Multi-tiered System of Support (MTSS) Handbook
2016-17 School Year
Independent School District 15
St. Francis, Minnesota
Independent School District 15
Strategic Plan Outline
Mission
Our mission is to equip all students with the knowledge and skills to empower them
to achieve their dreams and full potential while becoming responsible citizens in a dynamic world.
Core
Values
We believe that…
• Trust and respect are fundamental for thriving relationships.
• Our community flourishes when individuals, families and organizations
collaborate.
• Every person matters and has value.
• Responsibility and accountability are essential for personal growth,
organizational improvement and community engagement.
• Commitment to high expectations is essential to help achieve full individual
and collective potential.
• Everyone benefits when culture and diversity are understood and respected.
• Lifelong learning enriches individuals and creates opportunities.
• Open exchanges of ideas and communicated planning are integral for
continuous improvement.
Mission
Outcomes
By 2020, all students will…
• Develop a personalized educational path they can articulate and use to
progress toward their evolving dreams.
• Identify and choose positive ways they can take active ownership in their
community while recognizing its diversity.
Strategies
We will…
• Ensure that every employee understands, supports and promotes our core
values and mission.
• Build trust and facilitate engagement with all ISD 15 stakeholders.
• Align and support all educational programs and services to achieve our
mission and mission outcomes.
Strategic
Delimiters
We will NOT…
• Continue or adopt any program or service unless it is aligned with and
advances the mission and is accompanied by the necessary human and
financial resources.
• Make decisions without the use of relevant data provided by the appropriate
personnel.
• Allow past experiences to interfere with the consideration of new ideas.
Adopted by the Independent School District 15 School Board
May 11, 2015
Table of Contents
General Information:
When All Means All
Multi-tiered System of Support (MTSS): Foundational Beliefs.........4
RTI Tiered Instruction.............................................................................5
MTSS Teams.............................................................................................6
MTSS Team Responsibilities...................................................................7
Professional Learning
Communities and
MTSS
Purpose of the Professional Learning Community (PLC)..................8
MTSS Instructional Cycle—The Work of a PLC..................................9
Essential Learning Benchmarks (ELBs)..............................................10
Assessments
Common Assessments...........................................................................11
Schoolwide Benchmarking...................................................................12
Tier 1 Process
Tier 1........................................................................................................13
MTSS Tier 1 Core Instruction and Tier 2...........................................14
Tier 2 Process
Tier 2........................................................................................................15
Tier 3 Process
Tier 3........................................................................................................16
MTSS School Intervention Team (SIT) Process.................................17
Tier 3 Goal Setting.................................................................................18
Tier 3 Progress Monitoring Guidelines and Graduate Criteria.......... 19
Programming
Guidelines
Guidelines Regarding Federal Programming Requirements............20
Academic Behavior Checklist...............................................................21
Specific Subject
Area Information
Reading Diagnostic Menu.....................................................................22
Reading Interventions...................................................................... 23-25
Math Interventions.................................................................................26
Appendix
Student Intervention Team (SIT) Forms.............................................27
Student Intervention Team (SIT) Screening Summary Form..........27
Student Intervention Team (SIT) Intervention Plan Form...............27
Student Intervention Team (SIT) Plan Evaluation Form..................27
Essential Learning Benchmarks (ELBs)..............................................28
Elementary ELB Process 2015-18........................................................29
Elementary ELA ELB Process 2015-18................................................30
Elementary Math ELB Process 2015-18..............................................31
Secondary ELB Process 2015-18..........................................................32
Essential Learning Benchmark Chart..................................................33
MasteryConnect (MC) Districtwide Implementation 4-Year Plan... 34
Benchmarking Calendar and Assessments Matrix 2016-17....... 35-38
Elementary Cut Score Progressions by Grade Level.................... 39-46
Secondary Cut Scores for Risk Calculation........................................47
References
References................................................................................................48
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
3
General Information: When All Means All
Multi-tiered System of Support (MTSS):
Foundational Beliefs
Multi-tiered Systems of Support (MTSS), formerly Response to Intervention (RtI), is a framework of
instruction that provides support to ALL students to ensure mastery of grade-level content standards.
The tiers of MTSS provide varying levels of support for students who are struggling to reach mastery
as well as those to exceed grade-level.
MTSS provides a framework that incorporates screening, progress monitoring and data-based
decision making to provide effective instruction.
MTSS and RtI are viewed as similar concepts by the Minnesota Legislature; however, since 2012,
education leaders have witnessed a systematic movement away from RtI toward MTSS.
There are four critical components that guide the MTSS framework in ISD 15. These components are
Critical responsibility, Concentrated instruction, Convergent assessment, Certain access.
1. Critical responsibility: All stakeholders believe they are responsible for ensuring that each
student learns at a high level.
2. Concentrated instruction: Curriculum is developed based on identified essential learning.
Personalized learning paths are developed in order for each student to attain a high level of
mastery. (See ELB Process Maps)
3. Convergent assessment: The systemic use of data to determine the learning needs of each
student and monitoring the effectiveness of instruction in regards to meeting those needs.
4. Certain access: There is an articulated process that guarantees each student with the
support and time he/she needs in order to learn at high levels.
Buffum, Mattos, Weber. Simplifying Response to Intervention Four Essential Principles,
Solution Tree Press, 2012.
4
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
General Information: When All Means All
RtI Tiered Instruction
Tier 1 instruction, also known as core instruction, is at course/grade level instruction that each
student receive on a daily basis. For the majority of students, Tier 1 instruction will meet their
academic needs. For approximately 80% of students Tier 1 instruction will meet their academic and/or
behavioral needs.
Tier 2 instruction is supplemental instruction, at course/grade level, for students who need additional
support in learning course/grade level material. Tier 2 instruction is intended to be timely and
coordinated with Tier 1 instruction. Approximately 20% of students should need Tier 2 instruction in
the ideal MTSS framework. Tier 2 needs and interventions are identified during PLC conversations
referencing the four critical questions.
Tier 3 instruction is intensive support provided to students who are struggling with significant
learning gaps and need academic and/or behavioral support. Typically these students do not have the
appropriate course/grade level skills yet to be successful in solely Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruction. Tier 3
provides yet an additional level of intervention to help students develop foundational skills. Students
receiving Tier 3 instruction also receive Tier 1 and 2 instruction. Students are entered into the Tier 3
interventions based on a referral to the School Intervention Team (SIT).
The diagram below illustrates the three tiers.
Tier 1
Effective Core Instruction for All Students
Tier 2
Supplemental Interventions for
Some Identified Students
Tier 3
Intensive
Interventions for
Individual
Students
Buffum, Mattos, Weber. Simplifying Response to Intervention Four Essential Principles,
Solution Tree Press, 2012.
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
5
General Information: When All Means All
MTSS Teams
Teacher Teams/PLC
Team Purpose
Team Members
Frequency of
Meetings
The team has five main
functions:
• Course/grade level
teams
Weekly
1. Clearly define ELBs
• Department teams
2. Provide Tier 1
instruction
• Interdisciplinary
teams
3. Assess student
learning and
effectiveness of
instruction
4. Analyze data to
identify students in
need of additional
support
5. Take lead
responsibility for
Tier 2 interventions
School Intervention
Teams (SIT)
Primary function is to
analyze various forms of
data to determine how
to best meet the needs of
students requiring Tier 3
interventions.
• Determine students’
academic/behavioral
needs
• Diagnose causes of
struggles in Tier 1
and 2
•Determine appropriate
intervention
• Monitor student
progress
• Principal
Weekly
• Social worker/
counselor
• Intervention Lead
• General education
teacher(s)
• Special education
teacher/
representative
• School nurse
• EL teacher, as
needed
• Parent (invited, but
not required)
• Revise intervention as
needed
• Determine appropriate
next steps for students
6
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
General Information: When All Means All
MTSS Team Responsibilities
The diagram below illustrates the roles of the MTSS teams at the building level.
