Abstract
This overview article introduces the special series focused on implementing practices within an integrated multi-tiered system of support (I-MTSS) framework. The I-MTSS Research Network defines I-MTSS as “a comprehensive and equitable prevention framework for improving the outcomes of all students, including students with or at-risk for disabilities, through integrated academic and behavioral support.” In this special series, members of the I-MTSS Research Network Each descirbe a different component of I-MTSS: (a) integrating evidence-based practices in Tier 1, (b) integrating evidence-based practices in Tier 2, (c) integrating evidence-based practices in Tier 3, (d) providing professional development to support effective implementation, and (e) practical applications of I-MTSS in elementary settings. Across articles, demonstrate that integrating academic and behavior support within an I-MTSS framework can be feasible and effective with the right supports in place.
Welcome to a special series of Intervention in School and Clinic focused on implementing practices within an integrated multi-tiered system of support (I-MTSS) framework. We define I-MTSS as “a comprehensive and equitable prevention framework for improving the outcomes of all students, including students with or at-risk for disabilities, through integrated academic and behavioral support” (I-MTSS Research Network, 2023).
In this series, members of the I-MTSS Research Network, funded by the National Center on Special Education Research in the Institute for Education Sciences (R324N180020), share lessons learned and practical resources with the field. Each of the five articles focuses on a different component of I-MTSS: (a) integrating evidence-based practices in Tier 1 (Melton et al., 2024), (b) integrating evidence-based practices in Tier 2 (O’Donnell et al., 2024), (c) integrating evidence-based practices in Tier 3 (Duble Moore et al., 2024), (d) providing professional development to support effective implementation (Buckman et al., 2024), and (e) practical applications of I-MTSS in elementary settings (Majeika et al., 2024). You will notice that, where appropriate, articles follow a common organization to connect articles within the special issue:
Short vignette to set the context
Introduction to the focus of the article
A brief review of research that supports the topics addressed
Easy-to-implement suggestions and an actionable resource (e.g., list of guiding questions, lesson plan template, checklist to support implementation) to support practitioners
A brief conclusion that connects back to the vignette
In this intro, we orient you to each article and highlight some big ideas we hope you will take away from the series
Article 1: A Four-Step Plan to Integrate Behavioral Practices Into Tier 1 Foundational Reading Instruction With an Integrated Lesson Plan Template (Melton et al., 2024)
This article provides classroom teachers and interventionists with a practical framework for integrating evidence-based positive behavioral supports within an academic lesson plan to promote effective implementation of integrated classroom instruction in Tier 1. Specifically, the authors provide a lesson plan template integrating key evidence-based practices, including explicit instruction, high rates of varied opportunities to respond, prompting for behavior, specific praise, and group contingency to support students’ academic and behavioral growth. They also share how this lesson plan approach can integrate positive behavioral supports into early reading instruction. The big idea from this article is that integrating positive behavior support practices into academic instruction can work! With a bit of planning (using the provided lesson plan template), you can enhance your students’ engagement in instruction with supports that benefit all students and are critical for students with disabilities and more intensive or individualized needs.
Article 2: Integrating a Self-Regulation Intervention With a Tier 2 Academic Intervention (O’Donnell et al., 2024)
In this article, the authors describe the importance of integrating academic and behavioral support for students receiving targeted, or Tier 2, intervention. The authors share how interventionists can teach students to engage during instruction in ways consistent with positively stated expectations (e.g., respect and effort) and self-monitor and self-evaluate their engagement during Tier 2 academic intervention groups to enhance academic engagement and outcomes. The authors suggest using a “mystery match” or other evidence-based group contingency to increase student use and accuracy of self-monitoring. From this article, we learn the importance of supporting students’ behavior during academic instruction to enhance student engagement, and we see the potential benefits of teaching students to monitor and evaluate their own engagement—not only can it increase a student’s engagement but it can also empower students with skills to support their own learning.
Article 3: Integrated Intensive Intervention: Academic and Behavioral Support in Tier 3 (Duble Moore et al., 2024)
This article provides classroom teachers and interventionists with a model for completing an individualized assessment of behavioral and reading needs and developing an integrated intervention for both the classroom and intervention setting. The authors provide an assessment template that integrates key evidence-based practices, including a functional behavior assessment and a diagnostic reading assessment, as well as a tool to guide the development of an integrated Tier 3 intervention plan that provides function-based support and intensive reading instruction. A key takeaway message from this article is that integrating evidence-based practices in Tier 3 can create a more coherent experience for students, as there is intentional alignment and integration of their individualized supports.
Article 4: Data-Informed Professional Learning and Instruction in Integrated Tiered Systems (Buckman et al., 2024)
This article provides teachers and school leaders with a process to implement integrated tiered systems through professional learning. The authors present a step-by-step approach for building educators’ capacity to implement I-MTSS in their schools, including providing ongoing data-informed professional learning and instruction in integrated tiered systems for all teachers. A key message is the importance of developing a clearly articulated, comprehensive onboarding experience for new teachers in I-MTSS that includes engaged and interactive professional learning and mentorship.
Article 5: Integrated Multi-Tiered Systems of Supports in Elementary Schools: Practical Applications (Majeika et al., 2024)
This article describes an I-MTSS Fidelity Rubric (IMFR) based on the domains of (a) instruction and intervention, (b) assessment, (c) data-based decision-making, and (d) infrastructure support. These components of I-MTSS present unique opportunities for schools to integrate support that addresses the full range of student’s academic and behavioral needs. The authors then offer practical strategies for integrating academic and behavioral needs across these four domains. Case examples illustrate implementation within schools and classrooms. The authors consider integration within each tier of support within the multi-tiered framework.
Summary of Big Ideas
We are excited for you to dive into each article. Across practices, systems, and data elements, the big idea is that integrating academic and behavioral intervention can be feasible and effective with proper support. That said, we want to acknowledge that research is still new in this area (I-MTSS Research Network, 2024), and we are learning alongside you. Please use your local data to guide your decisions, continue to invest in evidence-based practices, and integrate practices where feasible and relevant. Also, bookmark our website (mtss.org) to find copies of these articles, free resources, and updates on I-MTSS research.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R324N180020. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.
