MTSS — Tiers Overview & Tier 3 Intensive Supports (Reading & Math)

Student & System Context (from source documents)

3.What are Multiple Tiers of Instruction and Intervention?

A multi-tiered model of instruction/intervention is fundamental to an effective MTSS . Although the

number of tiers may vary, the three-tiered model based on increasing levels of intensity matched to

student need is most common. Instruction is often intensified by increasing time, narrowing the focus to

specific barrier skills, and/or reducing the size of the group. The characteristics of each tier, as well as

how data are used to make educational decisions within each tier are described in the table below:

Characteristics Data and Decision Making

• High quality, evidence -based instructional

routines, differentiated small group instruction,

curriculum materials, etc.

Assessments & Progress Monitoring (from source documents)

The “deep-dive” processing domains (math analogs to reading’s 5)

Cross-cutting contributors: visual–spatial processing, working memory, attention/executive skills, math vocabulary/language, and writing/motor (setting up work).

Diagnostic data to collect (quick, repeatable probes)

• Magnitude & counting: dot-card subitizing; number-line placement; compare numbers (symbolic & non-symbolic); count-on/back tasks.
• Symbolic & place value: write/say a number shown with base-ten blocks; expanded form ↔ standard form; “How many tens/hundreds?”; rename a number (e.g., 342 = 300+40+2).
• Operations & relations: match story → operation; true/false equations (7+5=__+6); part–whole/compare diagrams; fraction on number line.
• Structure of expressions/equations: bracket “chunks” that go together; identify what operation a line of work represents; sort worked examples by structure.
• Schemas & representations: classify word problems (change/compare/combine; part–part–whole; ratio/proportion); translate table ↔ graph ↔ equation; choose/justify a diagram.

(Progress monitor weekly on the taught subskill; add a general math CBM every 2 weeks—computation and concepts/applications.)

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

• Magnitude & counting
• Daily number-line work (placement, hops); dot-card subitizing with quick “how do you know?”; count-on/back routines; compose/decompose to 5/10.
• Symbolic mapping & place value
• Concrete→Representational→Abstract (CRA) with base-ten blocks, bundles, place-value charts; rename numbers; compare by place; read/write/expand/round within the same lesson.
• Operations & relations
• Teach meanings of operations with bar/tape diagrams and story mats; equal-sign as balance; part–whole/compare structures; fraction magnitude on number line; ratio tables.
• Structure of expressions/equations
• Explicit lessons on “what goes together” (chunking), structure talk (“I see a double”, “I see a group of 3 tens”), algebra tiles/area models; worked-example → faded-example → independent sets.
• Schemas & representations
• Schema-based instruction for common word-problem types; choose/build the representation first, then write the equation; daily representation translation mini-drills (diagram ↔ equation ↔ sentence).
• Fluency (when accuracy is solid)
• Strategy-based facts (make-ten, doubles/near doubles); brief, accurate-first timings; interleaved practice; cumulative review.

Keep grade-level content in class via access supports (read-aloud/TTS for word problems, guided notes, worked-example scaffolds, graphic organizers). Tier 3 targets underlying processing, not a separate curriculum.

Implementation & training

• Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week; group of 1–3; align tasks to the diagnosed domain.
• Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; many opportunities to respond; immediate specific feedback; daily cumulative review.
• Materials: Manipulatives (base-ten blocks, number lines, fraction strips, algebra tiles), schematic diagrams (tape/bar, part–whole), controllable text/graphics for readability.
• Generalization: Make the same diagrams and language show up in core class; post structure anchor charts (e.g., “equal means same value,” “units travel through the work”).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

• Weekly: brief probe on the focus domain (e.g., place-value rename set; fraction number-line items).
• Bi-weekly: general math CBM (one computation, one concepts/applications).
• Rules (after 4–6 points):
• Below aimline → intensify (time, group size, explicitness; add CRA step; narrow goal).
• Above aimline → raise goal or fade to Tier 2 on that domain.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

• Digit-by-digit errors, place value confusions → return to CRA with rename/compose-decompose; slow rate; require verbal “place talk.”
• Equals sign as “do something” → daily true/false equations and balance-scale models; sentences like “__ and __ have the same value.”
• Fraction = “two numbers stacked” → fraction as number on a line; unit fraction building; area ↔ number-line bridges.
• Knows steps, not structure → sort problems by structure before solving; compare two worked examples; ask “what stays the same?”
• Fluency flat with high accuracy → repeated-reading analog: set easier accuracy-first goals, then phrasing/rate for computation; interleave known/unknown facts.

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Purpose (what Tier 3 data are for)

• Identify how the student learns and what supports they need (instruction + access + AT), then fund those supports via eligibility, not to label a student as incapable.
• Teams must not use RTI/MTSS to delay or deny an IDEA evaluation when a disability is suspected. Child Find still applies. ()

Guardrails before you interpret

• Fidelity & intensity verified (minutes, group size 1–3, explicit/cumulative instruction). WWC guidance backs daily intensive instruction at Tier 3 with frequent progress checks. ()
• Access barriers removed (AIM/AEM, TTS, calculators/accessible math tools, language scaffolds).
• Progress monitoring in place with simple decision rules (e.g., 4-point rule, trend vs. aimline). If 4 consecutive points fall below the aimline → change something; above → raise goal. Use trendline if data are variable. ()

A. Reading — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

Keep grade-level thinking intact via access supports while instruction remediates specific skills. WWC practice guides endorse intensive, systematic small-group instruction with ongoing monitoring. ()

B. Math — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

IES/WWC math guidance: explicit, systematic intervention; deep work on whole numbers (K–5) and rational numbers (4–8); visual representations; schema-based problem solving; ongoing progress monitoring. ()

C. Turning patterns into eligibility + AT decisions (the flow)

• Converge evidence
• Tier 3 progress graphs (slope + level), error patterns, fidelity logs, classroom work, observations.
• If insufficient response with fidelity → suspect disability and proceed to comprehensive evaluation; do not wait for more RTI if suspicion exists. ()
• Hypothesize learning profile
• Map patterns to processing domains (reading: phonological/orthographic/semantic/syntactic/discourse; math: magnitude/place-value/operations/structure/schemas).
• Note strengths (e.g., listening comprehension, verbal reasoning) to plan access.
• Name the support needs (instruction + access)
• Instructional targets (what we will teach intensively).
• Access/AT features (what we will provide so grade-level work continues now).
• Document for eligibility
• Tie the need for accommodations/AT/services to the data (minutes, goals, progress-monitoring plan, decision rules).
• Remember: Eligibility triggers funding for the supports so the student can make progress in grade-level standards—it isn’t a verdict about ability.
• Set decision rules in the plan (write them down)
• Example: “Weekly PM; if 4 points below aimline → intensify (time/group/CRA step); if 4 above → raise goal.” ()

Supports, Features & Interventions (from source documents)

The “deep-dive” processing domains (math analogs to reading’s 5)

Cross-cutting contributors: visual–spatial processing, working memory, attention/executive skills, math vocabulary/language, and writing/motor (setting up work).

Diagnostic data to collect (quick, repeatable probes)

• Magnitude & counting: dot-card subitizing; number-line placement; compare numbers (symbolic & non-symbolic); count-on/back tasks.
• Symbolic & place value: write/say a number shown with base-ten blocks; expanded form ↔ standard form; “How many tens/hundreds?”; rename a number (e.g., 342 = 300+40+2).
• Operations & relations: match story → operation; true/false equations (7+5=__+6); part–whole/compare diagrams; fraction on number line.
• Structure of expressions/equations: bracket “chunks” that go together; identify what operation a line of work represents; sort worked examples by structure.
• Schemas & representations: classify word problems (change/compare/combine; part–part–whole; ratio/proportion); translate table ↔ graph ↔ equation; choose/justify a diagram.

(Progress monitor weekly on the taught subskill; add a general math CBM every 2 weeks—computation and concepts/applications.)

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

• Magnitude & counting
• Daily number-line work (placement, hops); dot-card subitizing with quick “how do you know?”; count-on/back routines; compose/decompose to 5/10.
• Symbolic mapping & place value
• Concrete→Representational→Abstract (CRA) with base-ten blocks, bundles, place-value charts; rename numbers; compare by place; read/write/expand/round within the same lesson.
• Operations & relations
• Teach meanings of operations with bar/tape diagrams and story mats; equal-sign as balance; part–whole/compare structures; fraction magnitude on number line; ratio tables.
• Structure of expressions/equations
• Explicit lessons on “what goes together” (chunking), structure talk (“I see a double”, “I see a group of 3 tens”), algebra tiles/area models; worked-example → faded-example → independent sets.
• Schemas & representations
• Schema-based instruction for common word-problem types; choose/build the representation first, then write the equation; daily representation translation mini-drills (diagram ↔ equation ↔ sentence).
• Fluency (when accuracy is solid)
• Strategy-based facts (make-ten, doubles/near doubles); brief, accurate-first timings; interleaved practice; cumulative review.

Keep grade-level content in class via access supports (read-aloud/TTS for word problems, guided notes, worked-example scaffolds, graphic organizers). Tier 3 targets underlying processing, not a separate curriculum.

