Why do we implement MTSS?

Implementation of MTSS is supported by research, considered to be best practice, and is supported by federal, state, and local laws and guidelines.

The Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) framework is built for success. It encompasses the tools educators need for continuous improvement, problem-solving, and decision-making. It provides schools with meaningful data to positively impact students and their families, setting them on a path for success. MTSS is built on the premise of early intervention to prevent failure and to maximize the effectiveness of curriculum and instruction. It is not an initiative or program, but rather a framework for providing high-quality curriculum and instruction to all students and intervention support for some students.

Effective implementation of MTSS is associated with an increased likelihood of instruction and interventions leading to successful student outcomes. Implementing MTSS will contribute to more meaningful earlier identification of learning and behavioral problems, and improvement of instructional quality. High-quality implementation of MTSS provides all students with the best opportunities to succeed in school and helps ensure that students with disabilities receive timely, appropriate educational supports and services. MTSS benefits all students as it provides a framework for more personalized instruction and need-based interventions and supports.

Required Implementation of an Early Warning System (EWS)

State Bill 850 (2014) and House Bill 7069 (2017)

With the passage of SB 850 in 2014 and HB 7069 in 2017, schools with grades K-8 are required to implement early warning systems (EWS) to identify students exhibiting signs that they are at-risk for adverse outcomes. Schools are required to monitor students identified as at-risk on an ongoing basis and to provide supports to students based on the following indicators:

• Attendance below 90% for any reason including excused absences and suspensions

• One or more suspensions whether in-school or out-of-school

• A course failure in English language arts or mathematics in any grading period

• A level-1 score on statewide, standardized assessments in English language arts or mathematics or for K-3 students a substantial reading deficiency under 1008.25(5)(a), F.S.

Elementary and Secondary Education/Every Student Succeeds Act (ESEA/ESSA)

The Elementary and Secondary Education/Every Student Succeeds Act (ESEA/ESSA) was signed into law by President Obama on December 10, 2015. This law includes a number of provisions to help ensure success for all students and schools. The law allows districts discretion for developing, implementing, and evaluating school and schooling processes. ESSA legislation requires districts to engage in the following best practices.

• Provide: "for a multi-tier system of supports for literacy services." "As well as for specific groups of students such as at-risk, disengaged, unmotivated, unresponsive, underperforming, or consistently unsuccessful students."

• Provide: "a comprehensive continuum of evidence-based, systematic practices to support a rapid response to students' needs, with regular observation to facilitate data-based instructional decision-making."

• Institute: "Positive behavioral support systems"

• Provide: "Services, programs, strategies, and interventions to ensure that students with disabilities, with developmental delays, who are English learners, and who are struggling with literacy can meet the challenging State academic standards"

Changes to eligibility determination for

Emotional/Behavioral Disabilities:

(State Board of Education Rule 6A-6.03016)

During 2006-2007, Rule 6A-6.03016, Florida Administrative Code (FAC.), Exceptional Education Eligibility for Students with Emotional/Behavioral Disabilities, was revised and became effective as of July 1, 2007. Response to intervention became an essential component to determining eligibility for students with emotional/behavioral disabilities (E/BD). The rule was designed to ensure that students with emotional/behavioral disabilities receive appropriate interventions in general education settings; are identified in a responsive manner; and, when necessary, receive special education services in the least restrictive setting. The E/BD rule explicitly references RtI by defining "persistent" emotional/behavioral responses in RtI terminology ("is not sufficiently responsive to evidence-based interventions," Rule 6A-6.03016(1), FAC.). The eligibility determination for E/BD is now based upon the student's response to interventions, etiology of the emotional and/or behavioral difficulties, and the need for special education services.

EB/D Technical Assistant Paper LINK

Changes to eligibility determination for Specific Learning Disabilities:

(State Board of Education Rule 6A-6.03018)

In 2004 the federal government passed legislation through a law known as IDEA that no longer required the use of a severe discrepancy model to identify children as having a specific learning disability. The new law stated, that instead, the local educational agency (LEA) may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as a part of the evaluation procedures described in paragraphs 614, b, 2, & 3. This is referred to as the response-to-intervention or RtI model.

The Florida state board of education rule 6A-6.03018 was amended in 2009 and took an additional step towards requiring the use of RtI in determining eligibility for students with a Specific Learning Disability (SLD). Eligibility determination now requires the team to review student responses to scientific, research-based intervention. The student's academic performance must be significantly discrepant for the chronological age or grade level in which the student is enrolled, based on multiple sources of data when compared to multiple groups, which include the peer subgroup, classroom, school, district, and state-level comparison groups. When provided with well-delivered scientific, research-based general education instruction and interventions of reasonable intensity and duration with evidence of implementation fidelity, the student's rate of progress is insufficient or requires sustained and substantial effort to close the achievement gap with typical peers or academic expectations for the chronological age or grade level in which the student is currently enrolled.

SLD Technical Assistance Paper LINK