The RTI at Work Multitered System of Support Pyramid
Schoolwide Responsibilities
Teacher Teams Responsibilities
on
nti
eve
Pr
Tier 1: Core Instruction
All students have access to grade-level essential standards.
Tier 2: Intervention and Extension
d
an
si
ten
Ex
In addition to Tier 1: Targeted students receive additional time and
support to master grade-level, essential learning targets, immediate
prerequisite skills, and extension standards.
ted
Academic Skills
Mo
re
Ta
rge
n
tio
en
erv
Int
Academic and Social Behaviors
on
n
tio
dia
Mo
re
Hi
gh
me
Re
Interventions
Led by
Collaborative
Teacher Teams
Tiers 1 & 2
– Students in need of
supplemental support
in learning essential core
standards and English
language
ne
Interventions
Led by
Schoolwide
Teams
Tiers 1 & 2
– Students with
motivational issues
– Students with attendance
issues
– Students with behavior issues
Tier 3
– Students in need of intensive
remedial support in universal
skills: reading, writing, number
sense, English Language,
attendance and behavior
ly T
rai
In addition to Tiers 1 and 2:
Targeted students receive intensive support
to master universal skills.
Reading
Number sense
Social and academic
behavior
English language
d
Tier 3: Intensive Remediation
Writing
© Solution Tree 2015 • solution-tree.com • Reproducible.
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
7
Professional Learning Communities and MTSS
Purpose of the Professional Learning Community (PLC)
“The most promising strategy for sustained, substantive school improvement is developing the ability
of school personnel to function as professional learning communities” (DuFour & Eaker, 1998).
PLCs provide educators an avenue to collaborate regarding student learning and effective instructional
strategies. The three concepts of the PLC include clarifying what each student will learn and how
educators will ensure the learning, building a collaborative culture because the work cannot be
completed in isolation, and using various forms of data to monitor student learning and respond to
the learning in effective methods.
Collaboration is the key of the PLC, “the power of teachers is enhanced when teacher work
collaboratively in highly effective teams” (Eaker, 2016).
The PLC discussions are guided by the four critical questions:
1. What is it we expect our students to learn?
• Clarifying and adding meaning to standards
• What the benchmark, if met, would look like in student work
• Common scoring, learning targets, pacing
2. How will we know when they have learned it?
• Collaborative development and the use of common formative assessments
• Quick checks for understanding
3. How will we respond when some students do not learn?
• Differentiated instruction, MTSS
4. How will we respond when some students already know it?
• Differentiated instruction
Eaker, Robert. Kid by Kid, Skill by Skill: Becoming a Professional Learning Community, presented at
Professional Learning Communities at Work Institute, Minneapolis, MN, June, 2016.
8
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Professional Learning Communities and MTSS
MTSS Instructional Cycle­—The Work of a PLC
The following diagram illustrates the MTSS Instructional Cycle—The Work of the PLC. The diagram
shows how ELBs, tiered instruction and PLC come together to provide an effective MTSS system.
Review and
analysis of
standards
Select ELB and
appropriate learning
targets for unit plans.
Screen
for prior skills
(pre-assess).
All
students, including
those receiving supplemental
interventions, move on to the
next ELB.
Analyze
assessment data
(formative/summative).
Identify students in
need of supplemental
instruction.
Repeat
cycle for additional
learning targets.
Give
summative
assessments.
}How do we
respond when
students do learn?~
}What do we
want students
to learn?~
Analyze
assessments
data, provide
differentiated
instruction (Tier 2 and
enrichment) to meet
individualized
learning needs.
Introduce learning
targets, begin core
instruction (Tier 1).
Give
formative
assessments.
}How will they
know if they have
learned it?~
}How do we respond
when students
experience difficulty?~
Diagram modified from Buffum, Mattos, Weber. Simplifying Response to Intervention Four Essential Principles,
Solution Tree Press, 2012.
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
9
Professional Learning Communities and MTSS
Essential Learning Benchmarks (ELBs)
In order to answer the first PLC critical question, “What do we want our students to learn?”, educators
need to determine what the essential benchmarks are for each unit of instruction. In order to prioritize
the content standards there are four categories for reflection.
1. What is essential to know and do?
2. What is important to know and do?
3. What is worth being familiar with?
4. What is nice to know?
Essential benchmarks are imperative for student learning and are often the foundational pieces for
further learning. There are three criteria to be used when identifying essential benchmarks:
1. Endurance: Does knowledge of this benchmark go beyond performance on a single test/
assessment? Typically essential benchmarks focus on lifelong skills, concepts, and processes.
2. Leverage: Does the knowledge of this benchmark carry over to other content areas?
Is is widely applicable?
3. Readiness for further study: Does the benchmark provide foundational knowledge for
learning at another grade level or level of instruction?
Benchmarks that meet the three criteria above are identified as essential. If it meets two of the criteria
it is an important standard. If it only meets one of the criteria it is a nice-to-know standard.
It is the expectation of teachers that all standards and benchmarks are taught. The essential
benchmarks are those areas of knowledge that students are expected to master within the class/grade.
Student who struggle to master the ELBs are provided further instruction through Tier 2 and possible
Tier 3.
ISD 15 has currently identified ELBs for Math and English/Language Arts.
• K-12 English/Language Arts ELBs
• K-12 Math ELBs
Gregory, G., Kaufeldt, M. and Mattos, M. Best Practices at Tier 1. Solution Tree Press,
Bloomington, IN, 2016.
10
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Assessments
Common Assessments
We give common assessments so we can identify specifically which students did not demonstrate
mastery of essential standards. Because we give common assessments to measure student mastery
of essential standards, assessments should identify students that need additional help and support.
Additionally, if an assessment measures more than one essential standard, the test results must provide
more than an overall score for each student. They also should specifically delineate which standards
each student did not pass.
Essential question: Specifically which students did not demonstrate mastery?
Identify effective instructional practices: Because our teachers have autonomy in how they teach
essential standards, it is vital that common assessment data help validate which practices were
effective. This can be done best when common assessment results are displayed in such a way that
allows each teacher to compare their students’ results to other teachers who teach the same course.
Essential question: Which instructional practices proved to be most effective?
Identify patterns in student mistakes: Besides using common assessment results to identify best
instructional practices, this data should also be used to determine ineffective instructional
practices. Patterns emerge that can point to weaknesses or gaps in initial instruction when
analyzing the types of mistakes that failing students make.
Essential question: What patterns can we identify from student mistakes?
Measure assessment accuracy: Through a careful item analysis of the assessment, a team can
determine the validity of each test question. Over time, this will build a team’s capacity to create
better assessments.
Essential question: How can we improve this assessment?
Plan and target interventions: The ultimate goal of any PLC is to ensure high levels of learning
for all students. If a team uses common assessments to identify students in need of additional
help, determine effective and ineffective instructional practices, and measure the validity of
the assessment, then they should have the information needed to plan and implement targeted
interventions to assist the students that need help.
Essential question: What interventions are needed to provide struggling students
additional time and support?
Modified from © Mattos 2016. SolutionTree.com Reproducible
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
11
Assessments
Schoolwide Benchmarking
Benchmarking data is one piece of data to be considered regarding students’ progress during
PLC meetings. It is a piece of data for teachers to considered in PLC discussions regarding meeting
individual student needs—both the needs of students who do not have the necessary skills and
those who are already proficient. See Benchmarking Calendar and Assessment Matrix 2016-17
for more details.