Implementation & training

• Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week; group of 1–3; align tasks to the diagnosed domain.
• Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; many opportunities to respond; immediate specific feedback; daily cumulative review.
• Materials: Manipulatives (base-ten blocks, number lines, fraction strips, algebra tiles), schematic diagrams (tape/bar, part–whole), controllable text/graphics for readability.
• Generalization: Make the same diagrams and language show up in core class; post structure anchor charts (e.g., “equal means same value,” “units travel through the work”).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

• Weekly: brief probe on the focus domain (e.g., place-value rename set; fraction number-line items).
• Bi-weekly: general math CBM (one computation, one concepts/applications).
• Rules (after 4–6 points):
• Below aimline → intensify (time, group size, explicitness; add CRA step; narrow goal).
• Above aimline → raise goal or fade to Tier 2 on that domain.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

• Digit-by-digit errors, place value confusions → return to CRA with rename/compose-decompose; slow rate; require verbal “place talk.”
• Equals sign as “do something” → daily true/false equations and balance-scale models; sentences like “__ and __ have the same value.”
• Fraction = “two numbers stacked” → fraction as number on a line; unit fraction building; area ↔ number-line bridges.
• Knows steps, not structure → sort problems by structure before solving; compare two worked examples; ask “what stays the same?”
• Fluency flat with high accuracy → repeated-reading analog: set easier accuracy-first goals, then phrasing/rate for computation; interleave known/unknown facts.

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Purpose (what Tier 3 data are for)

• Identify how the student learns and what supports they need (instruction + access + AT), then fund those supports via eligibility, not to label a student as incapable.
• Teams must not use RTI/MTSS to delay or deny an IDEA evaluation when a disability is suspected. Child Find still applies. ()

Guardrails before you interpret

• Fidelity & intensity verified (minutes, group size 1–3, explicit/cumulative instruction). WWC guidance backs daily intensive instruction at Tier 3 with frequent progress checks. ()
• Access barriers removed (AIM/AEM, TTS, calculators/accessible math tools, language scaffolds).
• Progress monitoring in place with simple decision rules (e.g., 4-point rule, trend vs. aimline). If 4 consecutive points fall below the aimline → change something; above → raise goal. Use trendline if data are variable. ()

A. Reading — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

Keep grade-level thinking intact via access supports while instruction remediates specific skills. WWC practice guides endorse intensive, systematic small-group instruction with ongoing monitoring. ()

B. Math — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

IES/WWC math guidance: explicit, systematic intervention; deep work on whole numbers (K–5) and rational numbers (4–8); visual representations; schema-based problem solving; ongoing progress monitoring. ()

C. Turning patterns into eligibility + AT decisions (the flow)

• Converge evidence
• Tier 3 progress graphs (slope + level), error patterns, fidelity logs, classroom work, observations.
• If insufficient response with fidelity → suspect disability and proceed to comprehensive evaluation; do not wait for more RTI if suspicion exists. ()
• Hypothesize learning profile
• Map patterns to processing domains (reading: phonological/orthographic/semantic/syntactic/discourse; math: magnitude/place-value/operations/structure/schemas).
• Note strengths (e.g., listening comprehension, verbal reasoning) to plan access.
• Name the support needs (instruction + access)
• Instructional targets (what we will teach intensively).
• Access/AT features (what we will provide so grade-level work continues now).
• Document for eligibility
• Tie the need for accommodations/AT/services to the data (minutes, goals, progress-monitoring plan, decision rules).
• Remember: Eligibility triggers funding for the supports so the student can make progress in grade-level standards—it isn’t a verdict about ability.
• Set decision rules in the plan (write them down)
• Example: “Weekly PM; if 4 points below aimline → intensify (time/group/CRA step); if 4 above → raise goal.” ()

D. Quick “patterns → AT features” crosswalk (starter)

• Word-level decoding/fatigue → TTS, guided notes, reduced visual clutter, vocabulary pre-teach; maintain phonics/fluency instruction.
• Comprehension structure → graphic organizers, text-structure frames, language scaffolds; TTS to free working memory.
• Writing/dysgraphia → keyboarding, speech-to-text, word prediction, spelling/grammar support; structured writing templates.
• Print disability (any cause) → AIM/AEM (EPUB/HTML/PDF-tagged), TTS/audiobooks, braille/tactile graphics.
• Math place value/structure → CRA with base-ten blocks, number lines, algebra tiles; worked→faded examples.
• Math word-problem language → TTS/read-aloud (when construct allows), schema organizers, diagram-first routine, vocabulary frames.
• Computation bottleneck when solving multi-step problems → allow calculators and focus grading on reasoning/structure; keep fact work separate.

Tier 3 — Intensive Math Supports (MTSS)

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Tier 3 — Intensive Reading Supports (MTSS)

Purpose & principles

Intensive, not separate curriculum. Tier 3 increases specificity, time, and feedback; it does not replace grade-level expectations.

Hypothesis → intervention → data → adjust. Start with a skills hypothesis, choose aligned interventions, monitor frequently, and adjust by rules.

Diagnostic data to collect (match to need)

Collect brief, repeatable measures before starting and weekly thereafter.

Phonological processing (speech-sound awareness)

Quick probes: phoneme segmentation/blending, phoneme manipulation, nonsense-word accuracy.

Orthographic processing (print patterns, mapping)

Quick probes: high-frequency words, patterned word lists, spelling/encoding of taught patterns.

Semantic processing (word/concept meaning)

Quick probes: targeted vocabulary checks, morphology (roots/prefixes/suffixes), semantic mapping tasks.

Syntactic processing (sentence structure)

Quick probes: sentence combining/unscrambling accuracy, cloze with syntax focus, sentence imitation.

Discourse processing (connected text)

Quick probes: oral reading accuracy/fluency on controlled text, retell quality, main-idea/structure identification (narrative/expository).

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

Phonological

Daily explicit PA routines (isolation→blending→segmenting→manipulation); link to letters every session.

Orthographic

Systematic phonics with cumulative review; decoding/encoding of taught patterns; high-dosage practice with immediate error correction; orthographic mapping routines.

Semantic

Robust vocabulary instruction (student-friendly definitions, examples/non-examples, usage); morphology (roots/affixes) tied to content words.

Syntactic

Sentence combining, sentence frames that increase complexity, explicit instruction in clauses/connectives tied to current texts.

Discourse

Guided oral reading on decodable/controlled text for accuracy → phrasing → rate; comprehension strategy lessons targeting text structure (narrative/expository).

Keep grade-level content in class by adding access supports (e.g., text-to-speech, pre-teaching vocabulary, guided notes) while Tier 3 remediates specific skills.

Implementation & training

Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week, very small group (1–3) or 1:1 when needed.

Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; high opportunities to respond; immediate, specific feedback; built-in cumulative review.

Materials: Controlled text aligned to the skill focus; link Tier 3 words/passages to core topics when possible.

Fidelity: Brief checklist (components delivered, minutes, group size); admin/coach checks weekly.

Generalization: Teach/coach classroom use of access supports (notes, TTS, anchor charts, morphology walls).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

Weekly probes on the taught skill (plus an overall reading CBM every 2 weeks).

Graph vs. aimline; apply simple rules every 4–6 data points:

• 3–4\ points\ below\ aimline\ →\ intensify\ \(time,\ group\ size,\ explicitness,\ error\-correction\)\.
• 3–4\ points\ above\ →\ raise\ goal\ or\ transition\ to\ Tier\ 2\.

Document: goal, intervention, minutes, grouping, fidelity checks, graphs, decisions.

Documentation & compliance (what to write down)

Problem statement & hypothesis (processing area, evidence).

Intervention plan (who/what/when/minutes/materials).

Progress-monitoring plan (measure, schedule, decision rules).

Classroom access plan to keep work at grade-level complexity.

Family communication cadence and summary.

Note: Tier 3 ≠ special education by default; non-response over time with fidelity may prompt evaluation.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

Accuracy <95% on controlled text → drop level, increase modeling, tighten error-correction.

No growth after 4–6 data points → check fidelity/time; narrow the skill; reduce group size; add daily cumulative review.

Fluency flat but accuracy high → add repeated reading, phrasing/prosody work, easier rate goals; maintain comprehension checks.

Comprehension weak with adequate decoding → strengthen semantic/syntax work tied to core texts; teach text structures explicitly.

Tier 3 — Intensive Math Supports (MTSS)

The “deep-dive” processing domains (math analogs to reading’s 5)

Cross-cutting contributors: visual–spatial processing, working memory, attention/executive skills, math vocabulary/language, and writing/motor (setting up work).

Diagnostic data to collect (quick, repeatable probes)

Magnitude & counting: dot-card subitizing; number-line placement; compare numbers (symbolic & non-symbolic); count-on/back tasks.

Symbolic & place value: write/say a number shown with base-ten blocks; expanded form ↔ standard form; “How many tens/hundreds?”; rename a number (e.g., 342 = 300+40+2).

Operations & relations: match story → operation; true/false equations (7+5=__+6); part–whole/compare diagrams; fraction on number line.

Structure of expressions/equations: bracket “chunks” that go together; identify what operation a line of work represents; sort worked examples by structure.

Schemas & representations: classify word problems (change/compare/combine; part–part–whole; ratio/proportion); translate table ↔ graph ↔ equation; choose/justify a diagram.

(Progress monitor weekly on the taught subskill; add a general math CBM every 2 weeks—computation and concepts/applications.)

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

Magnitude & counting

Daily number-line work (placement, hops); dot-card subitizing with quick “how do you know?”; count-on/back routines; compose/decompose to 5/10.

Symbolic mapping & place value

Concrete→Representational→Abstract (CRA) with base-ten blocks, bundles, place-value charts; rename numbers; compare by place; read/write/expand/round within the same lesson.

Operations & relations

Teach meanings of operations with bar/tape diagrams and story mats; equal-sign as balance; part–whole/compare structures; fraction magnitude on number line; ratio tables.

Structure of expressions/equations

Explicit lessons on “what goes together” (chunking), structure talk (“I see a double”, “I see a group of 3 tens”), algebra tiles/area models; worked-example → faded-example → independent sets.

Schemas & representations

Schema-based instruction for common word-problem types; choose/build the representation first, then write the equation; daily representation translation mini-drills (diagram ↔ equation ↔ sentence).

Fluency (when accuracy is solid)

Strategy-based facts (make-ten, doubles/near doubles); brief, accurate-first timings; interleaved practice; cumulative review.

