Providing Intensive Intervention using Data-Based
Individualization (DBI) in Academics Rebecca Zumeta, Ph.D. TA&D
Coordinator November 2012
Slide 2
2 2 Todays Webinar The need for intensive intervention Using
Data-Based Individualization (DBI) to provide intensive
intervention in academics DBI process with student example Kelsey-
reading Time for questions
Slide 3
3 3 Intensive interventions are designed to address severe and
persistent learning or behavior difficulties. These interventions
should be data driven and are characterized by increased intensity
(e.g. smaller group, expanded time) and individualization of
academic instruction and/ or behavioral supports.
Slide 4
4 4 The Need for Intensive Intervention 2011 National
Assessment of Educational Progress data indicate that approximately
2/3 of students with disabilities performed below the Basic
proficiency level in reading and math at 8 th grade. The same was
true for 4 th grade reading; Nearly half were below Basic for 4 th
grade math. 4 out of 5 are either unemployed or work in low-paying
jobs as young adults (NLTS-2). Although the dropout rate has
declined significantly over the past 10 years, students with
learning disabilities continue to drop out of school at a much
higher rate than their non-disabled peers (Cortiella, 2011). Many
tiered intervention initiatives have not sufficiently addressed
students with the most intensive needs.
Slide 5
5 5 The Need for Intensive Intervention Not all students
respond to standardized, evidence-based interventions Analysis of
student response data from controlled studies suggests that
approximately 3-5% of students do not respond to standard,
evidence-based intervention programs (Fuchs et al., 2012; Wanzek
& Vaughn, 2009; Conduct Prevention Problems Research Group,
2002). Despite interventions being generally effective for students
demonstrating difficulty Categorization of risk may be too broadly
defined in these studies to generalize to students with the most
intensive needs
Slide 6
6 6 What does this suggest? Although standardized,
evidence-based (i.e., secondary, Tier 2, or remedial curriculum
materials) interventions are effective for many students, they may
be insufficient for those with the most intensive needs. There is
likely no silver bullet intervention program(s) that will meet the
needs of all students who have significant and persistent academic
or behavior challenges. For some students, individualized,
intensive intervention will be necessary to facilitate progress.
Student data and guiding principles for intensifying intervention
should drive these decisions. Note: Many good teachers already
adjust their instruction; DBI is a process that helps them to do so
in a more systematic and data- driven way.
Slide 7
7 7 Who needs intensive intervention? Students with
disabilities who are not making adequate progress in their current
instructional program. Students with disabilities who present with
very low academic achievement, and/or high-intensity or
high-frequency behavior problems Students in a tiered intervention
program who have not responded to secondary intervention programs
delivered with fidelity
Slide 8
8 8 NCIIs Approach to Intensive Intervention: Data-Based
Individualization (DBI) Data-Based Individualization (DBI) is a
systematic method for using data to determine when and how to
provide more intensive intervention: Origins in data-based program
modification/ experimental teaching first developed at the
University of Minnesota (Deno & Mirkin, 1977) and expanded upon
by others (Fuchs, Deno, & Mirkin, 1984; Fuchs, Fuchs,
&Hamlett, 1989b; Capizzi & Fuchs, 2005). DBI is a process,
not a single intervention program or strategy. Not a one-time
fixOngoing process comprising intervention and assessment adjusted
over time
Slide 9
9 9 Is DBI the same as RTI? Special Education? Many components
of DBI are consistent with elements of special education and tiered
service delivery systems. Although DBI does not have to operate
within these systems, it certainly could. Such designations may
vary by context. Tiered Interventions (RTI, MTSS, PBIS) Remediation
program/ secondary intervention platforms a precondition (usually)
Progress monitoring Team-based decisions based on data Special
Education Individualized instruction/ intervention Progress
monitoring Team-based decisions based on data
Slide 10
10 Before starting DBI, consider the secondary intervention
platform Has the student been taught using an evidence- based
secondary intervention platform that is appropriate for his/her
needs? Has the program been implemented with fidelity? Content
Dosage/schedule Group size Has the program been implemented for a
sufficient amount of time to determine response? Note: You may
think of secondary platform as Tier 2, strategic intervention, or
the remedial curriculum materials you use for struggling
learners.
Slide 11
11 Secondary Intervention Platform: Deliver evidence-based
intervention with fidelity
13 Secondary Intervention Platform: Student Example Kelsey
Background: Kelsey emerged with serious reading problems, reading
at an early 2 nd grade level at the beginning of 4 th grade.
Intervention Platform: Kelseys teacher selected a
research-validated program that addressed phonological awareness,
word study, and fluency skills.
Slide 14
14 Secondary Intervention Platform Student Example Kelsey
Fidelity Group size: 2-6 students Duration: 20-40 minutes per
session Frequency: 3-4 sessions per week for 7 weeks Instructional
content & delivery: Explicit instruction covering all
components laid out in the instruction manual Progress Monitoring:
Passage Reading Fluency collected weekly
Slide 15
15 Caveat Regarding Secondary Interventions A small number of
students may present with very significant academic or behavioral
difficulties where a standardized secondary intervention alone is
unlikely to be effective. Intervention teams may choose to bypass
the secondary intervention platform in favor of moving directly to
intensive intervention in these instances. However, decisions to
bypass a standardized secondary platform should be made on an
individual, case-by-case basis.
