Multi-Tiered Systems of Support

Overarching Themes of MTSS/RTI (NASDSE, 2008)

1: High Quality, Evidence Based instruction and Intervention

2: Decisions will be based on learning rate and level of performance according to reliable and valid data
3: High stakes decisions will be made with the use of reliable and valid data assessments

Problem Solving and Planning Process:
1. Problem Identification
2. Problem Analysis
3. Plan Development
4. Plan Evaluation

Transition to Multi-Tier System of Supports (MTSS)

This year, many have heard the acronym MTSS rather than RTI. The change reflects the objective of varying the intensity of services for students based on the intensity of need. Some of our students may require multiple levels of support rather than a singular ‘intervention’. MTSS provides a better description of a framework that is dynamic and allows a better fit by need for our students. MTSS also allows for an integration of academic and behavioral support rather than one area of the other. Through analysis of assessment data, services can be efficiently and effectively allocated.

Information adapted from Florida’s Multi-Tier System of Support

High Quality Instruction

High Quality Instruction

High quality instruction (curriculum, instruction, and assessment) is engaging, standards-based, data-driven, and research-based. All students should receive high quality, core academic and behavioral instruction that is differentiated for student need and aligned with the district standards for mathematics and English language arts and other state and local standards. Standards assist in providing consistent grade-level benchmarks.Core instruction refers to the curriculum, instruction, and assessment that all students receive. Core curriculum stems from and is directly shaped by the standards, the district curricular framework, and the effective use of formative, summative, and benchmark assessments. All curriculum and instructional practices should be examined against their evidence base and the educational context within which they will be implemented.

Research summaries will be developed to guide best practices in instruction and assessment. Archives will be maintained below.

Research Summaries

Reading Fluency

Math Fluency Research Synthesis

Social Emotional Synthesis

Interventions are intended to increase student performance in the general curriculum for students who are not meeting benchmarks in a particular curricular area. Additional challenges are intended to meet the needs of students who are exceeding benchmarks. For students whose screening data indicate they are either likely to not meet benchmarks or are likely to exceed benchmarks in a particular instructional area, educators use data in a collaborative process to determine appropriate interventions or additional challenges, which are matched to a student’s particular area of need. Within this process, the intensity of intervention or additional challenge is also determined. Students continue to access core curriculum, instruction, and assessment in addition to these small group or individual interventions or additional challenges. In certain cases when stu-dents exceed benchmarks, a collaborative team may determine that an additional challenge may most appropriately take place in lieu of core instruction.

High quality instruction (curriculum, instruction, and assessment) is engaging, standards-based, data-driven, and research-based. The process of identifying and using interventions and additional challenges is flexible and fluid. The intensity and nature of the interventions or additional challenges should be adjusted based on a student’s responsiveness as evidenced by multiple data sources. Instructional time, frequency of instructional sessions, size of the instructional group, level of instruction, instructional technique, and instructional provider are examples of adjustments that can be made to respond to student need. Interventions and additional challenges, as components of high-quality instruction, should each be culturally responsive and appropriate for the students being served. (Wisconsin RTI, 2010).

Below is a listing of high quality resources used in the development of the Elmbrook MTSS framework.

General MTSS/RTI Resources:

The What Works Clearinghouse or WWC, is provided by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES). The WWC provides reviews of interventions but also produces high quality practice guides to assist educators to access and use to inform decision making and practice. Several practice guides from the WWC are posted below along with resources from the Center on Instruction and others. Click to access the pdf's.

Assisting Students Struggling with Math WWC.pdf
Improving Mathematical Problem Solving Gr 4-8 WWC.pdf

Assisting Students Struggling with Reading-primary grades WWC.pdf
Evidence Based Reading Instruction for Adolescents Grades 6-12 Ceedar 5-2015.pdf
Improving Reading Comprehension k-3 WWC.pdf
COI- Adolescent Literacy.pdf
coi_struggling_readers (1).pdf

Evidence Based Practices for Writing-ceedar.pdf
Writing Next-Carnegie.pdf
Writing to Read.pdf

English Language Learners:

COI Recommendations Intervention students ELL.pdf

General MTSS/RTI References and Sites:

Click to access and open new windows:

Center on Instruction
Direct Behavior Ratings (DBR)
Evidence Based Intervention Network – U of Missouri
Florida Center for Reading Research (FCRR) – practical, free, and research based interventions
IES Practice Guides – Guidance and Best Practices
Intervention Central- RTI Resources
Minnesota Center for Reading Research
National Center for Intensive Intervention (NCII) – tools and assessment charts
National Center for RTI
National Implementation Research Network (NIRN-scaling up)
RTI Action Network
Vaughn-Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts (Meadows Center)

Please call or email
Chris Birr, MTSS Coordinator with questions/comments. Follow ElmbrookMTSS on twitter for updates

High Quality Intervention

High Quality Intervention

Intervention Descriptions

The descriptions below provide one page descriptions of potential interventions, entry and exit guidelines, and how progress will be monitored. Interventions are arranged in the following categories:

Area of Need:Description of Area
Reading Decoding/Basic Reading
  • Applying knowledge of letter-sound relationships, including knowledge of letter patterns, to correctly pronounce written words

Reading Fluency

  • Reading with speed, accuracy, and proper expression.