Keep grade-level content in class via access supports (read-aloud/TTS for word problems, guided notes, worked-example scaffolds, graphic organizers). Tier 3 targets underlying processing, not a separate curriculum.

Implementation & training

Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week; group of 1–3; align tasks to the diagnosed domain.

Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; many opportunities to respond; immediate specific feedback; daily cumulative review.

Materials: Manipulatives (base-ten blocks, number lines, fraction strips, algebra tiles), schematic diagrams (tape/bar, part–whole), controllable text/graphics for readability.

Generalization: Make the same diagrams and language show up in core class; post structure anchor charts (e.g., “equal means same value,” “units travel through the work”).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

Weekly: brief probe on the focus domain (e.g., place-value rename set; fraction number-line items).

Bi-weekly: general math CBM (one computation, one concepts/applications).

Rules (after 4–6 points):

Below aimline → intensify (time, group size, explicitness; add CRA step; narrow goal).

Above aimline → raise goal or fade to Tier 2 on that domain.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

Digit-by-digit errors, place value confusions → return to CRA with rename/compose-decompose; slow rate; require verbal “place talk.”

Equals sign as “do something” → daily true/false equations and balance-scale models; sentences like “__ and __ have the same value.”

Fraction = “two numbers stacked” → fraction as number on a line; unit fraction building; area ↔ number-line bridges.

Knows steps, not structure → sort problems by structure before solving; compare two worked examples; ask “what stays the same?”

Fluency flat with high accuracy → repeated-reading analog: set easier accuracy-first goals, then phrasing/rate for computation; interleave known/unknown facts.

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Purpose (what Tier 3 data are for)

Identify how the student learns and what supports they need (instruction + access + AT), then fund those supports via eligibility, not to label a student as incapable.

Teams must not use RTI/MTSS to delay or deny an IDEA evaluation when a disability is suspected. Child Find still applies. ()

Guardrails before you interpret

Fidelity & intensity verified (minutes, group size 1–3, explicit/cumulative instruction). WWC guidance backs daily intensive instruction at Tier 3 with frequent progress checks. ()

Access barriers removed (AIM/AEM, TTS, calculators/accessible math tools, language scaffolds).

Progress monitoring in place with simple decision rules (e.g., 4-point rule, trend vs. aimline). If 4 consecutive points fall below the aimline → change something; above → raise goal. Use trendline if data are variable. ()

A. Reading — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

Keep grade-level thinking intact via access supports while instruction remediates specific skills. WWC practice guides endorse intensive, systematic small-group instruction with ongoing monitoring. ()

B. Math — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

IES/WWC math guidance: explicit, systematic intervention; deep work on whole numbers (K–5) and rational numbers (4–8); visual representations; schema-based problem solving; ongoing progress monitoring. ()

C. Turning patterns into eligibility + AT decisions (the flow)

Converge evidence

Tier 3 progress graphs (slope + level), error patterns, fidelity logs, classroom work, observations.

If insufficient response with fidelity → suspect disability and proceed to comprehensive evaluation; do not wait for more RTI if suspicion exists. ()

Hypothesize learning profile

Map patterns to processing domains (reading: phonological/orthographic/semantic/syntactic/discourse; math: magnitude/place-value/operations/structure/schemas).

Note strengths (e.g., listening comprehension, verbal reasoning) to plan access.

Name the support needs (instruction + access)

Instructional targets (what we will teach intensively).

Access/AT features (what we will provide so grade-level work continues now).

Document for eligibility

Tie the need for accommodations/AT/services to the data (minutes, goals, progress-monitoring plan, decision rules).

Remember: Eligibility triggers funding for the supports so the student can make progress in grade-level standards—it isn’t a verdict about ability.

Set decision rules in the plan (write them down)

Example: “Weekly PM; if 4 points below aimline → intensify (time/group/CRA step); if 4 above → raise goal.” ()

D. Quick “patterns → AT features” crosswalk (starter)

Word-level decoding/fatigue → TTS, guided notes, reduced visual clutter, vocabulary pre-teach; maintain phonics/fluency instruction.

Comprehension structure → graphic organizers, text-structure frames, language scaffolds; TTS to free working memory.

Writing/dysgraphia → keyboarding, speech-to-text, word prediction, spelling/grammar support; structured writing templates.

Print disability (any cause) → AIM/AEM (EPUB/HTML/PDF-tagged), TTS/audiobooks, braille/tactile graphics.

Math place value/structure → CRA with base-ten blocks, number lines, algebra tiles; worked→faded examples.

Math word-problem language → TTS/read-aloud (when construct allows), schema organizers, diagram-first routine, vocabulary frames.

Computation bottleneck when solving multi-step problems → allow calculators and focus grading on reasoning/structure; keep fact work separate.

MTSS – Common Language/Common Understanding

3.What are Multiple Tiers of Instruction and Intervention?

A multi-tiered model of instruction/intervention is fundamental to an effective MTSS . Although the

number of tiers may vary, the three-tiered model based on increasing levels of intensity matched to

student need is most common. Instruction is often intensified by increasing time, narrowing the focus to

specific barrier skills, and/or reducing the size of the group. The characteristics of each tier, as well as

how data are used to make educational decisions within each tier are described in the table below:

Characteristics Data and Decision Making

Tier 1 • Instruction and supports provided to all students

• High quality, evidence -based instructional

routines, differentiated small group instruction,

curriculum materials, etc.

• Aligned to state standards or local standards

• Addresses academics, behavior, emotional and life skills

• Fine-tuned using a structured, data -based problem -

solving process to meet t he needs of the students

being served • Tier 1 alone should be sufficient for at least

80% of students to meet grade -level

expectations

• Screening data are used to determine

sufficiency of Tier 1 and to monitor the

progress of all students

• Formative data are used to guide real -time

adjustments to instruction

Tier 2 • Supplemental instruction, provided to some

students for whom Tier 1 alone is insufficient to

achieve Tier 1 expectations

• Provided in addition to Tier 1 instruction (more time for instruction)

• Focused on foundational knowledge and skill gaps

that pose barriers to students’ success in Tier 1

• Planned through a structured, data -based problem -

solving process, often using standard protocol

interventions that address high -probability barriers

(more narrowed focus)

• Delivered to students with similar needs

• Systematic and explicit instruction with multiple

opportunities for students to practice and receive

corrective feedback • Screening data are used to help identify

students at risk

• Diagnostic or other drilldown information is

used to identify student strengths and

weaknesses

• Frequent progress monitoring data are used to

measure student growth as well as to measure effectiveness of Tier 2 intervention for the group

• Tier 2 intervention should result in

improvement for at least 70% or more of

students receiving the services

Tier 3 • Most intensive, targeted instruction, provided to a

few students demonstrating either an intense or

severe need

• Provided in addition to Tier 1 and Tier 2 (even

more time)

• Instruction is individualized to address the student’s specific needs

• Planned using a structured, data -based problem -

solving process (even more narrowed focus)

• Delivered individually , or in very small groups

• Standards aligned , and integrated with Tier 1 and

Implementation & Training (from source documents)

The “deep-dive” processing domains (math analogs to reading’s 5)

Cross-cutting contributors: visual–spatial processing, working memory, attention/executive skills, math vocabulary/language, and writing/motor (setting up work).

Diagnostic data to collect (quick, repeatable probes)

• Magnitude & counting: dot-card subitizing; number-line placement; compare numbers (symbolic & non-symbolic); count-on/back tasks.
• Symbolic & place value: write/say a number shown with base-ten blocks; expanded form ↔ standard form; “How many tens/hundreds?”; rename a number (e.g., 342 = 300+40+2).
• Operations & relations: match story → operation; true/false equations (7+5=__+6); part–whole/compare diagrams; fraction on number line.
• Structure of expressions/equations: bracket “chunks” that go together; identify what operation a line of work represents; sort worked examples by structure.
• Schemas & representations: classify word problems (change/compare/combine; part–part–whole; ratio/proportion); translate table ↔ graph ↔ equation; choose/justify a diagram.

(Progress monitor weekly on the taught subskill; add a general math CBM every 2 weeks—computation and concepts/applications.)

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

• Magnitude & counting
• Daily number-line work (placement, hops); dot-card subitizing with quick “how do you know?”; count-on/back routines; compose/decompose to 5/10.
• Symbolic mapping & place value
• Concrete→Representational→Abstract (CRA) with base-ten blocks, bundles, place-value charts; rename numbers; compare by place; read/write/expand/round within the same lesson.
• Operations & relations
• Teach meanings of operations with bar/tape diagrams and story mats; equal-sign as balance; part–whole/compare structures; fraction magnitude on number line; ratio tables.
• Structure of expressions/equations
• Explicit lessons on “what goes together” (chunking), structure talk (“I see a double”, “I see a group of 3 tens”), algebra tiles/area models; worked-example → faded-example → independent sets.
• Schemas & representations
• Schema-based instruction for common word-problem types; choose/build the representation first, then write the equation; daily representation translation mini-drills (diagram ↔ equation ↔ sentence).
• Fluency (when accuracy is solid)
• Strategy-based facts (make-ten, doubles/near doubles); brief, accurate-first timings; interleaved practice; cumulative review.

Keep grade-level content in class via access supports (read-aloud/TTS for word problems, guided notes, worked-example scaffolds, graphic organizers). Tier 3 targets underlying processing, not a separate curriculum.