Benchmark assessments serve three purposes:
1. Allow students to be screened to monitor their academic progress.
Students below benchmarks are identified for further assessment.
2. Help set a baseline for school goal setting purposes.
3. Provide data on school programming effectiveness.
Kindergarten–Grade 5:
• All students are benchmarked (reading and math) three times per year using AIMsweb.
Grades 6-8:
• All students will be benchmarked (reading and math) during the fall and winter.
• Students receiving interventions may also be benchmarked in the spring.
• Eighth grade students will be benchmarked (reading and math) in the spring in
reading and math.
Grades 9-12:
• All 9th grade students will be benchmarked (reading and math) in the fall and spring
(or when they complete English 9).
• Identified 10th grade students will be benchmarked in reading and/or math in the fall.
• All 11th grade students will be benchmarked in math in the fall.
Saints Academy
• Will benchmark all students with the STAR Math and Reading Tests: fall, winter spring.
Crossroads School & Vocational Center
• Will benchmark all students at appropriate intervals using AIMsweb.
12
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Tier 1
Tier 1
Entry Criteria:
Tier 1, core instruction, is provided to all students.
Instruction:
Tier 1 instruction includes, but is not limited to:
• Research-based instructional strategies
• Data-driven decision making and instruction
• District approved core curriculum
• Differentiated instruction
• Flexible grouping
Tier 1
Effective Core Instruction
for All Students
Tier 2
Supplemental Interventions for
Some Identified Students
Tier 3
Intensive
Interventions
for Individual
Students
Benchmarking and Assessments:
All students will be benchmarked multiple times throughout the school year in the areas of reading
and math. See Benchmarking Calendar and Assessment Matrix 2016-17 for specific assessment
windows. Benchmarking data is one piece of data to be considered regarding students’ progress during
PLC meetings. It is a piece of data for teachers to considered in PLC discussions regarding meeting
individual student needs--both the needs of students who do not have the necessary skills and those
who are already proficient.
Students will have multiple opportunities to demonstrate their skills through common formative
and summative assessments. This data should be used in PLC discussions in regards to the
four critical questions.
Professional Learning Communities (PLC):
Professional Learning Communities will meet weekly to review student learning. The purpose of
these meetings is to discuss the four critical questions in regards to current student learning.
Teachers will identify the various students’ needs and discuss how, as a team, they will work to meet
the needs of all students.
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
13
Tier 1
MTSS Tier 1 Core Instruction and Tier 2
YES
Does data from common
(formative/summative) and/or
universal benchmarking show the
student is meeting course/grade
level benchmarks?
NO
Student data is reviewed in PLC. Are there other
students with similar struggles? What strategies could
be used with this student? Has the student received
Tier 2 or 3 interventions in the past? Tier 2 interventions
developed and implemented by PLC members.
Continue with instruction
and differentiation for
enrichment.
Tier 2 intervention
Determine length of intervention
and frequency of progress
monitoring.
Is intervention effective?
PLC reviews data from strategies
to determine if new instructional
strategy is effective. If not, does
strategy need to be changed or
fidelity of intervention reviewed?
YES
Continue with Tier 1
instruction.
Address fidelity
concern
YES
14
NO
Implement
new strategy
Implement new/revised strategy and
monitor student progress. Review data
at PLC. Is intervention effective?
Student able to
demonstrate mastery
Student continues
to struggle.
Continue with
Tier 1 instruction
Teacher may refer
student to SIT for
possible Tier 3
interventions
NO
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Tier 2
Tier 2
Entry Criteria:
Tier 2 interventions are intended for students who are
struggling to meet course/grade level expectations.
These interventions take place in addition to Tier 1,
core instruction.
Instruction:
Tier 1
Effective Core Instruction
for All Students
Tier 2
Supplemental Interventions for
Some Identified Students
Tier 3
Intensive
Interventions
for Individual
Students
Tier 2 instruction includes, but is not limited to:
• Flexible grouping
• Research-based instructional strategies
• Data-driven decision making and instruction
• Differentiated instruction
Progress Monitoring:
Teachers will monitor student learning in their Tier 2 groups using appropriate tools for the specific
interventions that will provide data for the PLC to monitor students’ progress.
Professional Learning Communities (PLC):
Tier 2 interventions will be determined during PLC meetings. Classroom teachers will review the
common assessments and other forms of data to identify students who need Tier 2 interventions.
Classroom teachers are responsible to take the lead in determining Tier 2 intervention needs while
utilizing the expertise of intervention teachers.
Decision-Making Process:
PLC conversations should continually include discussion regarding student success. If students
continue to struggle to learn a specific skill or demonstrate more significant need, there should be
discussion at the PLC regarding the appropriateness of the intervention used or the fidelity of the
intervention. After multiple interventions have been unsuccessful, the PLC should discuss if a School
Intervention Team referral is appropriate for a specific student.
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
15
Tier 3
Tier 3
Entry Criteria:
Tier 1
Effective Core Instruction
for All Students
Tier 2
Tier 3 interventions are intended for students who have below
Supplemental Interventions for
Some
Identified
Students
course/grade level learning gaps. These interventions take place
in addition to Tier 1, core instruction and Tier 2 interventions.
Tier 3
It is not required that the students score below the 10th percentile
Intensive
Interventions
in any standardized assessment to qualify for Tier 3 interventions.
for Individual
Students
A student qualifies for Tier 3 interventions based on recommendation
of the School Intervention Team’s (SIT) review of the student’s data.
Each fall students who received Tier 3 interventions the spring prior, may
begin receiving Tier 3 interventions without a SIT meeting, depending on
the student’s current needs at the start of the school year.
Instruction:
Tier 3 instruction is specific to each student’s needs and is dependent on diagnostic assessment data.
Tier 3 is:
• Small group, or individual instruction.
• Increased frequency of intervention.
• Additional minutes to Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruction. Tier 3 occurs during the school day,
in addition to scheduled Tier 2 intervention times, not in place of Tier 2 interventions
(for example, WIN time).
Progress Monitoring:
Students receiving Tier 3 interventions will be progress monitored in a frequency based on the specific
intervention being used. See Progress Monitoring Guidelines and Graduate Criteria for further details.
Decisions regarding appropriate progress monitoring tools are made at the SIT meeting. The teacher
providing the Tier 3 intervention is expected to frequently communicate student progress with the
classroom/referring teacher.
Professional Learning Communities (PLC):
PLC conversations should continually include discussion regarding the student’s Tier 1 and
Tier 2 progress. The classroom or referring teacher will participate in the SIT team’s discussions
of the student receiving Tier 3 intervention. See MTSS School Intervention Team (SIT) Process on
page 17 for more details.
Decision-Making Process:
See MTSS School Intervention Team (SIT) Process on page 17 for more details.
16
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Tier 3
MTSS School Intervention Team (SIT) Process
Significant concern regarding student performance is identified. Concern may
be generated by parent/guardian, classroom teacher or school staff.
Tier 1 and Tier 2 interventions have been tried
(with fidelity) without success.
Parent/
Guardian is
updated regarding
student’s progress with
intervention.
SIT referral form is completed and submitted to
SIT coordinator.
SIT team meeting: Review data, determine appropriate
next steps.
If Tier 3 intervention is appropriate. SIT coordinator makes
arrangements with intervention team for appropriate
Intervention.
Parent/
Guardian is
updated regarding
student’s progress with
intervention.
Implement intervention plan. Progress monitor student
as required by intervention strategy.
Parent/
Guardian is
updated regarding
student’s progress with
intervention.
Three week check-in meeting with SIT to evaluate
current progress. Make any adjustments needed.
Six week check-in meeting with SIT to evaluate
current progress.
Parent/
Guardian is
updated regarding
student’s progress with
intervention.