Reading Comprehension

  • Understanding and interpreting what is read.

Math Calculation

  • Solving math problems involving all four operations.

Math Reasoning:

  • Generalizing and applying math skills to solve problems.


Elementary: ERI, Fundations-Wilson, Jolly Phonics, Just Words, LLI-Blue, LLI-Green, LLI- Orange, LLI-Red, Road to the Code, Wilson Reading

Middle: Just Words, Wilson Reading
High: Just Words, Wilson Reading

Reading Fluency:
Elementary: HELPS, Quick Reads, Read Live (formerly Read Naturally), Repeated Reading
Middle: HELPS, LLI-Purple, Read Live
High: Read Live, HELPS-depending on reading level, Repeated Reading Intervention- (when probes unavailable or all used)

Link to Read Live Materials- click here - courtesy of Read Live
Link to HELPS Reading Fluency Intervention


ELEMENTARY ERI, Fundations-Wilson, Jolly Phonics, Just Words, LLI-Blue, LLI-Green, LLI- Orange, LLI-Red, Road to the Code, Wilson Reading

MIDDLEJust Words, Wilson Reading

HIGHJust Words, Wilson Reading

Reading Comprehension:
Elementary: LLI-Blue, LLI- Green, LLI- Orange, LLI-Red, Comprehension Focus Group, Visualizing and Verbalizing
Middle: LLI- Purple, Visualizing and Verbalizing , Read 180
High: Visualizing and Verbalizing, Read 180, Content Area Intervention

Math Calculation:
Elementary: Do the Math, Fastt Math,Number Worlds
Middle: ALEKS, Do the Math Now!, Fastt Math

Incremental Rehearsal: Consider use of this Intervention Protocol when mastery of math facts is needed (prerequisite skill for math computation). Adaptable for all grade levels.

Math Reasoning:
Elementary: Dreambox Learning
Middle: Math Support , ALEKS
High: Do the Math Now!

Writing : Presently in the process of developing our screening process, intervention selection will follow.

Behavior : click to view past version of interventions on MTSS- Behavior side of site
Elementary: Behavior Contract, Check in Check out, Social/Academic Skills Group
Middle: Behavior Contract, Check in Check out,Social/Academic Skills Group
High: Behavior Contract, Check in Check out, Lancer House-BCHS

An intervention can be defined as anything a school does, above and beyond what all students receive, that helps a child succeed in school. The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) has also provided some recommendations regarding the definition of ‘intensive intervention’ if students do not respond to instruction or intervention.

DPI recommends that intensive interventions are:

  • Systematic
  • Used with individuals or small groups
  • Focus on single skills or small groups of targeted skills
  • Substantial number of minutes (core general ed. + 30, 60, 90 minutes)
Interventions should also meet the following criteria:
  • Delivered in a manner consistent with design
  • Be aligned to student need (based on data)
  • Be culturally appropriate
Matching Intervention to Stage of Learning (Haring, Lovitt, Eaton, & Hansen, 1978)

In the School District of Elmbrook, we will select interventions that match the student level of skill acquisition. Haring et al. (1978) established the following stages of learning: Acquisition, Fluency, and Generalization/Adaptation. Targeting intervention by skill matched to the stage of learning provides maximum potential for benefit to our students. Stages of Learning chart

For more information, click here or on the link below.

Intervention Integrity

The term ‘treatment integrity’ is interchangeable with ‘treatment fidelity’ when used to describe delivery of an intervention. Both terms are receiving more attention and focus in the areas of education, psychology, and medicine. Without knowing how well any intervention or practice
was delivered, how can one know the obtained results are a reflection of the practice or the delivery? Although measuring Intervention Integrity is difficult at best, we will be striving to provide high quality practices, methods, and interventions to our students. By clicking this LINK, a proposed process is presented how intervention integrity checklists can be developed. The focus on the checklist is twofold. 1- The checklist is an efficient reminder for the teacher to focus on the key elements of instruction for the intervention. 2- The checklist is a method for peer observation so those who are not as familiar with the intervention, can still provide feedback to the interventionist. The sole purpose of an intervention integrity checklist is to serve as a vehicle for conversations to improve outcomes for students.