Implementation & training

• Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week; group of 1–3; align tasks to the diagnosed domain.
• Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; many opportunities to respond; immediate specific feedback; daily cumulative review.
• Materials: Manipulatives (base-ten blocks, number lines, fraction strips, algebra tiles), schematic diagrams (tape/bar, part–whole), controllable text/graphics for readability.
• Generalization: Make the same diagrams and language show up in core class; post structure anchor charts (e.g., “equal means same value,” “units travel through the work”).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

• Weekly: brief probe on the focus domain (e.g., place-value rename set; fraction number-line items).
• Bi-weekly: general math CBM (one computation, one concepts/applications).
• Rules (after 4–6 points):
• Below aimline → intensify (time, group size, explicitness; add CRA step; narrow goal).
• Above aimline → raise goal or fade to Tier 2 on that domain.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

• Digit-by-digit errors, place value confusions → return to CRA with rename/compose-decompose; slow rate; require verbal “place talk.”
• Equals sign as “do something” → daily true/false equations and balance-scale models; sentences like “__ and __ have the same value.”
• Fraction = “two numbers stacked” → fraction as number on a line; unit fraction building; area ↔ number-line bridges.
• Knows steps, not structure → sort problems by structure before solving; compare two worked examples; ask “what stays the same?”
• Fluency flat with high accuracy → repeated-reading analog: set easier accuracy-first goals, then phrasing/rate for computation; interleave known/unknown facts.

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Purpose (what Tier 3 data are for)

• Identify how the student learns and what supports they need (instruction + access + AT), then fund those supports via eligibility, not to label a student as incapable.
• Teams must not use RTI/MTSS to delay or deny an IDEA evaluation when a disability is suspected. Child Find still applies. ()

Guardrails before you interpret

• Fidelity & intensity verified (minutes, group size 1–3, explicit/cumulative instruction). WWC guidance backs daily intensive instruction at Tier 3 with frequent progress checks. ()
• Access barriers removed (AIM/AEM, TTS, calculators/accessible math tools, language scaffolds).
• Progress monitoring in place with simple decision rules (e.g., 4-point rule, trend vs. aimline). If 4 consecutive points fall below the aimline → change something; above → raise goal. Use trendline if data are variable. ()

A. Reading — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

Keep grade-level thinking intact via access supports while instruction remediates specific skills. WWC practice guides endorse intensive, systematic small-group instruction with ongoing monitoring. ()

B. Math — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

IES/WWC math guidance: explicit, systematic intervention; deep work on whole numbers (K–5) and rational numbers (4–8); visual representations; schema-based problem solving; ongoing progress monitoring. ()

C. Turning patterns into eligibility + AT decisions (the flow)

• Converge evidence
• Tier 3 progress graphs (slope + level), error patterns, fidelity logs, classroom work, observations.
• If insufficient response with fidelity → suspect disability and proceed to comprehensive evaluation; do not wait for more RTI if suspicion exists. ()
• Hypothesize learning profile
• Map patterns to processing domains (reading: phonological/orthographic/semantic/syntactic/discourse; math: magnitude/place-value/operations/structure/schemas).
• Note strengths (e.g., listening comprehension, verbal reasoning) to plan access.
• Name the support needs (instruction + access)
• Instructional targets (what we will teach intensively).
• Access/AT features (what we will provide so grade-level work continues now).
• Document for eligibility
• Tie the need for accommodations/AT/services to the data (minutes, goals, progress-monitoring plan, decision rules).
• Remember: Eligibility triggers funding for the supports so the student can make progress in grade-level standards—it isn’t a verdict about ability.
• Set decision rules in the plan (write them down)
• Example: “Weekly PM; if 4 points below aimline → intensify (time/group/CRA step); if 4 above → raise goal.” ()

D. Quick “patterns → AT features” crosswalk (starter)

• Word-level decoding/fatigue → TTS, guided notes, reduced visual clutter, vocabulary pre-teach; maintain phonics/fluency instruction.
• Comprehension structure → graphic organizers, text-structure frames, language scaffolds; TTS to free working memory.
• Writing/dysgraphia → keyboarding, speech-to-text, word prediction, spelling/grammar support; structured writing templates.
• Print disability (any cause) → AIM/AEM (EPUB/HTML/PDF-tagged), TTS/audiobooks, braille/tactile graphics.
• Math place value/structure → CRA with base-ten blocks, number lines, algebra tiles; worked→faded examples.
• Math word-problem language → TTS/read-aloud (when construct allows), schema organizers, diagram-first routine, vocabulary frames.
• Computation bottleneck when solving multi-step problems → allow calculators and focus grading on reasoning/structure; keep fact work separate.

Tier 3 — Intensive Math Supports (MTSS)

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Tier 3 — Intensive Reading Supports (MTSS)

Purpose & principles

Intensive, not separate curriculum. Tier 3 increases specificity, time, and feedback; it does not replace grade-level expectations.

Hypothesis → intervention → data → adjust. Start with a skills hypothesis, choose aligned interventions, monitor frequently, and adjust by rules.

Diagnostic data to collect (match to need)

Collect brief, repeatable measures before starting and weekly thereafter.

Phonological processing (speech-sound awareness)

Quick probes: phoneme segmentation/blending, phoneme manipulation, nonsense-word accuracy.

Orthographic processing (print patterns, mapping)

Quick probes: high-frequency words, patterned word lists, spelling/encoding of taught patterns.

Semantic processing (word/concept meaning)

Quick probes: targeted vocabulary checks, morphology (roots/prefixes/suffixes), semantic mapping tasks.

Syntactic processing (sentence structure)

Quick probes: sentence combining/unscrambling accuracy, cloze with syntax focus, sentence imitation.

Discourse processing (connected text)

Quick probes: oral reading accuracy/fluency on controlled text, retell quality, main-idea/structure identification (narrative/expository).

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

Phonological

Daily explicit PA routines (isolation→blending→segmenting→manipulation); link to letters every session.

Orthographic

Systematic phonics with cumulative review; decoding/encoding of taught patterns; high-dosage practice with immediate error correction; orthographic mapping routines.

Semantic

Robust vocabulary instruction (student-friendly definitions, examples/non-examples, usage); morphology (roots/affixes) tied to content words.

Syntactic

Sentence combining, sentence frames that increase complexity, explicit instruction in clauses/connectives tied to current texts.

Discourse

Guided oral reading on decodable/controlled text for accuracy → phrasing → rate; comprehension strategy lessons targeting text structure (narrative/expository).

Keep grade-level content in class by adding access supports (e.g., text-to-speech, pre-teaching vocabulary, guided notes) while Tier 3 remediates specific skills.

Implementation & training

Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week, very small group (1–3) or 1:1 when needed.

Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; high opportunities to respond; immediate, specific feedback; built-in cumulative review.

Materials: Controlled text aligned to the skill focus; link Tier 3 words/passages to core topics when possible.

Fidelity: Brief checklist (components delivered, minutes, group size); admin/coach checks weekly.

Generalization: Teach/coach classroom use of access supports (notes, TTS, anchor charts, morphology walls).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

Weekly probes on the taught skill (plus an overall reading CBM every 2 weeks).

Graph vs. aimline; apply simple rules every 4–6 data points:

• 3–4\ points\ below\ aimline\ →\ intensify\ \(time,\ group\ size,\ explicitness,\ error\-correction\)\.
• 3–4\ points\ above\ →\ raise\ goal\ or\ transition\ to\ Tier\ 2\.

Document: goal, intervention, minutes, grouping, fidelity checks, graphs, decisions.

Documentation & compliance (what to write down)

Problem statement & hypothesis (processing area, evidence).

Intervention plan (who/what/when/minutes/materials).

Progress-monitoring plan (measure, schedule, decision rules).

Classroom access plan to keep work at grade-level complexity.

Family communication cadence and summary.

Note: Tier 3 ≠ special education by default; non-response over time with fidelity may prompt evaluation.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

Accuracy <95% on controlled text → drop level, increase modeling, tighten error-correction.

No growth after 4–6 data points → check fidelity/time; narrow the skill; reduce group size; add daily cumulative review.

Fluency flat but accuracy high → add repeated reading, phrasing/prosody work, easier rate goals; maintain comprehension checks.

Comprehension weak with adequate decoding → strengthen semantic/syntax work tied to core texts; teach text structures explicitly.

Tier 3 — Intensive Math Supports (MTSS)

The “deep-dive” processing domains (math analogs to reading’s 5)

Cross-cutting contributors: visual–spatial processing, working memory, attention/executive skills, math vocabulary/language, and writing/motor (setting up work).

Diagnostic data to collect (quick, repeatable probes)

Magnitude & counting: dot-card subitizing; number-line placement; compare numbers (symbolic & non-symbolic); count-on/back tasks.

Symbolic & place value: write/say a number shown with base-ten blocks; expanded form ↔ standard form; “How many tens/hundreds?”; rename a number (e.g., 342 = 300+40+2).

Operations & relations: match story → operation; true/false equations (7+5=__+6); part–whole/compare diagrams; fraction on number line.

Structure of expressions/equations: bracket “chunks” that go together; identify what operation a line of work represents; sort worked examples by structure.

Schemas & representations: classify word problems (change/compare/combine; part–part–whole; ratio/proportion); translate table ↔ graph ↔ equation; choose/justify a diagram.

(Progress monitor weekly on the taught subskill; add a general math CBM every 2 weeks—computation and concepts/applications.)

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

Magnitude & counting

Daily number-line work (placement, hops); dot-card subitizing with quick “how do you know?”; count-on/back routines; compose/decompose to 5/10.

Symbolic mapping & place value

Concrete→Representational→Abstract (CRA) with base-ten blocks, bundles, place-value charts; rename numbers; compare by place; read/write/expand/round within the same lesson.

Operations & relations

Teach meanings of operations with bar/tape diagrams and story mats; equal-sign as balance; part–whole/compare structures; fraction magnitude on number line; ratio tables.

Structure of expressions/equations

Explicit lessons on “what goes together” (chunking), structure talk (“I see a double”, “I see a group of 3 tens”), algebra tiles/area models; worked-example → faded-example → independent sets.

