Warren, J. (2002). A blueprint for schoolwide positive behavior support: Implementation of three components. Exceptional Children, 68(3), 377–402.

U.S. Department of Education (2017). States granted waivers from No Child Left Behind allowed to reapply for renewal for 2014 and 2015 school years. Retrieved from https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/states-granted-waivers-no-child-left-behind-allowed-reapply-renewal-2014-and-2015-school-years

Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice18(3), 137–146.

Wayman, J. C., Midgley, S., & Stringfield, S. (2006). Leadership for data-based decision-making: Collaborative educator teams. In A. Danzig, K. Borman, B. Jones, & B. Wright (Eds.), Learner centered leadership: Research, policy, and practice, (pp. 189–206). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Wayman, M., Wallace, T., Wiley, H. I., Tichá, R., & Espin, C. A. (2007). Literature synthesis on curriculum-based measurement in reading. Journal of Special Education, 41(2), 85–120.

Wing Institute. (2017). 2007 Wing presentation Janet Twyman [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from https://www.winginstitute.org/2007-Wing-Presentation-Janet-Twyman.

Yeh, S. S. (2007). The cost-effectiveness of five policies for improving student achievement. American Journal of Evaluation, 28(4), 416–436.

 

Publications

TITLE
SYNOPSIS
CITATION
Multitiered System of Support

This overview describe Multitiered system of support (MTSS) as a conceptual framework for organizing service delivery to students. 

Teacher Coaching Overview

The purpose of this overview is to provide information about teacher coaching as it is used in schools, the research that examines this practice as a method of teacher professional development, and its impact on student outcomes.

 

Cleaver, S., Detrich, R. & States, J. (2018). Overview of Teacher Evaluation. Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute. https://www.winginstitute.org/teacher-evaluation-teacher-coaching.

 

Taking Response to Intervention to Scale: Developing and Implementing a Quality Response-to-Intervention Process

This paper presents RtI as a continuous evaluation cycle: problem identification, problem analysis, goal setting, plans implementation and plan evaluation.

Daly, III, E. J., Kupzyk, S., Bossard, M., Street, J., & Dymacel, R. (2008). Taking Response to Intervention to Scale: Developing and Implementing a Quality Response-to-Intervention Process. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 9(2), 102-127.

Response to intervention: What it is and what it is not

Response to Intervention is a framework for determining the intensity of services that are necessary for a student to benefit from instruction. This paper addresses some of the misconceptions about RtI.

Detrich, R., States, J., & Keyworth, R. (2008). Response to Intervention: What it Is and What it Is Not. Journal of Evidence-based Practices for Schools, 9(2), 60-83.

Conceptual and empirical issues related to developing a response-to-intervention framework

This paper examines five dimensions when implementing RtI: the tier model, identification of “at risk students”, preventative treatment, progress monitoring, and strategies for nonresponders.

Hintze, J. M. (2008). Conceptual and empirical issues related to developing a response-to-intervention framework. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools. Retrieved from http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=17426155176752854167&hl=en&inst=569367360547434339&oi=scholarr

Establishing and sustaining statewide positive behavior supports implementation: A description of Maryland’s model

This paper examines the evidence-based education issues that come into play with the implementation of a Positive Behavior Support school culture.

Lewis-Palmer, T., & Barrett, S. (2007). Establishing and sustaining statewide positive behavior supports implementation: A description of Maryland’s model. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 8(1), 45-61.

Framework for Improving Education Outcomes

Multitiered system of support (MTSS) is a framework for organizing service delivery. At the core of MTSS is the adoption and implementation of a continuum of evidence-based interventions that result in improved academic and behavioral outcomes for all students. MTSS is a data-based decision making approach based on the frequent screening of progress for all students and intervention for students who are not making adequate progress.

 

States, J., Detrich, R., and Keyworth, R. (2017). Multitiered System of Support Overview. Oakland, Ca. The Wing Institute.

Culture, Context, and Connections: Behavior Analytic Considerations for Enhancing School Climate"

This paper examines the issue of school culture from the context of helping schools adopt and implement positive behavior interventions.

Sugai, G. (2014). Culture, Context, and Connections: Behavior Analytic Considerations for Enhancing School Climate" Retrieved from ../../uploads/docs/2014WingSummitGS.pdf.

School-wide positive behavior support: Establishing a continuum of evidence based practices

This paper provides an overview of "lessons learned" from efforts to sustain and scale-up a school-wide continuum of evidence-based behavioral practices and systems in schools.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2010). School-wide positive behavior support: Establishing a continuum of evidence based practices. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 11(1), 62-83.