Slide 16
16 Progress Monitoring: Is the secondary intervention
working?
Slide 17
17 Progress Monitoring Collect progress monitoring data using a
validated assessment tool. Consider 1.Frequency of assessment
needed 2.Reliability and validity of the assessment 3.Assessments
ability to detect improvement 4.The rate of change at which a
student should progress to meet his/her goal 5.The amount of time
needed to determine response Note: NCII is planning a future
webinar on progress monitoring. Please visit www.rti4success.org
for more resources for progress monitoring.www.rti4success.org
Slide 18
18 Progress Monitoring: Student Example Kelsey Valid tool:
Kelseys teacher implemented formal progress monitoring each week,
using passage reading fluency (PRF) assessments Detect improvement
: This progress monitoring tool was able to detect changes in
Kelseys reading, given her skill level. Rate of progress: Based
Kelseys progress monitoring graph, she was not progressing at the
rate needed to meet her goal.
Slide 19
19 Progress Monitoring Kelseys Example- Reading
Slide 20
20 Next Steps Despite a secondary intervention delivered with
fidelity, Kelsey continued to make insufficient progress. The
intervention team decided that more intensive supports were needed.
Additional data will help the team to individualize the
intervention
Slide 21
21 Diagnostic Assessment: What changes are needed to support
Kelsey?
Slide 22
22 Diagnostic Assessment Progress Monitoring assessments help
teams to determine when an instructional change is needed.
Diagnostic assessments help teams determine the nature of the
intervention change needed.
Slide 23
23 Diagnostic Assessment Potential Data Sources:
Classroom-based assessments Error analysis of progress monitoring
data Functional behavior assessment (FBA) Student work samples
Standardized measures (if feasible) Note: NCII has planned a future
webinar on use of diagnostic assessment to inform instructional
planning. It will take place in early 2013.
Slide 24
24 Diagnostic Assessment: Student Example Kelsey To determine
the nature of the instructional change needed, Kelseys teacher
conducted an error analysis of Kelseys most recent passage reading
fluency data. She also administered a phonics survey to determine
Kelseys decoding strengths and weaknesses.
Slide 25
25 Intervention Adaptation: Use Diagnostic Information to Adapt
the Intervention
Slide 26
26 Intervention Adaptation/Change When appropriate, use
diagnostic data to make adjustments/adaptations to the secondary
intervention platform to meet the unique needs of the individual.
In some cases, however, data may indicate that the student requires
a different intervention platform or approach. Consider Two types
of intervention change: Quantitative Qualitative
Slide 27
27 Quantitative Changes Increase intervention length,
frequency, or duration Decrease group size Decrease heterogeneity
of the intervention group Increase the skill level of the
interventionist Note: In many cases, quantitative changes may be
necessary, but not sufficient to facilitate progress for students
with intensive needs.
Slide 28
28 Qualitative Changes Qualitative adaptations may also be made
to the intervention platform that alter the way the content is
delivered, how students respond, or the amount of adult feedback
and error correction they receive.
Slide 29
29 Qualitative Changes: Principles of Intensive Intervention
Use precise, simple language to teach key concepts or procedures.
Present the same or a similar partially worked example. Explain why
the step is important, have the student do it, and explain
importance. When introducing a concept, provide worked examples and
show the steps in writing. Break tasks into smaller steps, compared
to less intensive levels of instruction/intervention. Provide
concrete learning opportunities (including role play and use of
manipulatives) Use explicit instruction and modeling with
repetition to teach a concept or demonstrate steps in a process.
Have students explain new concepts, in their own words,
incorporating the important terms youve taught. (Fuchs et al.,
2008; Vaughn et al., 2012)
Slide 30
30 Qualitative Changes: Principles of Intensive Intervention
Once students can complete entire examples and explain their work,
incorporate fluency building activities. Once students can fluently
produce correct work, move to a new concept. Provide ongoing
practice opportunities to facilitate skill maintenance. Fade steps
from examples, so students gradually assume responsibility for
completing more and more steps. Provide explicit error correction,
and have student repeat the correct response. Provide repeated
opportunities to correctly practice the step. (Fuchs et al., 2008;
Vaughn et al., 2012) Note: NCII is planning future webinars to
provide more details about the application of these
principles.