Team
determines
appropriate next
steps.
Goal
met:
Discontinued
intervention
Significant
progress:
Maintain
intervention
Below average
progress:
Change
intervention
No/minimal
progress:
Change
intervention*
*If the intervention plan and its revisions are not successful in helping the student meet the goal(s),
the SIT may make a referral to the Child Study Team for a possible special education evaluation.
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
17
Tier 3
Tier 3 Goal Setting
Instructional Level Goal Setting
Tier 1
Effective Core Instruction
for All Students
Tier 2
• Utilize AIMSweb formula for setting goals as a starting
Supplemental Interventions for
Some
Identified
Students
point this year
• AIMSweb ROI Growth Norms using the spring column
Tier 3
Intensive
• Set aggressive goals (the far right hand side of the table
Interventions
for Individual
provides a range of goals in the 75th and 85th percentile)
Students
• Formula:
■ Reading: baseline + number of instructional weeks
(27 based on a start the last week of September) x ROI
(per week gain)
Example: 80 + (27 x1.91) Goal = round to whole number
■ Math: baseline + number of instructional weeks (27 based on a start the
last week of September) x ROI (per week gain)
■ This goal will be changed when the student is moved to a new instructional level;
this will allow the avoidance of a flat line (goal setting at course/grade level)
■ If using a measure that records errors, it is recommended to aim for 95% accuracy which
will help calculate the allowable amount of errors.
■ Example: Goal = 139 132 is 95% of 139. 139-132 = 7 allowable errors
Off-course/grade level Goal Setting
• When a student is performing below course/grade level, it is necessary to complete an
additional assessment by dropping down one course/grade level (off course/grade level),
assessing with one passage or probe (called SLA-survey level assessment), and then
determining if this is the appropriate level to set a goal. Continue this process until appropriate
instructional level is identified to set an off-course/grade level goal. The appropriate
instructional level is identified when the student scores above the 10th percentile. SLAs are
completed via paper/pencil.
• The off-course/grade level goal setting cycle identified above will continue until the students
has scored three consecutive data points above the aimline at their actual course/grade level.
18
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Tier 3
Tier 3 Progress Monitoring
Guidelines and Graduate
Criteria
Tier 1
Effective Core Instruction
for All Students
Tier 2
Supplemental Interventions for
Some Identified Students
Progress Monitoring:
Tier 3
Intensive
• Typically occurs at a student’s instructional level
Interventions
for Individual
(below course/grade level when necessary).
Students
• When student is progress monitored at a performance level
that is below course/grade level, three consecutive data points
must occur above the aimline. Teachers will continue to set a new
goal at the subsequent course/grade level until student has met graduate
criteria at their current course/grade level.
• Progress monitoring:
■ Occurs at performance level
■ Twice per week—reading; one time per week—math. This may be altered based on
SIT meeting discussions
◆ One time per week if a short week
◆ Progress monitoring can happen more frequently based on SIT meeting discussion
■ Use a tool that matches your diagnostic outcome
■ After graduating a student, PM for two additional months bi-weekly (every other week)
Graduate Criteria:
• Three consecutive data points are expected above the aimline
(their current course/grade level)
• Decision is based on data points; not length of intervention
• The SIT decision is a critical component of the this process; the data from AIMSweb,
STAR 360, or other sources is one piece of data to be reviewed. Teacher input, staff input,
communication, etc. are essential.
Exit Criteria:
• The student left district
• The parent requested for Tier 3 services to be discontinued
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
19
Programming Guidelines
Guidelines Regarding Federal
Programming Requirements
Those providing intervention services and funded via Title I and ADSIS:
Central Services will send certifications to building administrators two times a year to verify the
funding source and percentage of work under these funding sources (Title I and ADSIS). This will
negate the need for Time Record completion by Title teachers as was past practice.
Compacts and Guardian Permission Forms:
Each site (including principal, intervention teachers, classroom teachers, parents) is responsible to
develop a compact/guardian permission that identifies the partnership between home and school. This
compact/guardian permission will be written in such a manner that it will meet requirements for both
ADSIS and Title I in order to avoid redundancy and confusion in distribution.
Parent/Guardian Permission:
• Must be presented to parent/guardian up to three times as an attempt to obtain a signature. • Forms must provide a check box giving permission and another check box refusing
permission.
• Permission form will state that programming will proceed if not received by a predetermined
date; before that time frame has ended, two additional parent/guardian attempts must be
made and documented.
• Verbal permission is acceptable and must be documented on a permission form.
• Each site is to keep record of the permission forms.
• The date of effectiveness should reference one year to allow for services to begin the first day
of the next school year.
• Each site’s developed Title Compact/guardian permission must be placed in the site’s Title
Google drive file. Sites are required to send an email to OCI notifying of updated Title
Compact/guardian permission.
• A site with ADSIS federal funding only will send a copy of the site developed guardian
permission via email to OCI upon completion yearly.
• Building administrators will share the revised compact/guardian permission with site Title
and ADSIS teachers for use each year.
Guardian permission forms are to be saved for a total of three years. Each site will develop a system to
save these documents should they be requested by MDE. If utilizing the Cumulative Folders, sites will
need to determine another means to save these in a centralized location for a period of three years.
While MDE would not request to see permissions from Compensatory Education funded
intervention, each site will save these permission forms for a total of three years.
20
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Programming Guidelines
Service Hour Spreadsheets (ADSIS):
ADSIS funded interventionists will complete the service hour spreadsheets on or before the 5th of
each month. OCI will send the updated version at the start of the school year.
Special Education Services Clarification:
• ADSIS cannot serve ANY special education student (speech included); this does not mean
that they cannot receive Tier 2 and Tier 3 support.
■ ADSIS funded teachers are not the only staff members allowed to provide intervention
support. Title I, classroom teachers, compensatory funded teachers, or other trained staff
can provide interventions.
• Title I can serve special education students, but not in the area of their IEPs.
■ IEP goal for reading only: could receive math intervention by a title teacher
■ IEP goal for math only: could receive reading intervention by a title teacher
■ IEP goal for behavior only: could receive either math/reading intervention by a title teacher
Academic Behavior Checklist:
Tracking and measuring the indirect impact of ADSIS intervention on academic behavior is a
requirement of ADSIS funding via the Minnesota Department of Education. The checklist will be
completed for any student who receives ADSIS services. The following process will allow this to occur
with fidelity:
• When a student receives ADSIS funded services the first time in an academic year, the
classroom teacher will complete the Academic Behavior Checklist.
• When a student is no longer receiving ADSIS services (exit/graduate/move/end of year), the
classroom teacher will complete the Academic Behavior Checklist.
• The behavior checklist for ADSIS serviced students will be completed two times in a given
year (once when beginning and once when completing services) regardless of times a student
accesses ADSIS services in an academic year.
• To access the ADSIS Academic Behavior Checklist, go to www.isd15.org/curriculum. In the
left-hand column, select Staff Resources. The password to login is: curriculum. On the Staff
Resources page, you will find the link to the ADSIS Academic Behavior Checklist.