Schemas & representations

Schema-based instruction for common word-problem types; choose/build the representation first, then write the equation; daily representation translation mini-drills (diagram ↔ equation ↔ sentence).

Fluency (when accuracy is solid)

Strategy-based facts (make-ten, doubles/near doubles); brief, accurate-first timings; interleaved practice; cumulative review.

Keep grade-level content in class via access supports (read-aloud/TTS for word problems, guided notes, worked-example scaffolds, graphic organizers). Tier 3 targets underlying processing, not a separate curriculum.

Implementation & training

Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week; group of 1–3; align tasks to the diagnosed domain.

Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; many opportunities to respond; immediate specific feedback; daily cumulative review.

Materials: Manipulatives (base-ten blocks, number lines, fraction strips, algebra tiles), schematic diagrams (tape/bar, part–whole), controllable text/graphics for readability.

Generalization: Make the same diagrams and language show up in core class; post structure anchor charts (e.g., “equal means same value,” “units travel through the work”).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

Weekly: brief probe on the focus domain (e.g., place-value rename set; fraction number-line items).

Bi-weekly: general math CBM (one computation, one concepts/applications).

Rules (after 4–6 points):

Below aimline → intensify (time, group size, explicitness; add CRA step; narrow goal).

Above aimline → raise goal or fade to Tier 2 on that domain.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

Digit-by-digit errors, place value confusions → return to CRA with rename/compose-decompose; slow rate; require verbal “place talk.”

Equals sign as “do something” → daily true/false equations and balance-scale models; sentences like “__ and __ have the same value.”

Fraction = “two numbers stacked” → fraction as number on a line; unit fraction building; area ↔ number-line bridges.

Knows steps, not structure → sort problems by structure before solving; compare two worked examples; ask “what stays the same?”

Fluency flat with high accuracy → repeated-reading analog: set easier accuracy-first goals, then phrasing/rate for computation; interleave known/unknown facts.

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Purpose (what Tier 3 data are for)

Identify how the student learns and what supports they need (instruction + access + AT), then fund those supports via eligibility, not to label a student as incapable.

Teams must not use RTI/MTSS to delay or deny an IDEA evaluation when a disability is suspected. Child Find still applies. ()

Guardrails before you interpret

Fidelity & intensity verified (minutes, group size 1–3, explicit/cumulative instruction). WWC guidance backs daily intensive instruction at Tier 3 with frequent progress checks. ()

Access barriers removed (AIM/AEM, TTS, calculators/accessible math tools, language scaffolds).

Progress monitoring in place with simple decision rules (e.g., 4-point rule, trend vs. aimline). If 4 consecutive points fall below the aimline → change something; above → raise goal. Use trendline if data are variable. ()

A. Reading — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

Keep grade-level thinking intact via access supports while instruction remediates specific skills. WWC practice guides endorse intensive, systematic small-group instruction with ongoing monitoring. ()

B. Math — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

IES/WWC math guidance: explicit, systematic intervention; deep work on whole numbers (K–5) and rational numbers (4–8); visual representations; schema-based problem solving; ongoing progress monitoring. ()

C. Turning patterns into eligibility + AT decisions (the flow)

Converge evidence

Tier 3 progress graphs (slope + level), error patterns, fidelity logs, classroom work, observations.

If insufficient response with fidelity → suspect disability and proceed to comprehensive evaluation; do not wait for more RTI if suspicion exists. ()

Hypothesize learning profile

Map patterns to processing domains (reading: phonological/orthographic/semantic/syntactic/discourse; math: magnitude/place-value/operations/structure/schemas).

Note strengths (e.g., listening comprehension, verbal reasoning) to plan access.

Name the support needs (instruction + access)

Instructional targets (what we will teach intensively).

Access/AT features (what we will provide so grade-level work continues now).

Document for eligibility

Tie the need for accommodations/AT/services to the data (minutes, goals, progress-monitoring plan, decision rules).

Remember: Eligibility triggers funding for the supports so the student can make progress in grade-level standards—it isn’t a verdict about ability.

Set decision rules in the plan (write them down)

Example: “Weekly PM; if 4 points below aimline → intensify (time/group/CRA step); if 4 above → raise goal.” ()

D. Quick “patterns → AT features” crosswalk (starter)

Word-level decoding/fatigue → TTS, guided notes, reduced visual clutter, vocabulary pre-teach; maintain phonics/fluency instruction.

Comprehension structure → graphic organizers, text-structure frames, language scaffolds; TTS to free working memory.

Writing/dysgraphia → keyboarding, speech-to-text, word prediction, spelling/grammar support; structured writing templates.

Print disability (any cause) → AIM/AEM (EPUB/HTML/PDF-tagged), TTS/audiobooks, braille/tactile graphics.

Math place value/structure → CRA with base-ten blocks, number lines, algebra tiles; worked→faded examples.

Math word-problem language → TTS/read-aloud (when construct allows), schema organizers, diagram-first routine, vocabulary frames.

Computation bottleneck when solving multi-step problems → allow calculators and focus grading on reasoning/structure; keep fact work separate.

Documentation, Eligibility & Compliance (from source documents)

Update (2025-09-24): OSEP clarified that an RTI/MTSS process cannot be used to delay or deny an IDEA evaluation; districts must ensure timely evaluations when a disability is suspected. source

Update (2025-09-24): Common progress‑monitoring decision rules include the four‑point rule and trendline analysis for making instructional changes. source

The “deep-dive” processing domains (math analogs to reading’s 5)

Cross-cutting contributors: visual–spatial processing, working memory, attention/executive skills, math vocabulary/language, and writing/motor (setting up work).

Diagnostic data to collect (quick, repeatable probes)

• Magnitude & counting: dot-card subitizing; number-line placement; compare numbers (symbolic & non-symbolic); count-on/back tasks.
• Symbolic & place value: write/say a number shown with base-ten blocks; expanded form ↔ standard form; “How many tens/hundreds?”; rename a number (e.g., 342 = 300+40+2).
• Operations & relations: match story → operation; true/false equations (7+5=__+6); part–whole/compare diagrams; fraction on number line.
• Structure of expressions/equations: bracket “chunks” that go together; identify what operation a line of work represents; sort worked examples by structure.
• Schemas & representations: classify word problems (change/compare/combine; part–part–whole; ratio/proportion); translate table ↔ graph ↔ equation; choose/justify a diagram.

(Progress monitor weekly on the taught subskill; add a general math CBM every 2 weeks—computation and concepts/applications.)

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

• Magnitude & counting
• Daily number-line work (placement, hops); dot-card subitizing with quick “how do you know?”; count-on/back routines; compose/decompose to 5/10.
• Symbolic mapping & place value
• Concrete→Representational→Abstract (CRA) with base-ten blocks, bundles, place-value charts; rename numbers; compare by place; read/write/expand/round within the same lesson.
• Operations & relations
• Teach meanings of operations with bar/tape diagrams and story mats; equal-sign as balance; part–whole/compare structures; fraction magnitude on number line; ratio tables.
• Structure of expressions/equations
• Explicit lessons on “what goes together” (chunking), structure talk (“I see a double”, “I see a group of 3 tens”), algebra tiles/area models; worked-example → faded-example → independent sets.
• Schemas & representations
• Schema-based instruction for common word-problem types; choose/build the representation first, then write the equation; daily representation translation mini-drills (diagram ↔ equation ↔ sentence).
• Fluency (when accuracy is solid)
• Strategy-based facts (make-ten, doubles/near doubles); brief, accurate-first timings; interleaved practice; cumulative review.

Keep grade-level content in class via access supports (read-aloud/TTS for word problems, guided notes, worked-example scaffolds, graphic organizers). Tier 3 targets underlying processing, not a separate curriculum.

Implementation & training

• Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week; group of 1–3; align tasks to the diagnosed domain.
• Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; many opportunities to respond; immediate specific feedback; daily cumulative review.
• Materials: Manipulatives (base-ten blocks, number lines, fraction strips, algebra tiles), schematic diagrams (tape/bar, part–whole), controllable text/graphics for readability.
• Generalization: Make the same diagrams and language show up in core class; post structure anchor charts (e.g., “equal means same value,” “units travel through the work”).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

• Weekly: brief probe on the focus domain (e.g., place-value rename set; fraction number-line items).
• Bi-weekly: general math CBM (one computation, one concepts/applications).
• Rules (after 4–6 points):
• Below aimline → intensify (time, group size, explicitness; add CRA step; narrow goal).
• Above aimline → raise goal or fade to Tier 2 on that domain.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

• Digit-by-digit errors, place value confusions → return to CRA with rename/compose-decompose; slow rate; require verbal “place talk.”
• Equals sign as “do something” → daily true/false equations and balance-scale models; sentences like “__ and __ have the same value.”
• Fraction = “two numbers stacked” → fraction as number on a line; unit fraction building; area ↔ number-line bridges.
• Knows steps, not structure → sort problems by structure before solving; compare two worked examples; ask “what stays the same?”
• Fluency flat with high accuracy → repeated-reading analog: set easier accuracy-first goals, then phrasing/rate for computation; interleave known/unknown facts.