School-wide positive behavior support: Establishing a continuum of evidence-based practices

The purpose of this article is to describe how effective practices are incorporated into an approach termed schoolwide positive behavior supports (SWPBS)

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2010). School-wide positive behavior support: Establishing a continuum of evidence based practices. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools11(1), 62-83.

 

Presentations

TITLE
SYNOPSIS
CITATION
Developing and Implementing a Quality RtI Process

This paper presents RtI as a continuous evaluation cycle: problem identification, problem analysis, goal setting, plans implementation and plan evaluation.

Daly, E, III. (2007). Developing and Implementing a Quality RtI Process [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2007-wing-presentation-john-hintze.

Evaluating Student Response to Instruction Using a 3 Tier RtI Progress Monitoring System

This paper examines five dimensions when implementing RtI: the tier model, identification of “at risk students”, preventative treatment, progress monitoring, and strategies for nonresponders.

Hintze, J. (2007). Evaluating Student Response to Instruction Using a 3 Tier RtI Progress Monitoring System [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2007-wing-presentation-john-hintze.

Supporting and Evaluating Broad Scale Implementation of Positive Behavior Support

This paper examines the evidence-based education issues that come into play with the implementation of a Positive Behavior Support school culture.

Lewis, T. (2006). Supporting and Evaluating Broad Scale Implementation of Positive Behavior Support [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2006-wing-presentation-teri-lewis-palmer.

Sustainability and Scaling and the Failure of the Friday Inservice Day

This paper provides an overview of "lessons learned" from efforts to sustain and scale-up a school-wide continuum of evidence-based behavioral practices and systems in schools.

Sugai, G. (2008). Sustainability and Scaling and the Failure of the Friday Inservice Day [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2008-wing-presentation-george-sugai.

Culture, Context, and Connections: Behavior Analytic Considerations for Enhancing School Climate

This paper examines the issue of school culture from the context of helping schools adopt and implement positive behavior interventions.

Sugai, G. (2014). Culture, Context, and Connections: Behavior Analytic Considerations for Enhancing School Climate" [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2014-wing-presentation-george-sugai.

From the Boutique to the Mainstream: The Role of Behavior Analysis in Education Reform
Much of the work in education by behavior analysts could be characterized as boutique programs. If we are to reform education we must be able to take our interventions to scale.
Detrich, R. (2010). From the Boutique to the Mainstream: The Role of Behavior Analysis in Education Reform [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2010-midaba-presentation-ronnie-detrich.
Installing Tier 2/3 Behavior Supports in Schools: The Principal's Role
This paper describes the development, content and delivery of a professional development course for Principals regarding their role in multi-tiered systems of school-wide positive behavior supports.
Eber, L. (2015). Installing Tier 2/3 Behavior Supports in Schools: The Principal's Role [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2015-wing-presentation-lucille-eber.

 

Student Research

TITLE
SYNOPSIS
CITATION
Supporting teachers’ professional development: Investigating the impact of a targeted intervention on teacher’ presentation of opportunities to respond.
This study evaluated a multi-tiered system of support for teachers to increase the rate of teacher presented opportunities to respond.
MacSuga-Gage, A. S. (2012). Supporting teachers’ professional development: Investigating the impact of a targeted intervention on teacher’ presentation of opportunities to respond. Retrieved from student-research-2012.
Effects of behavioral skills training and instruction coaching on teachers’ implementation of empirically supported procedures.
This study evaluated the effects of behavioral skills training and coaching to help new teachers implemented empirically supported practices. Also, evaluated was the quality of implementation (treatment integrity) as function of coaching.
Sawyer, M. (2013). Effects of behavioral skills training and instruction coaching on teachers’ implementation of empirically supported procedures. Retrieved from student-research-2013.
A multilevel investigation of teacher instructional practices and the use of the responsive classroom curriculum.
The Responsive Classroom is a specific curriculum designed to improve social skills of students and reduce problem behavior. This study evaluated the impact across several schools and classrooms.
Solomon, B. Klein, S., Marcotte, & Hintze, J. (2009). A multilevel investigation of teacher instructional practices and the use of the responsive classroom curriculum. Retrieved from student-research-2009-b.
TITLE
SYNOPSIS
CITATION
Multitiered System of Support

This overview describe Multitiered system of support (MTSS) as a conceptual framework for organizing service delivery to students. 

Call for Action to Prevent Gun Violence in the United States of America Interdisciplinary Group on Preventing School and Community Violence

In response to the continuing gun violence in American schools, an interdisciplinary group of 19 scholars are proposing an eight-point plan to prevent future tragedies that have become common place in the nation. This one-page position statement proposes a public health approach to protecting children as well as adults from gun violence involves three levels of prevention: (1) universal approaches promoting safety and well-being for everyone; (2) practices for reducing risk and promoting protective factors for persons experiencing difficulties; and (3) interventions for individuals where violence is present or appears imminent.