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
21
Specific Subject Area Information
Reading Diagnostic Menu
Phonemic
Awareness
Phonics/
Decoding
Fluency
Comprehension
Sight Words
22
K
1
2
3
4
5
Press
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
Press
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
Press
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
Press
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
Press
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
Press
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
Press
Orton
Gillingham
Press
Orton
Gillingham
Reading
Mastery
Fast Cycle
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
Press
Orton
Gillingham
Reading
Mastery
Fast Cycle
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
Press
Orton
Gillingham
Corrective
Reading
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
Press
Orton
Gillingham
Corrective
Reading
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
Press
Orton
Gillingham
Corrective
Reading
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
RN placement
QRI
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
RN placement
QRI
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
RN placement
QRI
Corrective
Reading
placement test
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
RN placement
QRI
Corrective
Reading
placement test
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
RN placement
QRI
Corrective
Reading
placement test
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
QRI
CARS
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
QRI
CARS
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
QRI
CARS
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
QRI
CARS
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
QRI
CARS
HMH Reading
Diagnostic
Frye Sight
Words Lists
QRI
Frye Sight
Words Lists
QRI
Orton
Gillingham
Frye Sight
Words Lists
QRI
Orton
Gillingham
Frye Sight
Words Lists
QRI
Orton
Gillingham
Frye Sight
Words Lists
QRI
Orton
Gillingham
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Specific Subject Area Information
Reading Interventions
Phonemic
Awareness
K
1
2
3
Great Leaps K-2
PRESS
Journeys Toolkit
PALS
Phonemic
Awareness
Instructional
Routine Words
Syllables
Rhyme
Phoneme
Isolation
Phoneme
Blending
Phoneme
Segmenting
Great Leaps K-2
Great Leaps K-2
Great Leaps 3-5
PRESS
PRESS
PRESS
Great Leaps K-2
Great Leaps K-2
PRESS
Journeys Toolkit
PALS
Orton
Gillingham
Decode Words
in Connected
Text
Decode and
Write Words
Decode and
Write Words
with Blends
Decode and
Write Words
with Silent the
“e”
Decode and
Write Words
with More than
One Syllable
PRESS
Journeys Toolkit
PALS
Orton
Gillingham
Letter Sound
Correspondence
Phonics/
Decoding
Blending Sounds
in Short Words
Segmenting
Sounds in Short
Words
Writing Simple
Words
Decoding Words
in Connected
Text
Journeys Toolkit Journeys Toolkit Journeys Toolkit
PALS
PALS
PALS
Phoneme
Isolation
4
5
Great Leaps
3-5
Great Leaps
3-5
PRESS
PRESS
Journeys
Toolkit
Journeys
Toolkit
PALS
PALS
Great Leaps
3-5
Great Leaps
3-5
PRESS
PRESS
Journey’s
Toolkit
Journey’s
Toolkit
Phoneme
Blending
Phoneme
Segmenting
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
Great Leaps K-2
Great Leaps 3-5
PRESS
PRESS
Journeys Toolkit Journey’s Toolkit
Read and Write
Irregularly
Spelled Words
Diagraphs and
Consonant
Blends
Base Words and
Suffixes #1
Base Words and
Suffixes #2
Words with
More than One
Syllable
23
Specific Subject Area Information
Reading Interventions
Fluency
Vocabulary
K
1
2
3
Great Leaps K-2
Great Leaps K-2
PALS
PALS
Great Leaps
3-5
Read Live
PALS
PALS
High Frequency
Words
PRESS
Great Leaps 3-5
PALS
Read Live
PRESS
Phonetically
Regular Words
Irregularly
Spelled Words
Connected
Text with
Appropriate
Phrasing
Great Leaps
3-5
PRESS
Great Leaps K-2
PALS
Read Live
PRESS
Phonetically
Regular Words
Irregularly
Spelled Words
Connected
Text with
Appropriate
Phrasing
Read Live
Read Live
PRESS
PRESS
PRESS
PRESS
PRESS
Categorize
Describe
Describe
and Describe
in General
in General
Features
and
Specific
and Specific
Language
Language
Make
Connections
Identify
and
Sort
Identify and Sort
Base Words and
into
Conceptual
into Conceptual
Affixes
Categories
Categories
Synonyms,
New Vocabulary New Vocabulary
Antonyms,
Multiple
Homophones
Meanings
Multiple
Using Context
Meaning Words
Clues
in Context
PRESS
Categorize
and Describe
Features
Make
Connections
Base Words and
Affixes
Multiple
Meaning Words
in Context
Shades of
Meaning
PRESS
PRESS
Great Leaps K-5
Great Leaps 3-5
Great Leaps
3-5
Great Leaps
3-5
Journey’s
Toolkit
Journey’s
Toolkit
CARS/Stars
CARS/Stars
PRESS
PRESS
PALS S
PALS
Reading
Text with
Appropriate
Expression
Great Leaps K-5
Journeys Toolkit Journeys Toolkit
CARS/Stars
PRESS
PRESS
Identify Story
Answer and
Grammar
Ask Explicit
Questions
Answer and
Ask Explicit
Identify Main
Questions
Idea
Comprehension
Answering
Identify Main
Higher Level
Idea
Questions
Answering
Sequence Events
Higher Level
in a Story
Questions
Identify Details
to Support
Answers
24
Great Leaps K-5
Journey’s Toolkit
CARS/Stars
PRESS
PALS
Sequence Events
in a Text
Compare and
Contrast in One
Text #1
Compare and
Contrast in One
Text #2
Cause and Effect
Author’s
Purpose
Retell and
Summarize
Journey’s Toolkit
CARS/Stars
PRESS
PALS
Cause and Effect
Author’s
Purpose
4
5
Compare and
Contrast in
Two Texts
Making
Inferences
Retell and
Summarize
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Specific Subject Area Information
Reading Interventions
K
Sight Words
1
2
3
4
5
PALS
PALS
Great
Great
Great
Great Leaps K-2
Great Leaps K-2
Leaps K-5
Leaps K-5
Leaps K-5
Florida Center
for Reading
Research
Florida Center
for Reading
Research
Florida Center
for Reading
Research
Florida Center
for Reading
Research
Florida Center
for Reading
Research
Words Their
Way
Words Their
Way
Words Their
Way
Words Their
Way
Words Their
Way
Dibels
Dibels
Dibels
Dibels
Dibels
Comprehensive
Supplemental
Florida Center
for Reading
Research
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
25
Specific Subject Area Information
Math Interventions
K
Number and
Operation
focusMATH
Kindergarten
Great Number
Line Race!
1
2
3
focusMATH
Grade 1
Book B
focusMATH
Grade 2
Book A
focusMATH
Grade 3
Book B
Great Number
Line Race!
Strategic
Number
Counting
Errorless
Learning
Strategic
Number
Counting
Copy Cover
Compare
focusMATH
Grade 3
Book A
Folding In
Technique
Problem
Solving
Peer tutoring
focusMATH
Grade 3
Book B
Self monitoring
focusMATH
Grade 2
Book B
Algebra
26
focusMATH
Grade 5
Book A & B
Peer tutoring
Self monitoring
focusMATH
Grade 4
Book A & C
Problem
Solving
Errorless
Learning
focusMATH
Grade 4
Book A & B
focusMATH
Grade 3
Book A
Self monitoring
CAMS/STAMS
Folding In
Technique
Copy Cover
Compare
Peer tutoring
CAMS/STAMS
Errorless
Learning
Peer tutoring
Folding In
Technique
Comprehensive
Copy Cover
Compare
Folding In
Technique
Copy Cover
Compare
focusMATH
Kindergarten
5
Self monitoring
focusMATH
Grade 1
Book A
Geometry and
Measurement
4
focusMATH
Grade 2
Book C
focusMATH
Grade 2
Book C
focusMATH
Grade 2
Book C
focusMATH
Grade 2
Book C
CAMS/STAMS
CAMS/STAMS
CAMS/STAMS
CAMS/STAMS
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Appendix
Student Intervention Team (SIT) Forms
Click on the links below to access the appropriate SIT forms. These forms are fillable PDFs. You will
need to download the form to your desktop, name appropriately, save, and complete the form.
• Student Intervention Team (SIT) Screening Summary Form
• Student Intervention Team (SIT) Intervention Plan Form
• Student Intervention Team (SIT) Plan Evaluation Form
SIT Forms are also available from Infinite Campus under PLP, Form Documents.
