Progress Monitoring Tier 2 Services

Students who are at risk for or show low-intensity behavioral problems may need targeted, Tier 2 interventions. Often, Tier 2 problem-solving teams are charged with monitoring student responsiveness to intervention. This process may be difficult for those who are not trained in data collection and analysis procedures. To aid practitioners in these worthwhile tasks, we offer a step-by-step guide to collecting and evaluating Tier 2 behavioral progress monitoring data. This systematic approach includes (a) selecting an appropriate method of measurement, (b) planning for data collection and evaluation, (c) collecting and analyzing data, (d) considering treatment fidelity, and (e) adjusting intervention based on student responsiveness. Each step is described in detail with specific examples and additional resources are provided.

Download Full-text

Response to Intervention

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education ◽

10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.1187 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Evelyn S. Johnson

Keyword(s):

Response To Intervention ◽

General Education ◽

Progress Monitoring ◽

Instructional Program ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Tier 2 ◽

Academic Challenges ◽

Essential Components ◽

Tier 1 ◽

Tier 2 Intervention

Response to intervention (RTI) is a framework that can help ensure the academic strengths and needs of students are met effectively and efficiently. Patterned on a public health model of prevention, the focus of RTI is on preventing and intervening for academic challenges through a system of increasingly intensive supports, where the least intensive but most effective option is the most desirable. RTI models consist of the key essential components of effective inclusive instruction, universal screening, progress monitoring, data-based instructional decision-making, tiered levels of evidence-based and culturally responsive interventions, and fidelity of implementation. When the RTI framework is well implemented, most students are successful in the general education environment. In the general education classroom, teachers provide quality core, or Tier 1, instruction for all students. Even with high-quality instruction, however, not all students will be successful. Between 10 and 15% of the student population will likely need more intensive academic support at some point during their schooling, typically referred to as Tier 2 intervention. Tier 2 provides a system of evidence-based intervention, designed to meet the needs of most students at risk for poor academic outcomes. Tier 2 interventions are meant to be short in duration, focused on improving skill deficits that interfere with students’ success, and comprised of systematic approaches to providing student support. For some students whose needs cannot be met through Tier 1 or 2 instruction, an even more intensive level of intervention will be required. Tier 3 consists of specially designed interventions to support the needs of students who require a more individualized, intensive instructional program. Through this multi-leveled prevention system, the RTI framework provides supports to students that are appropriate to their needs within an environment of equity, efficiency, and accountability. With a well-structured, rigorous implementation of RTI, schooling becomes much more fluid and responsive to meet student needs.

Download Full-text

A Review of the Pyramidal Training Approach for Practitioners Working With Individuals With Disabilities

Behavior Modification ◽

10.1177/0145445517692952 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 41 (4) ◽

pp. 558-580 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Natalie Andzik ◽

Helen Irene Cannella-Malone

Keyword(s):

Progress Monitoring ◽

Tier 2 ◽

Pyramidal Training ◽

Individuals With Disabilities ◽

Training Approach ◽

Tier 1

Pyramidal training has been used for many years to expedite training for those who work with individuals with disabilities and utilizes an expert who provides training to a practitioner who then trains another practitioner to implement practices with clients. Fourteen articles were analyzed to investigate the viability of this training approach for practitioners of all types who support individuals with disabilities. Research does support the effectiveness of pyramidal training within the parameters with which it has been evaluated in this review. All Tier 1 participants made improvement; 83% of Tier 2 participants and 43% of individuals with disabilities showed improvement. Future researchers are encouraged to analyze not only the fidelity of the implementation of these practices but also the changes among the individuals with disabilities. To that end, progress monitoring is necessary to determine whether the implementation was the cause for the meaningful gains for the population being served.

Download Full-text

Linking Screening for Emotional and Behavioral Problems to Problem-Solving Efforts: An Adaptive Model of Behavioral Assessment

Assessment for Effective Intervention ◽

10.1177/1534508410377194 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 35 (4) ◽

pp. 240-244 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

Robert J. Volpe ◽

Amy M. Briesch ◽

Sandra M. Chafouleas

Keyword(s):

Behavioral Problems ◽

Universal Screening ◽

Progress Monitoring ◽

Behavioral Assessment ◽

Emotional And Behavioral Problems ◽

Tier 2 ◽

Adaptive Model ◽

Special Issue ◽

Tier 2 Interventions ◽

Emotional And Behavioral Health

This paper addresses several objectives of the special issue on universal screening by addressing gaps in the current research base concerning universal screening for mental, emotional, and behavioral health and by providing a framework for addressing the limitations of extant approaches. Specifically, an adaptive model of behavioral assessment (AMBA) is proposed as a conceptual framework for linking screening and progress monitoring and designing tier 2 interventions.