Astor, R. et al. (2018). Call for Action to Prevent Gun Violence in the United States of America. University of Virginia.

 

Technical Adequacy for Response to Intervention Practices

Key points of analysis and recommendations for RTI technical adequacy standards are addressed, and a case study is used to illustrate technical checks. The authors conclude with a discussion of how RTI technical adequacy may be simplified.

Barnett, D. W., Elliott, N., Graden, J., Ihlo, T., Macmann, G., Nantais, M., & Prasse, D. (2006). Technical adequacy for response to intervention practices. Assessment for Effective Intervention32(1), 20-31.

Teaching from a research knowledge base: A development and renewal process

Bellon, J. J., Bellon, E. C., & Blank, M. A. (1992). Teaching from a research knowledge base: A development and renewal process. Merrill.

Formative assessment: A critical review.

Six issues presented in this presentation are (1) The definitional issue (2) The effectiveness issue (3) The domain issue (4) The measurement issue (5) The professional development issue (6) The system issue

Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice18(1), 5-25.

Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis

This study is a meta-analysis of the research on the impact of comprehensive school reform (CSR) on student achievement. The research summarizes the specific effects of 29 widely implemented models.

Borman, G. D., Hewes, G. M., Overman, L. T., & Brown, S. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 73(2), 125-230.

A state-wide partnership to promote safe and supportive schools: The PBIS Maryland initiative

This paper summarizes an approach to prevention partnerships developed over a decade and centered on the three-tiered Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) model.

Bradshaw, C. P., Pas, E. T., Bloom, J., Barrett, S., Hershfeldt, P., Alexander, A., ... & Leaf, P. J. (2012). A state-wide partnership to promote safe and supportive schools: The PBIS Maryland initiative. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research39(4), 225-237.

Buried Treasure: Developing a Management Guide From Mountains of School Data

This report provides a practical “management guide,” for an evidence-based key indicator data decision system for school districts and schools.

Celio, M. B., & Harvey, J. (2005). Buried Treasure: Developing A Management Guide From Mountains of School Data. Center on Reinventing Public Education.

Core Features of Multi-tiered Systems of reading and Behavioral Support

Showcasing evidence-based models for schoolwide prevention of reading and behavior problems, this book is highly informative, practical, and grounded in research.

Chard, D. J., Harn, B. A., Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., Simmons, D. C., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2008). Core features of multi-tiered systems of reading and behavioral support. In C. R. Greenwood, T. R. Kratochwill, & M. Clemens (Eds.), Schoolwide prevention models: Lessons learned in elementary schools (pp. 31–58). New York, NY: Guildford Press.

Understanding the common elements of evidence-based practice:

At this manual level of analysis, practitioners may choose from a variety of specific treatment programs that have demonstrated their efficacy in research trials.

Chorpita, B. F., Becker, K. D., & Daleiden, E. L.. (2007). Understanding the common elements of evidence-based practice: Misconceptions and clinical examples. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry46(5), 647–652.

Using active supervision and precorrection to improve transition behaviors in an elementary school

This study investigates the effect of a school-wide intervention plan, consisting of precorrection and active supervision strategies, on the social behavior of elementary students.

Colvin, G., Sugai, G., Good III, R. H., & Lee, Y. Y. (1997). Using active supervision and precorrection to improve transition behaviors in an elementary school. School Psychology Quarterly, 12(4), 344.

Evidence-based practices in learning and behavioral disabilities: The search for effective instruction

In this 26th volume of Advances in Learning and Behavioral Disabilities we address one of the most important educational reforms of recent years evidence-based practices (EBPs).

Cook, B. G., Tankersley, M., & Landrum, T. J. (Eds.). (2013). Evidence-based practices in learning and behavioral disabilities: The search for effective instruction (Vol. 26). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.

Construct validity in psychological tests.

The present interpretation of construct validity is not “official” and deals with some areas where the Committee would probably not be unanimous. The present writers are solely responsible for this attempt to explain the concept and elaborate its implications.

Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological bulletin52(4), 281–302.

Taking Response to Intervention to Scale: Developing and Implementing a Quality Response-to-Intervention Process

Taking Response to Intervention to Scale: Developing and Implementing a Quality Response-to-Intervention Process

Daly, III, E. J., Kupzyk, S., Bossard, M., Street, J., & Dymacel, R. (2008). Taking Response to Intervention to Scale: Developing and Implementing a Quality Response-to-Intervention Process. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 9(2), 102-127.

Some theory of sampling.