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
27
Appendix
Essential Learning Benchmarks (ELBs)
• K-12 English/Language Arts ELBs
• K-12 Math ELBs
28
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Appendix
Elementary ELB Process 2015-18
Math 2015-16
ELA 2015-16
ELB Draft
Develop ELB draft by
March 14, 2016
LAC Review
LAC review ELBs for
horizontal and vertical
articulation spring/
summer 2016
Tier 1/Core instruction
Tier 1/Core instruction
Teams fully
implement* 2-3 ELBs
by Spring 2016
Learning
targets
Develop CA
process
2016-17 Teams fully
implement* approx
3-5 ELBs
Develop Tier 2
programming
Learning
targets
2016-17 Teams fully
implement* approx
4-6 total ELBs
Learning
targets
Develop CA
process
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
Develop CA
process
Develop Tier 2
programming
2017-18 Teams fully
implement* approx
6-10 total ELBs
Develop Tier 2
programming
Learning
targets
Develop CA
process
Develop Tier 2
programming
29
Appendix
Elementary ELA ELB Process 2015-18
Key
ELA 2015-16
Develop ELB draft by
March 14, 2016
LAC review ELBs for
horizontal and vertical
articulation spring/
summer 2016
* Fully implemented
ELB:
Tier 1/Core instruction
2016-17 Teams fully
implement* approx 3-5
ELBs
Learning
targets
Develop CA
process
ELB: Essential learning
benchmark
LAC: Learning area
committee
CA: Common formative
and summative
assessments
PLC: Professional learning
community
ELA: English language arts
Develop Tier 2
programming
• Learning Targets identified
• CA (formative and
summative) developed and
process implemented and
assessments administrated
via Mastery Connect
• Tier 2 interventions &
enrichments identified
• PLC meets to analyze
CAs to determine student
needs/strengths and to
answer the four critical
questions
2017-18 Teams fully
implement* approx 6-10
total ELBs
Learning
targets
30
Develop CA
process
Develop Tier 2
programming
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Appendix
Elementary Math ELB Process 2015-18
Key
Math 2015-16
ELB: Essential learning
benchmark
LAC: Learning area
committee
CA: Common formative
and summative
assessments
PLC: Professional learning
community
ELA: English language arts
ELB Draft
LAC Review
* Fully implemented
ELB:
Tier 1/Core instruction
Teams fully implement*
2-3 ELBs by Spring 2016
Learning
targets
Develop CA
process
Develop Tier 2
programming
• Learning Targets identified
• CA (formative and
summative) developed and
process implemented and
assessments administrated
via Mastery Connect
• Tier 2 interventions &
enrichments identified
• PLC meets to analyze
CAs to determine student
needs/strengths and to
answer the four critical
questions
2016-17 Teams fully
implement* approx 4-6
total ELBs
Learning
targets
Develop CA
process
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
Develop Tier 2
programming
31
Appendix
Secondary ELB Process 2015-18
Key
Identify ELBs for
each area
ELB: Essential learning
benchmark
LAC: Learning area
committee
CA: Common formative
and summative
assessments
PLC: Professional learning
community
ELA: English language arts
Align ELBs to specific
courses
Teams fully implement*
3-5 ELBs per course
2016-17
Learning
targets
Develop
Common
Assessments
* Fully implemented
ELB:
Develop Tier 2
intervention &
enrichment
2017-18 Teams fully
implement* approx 6-10
total ELBs
Learning
targets
32
Develop
Common
Assessments
• Learning Targets identified
• CA (formative and
summative) developed and
process implemented and
assessments administrated
via Mastery Connect
• Tier 2 interventions &
enrichments identified
• PLC meets to analyze
CAs to determine student
needs/strengths and to
answer the four critical
questions
Develop Tier 2
intervention &
enrichment
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
What does proficient
student work look like?
Provide an example or
description.
What is the essential
benchmark to be learned?
Describe in student friendly
language.
What prior knowledge,
skills, or vocabulary are
needed for a student to
master this benchmark?
Prerequisite Skills
Trimester:
Adapted from Gregory, Kaufeldt, Mattos, 2016
What assessment will we
use to measure student
mastery?
Common Summative
Assessment
What will we do when
students have already
learned this benchmark?
Extension Standards
Essential Learning Benchmark Chart
E
L
P
When will this benchmark
be taught?
When Taught
Team Members:
M
A
S
Example of Rigor
Subject:
Description of Benchmark
Grade:
What do we want our students to learn?
Curriculum & Instruction
4115 Ambassador Boulevard NW, St. Francis, MN 55070
763-753-7040 • www.isd15.org
Independent School District 15
Appendix
Click here to link to the Essential Learning Benchmark Chart as a PDF
Click here to link to the Essential Learning Benchmark Chart in Google Docs
33
Appendix
MasteryConnect (MC) Districtwide Implementation 4-year Plan
2019-20
• All teachers K-12 (E-21?) have are utilizing MC to track student learning.
• All ELBs K-12 are located in MC for all subject areas.
• Common assessments have been developed and implemented for all ELBs across all content areas.
2018-19
• MC Use expectations:
■ Elementary: Create trackers for all social studies/science ELBs, including common assessments.
Update, revise and add needed instructional materials to trackers developed in 2016-18.
■ Middle School: Update, revise and add needed instructional materials to trackers developed in
2016-18.
■ High School: Develop trackers for any remaining courses based on appropriate ELBs for course,
including common assessments. Update, revise and add needed instructional materials to trackers
developed in 2016-18.
2017-18
• MC Use expectations:
■ Elementary: Create trackers for all Math ELBs, including common assessments. Update, revise and
add needed instructional materials to trackers developed in 2016-17.
■ Middle School: Update, revise and add needed instructional materials to trackers developed in
2016-17.
■ High School: Choose a second course per trimester to create trackers based on appropriate ELBs
for course, including common assessments. Update, revise and add needed instructional materials
to trackers developed in 2016-17.
2016-17
• Required MC training (1 hour) during back-to-school week for all teaching staff.
■ Those who have already received MC 1.0 training will participate in MC 2.0 training.
• Sept-Dec required four, 30 min MC trainings (1 per month Sept-Dec) at 2.0 and 2.+ level for all staff. ■ Utilize PLC opportunities to analyze MC implementation and needed areas of training .
• MC Mentors will continue to provide on-going MC support to staff at each site.
■ OCI will monitor curriculum maps and solicit feedback regarding accuracy, efficiency and use of
maps make revisions as needed for following school year.
• OCI will develop curriculum maps for math and English language arts by August 2016. These will be
the district common curriculum maps to guide instruction K-12 throughout the content areas.
• MC Use expectations:
■ Elementary: Create trackers for 4-6 full implemented math ELBs; and 3-5 full implemented ELA
ELBs.
■ Middle School: Create content area trackers for ELBs, including common assessments.
■ High School: Choose one course per trimester to create trackers based on appropriate ELBs for
course, including common assessments.
• OCI will evaluate possibility of opening student/parent portal to MC.
2015-16
• MC Mentors have received on-going professional development regarding the implementation of MC.
• Other non-mentor teachers have begun using MC voluntarily.
• Voluntary MC trainings provided throughout spring 2016 for teachers who want to begin their MC
training (MC 1.0 level training).
• OST, OCI evaluate current technology and needs for effective MC implementation by all staff in fall
2016.