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Purpose (what Tier 3 data are for)

• Identify how the student learns and what supports they need (instruction + access + AT), then fund those supports via eligibility, not to label a student as incapable.
• Teams must not use RTI/MTSS to delay or deny an IDEA evaluation when a disability is suspected. Child Find still applies. ()

Guardrails before you interpret

• Fidelity & intensity verified (minutes, group size 1–3, explicit/cumulative instruction). WWC guidance backs daily intensive instruction at Tier 3 with frequent progress checks. ()
• Access barriers removed (AIM/AEM, TTS, calculators/accessible math tools, language scaffolds).
• Progress monitoring in place with simple decision rules (e.g., 4-point rule, trend vs. aimline). If 4 consecutive points fall below the aimline → change something; above → raise goal. Use trendline if data are variable. ()

A. Reading — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

Keep grade-level thinking intact via access supports while instruction remediates specific skills. WWC practice guides endorse intensive, systematic small-group instruction with ongoing monitoring. ()

B. Math — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

IES/WWC math guidance: explicit, systematic intervention; deep work on whole numbers (K–5) and rational numbers (4–8); visual representations; schema-based problem solving; ongoing progress monitoring. ()

C. Turning patterns into eligibility + AT decisions (the flow)

• Converge evidence
• Tier 3 progress graphs (slope + level), error patterns, fidelity logs, classroom work, observations.
• If insufficient response with fidelity → suspect disability and proceed to comprehensive evaluation; do not wait for more RTI if suspicion exists. ()
• Hypothesize learning profile
• Map patterns to processing domains (reading: phonological/orthographic/semantic/syntactic/discourse; math: magnitude/place-value/operations/structure/schemas).
• Note strengths (e.g., listening comprehension, verbal reasoning) to plan access.
• Name the support needs (instruction + access)
• Instructional targets (what we will teach intensively).
• Access/AT features (what we will provide so grade-level work continues now).
• Document for eligibility
• Tie the need for accommodations/AT/services to the data (minutes, goals, progress-monitoring plan, decision rules).
• Remember: Eligibility triggers funding for the supports so the student can make progress in grade-level standards—it isn’t a verdict about ability.
• Set decision rules in the plan (write them down)
• Example: “Weekly PM; if 4 points below aimline → intensify (time/group/CRA step); if 4 above → raise goal.” ()

Tier 3 — Intensive Math Supports (MTSS)

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Tier 3 — Intensive Reading Supports (MTSS)

Purpose & principles

Intensive, not separate curriculum. Tier 3 increases specificity, time, and feedback; it does not replace grade-level expectations.

Hypothesis → intervention → data → adjust. Start with a skills hypothesis, choose aligned interventions, monitor frequently, and adjust by rules.

Diagnostic data to collect (match to need)

Collect brief, repeatable measures before starting and weekly thereafter.

Phonological processing (speech-sound awareness)

Quick probes: phoneme segmentation/blending, phoneme manipulation, nonsense-word accuracy.

Orthographic processing (print patterns, mapping)

Quick probes: high-frequency words, patterned word lists, spelling/encoding of taught patterns.

Semantic processing (word/concept meaning)

Quick probes: targeted vocabulary checks, morphology (roots/prefixes/suffixes), semantic mapping tasks.

Syntactic processing (sentence structure)

Quick probes: sentence combining/unscrambling accuracy, cloze with syntax focus, sentence imitation.

Discourse processing (connected text)

Quick probes: oral reading accuracy/fluency on controlled text, retell quality, main-idea/structure identification (narrative/expository).

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

Phonological

Daily explicit PA routines (isolation→blending→segmenting→manipulation); link to letters every session.

Orthographic

Systematic phonics with cumulative review; decoding/encoding of taught patterns; high-dosage practice with immediate error correction; orthographic mapping routines.

Semantic

Robust vocabulary instruction (student-friendly definitions, examples/non-examples, usage); morphology (roots/affixes) tied to content words.

Syntactic

Sentence combining, sentence frames that increase complexity, explicit instruction in clauses/connectives tied to current texts.

Discourse

Guided oral reading on decodable/controlled text for accuracy → phrasing → rate; comprehension strategy lessons targeting text structure (narrative/expository).

Keep grade-level content in class by adding access supports (e.g., text-to-speech, pre-teaching vocabulary, guided notes) while Tier 3 remediates specific skills.

Implementation & training

Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week, very small group (1–3) or 1:1 when needed.

Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; high opportunities to respond; immediate, specific feedback; built-in cumulative review.

Materials: Controlled text aligned to the skill focus; link Tier 3 words/passages to core topics when possible.

Fidelity: Brief checklist (components delivered, minutes, group size); admin/coach checks weekly.

Generalization: Teach/coach classroom use of access supports (notes, TTS, anchor charts, morphology walls).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

Weekly probes on the taught skill (plus an overall reading CBM every 2 weeks).

Graph vs. aimline; apply simple rules every 4–6 data points:

• 3–4\ points\ below\ aimline\ →\ intensify\ \(time,\ group\ size,\ explicitness,\ error\-correction\)\.
• 3–4\ points\ above\ →\ raise\ goal\ or\ transition\ to\ Tier\ 2\.

Document: goal, intervention, minutes, grouping, fidelity checks, graphs, decisions.

Documentation & compliance (what to write down)

Problem statement & hypothesis (processing area, evidence).

Intervention plan (who/what/when/minutes/materials).

Progress-monitoring plan (measure, schedule, decision rules).

Classroom access plan to keep work at grade-level complexity.

Family communication cadence and summary.

Note: Tier 3 ≠ special education by default; non-response over time with fidelity may prompt evaluation.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

Accuracy <95% on controlled text → drop level, increase modeling, tighten error-correction.

No growth after 4–6 data points → check fidelity/time; narrow the skill; reduce group size; add daily cumulative review.

Fluency flat but accuracy high → add repeated reading, phrasing/prosody work, easier rate goals; maintain comprehension checks.

Comprehension weak with adequate decoding → strengthen semantic/syntax work tied to core texts; teach text structures explicitly.

Tier 3 — Intensive Math Supports (MTSS)

The “deep-dive” processing domains (math analogs to reading’s 5)

Cross-cutting contributors: visual–spatial processing, working memory, attention/executive skills, math vocabulary/language, and writing/motor (setting up work).

Diagnostic data to collect (quick, repeatable probes)

Magnitude & counting: dot-card subitizing; number-line placement; compare numbers (symbolic & non-symbolic); count-on/back tasks.

Symbolic & place value: write/say a number shown with base-ten blocks; expanded form ↔ standard form; “How many tens/hundreds?”; rename a number (e.g., 342 = 300+40+2).

Operations & relations: match story → operation; true/false equations (7+5=__+6); part–whole/compare diagrams; fraction on number line.

Structure of expressions/equations: bracket “chunks” that go together; identify what operation a line of work represents; sort worked examples by structure.

Schemas & representations: classify word problems (change/compare/combine; part–part–whole; ratio/proportion); translate table ↔ graph ↔ equation; choose/justify a diagram.

(Progress monitor weekly on the taught subskill; add a general math CBM every 2 weeks—computation and concepts/applications.)

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

Magnitude & counting

Daily number-line work (placement, hops); dot-card subitizing with quick “how do you know?”; count-on/back routines; compose/decompose to 5/10.

Symbolic mapping & place value

Concrete→Representational→Abstract (CRA) with base-ten blocks, bundles, place-value charts; rename numbers; compare by place; read/write/expand/round within the same lesson.

Operations & relations

Teach meanings of operations with bar/tape diagrams and story mats; equal-sign as balance; part–whole/compare structures; fraction magnitude on number line; ratio tables.

Structure of expressions/equations

Explicit lessons on “what goes together” (chunking), structure talk (“I see a double”, “I see a group of 3 tens”), algebra tiles/area models; worked-example → faded-example → independent sets.

Schemas & representations

Schema-based instruction for common word-problem types; choose/build the representation first, then write the equation; daily representation translation mini-drills (diagram ↔ equation ↔ sentence).

Fluency (when accuracy is solid)

Strategy-based facts (make-ten, doubles/near doubles); brief, accurate-first timings; interleaved practice; cumulative review.

Keep grade-level content in class via access supports (read-aloud/TTS for word problems, guided notes, worked-example scaffolds, graphic organizers). Tier 3 targets underlying processing, not a separate curriculum.

Implementation & training

Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week; group of 1–3; align tasks to the diagnosed domain.

Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; many opportunities to respond; immediate specific feedback; daily cumulative review.

Materials: Manipulatives (base-ten blocks, number lines, fraction strips, algebra tiles), schematic diagrams (tape/bar, part–whole), controllable text/graphics for readability.

Generalization: Make the same diagrams and language show up in core class; post structure anchor charts (e.g., “equal means same value,” “units travel through the work”).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

Weekly: brief probe on the focus domain (e.g., place-value rename set; fraction number-line items).

Bi-weekly: general math CBM (one computation, one concepts/applications).

Rules (after 4–6 points):

Below aimline → intensify (time, group size, explicitness; add CRA step; narrow goal).

Above aimline → raise goal or fade to Tier 2 on that domain.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

Digit-by-digit errors, place value confusions → return to CRA with rename/compose-decompose; slow rate; require verbal “place talk.”

Equals sign as “do something” → daily true/false equations and balance-scale models; sentences like “__ and __ have the same value.”

Fraction = “two numbers stacked” → fraction as number on a line; unit fraction building; area ↔ number-line bridges.

Knows steps, not structure → sort problems by structure before solving; compare two worked examples; ask “what stays the same?”

Fluency flat with high accuracy → repeated-reading analog: set easier accuracy-first goals, then phrasing/rate for computation; interleave known/unknown facts.

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Purpose (what Tier 3 data are for)

Identify how the student learns and what supports they need (instruction + access + AT), then fund those supports via eligibility, not to label a student as incapable.

Teams must not use RTI/MTSS to delay or deny an IDEA evaluation when a disability is suspected. Child Find still applies. ()

Guardrails before you interpret

Fidelity & intensity verified (minutes, group size 1–3, explicit/cumulative instruction). WWC guidance backs daily intensive instruction at Tier 3 with frequent progress checks. ()

Access barriers removed (AIM/AEM, TTS, calculators/accessible math tools, language scaffolds).