Analysis of the problems, theory, and design of sampling techniques for social scientists, industrial managers, and others who find statistics increasingly important in their work. Only college algebra assumed. Illustrated with dozens of actual large-scale surveys in government and industry. "The 'bible' of sampling statisticians."

Deming, W. E. (1966). Some theory of sampling. North Chelmsford, MA: Courier Corporation.

Meta-analysis of early intensive behavioral intervention for children with autism

The authors concluded that early intensive behavioral intervention was associated with large to moderate improvements in IQ (intelligence quotient) and adaptive behavior in children with autism compared to no intervention or eclectic treatment.

Eldevik, S., Hastings, R. P., Hughes, J. C., Jahr, E., Eikeseth, S., & Cross, S. (2009). Meta-analysis of early intensive behavioral intervention for children with autism. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology38(3), 439-450.

Consideration of Culture and Context in School-Wide Positive Behavior Support A Review of Current Literature

This is a literature review of culture and student behavior. Based on this review, general recommendations are presented for practitioners, personnel preparers, policy makers, and researchers, especially, in the context of implementing SWPBS.

Fallon, L. M., O’Keeffe, B. V., & Sugai, G. (2012). Consideration of Culture and Context in School-Wide Positive Behavior Support A Review of Current Literature. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14(4), 209-219.

The challenges of implementing evidence based practice: Ethical considerations in practice, education, policy, and research.

This paper identified and discussed some of the more pressing challenges and associated ethical dilemmas of implementing EBP in social work and strategies to manage them, in the hopes of affirming that the process of EBP is both feasible and practicable.

Farley, A. (2009). The challenges of implementing evidence based practice: ethical considerations in practice, education, policy, and research. Social Work & Society7(2), 246-259.

Readiness for Change

The purpose of this Brief is to define the variables a state or large district leadership team may wish to consider as they determine if they are “ready” to invest in the scaling-up of innovation in education.

Fixsen, D. L., Blase, K. A., Horner, R., & Sugai, G. (2009). Readiness for Change. Scaling-Up Brief. Number 3. FPG Child Development Institute.

Core Implementation Components

The failure of better science to readily produce better services has led to increasing interest in the science and practice of implementation. The results of recent reviews of implementation literature and best practices are summarized in this article.

Fixsen, D. L., Blase, K. A., Naoom, S. F., & Wallace, F. (2009). Core implementation components. Research on social work practice19(5), 531-540.

Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?

In this article, we explain important features of RTI, why it has been promoted as a substitute for IQ-achievement discrepancy, and what remains to be understood before it may be seen as a valid means of LD identification.

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?. Reading research quarterly41(1), 93-99.

A model for implementing responsiveness to intervention

To implement RTI for prevention and identification, schools must make decisions about six components that constitute the process. The authors recommendation is that schools employ three tiers, with only one tier separating general and special education.

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2007). A model for implementing responsiveness to intervention. Teaching exceptional children39(5), 14-20.

Responsiveness to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. Executive Summary

This executive summary discusses the definition of learning disabilities (LD) and how students are identified as having a learning disability.

Gresham, F. (August, 2001). Responsiveness to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. Executive summary. Paper presented at the 2001 Learning Disabilities Summit: Building a Foundation for the Future, Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED458755.pdf

Responsiveness to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification

This paper discusses the definition of learning disabilities (LD) and how students are identified as having a learning disability.

Gresham, F. M. (2002). Responsiveness to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice467519.

Evolution of the response-to-intervention concept: Empirical foundations and recent developments

The purpose of this chapter is to present the evolution of the response to intervention (RTI) concept and discuss how that concept can be and is being used to provide more effective services to children and youth with both academic and social/behavioral difficulties

Gresham, F. M. (2007). Evolution of the response-to-intervention concept: Empirical foundations and recent developments. In Handbook of response to intervention (pp. 10-24). Springer, Boston, MA.

Implementing response to intervention: A principal's guide.

This principal's guide to implementing Response to Intervention (RTI) for elementary and middle school reading emphasizes the critical role administrators play in ensuring RTI success in their schools. The author makes recommendations for putting the RTI process in motion and helps school leaders:

Hall, S. L. (Ed.). (2007). Implementing response to intervention: A principal's guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Practitioner’s Guide to Curriculum-Based Evaluation in Reading

This book gives researchers and professionals the means to break this frustrating cycle, crafted by authors who have not only been there and done that, but can explain in-depth how to replicate the method

Harlacher J., Sakelaris T., Kattelman N. (2014) Practitioner’s guide to curriculum-based evaluation in reading. New York, NY: Springer.