34
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Appendix
Benchmarking Calendar and Assessments Matrix
2016-17
Benchmarking: is conducted throughout the school year for all current students and new students
to the district. The dates for benchmarking as well as the assessments used for benchmarking are as
follows:
Grades K-5
Month
Assessment Window Including Data Entry
September
September 8-16
January
January 17-27
May
May 9-19
Grades 6-12
Month
Assessment Window Including Data Entry
September
September 8-30
January
January 3-February 28
May
May 9-31
Students in grades K-5 will be benchmarked three times per year. For middle and high school
students’ benchmark schedule will vary based on the grade level. See pages 36-38 for more details.
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
35
Appendix
Benchmarking Calendar and Assessments Matrix
2016-17
The following tables identify the various benchmark assessments that are given during each
benchmarking period, for each grade/level.
• Grades K-5
• Grades 6-8
• Grades 9-12
Fall
Kindergarten
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
LNF LETTER
NAMING
FLUENCY
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
LSF LETTER
SOUND FLUENCY
PSF PHONEMIC
SEG FLUENCY
MAZE GROUP
ADMINISTERED
MAZE GROUP
ADMINISTERED
MAZE GROUP
ADMINISTERED
ISF INITIAL
SOUND FLUENCY
NWF NONSENSE
WORD FLUENCY
OCM ORAL
COUNTING
M-COMP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
M-COMP GROUP M-COMP GROUP M-COMP GROUP M-COMP GROUP
ADMINISTERED ADMINISTERED ADMINISTERED ADMINISTERED
NIM NUMBER
IDENTIFICATION
NIM NUMBER
IDENTIFICATION
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
QDM QUANTITY QDM QUANTITY
DISCRIMINATION DISCRIMINATION
MNM MISSING
NUMBER
MNM MISSING
NUMBER
Winter
Kindergarten
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
LSF LETTER
SOUND FLUENCY
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
PSF PHONEMIC
SEG FLUENCY
PSF PHONEMIC
SEG FLUENCY
MAZE GROUP
ADMINISTERED
MAZE GROUP
ADMINISTERED
MAZE GROUP
ADMINISTERED
NWF NONSENSE
WORD FLUENCY
NWF NONSENSE
WORD
NIM NUMBER
IDENTIFICATION
M-COMP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
M-COMP GROUP M-COMP GROUP M-COMP GROUP M-COMP GROUP
ADMINISTERED ADMINISTERED ADMINISTERED ADMINISTERED
QDM QUANTITY
DISCRIMINATION
NIM NUMBER
IDENTIFICATION
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
MNM MISSING
NUMBER
QDM QUANTITY
DISCRIMINATION
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
MNM MISSING
NUMBER
36
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Appendix
Benchmarking Calendar and Assessments Matrix
2016-17
Spring
Kindergarten
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
LSF LETTER
SOUND FLUENCY
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
R-CBM Reading
MAZE GROUP
ADMINISTERED
MAZE GROUP
ADMINISTERED
MAZE GROUP
ADMINISTERED
PSF PHONEMIC
SEG FLUENCY
NWF NONSENSE
WORD FLUENCY
M-COMP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
QDM QUANTITY QDM QUANTITY
DISCRIMINATION DISCRIMINATION
MNM MISSING
NUMBER
M-COMP GROUP M-COMP GROUP M-COMP GROUP M-COMP GROUP
ADMINISTERED ADMINISTERED ADMINISTERED ADMINISTERED
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
M-CAP GROUP
ADMINISTERED
MNM MISSING
NUMBER
Lexile Levels for Benchmark Reading Probes
Kindergarten
Grade 1
Lexile up to 300
Grade 2
Lexile 140-500
Grade 3
Lexile 330-700
Grade 4
Lexile 445-810
Grade 5
Lexile 565-910
September: #1, 2, 3
(average)
September: #1-3
(average)
September: #1-3
(average)
September: #1-3
(average)
September: #1-3
(average)
September: #1-3
(average)
January: #1, 2, 3
(average)
January: #1-3
(average)
January: #1-3
(average)
January:#1-3
(average)
January:#1-3
(average)
January: #1-3
(average)
May: #1, 2, 3
(average)
May: #1-3
(average)
May: #1-3
(average)
May: #1-3
(average)
May: #1-3
(average)
May: #1-3
(average)
#1, lexile 240
#1, lexile 420
#1, lexile 630
#1, lexile 770
#1, lexile 810
#2, lexile 210
#2, lexile 440
#2, lexile 460
#2, lexile 650
#2, lexile 780
#3, lexile 250
#3, lexile 470
#3, lexile 570
#3, lexile 670
#3, lexile 770
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
37
Appendix
Benchmarking Calendar and Assessments Matrix
2016-17
Fall
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade 9
Grade 10
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
(identified
students)
Grade 11
Grade 12
Saints Academy will benchmark all students with the STAR Reading Test
Crossroads will benchmark all students at appropriate intervals using AIMsweb
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
(identified
students)
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
Saints Academy will benchmark all students with the STAR Math Test
Crossroads will benchmark all students at appropriate intervals using AIMsweb
Winter
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
Grade 9
Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12
Saints Academy will benchmark all students with the STAR Reading Test Crossroads will benchmark all students at appropriate
intervals using AIMsweb
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
Saints Academy will benchmark all students with the STAR Math Test
Crossroads will benchmark all students at appropriate intervals using AIMsweb
Spring
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade 9
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
(identified
students)
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
(identified
students)
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
STAR Reading
Enterprise Test
(at the completion
of Engl 9)
Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12
Saints Academy will benchmark all students with the STAR Reading Test
Crossroads will benchmark all students at appropriate intervals using AIMsweb
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
(identified
students)
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
(identified
students)
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
STAR Math
Enterprise Test
Saints Academy will benchmark all students with the STAR Math Test
Crossroads will benchmark all students at appropriate intervals using AIMsweb
38
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Appendix
Elementary Cut Score
Progressions by Grade Level
Key: Tier 1—At or Above Benchmark
Tier 2—Below Benchmark
Tier 3—Well Below Benchmark
AIMSweb/DIBELS Kindergarten Cut Scores for Risk Calculation
Reading
Letter Naming Fluency (LNF)
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Fall
13+
4-12
0-3
Winter
38+
25-37
0-24
Spring
46+
35-45
0-34
Fall
2+
1
0
Winter
20+
10-19
0-9
Spring
33+
24-32
0-23
Winter
18+
7-17
0-6
Spring
41+
26-40
0-25
Winter
19+
9-18
0-8
Spring
33+
23-32
0-22
Letter Sound Fluency (LSF)
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF)
Fall
Tier 1
Not Given
Tier 2
Not Given
Tier 3
Not Given
Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF)
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Fall
Not Given
Not Given
Not Given
DIBELS First Sound Fluency
Fall
Winter
Tier 1
23+
Not Given
Tier 2
12-22
Not Given
Tier 3
0-11
Not Given