Progress monitoring in place with simple decision rules (e.g., 4-point rule, trend vs. aimline). If 4 consecutive points fall below the aimline → change something; above → raise goal. Use trendline if data are variable. ()

A. Reading — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

Keep grade-level thinking intact via access supports while instruction remediates specific skills. WWC practice guides endorse intensive, systematic small-group instruction with ongoing monitoring. ()

B. Math — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

IES/WWC math guidance: explicit, systematic intervention; deep work on whole numbers (K–5) and rational numbers (4–8); visual representations; schema-based problem solving; ongoing progress monitoring. ()

C. Turning patterns into eligibility + AT decisions (the flow)

Converge evidence

Tier 3 progress graphs (slope + level), error patterns, fidelity logs, classroom work, observations.

If insufficient response with fidelity → suspect disability and proceed to comprehensive evaluation; do not wait for more RTI if suspicion exists. ()

Hypothesize learning profile

Map patterns to processing domains (reading: phonological/orthographic/semantic/syntactic/discourse; math: magnitude/place-value/operations/structure/schemas).

Note strengths (e.g., listening comprehension, verbal reasoning) to plan access.

Name the support needs (instruction + access)

Instructional targets (what we will teach intensively).

Access/AT features (what we will provide so grade-level work continues now).

Document for eligibility

Tie the need for accommodations/AT/services to the data (minutes, goals, progress-monitoring plan, decision rules).

Remember: Eligibility triggers funding for the supports so the student can make progress in grade-level standards—it isn’t a verdict about ability.

Set decision rules in the plan (write them down)

Example: “Weekly PM; if 4 points below aimline → intensify (time/group/CRA step); if 4 above → raise goal.” ()

Issues & Troubleshooting (from source documents)

The “deep-dive” processing domains (math analogs to reading’s 5)

Cross-cutting contributors: visual–spatial processing, working memory, attention/executive skills, math vocabulary/language, and writing/motor (setting up work).

Diagnostic data to collect (quick, repeatable probes)

• Magnitude & counting: dot-card subitizing; number-line placement; compare numbers (symbolic & non-symbolic); count-on/back tasks.
• Symbolic & place value: write/say a number shown with base-ten blocks; expanded form ↔ standard form; “How many tens/hundreds?”; rename a number (e.g., 342 = 300+40+2).
• Operations & relations: match story → operation; true/false equations (7+5=__+6); part–whole/compare diagrams; fraction on number line.
• Structure of expressions/equations: bracket “chunks” that go together; identify what operation a line of work represents; sort worked examples by structure.
• Schemas & representations: classify word problems (change/compare/combine; part–part–whole; ratio/proportion); translate table ↔ graph ↔ equation; choose/justify a diagram.

(Progress monitor weekly on the taught subskill; add a general math CBM every 2 weeks—computation and concepts/applications.)

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

• Magnitude & counting
• Daily number-line work (placement, hops); dot-card subitizing with quick “how do you know?”; count-on/back routines; compose/decompose to 5/10.
• Symbolic mapping & place value
• Concrete→Representational→Abstract (CRA) with base-ten blocks, bundles, place-value charts; rename numbers; compare by place; read/write/expand/round within the same lesson.
• Operations & relations
• Teach meanings of operations with bar/tape diagrams and story mats; equal-sign as balance; part–whole/compare structures; fraction magnitude on number line; ratio tables.
• Structure of expressions/equations
• Explicit lessons on “what goes together” (chunking), structure talk (“I see a double”, “I see a group of 3 tens”), algebra tiles/area models; worked-example → faded-example → independent sets.
• Schemas & representations
• Schema-based instruction for common word-problem types; choose/build the representation first, then write the equation; daily representation translation mini-drills (diagram ↔ equation ↔ sentence).
• Fluency (when accuracy is solid)
• Strategy-based facts (make-ten, doubles/near doubles); brief, accurate-first timings; interleaved practice; cumulative review.

Keep grade-level content in class via access supports (read-aloud/TTS for word problems, guided notes, worked-example scaffolds, graphic organizers). Tier 3 targets underlying processing, not a separate curriculum.

Implementation & training

• Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week; group of 1–3; align tasks to the diagnosed domain.
• Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; many opportunities to respond; immediate specific feedback; daily cumulative review.
• Materials: Manipulatives (base-ten blocks, number lines, fraction strips, algebra tiles), schematic diagrams (tape/bar, part–whole), controllable text/graphics for readability.
• Generalization: Make the same diagrams and language show up in core class; post structure anchor charts (e.g., “equal means same value,” “units travel through the work”).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

• Weekly: brief probe on the focus domain (e.g., place-value rename set; fraction number-line items).
• Bi-weekly: general math CBM (one computation, one concepts/applications).
• Rules (after 4–6 points):
• Below aimline → intensify (time, group size, explicitness; add CRA step; narrow goal).
• Above aimline → raise goal or fade to Tier 2 on that domain.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

• Digit-by-digit errors, place value confusions → return to CRA with rename/compose-decompose; slow rate; require verbal “place talk.”
• Equals sign as “do something” → daily true/false equations and balance-scale models; sentences like “__ and __ have the same value.”
• Fraction = “two numbers stacked” → fraction as number on a line; unit fraction building; area ↔ number-line bridges.
• Knows steps, not structure → sort problems by structure before solving; compare two worked examples; ask “what stays the same?”
• Fluency flat with high accuracy → repeated-reading analog: set easier accuracy-first goals, then phrasing/rate for computation; interleave known/unknown facts.

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Purpose (what Tier 3 data are for)

• Identify how the student learns and what supports they need (instruction + access + AT), then fund those supports via eligibility, not to label a student as incapable.
• Teams must not use RTI/MTSS to delay or deny an IDEA evaluation when a disability is suspected. Child Find still applies. ()

Guardrails before you interpret

• Fidelity & intensity verified (minutes, group size 1–3, explicit/cumulative instruction). WWC guidance backs daily intensive instruction at Tier 3 with frequent progress checks. ()
• Access barriers removed (AIM/AEM, TTS, calculators/accessible math tools, language scaffolds).
• Progress monitoring in place with simple decision rules (e.g., 4-point rule, trend vs. aimline). If 4 consecutive points fall below the aimline → change something; above → raise goal. Use trendline if data are variable. ()

A. Reading — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

Keep grade-level thinking intact via access supports while instruction remediates specific skills. WWC practice guides endorse intensive, systematic small-group instruction with ongoing monitoring. ()

B. Math — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

IES/WWC math guidance: explicit, systematic intervention; deep work on whole numbers (K–5) and rational numbers (4–8); visual representations; schema-based problem solving; ongoing progress monitoring. ()

C. Turning patterns into eligibility + AT decisions (the flow)

• Converge evidence
• Tier 3 progress graphs (slope + level), error patterns, fidelity logs, classroom work, observations.
• If insufficient response with fidelity → suspect disability and proceed to comprehensive evaluation; do not wait for more RTI if suspicion exists. ()
• Hypothesize learning profile
• Map patterns to processing domains (reading: phonological/orthographic/semantic/syntactic/discourse; math: magnitude/place-value/operations/structure/schemas).
• Note strengths (e.g., listening comprehension, verbal reasoning) to plan access.
• Name the support needs (instruction + access)
• Instructional targets (what we will teach intensively).
• Access/AT features (what we will provide so grade-level work continues now).
• Document for eligibility
• Tie the need for accommodations/AT/services to the data (minutes, goals, progress-monitoring plan, decision rules).
• Remember: Eligibility triggers funding for the supports so the student can make progress in grade-level standards—it isn’t a verdict about ability.
• Set decision rules in the plan (write them down)
• Example: “Weekly PM; if 4 points below aimline → intensify (time/group/CRA step); if 4 above → raise goal.” ()

D. Quick “patterns → AT features” crosswalk (starter)

• Word-level decoding/fatigue → TTS, guided notes, reduced visual clutter, vocabulary pre-teach; maintain phonics/fluency instruction.
• Comprehension structure → graphic organizers, text-structure frames, language scaffolds; TTS to free working memory.
• Writing/dysgraphia → keyboarding, speech-to-text, word prediction, spelling/grammar support; structured writing templates.
• Print disability (any cause) → AIM/AEM (EPUB/HTML/PDF-tagged), TTS/audiobooks, braille/tactile graphics.
• Math place value/structure → CRA with base-ten blocks, number lines, algebra tiles; worked→faded examples.
• Math word-problem language → TTS/read-aloud (when construct allows), schema organizers, diagram-first routine, vocabulary frames.
• Computation bottleneck when solving multi-step problems → allow calculators and focus grading on reasoning/structure; keep fact work separate.

Tier 3 — Intensive Math Supports (MTSS)

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Tier 3 — Intensive Reading Supports (MTSS)

Purpose & principles

Intensive, not separate curriculum. Tier 3 increases specificity, time, and feedback; it does not replace grade-level expectations.

Hypothesis → intervention → data → adjust. Start with a skills hypothesis, choose aligned interventions, monitor frequently, and adjust by rules.

Diagnostic data to collect (match to need)

Collect brief, repeatable measures before starting and weekly thereafter.

Phonological processing (speech-sound awareness)

Quick probes: phoneme segmentation/blending, phoneme manipulation, nonsense-word accuracy.

Orthographic processing (print patterns, mapping)

Quick probes: high-frequency words, patterned word lists, spelling/encoding of taught patterns.

Semantic processing (word/concept meaning)

Quick probes: targeted vocabulary checks, morphology (roots/prefixes/suffixes), semantic mapping tasks.

Syntactic processing (sentence structure)

Quick probes: sentence combining/unscrambling accuracy, cloze with syntax focus, sentence imitation.

Discourse processing (connected text)

Quick probes: oral reading accuracy/fluency on controlled text, retell quality, main-idea/structure identification (narrative/expository).

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

Phonological

Daily explicit PA routines (isolation→blending→segmenting→manipulation); link to letters every session.

Orthographic

Systematic phonics with cumulative review; decoding/encoding of taught patterns; high-dosage practice with immediate error correction; orthographic mapping routines.