Conceptual and empirical issues related to developing a response-to-intervention framework

This paper examines five dimensions when implementing RtI: the tier model, identification of “at risk students”, preventative treatment, progress monitoring, and strategies for nonresponders.

Hintze, J. M. (2008). Conceptual and empirical issues related to developing a response-to-intervention framework. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools. Retrieved from http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=17426155176752854167&hl=en&inst=569367360547434339&oi=scholarr

Early identification of learning problems: A meta-analysis

Conducted a meta-analysis of 58 studies (1960–1984) on the early prediction of learning problems that reported correlations between measures administered in kindergarten or 1st-grade and reading achievement later in elementary school.

Horn, W. F., & Packard, T. (1985). Early identification of learning problems: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology77(5), 597.

Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support.

The purposes of this manuscript are to propose core features that may apply to any practice or set of practices that proposes to be evidence-based in relation to School-wide Positive Behavior Support (SWPBS). 

Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptional Children, 42(8), 1.

 

Deaths: Final Data for 1999

This report presents final 1999 data on U.S. deaths and death rates according to demographic and medical characteristics. Trends and patterns in general mortality, life expectancy, and infant and maternal mortality are also described.

Hoyert, D. L., Kochanek, K. D., & Murphy, S. L. (1999). Deaths: final data for 1997. Natl Vital Stat Rep47(19), 1-104.

Restorative justice in Oakland schools. Implementation and impact: An effective strategy to reduce racially disproportionate discipline, suspensions, and improve academic outcomes.

This study examines the impact of The Whole School Restorative Justice Program (WSRJ). WSRJ utilizes a multi-tiered strategy. Tier 1 is regular classroom circles, Tier 2 is repair harm/conflict circles, and Tier 3 includes mediation, family group conferencing, and welcome/re-entry circles to initiate successful re-integration of students being released from juvenile detention centers.The key findings of this report show decreased problem behavior, improved school climate, and improved student achievement. 

Jain, S., Bassey, H., Brown, M. A., & Kalra, P. (2014). Restorative justice in Oakland schools. Implementation and impact: An effective strategy to reduce racially disproportionate discipline, suspensions, and improve academic outcomes. Retrieved from http://www.rjtica.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/OUSD-RJ-Report-full.pdf

Screening for at-risk readers in a response to intervention framework

This article examines universal screening, one component in a response to intervention approach for serving struggling learners.

Jenkins, J. R., Hudson, R. F., & Johnson, E. S. (2007). Screening for At-Risk Readers in a Response to. School Psychology Review36(4), 582-600.

Handbook of Response to Intervention: The Science and Practice of Multi-Tiered Systems of Support

The Second Edition of this essential handbook provides a comprehensive, updated overview of the science that informs best practices for the implementation of response to intervention (RTI) processes within Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) to facilitate the academic success of all students.

Jimerson, S. R., Burns, M. K., & VanDerHeyden, A. M. (Eds.). (2015). Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of multi-tiered systems of support. Springer.

Increasing Teachers’ Use of Behavior-Specific Praise with the Teacher vs. Student Game.

This study examines the impact of a Teacher Versus Student Game, a program that is based upon The Good Behavior Game (GBG). This paper found that the game increased teachers rates of praise; however, the teachers gradually decreased their use of BSP over time.

 

Lastrapes, R. E., Fritz, J. N., and Hasson, R. C., (2019). Increasing Teachers’ Use of Behavior-Specific Praise with the Teacher vs. Student Game. Retrieved from Researchgate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331178227_Increasing_Teachers%27_Use_of_Behavior-Specific_Praise_with_the_Teacher_vs_Student_Game

 

Establishing and sustaining statewide positive behavior supports implementation: A description of Maryland’s model

This paper examines the evidence-based education issues that come into play with the implementation of a Positive Behavior Support school culture.

Lewis-Palmer, T., & Barrett, S. (2007). Establishing and sustaining statewide positive behavior supports implementation: A description of Maryland’s model. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 8(1), 45-61.

Vital statistics rates in the United States, 1940-1960

Sixteenth census of United States: 1940; Vital statistics rates in the United States, 1940-1960

Linder, F. E., & Grove, R. D. (1943). Vital statistics rates in the United States, 1900-1940. US Government Printing Office.

Leadership: The key concepts.

Leadership: The Key Concepts is an indispensable and authoritative guide to the most crucial ideas, concepts and debates surrounding the study and exercise of leadership

Marturano, A., & Gosling, J. (2007). Leadership: The key concepts. Routledge.

Demonstration of Combined Efforts in School-Wide Academic and Behavioral Systems and Incidence of Reading and Behavior Challenges in Early Elementary Grades

This study provides descriptive data on the rates of office discipline referrals and beginning reading skills for students in grades K—3 for one school district that is implementing a three-tier prevention model for both reading and behavior support. 