Updated Fall 2016 to the DIBELSNext Recommended Benchmark Goals 2012
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
Spring
Not Given
Not Given
Not Given
39
Appendix
Elementary Cut Score
Progressions by Grade Level
Key: Tier 1—At or Above Benchmark
Tier 2—Below Benchmark
Tier 3—Well Below Benchmark
AIMSweb Kindergarten Cut Scores for Risk Calculation
Math
OCM (Oral Counting Measure)
Fall
30+
18-29
0-17
Winter
57+
40-56
0-39
Spring
70+
57-69
0-56
NIM (Number Identification Measure)
Fall
Tier 1
22+
Tier 2
9-21
Tier 3
0-8
Winter
45+
31-44
0-30
Spring
55+
45-54
0-44
QDM (Quantity Discrimination Measure)
Fall
Tier 1
7+
Tier 2
3-6
Tier 3
0-2
Winter
16+
9-15
0-8
Spring
25+
16-24
0-15
Winter
9+
5-8
0-4
Spring
13+
9-12
0-8
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
MNM (Missing Number Measure)
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
40
Fall
2+
1
0
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Appendix
Elementary Cut Score
Progressions by Grade Level
Key: Tier 1—At or Above Benchmark
Tier 2—Below Benchmark
Tier 3—Well Below Benchmark
AIMSweb First Grade Cut Scores for Risk Calculation
Reading
R-CBM/ORF (Oral Reading Fluency)
Fall
Tier 1
Not Defined
Tier 2
Not Defined
Tier 3
Not Defined
Winter
30+
15-29
0-14
Spring
53+
25-52
0-24
Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF)
Fall
Tier 1
35+
Tier 2
22-34
Tier 3
0-21
Winter
45+
36-44
0-35
Spring
49+
41-48
0-40
Winter
45+
35-44
0-34
Spring
57+
44-56
0-44
Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF)
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Fall
27+
18-26
0-17
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
41
Appendix
Elementary Cut Score
Progressions by Grade Level
Key: Tier 1—At or Above Benchmark
Tier 2—Below Benchmark
Tier 3—Well Below Benchmark
AIMSweb First Grade Cut Scores for Risk Calculation
Math
M-COMP (Computation)
Winter
26+
15-25
0-14
Spring
37+
26-36
0-25
NIM (Number Identification Measure)
Fall
Tier 1
36+
Tier 2
23-35
Tier 3
0-22
Winter
55+
45-54
0-44
Spring
60+
50-59
0-49
QDM (Quantity Discrimination Measure)
Fall
Tier 1
18+
Tier 2
10-17
Tier 3
0-9
Winter
28+
22-27
0-21
Spring
32+
27-31
0-26
Winter
16+
13-15
0-12
Spring
18+
14-17
0-13
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Fall
7+
3-6
0-2
MNM (Missing Number Measure)
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
42
Fall
9+
6-8
0-5
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Appendix
Elementary Cut Score
Progressions by Grade Level
Key: Tier 1—At or Above Benchmark
Tier 2—Below Benchmark
Tier 3—Well Below Benchmark
AIMSweb Second Grade Cut Scores for Risk Calculation
Reading
R-CBM/ORF (Oral Reading Fluency)
Fall
Tier 1
55+
Tier 2
22-54
Tier 3
0-21
Winter
80+
48-79
0-47
Spring
92+
62-91
0-61
Fall
15+
9-14
0-8
Winter
30+
19-29
0-18
Spring
38+
27-37
0-26
M-CAP (Concepts and Applications)
Fall
Tier 1
5+
Tier 2
3-4
Tier 3
0-2
Winter
13+
7-12
0-6
Spring
18+
9-17
0-8
Math
M-COMP (Computation)
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
43
Appendix
Elementary Cut Score
Progressions by Grade Level
Key: Tier 1—At or Above Benchmark
Tier 2—Below Benchmark
Tier 3—Well Below Benchmark
AIMSweb Third Grade Cut Scores for Risk Calculation
Reading
R-CBM/ORF (Oral Reading Fluency)
Fall
Tier 1
77+
Tier 2
43-76
Tier 3
0-42
Winter
105+
65-104
0-64
Spring
119+
84-118
0-83
Fall
11+
7-10
0-6
Winter
14+
9-13
0-8
Spring
15+
10-14
0-9
Fall
20+
11-19
0-10
Winter
40+
24-39
0-23
Spring
53+
32-52
0-31
Winter
10+
6-9
0-5
Spring
14+
9-13
0-8
MAZE
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Math
M-COMP (Computation)
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
M-CAP (Concepts and Applications)
Fall
Tier 1
5+
Tier 2
3-4
Tier 3
0-2
44
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Appendix
Elementary Cut Score
Progressions by Grade Level
Key: Tier 1—At or Above Benchmark
Tier 2—Below Benchmark
Tier 3—Well Below Benchmark
AIMSweb Fourth Grade Cut Scores for Risk Calculation
Reading
R-CBM/ORF (Oral Reading Fluency)
Fall
Tier 1
105+
Tier 2
68-104
Tier 3
0-67
Winter
120+
87-119
0-86
Spring
136+
103-135
0-102
Fall
12+
8-11
0-7
Winter
19+
13-18
0-12
Spring
19+
13-18
0-12
Fall
23+
14-22
0-13
Winter
42+
27-41
0-26
Spring
55+
35-54
0-34
M-CAP (Concepts and Applications)
Fall
Tier 1
13+
Tier 2
7-12
Tier 3
0-6
Winter
15+
9-14
0-8
Spring
18+
9-17
0-8
MAZE
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Math
M-COMP (Computation)
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
45
Appendix
Elementary Cut Score
Progressions by Grade Level
Key: Tier 1—At or Above Benchmark
Tier 2—Below Benchmark
Tier 3—Well Below Benchmark
AIMSweb Fifth Grade Cut Scores for Risk Calculation
Reading
R-CBM/ORF (Oral Reading Fluency)
Fall
Tier 1
114+
Tier 2
79-113
Tier 3
0-78
Winter
129+
99-128
0-97
Spring
143+
107-142
0-106
Fall
16+
11-15
0-10
Winter
21+
14-20
0-13
Spring
25+
18-24
0-17
Fall
12+
7-11
0-6
Winter
20+
11-19
0-10
Spring
30+
17-29
0-16
M-CAP (Concepts and Applications)
Fall
Tier 1
8+
Tier 2
5-7
Tier 3
0-4
Winter
10+
7-9
0-6
Spring
13+
7-12
0-6
MAZE
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Math
M-COMP (Computation)
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
46
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
Appendix
Secondary Cut Scores for Risk Calculation (MCA correlated)
STAR 360 Grades 6-12
Does Not Meet
Partially Meets
Meets Standards
Exceeds
Grade 6
Below 564 SS
564-693 SS
694-975 SS
At/Above 976 SS
Grade 7
Below 665 SS
665-840 SS
841-1158 SS
At/Above 1159 SS
Grade 8
Below 734 SS
734-905 SS
906-1243 SS
At/Above 1244 SS
Grade 9
Below 849 SS
849-976 SS
977-1295 SS
At/Above 1296 SS
Grade 10
Below 879 SS
879-1044 SS
1045-1315 SS
At/Above 1316
Grade 11
Below 907 SS
907- 1100 SS
1101-1322 SS
At/Above 1323
Grade 12
Below 949 SS
949-1172 SS
1173-1333 SS
At/Above 1334
SS--Scaled Score is calculated based on the difficulty of questions in a student’s test and the number of
correct responses. STAR scaled scores range from 0-1400 for STAR Reading and STAR Math. They can
be used to compare student performance over time and across grade levels.
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
47
References
References
Buffum, A., Mattos, M., Weber, C. Simplifying Response to Intervention Four Essential Principles.
Solution Tree Press, Bloomington, IN, 2012.
Burns, M., & Gibbons, K. Implementing Response-to-Intervention in Elementary and Secondary
Schools. Routledge, New York, NY, 2008.
Burns, M., Riley-TIllman, T., & VanDerHeyden, A. RTI Applications Academic and Behavioral
Interventions Vol. 1. The Guilford Press, New York, NY, 2012.
Critical Components of MTSS:
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/EdExc/StandImplToolkit/Exploration/CriticalCompMTSS/
index.html.
Eaker, Robert. Kid by Kid, Skill by Skill: Becoming a Professional Learning Community, presented at
Professional Learning Communities at Work Institute, Minneapolis, MN, June, 2016.
Gregory, G., Kaufeldt, M. Mattos, M. Best Practices at Tier 1. Solution Tree Press,
Bloomington, IN, 2016.
48
Revised October 2016 • Independent School District 15 • St. Francis, Minnesota
MTSS Handbook 2016-17 • Revised October 2016
49