Download Full-text

Tier 2: Critical Issues in Systems, Practices, and Data

Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders ◽

10.1177/1063426620949859 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 106342662094985

Author(s):

Allison L. Bruhn ◽

Sara C. McDaniel

Keyword(s):

Progress Monitoring ◽

Future Research ◽

Tier 2 ◽

Behavior Interventions ◽

Social Emotional ◽

Targeted Interventions ◽

Positive Behavior Interventions ◽

Behavioral Needs ◽

Critical Issues

The purpose of Tier 2 positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS) is to address identified social, emotional, and behavioral needs with efficient, targeted interventions. Although only 10% to 15% of each school’s population will require Tier 2 supports, without effective systems, practices, and data, students will continue to demonstrate unwanted behavior, which may lead to increased rates of exclusionary discipline (e.g., office discipline referrals and suspension). This article extends the logic of Tier 1 PBIS, which is founded in systems, practices, and data, by addressing research related to implementation issues of systems, practices, and data in Tier 2. First, we present current research and practice in systems with a specific focus on Tier 2 teaming, resources, and professional development (i.e., initial training and coaching). Second, we discuss Tier 2 practices and the need to consider intervention matching, as well as initial and in vivo intervention adaptations to improve acceptability and effectiveness. Third, we present Tier 2 data considerations for informing intervention design, progress monitoring, and treatment fidelity. Across Tier 2 systems, practices, and data, we offer recommendations for future research.

Download Full-text

Progress Monitoring and Decision Making for Tier 2 and Beyond

Functional Behavioral Assessment ◽

10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199764938.003.0043 ◽

2011 ◽

pp. 58-72

Author(s):

Kevin J. Filter ◽

Michelle E. Alvarez

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Progress Monitoring ◽

Tier 2

Download Full-text

Responsiveness to Intervention in Reading

Learning Disability Quarterly ◽

10.1177/0731948712464963 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 36 (1) ◽

pp. 36-46 ◽

Cited By ~ 28

Author(s):

Joseph R. Jenkins ◽

Ellen Schiller ◽

Jose Blackorby ◽

Sara Kalb Thayer ◽

W. David Tilly

Keyword(s):

Differentiated Instruction ◽

Progress Monitoring ◽

Educational Programs ◽

Tier 2 ◽

Model Schools ◽

Tier 2 Interventions ◽

Tier 1 ◽

Individualized Educational Programs ◽

Rti Model ◽

Tier 3

This article describes how a purposeful sample of 62 elementary schools from 17 states implemented a Response to Intervention (RtI) framework for reading. School informants answered surveys and were interviewed about differentiated instruction in Tier 1, screening/benchmarking, where Tier 2 interventions were located, typical group size and the minutes/day of intervention in Tiers 2 and 3 groups, and how students with individualized educational programs (IEPs) in reading were served in the school’s RtI model. Schools reported using differentiated instruction in Tier 1, favored curriculum-based measures for screening/benchmarking and progress monitoring, reported more intensive interventions and more progress monitoring in Tier 3, and used a wide variety of models for serving students with IEPs within the schools’ RtI models.

Download Full-text

Small Groups, Big Gains: Efficacy of a Tier 2 Phonological Awareness Intervention With Preschoolers With Early Literacy Deficits

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology ◽

10.1044/2015_ajslp-14-0035 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 24 (2) ◽

pp. 189-205 ◽

Cited By ~ 23

Author(s):

Lydia G. Kruse ◽

Trina D. Spencer ◽

Arnold Olszewski ◽

Howard Goldstein

Keyword(s):

Phonological Awareness ◽

Early Literacy ◽

Small Group ◽

Small Groups ◽

Low Income ◽

Progress Monitoring ◽

Tier 2 ◽

Alphabet Knowledge ◽

Baseline Design ◽

First Sound

PurposeThe purpose of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of a phonological awareness (PA) intervention, designed for Tier 2 instruction in a Response to Intervention (RTI) model, delivered to small groups of preschoolers.MethodA multiple-baseline design across participants was used to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention on low-income preschool children's PA skills. A trained interventionist delivered small group sessions 3 to 4 days a week and ensured children received frequent opportunities to respond and contingent feedback. Participants received 28 to 36 lessons that lasted about 10 min each and focused on PA and alphabet knowledge. Initiation of intervention was staggered across 3 triads, and 7 children completed the study.ResultsThe intervention produced consistent gains on weekly progress monitoring assessments of the primary outcome measure for first sound identification (First Sound Fluency). Most children also demonstrated gains on other measures of PA and alphabet knowledge.ConclusionsResults provide support for the application of a small group intervention consistent with an RTI framework and document the potential benefits of the intervention to learners who need early literacy instruction beyond the core curriculum.

Download Full-text