McIntosh, K., Chard, D. J., Boland, J. B., & Horner, R. H. (2006). Demonstration of combined efforts in school-wide academic and behavioral systems and incidence of reading and behavior challenges in early elementary grades. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions8(3), 146-154.

RTI: A practitioner's guide to implementing response to intervention.

This comprehensive yet accessible reference covers the three tiers of RTI, schoolwide screening, progress monitoring, challenges to implementation, and changes in school structures and individual staff roles.

Mellard, D. F., & Johnson, E. S. (Eds.). (2007). RTI: A practitioner's guide to implementing response to intervention. Corwin Press.

Literature synthesis on curriculum-based measurement in reading

In this article, the authors review the research on curriculum-based measurement (CBM) in reading published since the time of Marston’s 1989 review

Miura Wayman, M., Wallace, T., Wiley, H. I., Tichá, R., & Espin, C. A. (2007). Literature synthesis on curriculum-based measurement in reading. The Journal of Special Education41(2), 85-120.

Institute of Medicine report on prevention of mental disorders: Summary and commentary.

A comprehensive report mandated by the US Congress on the state of the science of prevention recommends a stricter definition of the term prevention; summarizes specific preventive intervention research programs across the life span; and specifies funding, personnel, and coordination priorities to build a national prevention research infrastructure

Munoz, R. F., Mrazek, P. J., & Haggerty, R. J. (1996). Institute of Medicine report on prevention of mental disorders: summary and commentary. American Psychologist51(11), 1116.

Increasing teacher intervention implementation in general education settings through consultation and performance feedback.

Examined the treatment integrity with which general education teachers implemented a reinforcement based intervention designed to improve the academic performance of elementary school students

Noell, G. H., Witt, J. C., Gilbertson, D. N., Ranier, D. D., & Freeland, J. T. (1997). Increasing teacher intervention implementation in general education settings through consultation and performance feedback. School Psychology Quarterly12(1), 77.

Factors Related to Intervention Integrity and Child Outcome in Social Skills Interventions

The purpose of the current investigation was to assess the relationship between the integrity with which social skills interventions were implemented in early childhood special education classrooms and 3 factors: teacher ratings of intervention acceptability, consultative support for implementation, and individual child outcomes.

Peterson, C. A., & McCONNELL, S. R. (1996). Factors related to intervention integrity and child outcome in social skills interventions. Journal of early intervention20(2), 146-164.

The handbook of school psychology, 3rd ed.

The book covers topics vital to school psychology, ranging from theory-based presentation to scholarly reviews of research to more directive, or how-to, chapters.

Reynolds, C. R., & Gutkin, T. B. (1999). The handbook of school psychology. John Wiley & Sons Inc.

The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban first-grade students

The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban first-grade students

Riedel, B. W. (2007). The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban first‐grade students. Reading research quarterly42(4), 546-567.

Dilemmas in a general theory of planning

In this paper, it is argued that Critical Planning Theory is inadequate as a planning theory. 

Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy sciences4(2), 155-169.

The Effect of Linguistic Comprehension Training on Language and Reading Comprehension

This review considers whether language-supportive programs are effective. The research aims to examine the immediate and long-run effects of such programs on generalized measures of linguistic comprehension and reading comprehension.

Rogde, K., Hagen, Å. M., Melby-Lervåg, M., & Lervåg, A. (2019). The Effect of Linguistic Comprehension Training on Language and Reading Comprehension: A Systematic Review. Campbell Systematic Reviews.

Toward Effective Quality Assurance in Evidence-Based Practice: Links Between Expert Consultation, Therapist Fidelity, and Child Outcomes

This study validated a measure of expert clinical consultation and examined the association between consultation, therapist adherence, and youth outcomes in community-based settings.

Schoenwald, S. K., Sheidow, A. J., & Letourneau, E. J. (2004). Toward effective quality assurance in evidence-based practice: Links between expert consultation, therapist fidelity, and child outcomes. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology33(1), 94-104.

A meta-analysis of school-wide positive behavior support: An exploratory study using single-case synthesis

This meta-analysis of School-wide Positive Behavior Supports examines 20 articles. Single-case studies were evaluated using a regression-based procedure to establish efficacy of the approach.

Solomon, B. G., Klein, S. A., Hintze, J. M., Cressey, J. M., & Peller, S. L. (2012). A meta?analysis of school?wide positive behavior support: An exploratory study using single?case synthesis. Psychology in the Schools, 49(2), 105-121.