The Institute of Educational Sciences (IES) provides Practice Guides in the areas of Literacy, Mathematics, and Writing. The practice guides bring together the best evidence and research to provide guidance to schools to instruct students using the best methods and processes.

One page summaries of the guides are posted below, click to access the summary.


During the 2012-2013 school year, a district Response to Intervention Committee compiled lists of interventions in the areas of reading/English language arts, mathematics and behavior. Interventions were selected for use at the elementary, middle and high school levels. Listed below are the interventions for each level. Descriptions provide entry and exit considerations along with the areas of measurement to be collected to monitor progress.

Intervention Resources

Intervention Selection:NIRN Hexagon

Initially, interventions present in the system were used to build our inventory. As we continue to refine our assessment and intervention frameworks, continual review of intervention outcomes will be conducted. Continual review of existing and exploration of new tools and interventions will be conducted to ensure we provide our students the best service possible.

To evaluate new products, this process will be followed:
1. The team identifies the discrete skill addressed by the intervention.
2. Independent Research Review: use of ERIC, What Works Clearinghouse, National Center for Intensive Intervention, Best Evidence Encyclopedia, Google Scholar or other academic database to collect relevant, independent supporting research of the product in review.
3. Review of Publisher based research.
4. Review of district data (assessment) to determine if the intensity of need.
5. Development of pilot plan to deploy intervention or product to a limited group. Team of representative professionals will be selected to evaluate use of intervention or product.
6. Selection of assessments to be used to conduct program evaluation (pre-post) or effect of intervention on pilot group.
7. To summarize finding and plan for future, the HEXAGON Tool from the National Implementation Research Network (NIRN) will be completed by the representative group. Click to access the Hexagon tool.

Questions to ask when considering new products or materials. - Click for Link.

Completed Intervention Reviews-click link to access review
Blase, K., Kiser, L. and Van Dyke, M. (2013). The Hexagon Tool: Exploring Context. Chapel Hill, NC:National Implementation Research Network, FPG Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Please call or email Chris Birr, MTSS Coordinator with questions/comments.

Follow ElmbrookMTSS on twitter for updates

Data-Based Decision Making

Data-Based Decision Making:

General Warning "Triggers":
Student performance will be reviewed when 2 or more 'triggers' indicate possible need for additional instruction or intervention.

  • Triggers do not mean mandatory intervention, teams need to consider student need and all relevant information to select best way to increase skills.
"2 out of 3" rule continues to apply.

  • For example, if MAP and OR scores are below triggers, team should consider intervention. If only 1 trigger is low, examine student performance (time of assessment, subtest scores) or collect more data such as a CBM.
  • CBM is a confirmatory measure when assessment results contradict.
  • When making student level decisions, intervention is not mandated when 2 triggers are met.

Triggers considered are:

Below the 25th Percentile Nationally:

  • Below 25th percentile in MAP Reading and/or Math
  • Below 25th percentile on Oral Reading Assessments
  • If confirmatory CBM are used, scores below the 25th percentile (+/- 2 points)
Accuracy Trigger:
  • Below 93% read correctly on passages (OR reading assessment)
  • Below 75% read correctly on Word Reading Fluency (1st grade Fall)

State Criteria:

  • K-1 PALS : missed sum benchmark- automatic entry into intervention per statute
  • 1st PALS is administered only in fall
  • Minimal or Basic on Wisconsin Forward (Formerly WKCE, Badger 3-8)

Below district criteria:

  • Below Trigger for Teachers’ College Assessment (Reading)
  • Below district targets/triggers for writing assessment (TBD)
  • Below expectations on Math fluency measures- less than 20 correct per minute

Consider if intervention is necessary,

  • What specific skill instruction does this student need to close the gap and eventually meet tier 1 targets?
  • How can those skills be most effectively be taught to the student?

Progress Monitoring Rules applicable to students receiving academic intervention:

  • Initial CBM conducted within Fall benchmark period (Sept 1-Oct 15) or within 2 weeks initiation of intervention.

Minimum monitoring is every other week

Conduct weekly progress monitoring when:

MAP Reading is below 15th percentile AND CBM scores are below 25th percentile

  • If rate of improvement is unclear and/or below the aimline
  • Teams can increase the frequency of monitoring to weekly.
The following measures can be used up to weekly :
  • Letter Name, Letter Sounds, Phoneme Segmenting- early Literacy Fluency Measures- continue Early Literacy areas until 50th percentile reached with 96% accuracy
  • Word Reading Fluency: Nonsense Word Fluency: First grade
  • Passage Reading Fluency: End of First-Eighth grade
  • AIMSWeb: CBM-OR (reading fluency), Maze, Math computation, Math applications and concepts, spelling, writing
Exit Guidelines : Triangulate data when considering exit from intervention. Consider monitoring using CBM up to weekly when making exit decisions.