Slide 31
31 Coming Soon! NCII Adaptation Guides Exemplars of adapted,
focused instruction in reading and mathematics Explicit examples of
application of principles of intensive intervention Identification
of relevant Common Core Standards Includes: instructions with
sample teacher talk, downloadable materials, and worksheets for
extra practiceComing Soon to www.intensiveintervention.org
www.intensiveintervention.org
Slide 32
32 Intervention Adaptation: Student Example Kelsey 1. Data
suggested that Kelsey inadequately relied on semantics when
reading. Thus, her teacher introduced a tape recorder activity to
help monitor semantic miscues. 2. Data showed that Kelsey also had
difficulty applying decoding strategies to vowel teams. Thus, her
teacher applied the following intensive intervention principles to
intensify her decoding instruction: Increased explicit instruction
of vowel teams Incorporated fluency practice of newly taught teams,
with specified mastery criteria Provided explicit error correction
Checked for retention over time
Slide 33
33 Ongoing Progress Monitoring: Is the student responding to
the adapted, instruction? Is the response sufficient?
Slide 34
34 Progress Monitoring: Evaluation of Student Progress Kelsey
Kelseys teacher again studied her progressShe had improved
substantially with this revised program, but her most recent 4
progress monitoring scores still fell below her goal line. Given
this, Kelsey is not likely to achieve her goal. Another
instructional change is needed. Kelseys teacher may collect
additional diagnostic data if needed to inform the instructional
change(s). She will continue to collect progress monitoring data
and meet with the intervention team to evaluate progress and
further modify the plan as needed.
Slide 35
35 In Summary DBI is an ongoing process that comprises ongoing
assessment, intervention, evaluation, and adjustment to maximize
student outcomes. Intensive interventions will not look the same
for all students Students requiring intensive intervention are
likely to need it for a significant amount of time. There is no
quick fix.
Slide 36
36 Caveats & Implementation Tips DBI is intense. If more
than 3-5% of students in a school appear to need it, consider
evaluating core instruction, school-wide behavior supports, and
secondary intervention programs. Academic and behavior supports do
not exist in isolation; They are often most successful when
combined to meet students individual needs. When making
intervention adaptations, consider choosing a small number to try
at a time. This will allow you to be more systematic in your
ongoing progress monitoring and analysis. Every student presents
unique needs. While our examples provide an illustration of the DBI
process, it will vary based on individual needs. Some DBI processes
will be much more involved than others.
Slide 37
37 References Capizzi, A.M., & Fuchs, L.S. (2005). Effects
of curriculum-based measurement with and without diagnostic
feedback on teacher planning. Remedial and Special Education, 26
(3), 159-174. Conduct Prevention Problems Research Group (2002).
Evaluation of the first 3 years of the Fast Track prevention trail
with children at high risk for adolescent conduct problems. Journal
of Abnormal Child Psychology, 30(1), 1935. Cortiella, C. (2011).
The State of Learning Disabilities. New York, NY: National Center
for Learning Disabilities. Deno, S. L., Mirkin, P. K., &
Leadership Training Inst. for Special Education, M. n. (1977).
Data-Based Program Modification: A Manual. Fuchs, L.S., Deno,
S.L.& Mirkin, P.K. (1984). The effects of curriculum-based
measurement evaluation on pedagogy, student achievement, and
student awareness of learning. American Educational Research
Journal, 21(2), 449-460.
Slide 38
38 References Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D, & Hamlett, C.L.
(1989b). Effects of instrumental use of curriculum-based
measurement to enhance instructional programs. Remedial and Special
Education, 10, 43-52. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Powell, S. R.,
Seethaler, P. M., Cirino, P. T., & Fletcher, J. M. (2008).
Intensive Intervention for Students with Mathematics Disabilities:
Seven Principles of Effective Practice. Learning Disability
Quarterly, 31(2), 79-92. Fuchs, D., Fuchs., L.S., & Compton,
D.L. (2012). Smart RTI: A next-generation approach to multilevel
prevention. Exceptional Children, 78, 263-279. National Center for
Education Statistics, (2011). The Nation's Report Card: Mathematics
2011. Trial Urban District Assessment Results at Grades 4 and 8.
NCES 2012-452. National Center For Education Statistics.
Slide 39
39 References National Center for Education Statistics, (2011).
The Nation's Report Card: Reading 2011. Trial Urban District
Assessment Results at Grades 4 and 8. NCES 2012-455. National
Center For Education Statistics. Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., Murray, C.
S., Roberts, G. (2012). Intensive interventions for students
struggling in reading and mathematics: A practice guide.
Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2009). Students demonstrating
persistent low response to reading intervention: Three case
studies. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(3),
151-163. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2009.00289.x Wagner, M., Newman,
L., Cameto, R., Levine, P., & SRI International, M. A. (2005).
Changes over Time in the Early Postschool Outcomes of Youth with
Disabilities. A Report of Findings from the National Longitudinal
Transition Study (NLTS) and the National Longitudinal Transition
Study-2 (NLTS2). Online Submission.
Slide 40
40 Disclaimer This webinar was produced under the U.S.
Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs,
Award No. H326Q110005. Celia Rosenquist serves as the project
officer. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent
the positions or polices of the U.S. Department of Education. No
official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any
product, commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in this website
is intended or should be inferred.
Slide 41
41 Rebecca Zumeta, Ph.D. E-Mail: [email protected]@air.org
1050 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Washington, DC 20007- 3835 General
Information: 866-577-5787 Website:
www.intensiveintervention.org