Scaling Up an Early Reading Program: Relationships Among Teacher Support, Fidelity of Implementation, and Student Performance Across Different Sites and Years

In this article, the authors address the following questions: How does the level of on-site technical assistance affect student outcomes? Do teachers’ fidelity of treatment implementation and their perceptions of school climate mediate effects on student performance?

Stein, M. L., Berends, M., Fuchs, D., McMaster, K., Sáenz, L., Yen, L., ... & Compton, D. L. (2008). Scaling up an early reading program: Relationships among teacher support, fidelity of implementation, and student performance across different sites and years. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis30(4), 368-388.

Multi-tiered systems of support and evidence-based practices

The purpose of this chapter is to present a combined research- and practice-based framework for integrating a comprehensive MTSS model with EBP, and thus, optimize the results stemming from school improvement efforts.

Stoiber, K. C., & Gettinger, M. (2016). Multi-tiered systems of support and evidence-based practices. In Handbook of response to intervention (pp. 121-141). Springer, Boston, MA.

Role of Leadership and culture in PBIS Implementation

This presentation slide describes the important role of leadership in effective, efficient, and relevant PBIS implementation

 

Sugai, G. (2013). Role of Leadership and culture in PBIS Implementation [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://www.pbis.org/common/cms/files/pbisresources/PBIS_Implementation_leadership_braiding_apr_11_2013_HAND.pdf

School-wide positive behavior support: Establishing a continuum of evidence-based practices

The purpose of this article is to describe how effective practices are incorporated into an approach termed schoolwide positive behavior supports (SWPBS)

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2010). School-wide positive behavior support: Establishing a continuum of evidence based practices. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools11(1), 62-83.

A contextual consideration of culture and school-wide positive behavior support

This article considers culture within the context of School-wide Positive Behavior Support. The paper provides an overview of culture and working definitions to assist educators to more effectively implement evidence-based practices.

Sugai, G., O’Keeffe, B. V., & Fallon, L. M. (2012). A contextual consideration of culture and school-wide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14(4), 197-208. Can pd

The impact of tier 1 reading instruction on reading outcomes for students in Grades 4–12: A meta-analysis

This meta-analysis examines the impact of 1st tier reading instruction on reading outcomes for students in grades 4-12 in an Multi-tiered System of Support (MTSS) service delivery model. 37 studies met criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The study finds small, but positive effects for 1st tier reading instruction on comprehension, vocabulary, and indicates minimum evidence for struggling readers maintaining or improving reading comprehension over struggling students receiving typical instruction. Hedges’s g was used calculating effect sizes. Because of the limited number of studies examining phonics/word recognition and fluency instruction, it was not possible these critical instruction areas in this meta-analysis.

 

Swanson, E., Stevens, E. A., Scammacca, N. K., Capin, P., Stewart, A. A., & Austin, C. R. (2017). The impact of tier 1 reading instruction on reading outcomes for students in Grades 4–12: A meta-analysis. Reading and Writing30(8), 1639-1665.

 

A blueprint for schoolwide positive behavior support: Implementation of three components.

This article provides a case study (focus on an eighth-grader with autism) within a case study (focus on an urban middle school) in terms of the implementation of positive behavior support (PBS).

Turnbull, A., Bohanon, H., Griggs, P., Wickham, D., Sailor, W., Freeman, R., ... & Warren, J. (2002). A blueprint for schoolwide positive behavior support: Implementation of three components. Exceptional Children68(3), 377–402.

States granted waivers from No Child Left Behind allowed to reapply for renewal for 2014 and 2015 school years

As students and educators go back to school across the country, and as Congress continues to debate how to fix the law commonly known as No Child Left Behind, the U.S. Department of Education announced today that states whose waivers from certain provisions of federal education law will expire at the end of the 2013-2014 school year will soon be able to request renewals of their reform plans, for up to two more years.

U.S. Department of Education (2017). States granted waivers from No Child Left Behind allowed to reapply for renewal for 2014 and 2015 school years. Retrieved from https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/states-granted-waivers-no-child-left-behind-allowed-reapply-renewal-2014-and-2015-school-years

Keeping RTI on track: How to identify, repair and prevent mistakes that derail implementation

Keeping RTI on Track is a resource to assist educators overcome the biggest problems associated with false starts or implementation failure. Each chapter in this book calls attention to a common error, describing how to avoid the pitfalls that lead to false starts, how to determine when you're in one, and how to get back on the right track.

Vanderheyden, A. M., & Tilly, W. D. (2010). Keeping RTI on track: How to identify, repair and prevent mistakes that derail implementation. LRP Publications.