Semantic

Robust vocabulary instruction (student-friendly definitions, examples/non-examples, usage); morphology (roots/affixes) tied to content words.

Syntactic

Sentence combining, sentence frames that increase complexity, explicit instruction in clauses/connectives tied to current texts.

Discourse

Guided oral reading on decodable/controlled text for accuracy → phrasing → rate; comprehension strategy lessons targeting text structure (narrative/expository).

Keep grade-level content in class by adding access supports (e.g., text-to-speech, pre-teaching vocabulary, guided notes) while Tier 3 remediates specific skills.

Implementation & training

Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week, very small group (1–3) or 1:1 when needed.

Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; high opportunities to respond; immediate, specific feedback; built-in cumulative review.

Materials: Controlled text aligned to the skill focus; link Tier 3 words/passages to core topics when possible.

Fidelity: Brief checklist (components delivered, minutes, group size); admin/coach checks weekly.

Generalization: Teach/coach classroom use of access supports (notes, TTS, anchor charts, morphology walls).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

Weekly probes on the taught skill (plus an overall reading CBM every 2 weeks).

Graph vs. aimline; apply simple rules every 4–6 data points:

• 3–4\ points\ below\ aimline\ →\ intensify\ \(time,\ group\ size,\ explicitness,\ error\-correction\)\.
• 3–4\ points\ above\ →\ raise\ goal\ or\ transition\ to\ Tier\ 2\.

Document: goal, intervention, minutes, grouping, fidelity checks, graphs, decisions.

Documentation & compliance (what to write down)

Problem statement & hypothesis (processing area, evidence).

Intervention plan (who/what/when/minutes/materials).

Progress-monitoring plan (measure, schedule, decision rules).

Classroom access plan to keep work at grade-level complexity.

Family communication cadence and summary.

Note: Tier 3 ≠ special education by default; non-response over time with fidelity may prompt evaluation.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

Accuracy <95% on controlled text → drop level, increase modeling, tighten error-correction.

No growth after 4–6 data points → check fidelity/time; narrow the skill; reduce group size; add daily cumulative review.

Fluency flat but accuracy high → add repeated reading, phrasing/prosody work, easier rate goals; maintain comprehension checks.

Comprehension weak with adequate decoding → strengthen semantic/syntax work tied to core texts; teach text structures explicitly.

Tier 3 — Intensive Math Supports (MTSS)

The “deep-dive” processing domains (math analogs to reading’s 5)

Cross-cutting contributors: visual–spatial processing, working memory, attention/executive skills, math vocabulary/language, and writing/motor (setting up work).

Diagnostic data to collect (quick, repeatable probes)

Magnitude & counting: dot-card subitizing; number-line placement; compare numbers (symbolic & non-symbolic); count-on/back tasks.

Symbolic & place value: write/say a number shown with base-ten blocks; expanded form ↔ standard form; “How many tens/hundreds?”; rename a number (e.g., 342 = 300+40+2).

Operations & relations: match story → operation; true/false equations (7+5=__+6); part–whole/compare diagrams; fraction on number line.

Structure of expressions/equations: bracket “chunks” that go together; identify what operation a line of work represents; sort worked examples by structure.

Schemas & representations: classify word problems (change/compare/combine; part–part–whole; ratio/proportion); translate table ↔ graph ↔ equation; choose/justify a diagram.

(Progress monitor weekly on the taught subskill; add a general math CBM every 2 weeks—computation and concepts/applications.)

Intervention menu (feature-agnostic; pick what matches the data)

Magnitude & counting

Daily number-line work (placement, hops); dot-card subitizing with quick “how do you know?”; count-on/back routines; compose/decompose to 5/10.

Symbolic mapping & place value

Concrete→Representational→Abstract (CRA) with base-ten blocks, bundles, place-value charts; rename numbers; compare by place; read/write/expand/round within the same lesson.

Operations & relations

Teach meanings of operations with bar/tape diagrams and story mats; equal-sign as balance; part–whole/compare structures; fraction magnitude on number line; ratio tables.

Structure of expressions/equations

Explicit lessons on “what goes together” (chunking), structure talk (“I see a double”, “I see a group of 3 tens”), algebra tiles/area models; worked-example → faded-example → independent sets.

Schemas & representations

Schema-based instruction for common word-problem types; choose/build the representation first, then write the equation; daily representation translation mini-drills (diagram ↔ equation ↔ sentence).

Fluency (when accuracy is solid)

Strategy-based facts (make-ten, doubles/near doubles); brief, accurate-first timings; interleaved practice; cumulative review.

Keep grade-level content in class via access supports (read-aloud/TTS for word problems, guided notes, worked-example scaffolds, graphic organizers). Tier 3 targets underlying processing, not a separate curriculum.

Implementation & training

Dosage: 45–60 min/day, 4–5 days/week; group of 1–3; align tasks to the diagnosed domain.

Design: Explicit, systematic, cumulative; many opportunities to respond; immediate specific feedback; daily cumulative review.

Materials: Manipulatives (base-ten blocks, number lines, fraction strips, algebra tiles), schematic diagrams (tape/bar, part–whole), controllable text/graphics for readability.

Generalization: Make the same diagrams and language show up in core class; post structure anchor charts (e.g., “equal means same value,” “units travel through the work”).

Progress monitoring & decision rules

Weekly: brief probe on the focus domain (e.g., place-value rename set; fraction number-line items).

Bi-weekly: general math CBM (one computation, one concepts/applications).

Rules (after 4–6 points):

Below aimline → intensify (time, group size, explicitness; add CRA step; narrow goal).

Above aimline → raise goal or fade to Tier 2 on that domain.

Troubleshooting (red flags → fixes)

Digit-by-digit errors, place value confusions → return to CRA with rename/compose-decompose; slow rate; require verbal “place talk.”

Equals sign as “do something” → daily true/false equations and balance-scale models; sentences like “__ and __ have the same value.”

Fraction = “two numbers stacked” → fraction as number on a line; unit fraction building; area ↔ number-line bridges.

Knows steps, not structure → sort problems by structure before solving; compare two worked examples; ask “what stays the same?”

Fluency flat with high accuracy → repeated-reading analog: set easier accuracy-first goals, then phrasing/rate for computation; interleave known/unknown facts.

Tier 3 → Eligibility: Interpreting Response Patterns (Reading & Math)

Purpose (what Tier 3 data are for)

Identify how the student learns and what supports they need (instruction + access + AT), then fund those supports via eligibility, not to label a student as incapable.

Teams must not use RTI/MTSS to delay or deny an IDEA evaluation when a disability is suspected. Child Find still applies. ()

Guardrails before you interpret

Fidelity & intensity verified (minutes, group size 1–3, explicit/cumulative instruction). WWC guidance backs daily intensive instruction at Tier 3 with frequent progress checks. ()

Access barriers removed (AIM/AEM, TTS, calculators/accessible math tools, language scaffolds).

Progress monitoring in place with simple decision rules (e.g., 4-point rule, trend vs. aimline). If 4 consecutive points fall below the aimline → change something; above → raise goal. Use trendline if data are variable. ()

A. Reading — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

Keep grade-level thinking intact via access supports while instruction remediates specific skills. WWC practice guides endorse intensive, systematic small-group instruction with ongoing monitoring. ()

B. Math — response patterns → hypotheses → supports/AT

IES/WWC math guidance: explicit, systematic intervention; deep work on whole numbers (K–5) and rational numbers (4–8); visual representations; schema-based problem solving; ongoing progress monitoring. ()

C. Turning patterns into eligibility + AT decisions (the flow)

Converge evidence

Tier 3 progress graphs (slope + level), error patterns, fidelity logs, classroom work, observations.

If insufficient response with fidelity → suspect disability and proceed to comprehensive evaluation; do not wait for more RTI if suspicion exists. ()

Hypothesize learning profile

Map patterns to processing domains (reading: phonological/orthographic/semantic/syntactic/discourse; math: magnitude/place-value/operations/structure/schemas).

Note strengths (e.g., listening comprehension, verbal reasoning) to plan access.

Name the support needs (instruction + access)

Instructional targets (what we will teach intensively).

Access/AT features (what we will provide so grade-level work continues now).

Document for eligibility

Tie the need for accommodations/AT/services to the data (minutes, goals, progress-monitoring plan, decision rules).

Remember: Eligibility triggers funding for the supports so the student can make progress in grade-level standards—it isn’t a verdict about ability.

Set decision rules in the plan (write them down)

Example: “Weekly PM; if 4 points below aimline → intensify (time/group/CRA step); if 4 above → raise goal.” ()

D. Quick “patterns → AT features” crosswalk (starter)

Word-level decoding/fatigue → TTS, guided notes, reduced visual clutter, vocabulary pre-teach; maintain phonics/fluency instruction.

Comprehension structure → graphic organizers, text-structure frames, language scaffolds; TTS to free working memory.

Writing/dysgraphia → keyboarding, speech-to-text, word prediction, spelling/grammar support; structured writing templates.

Print disability (any cause) → AIM/AEM (EPUB/HTML/PDF-tagged), TTS/audiobooks, braille/tactile graphics.

Math place value/structure → CRA with base-ten blocks, number lines, algebra tiles; worked→faded examples.

Math word-problem language → TTS/read-aloud (when construct allows), schema organizers, diagram-first routine, vocabulary frames.

Computation bottleneck when solving multi-step problems → allow calculators and focus grading on reasoning/structure; keep fact work separate.

References (authoritative sources)

• OSEP (2011) RTI memo — do not delay/deny IDEA evaluations
• NCII Decision Rules for Progress Monitoring (2024)
• WWC Practice Guide: Math RtI (2009)
• WWC Practice Guide: Foundational Reading (rev. 2019)
• NCII – Data‑Based Individualization overview