Redefining Learning Disabilities as Inadequate Response to Instruction: The Promise and Potential Problems

In this introduction to the special issue, a response-to-instruction approach to learning disabilities (LD) identification is discussed

Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning disabilities research & practice18(3), 137-146.

Role of professional development and multi-level coaching in promoting evidence-based practice in education

 Due to the increased need to support teachers' use of evidence-based practices in multi-tiered systems of support such as RTI [Response to Intervention] and PBIS [Positive Behavior Interventions and Support], coaching can extend and strengthen professional development. This paper describes a multi-level approach to coaching and provides implications for practice and research.

Wood, C. L., Goodnight, C. I., Bethune, K. S., Preston, A. I., Cleaver, S. L. (2016). Role of professional development and multi-level coaching in promoting evidence-based practice in education. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 14,159-170.

Improving teachers means improving principals, too
The article discusses the critical role principals play in improving teacher performance.
Borsuk, A., (2010) Improving teachers means improving principals, too
Meta-Analytic Review of Responsiveness-To- Intervention Research: Examining Field-Based and Research-Implemented Models
This study conducted a meta-analysis on four existing large-scale RTI models and other models implemented for research.
Burns, M. K., Appleton, J. J., & Stehouwer, J. D. (2005). Meta-analytic review of responsiveness-to-intervention research: Examining field-based and research-implemented models. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23(4), 381-394.
A Parent’s Guide to Response-to-Intervention
This guide provides a description of RTI specifically designed for parents of students with Learning disabilities.
Cortiella, C. (2006). A parent's guide to response-to-intervention. National Center for Learning Disabilities.
Effective Behavior Support: A Systems Approach to Proactive School-wide Management
This study describes Effective Behavioral Support, a systems approach to enhancing the capacity of schools to adopt and sustain use of effective processes for all students.
Lewis, T. J., & Sugai, G. (1999). Effective Behavior Support: A Systems Approach to Proactive Schoolwide Management. Focus on Exceptional Children, 31(6), 1-24.
A meta-analysis of positive behavior support.
This meta-analysis of School-wide Positive Behavior Supports examines the effectiveness of systems wide intervention.
Marquis, J. G., Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Turnbull, A. P., Thompson, M., Behrens, G. A., ... & Doolabh, A. (2000). A meta-analysis of positive behavior support. Contemporary special education research: Syntheses of the knowledge base on critical instructional issues, 137-178.
Response to intervention and teacher preparation
A review of the critical skills taught teachers in 13 teacher preparation programs in the state of Connecticut with the emphasis on progress monitoring.
Spear-Swerling, L. (2008). Response to intervention and teacher preparation. In E. L. Grigorenko (Ed.), Educating Individuals with Disabilities: IDEIA 2004 and Beyond. (pp.273-293). New York, NY : Springer Publishing Company.
The Emergence and Possible Futures of Response To Intervention
This study is designed to operationalize, standardize, and field test the RtI process by examining four measures of student performance, curriculum-based measurement, Brigance subtests, state reading test, and teacher identification.
VanDerHeyden, A. M., Witt, J. C., & Barnett, D. W. (2005). The emergence and possible futures of response to intervention. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23(4), 339-361.
TITLE
SYNOPSIS
Brookings Institution - The Brown Center on Educational Policy
This is national nonprofit public policy organization with the mission to conduct high-quality, independent research and, based on that research, to provide recommendations that advance the American education system. The Brown Center on Educational Policy is the division of Brookings that is dedicated to improving the American education system.
California Services for Technical Assistance and Training (CalSTAT)
CalSTAT is a project of the California Department of Education. that supports and develops partnerships with schools and families by providing training, technical assistance and resources to both special education and general education.
CalSTAT
CalSTAT (California Services for Technical Assistance and Training) is a project of the California Department of Education. CalSTAT supports and develops partnerships with schools and families by providing training, technical assistance and resources to both special education and general education.
Center on Teaching and Learning (CTL)
CTL is research center that conducts and disseminates research that focuses on practical solutions to serious problems in school systems.
Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation
MDRC is best known for mounting large-scale evaluations of real-world policies and programs targeted to low-income people.
National School Climate Center
NSCC works to translate research into practice by establishing meaningful and relevant guidelines, programs and services that support a model for whole school improvement with a focus on school climate.
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS)

The Technical Assistance Center on PBIS provides support states, districts and schools to establish, scale-up and sustain the PBIS framework.

Raising the Bar on Instruction: 21st Century Learning Standards
West Ed has a new web site to support educators coping with the demands for providing effective instruction under the guidelines of Common Core. The site offers free resources, professional development tools, implementation strategies, and collaboration opportunities with other educators.
The Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media
This in-depth education journal investigates, analyzes, and reports on issues in education.
Back to Top