Cheat Sheets / Resources

ion- Data Management System

ion will be our software to record student plans and view reports on students. Cheat sheets are available at the link below:


ion information- click here for cheat sheets- updated frequently

CBM and aimsweb 2.0

aimsweb will continue to be our assessment system to monitor progress for students receiving academic intervention or supplemental instruction. aimsweb will be the primary progress monitoring tool to assess progress of students receiving additional instruction or intervention. Minimum monitoring will occur every other week.

Various cheat sheets and tutorials are available at the links below:

CBM and aimsweb information- click here

Monitoring Progress Using CBM

Monitoring Progress using Curriculum Based Measurement (CBM)

Curriculum Based Measurement (CBM) is a form of assessment that allows for efficient and repeated measurement of a child's academic skills in specific areas. CBM's can be used as a universal screening tool (2-3 times a year for all) or to monitor program for those receiving additional and more intensive instruction. In general, a child is administered various measures on a fairly regular basis (i.e. monthly, bi-weekly, or weekly) to assess progress toward expected outcomes. The frequency of assessment depends on the child's progress and intensity of intervention. The alternative forms of CBM are developed to be controlled for difficulty so progress can be assessed as the child receives instruction or intervention. Gains in performance then accurately reflect skill acquisition. CBM's are typically used to monitor progress of students in academic interventions. For students receiving interventions or supplemental instruction, we will monitor progress at least every other week.

The advantages to using CBM to monitor progress are:

  • efficiency- measures take from 1-10 minutes to administer
  • alignment to basic skills
  • reliability (similar scores result from different assessors)
  • ability to use as a universal screening tool and to monitor skills more frequently

For students receiving supplemental academic instruction (intervention), we will monitor progress every other week.

Questions to consider when viewing student CBM performance?

  • Is the student making adequate progress to close the gap between his/her current performance and grade level peers? CONTINUE
  • Is the student making progress, but not enough to close the gap with grade level peers? CHANGE- intensity, frequency, dosage
  • Is the student making less progress than his/her peers? CONSIDER SOMETHING ELSE
When making decisions using CBM data, keep in mind:

  • Initial decisions such as whether to intensify intensity or frequency, can be made after 4-6 weeks
  • More significant decisions require at least 10-12 data points


Hosp, M. K., Hosp, J. L., & Howell, K. W. (2006). The ABCs of CBM: a practical guide to curriculum-based measurement (1st ed.). New York: Guilford Publications.

Progress Monitoring Resources

District Guidance Documents/Resources:

Below are links to collections of articles and references used in the selection and justification of CBM as an assessment to monitor progress.

Problem Solving Teams (PST)

School District of Elmbrook Problem Solving Team (PST) Process:
PST steps

1.Problem Identification: To identify and clearly articulate the difficulty a student is experiencing, it is important to review all available and pertinent data about that student. This data typically includes:

· Universal Screening Measures

· Grade level expectation and student’s level of performance (gap)

· Past performance and educational history

· Classroom performance and available classroom data

Once the data has been reviewed, the Problem-Solving Team should identify the specific Problem Area(s) in Terms of Expected Performance and Current Performance. The problem should be defined in observable and measurable terms. Examples are below.

· Billy’s performance on standardized reading assessments (MAP and WKCE) are below the Tier 1 Target (consistently in the 20 th to 30 th percentile). Teachers’ College Assessments and Reading Fluency assessments also typically fall below the expected level for his grade.

· Susie is receiving poor grades in Social Studies, Science, and Math (D, F, F). Previous assessments indicate that her reading skills have typically been in the low average range (20 th percentile).

· In math, Damien’s MAP scores typically fall in the 20 th percentile. In particular, he struggles to complete 20 addition facts per minute with accuracy.

2. Problem Analysis : Once a problem statement has been identified, the team should use available data and additional assessments to narrow in on a Root Cause or specific area of concern. At least two assessments should be used to confirm or triangulate the suspected root cause or specific area of weakness. Teams should also collect data to confirm whether difficulties are skill or performance based.

· Additional assessment reveals that Billy struggles to decode words with R-controlled vowels (i.e. target, harm, nerm) and words with variant vowels (i.e. few, hawk, new)

· On a reading fluency CBM, Susie is able to read 125 words per minute with only one error. In class, her level of engagement on a direct behavior rating averaged 60 percent for two weeks.

· Damien is administered more math fact probes and it is revealed that double digit addition is a significant weakness. On facts from 1-9, he demonstrates proficiency.

3. Plan Development : Following the problem analysis, the Problem-Solving Team will create a plan of action to support the student in improving their performance by addressing the root cause hypothesis. The format for documenting the plan can be found on PST Plan Form and will eventually be documented using the RtI Tab in Infinite Campus.

· Baseline for academic concerns will be developed through the use of screening data and Curriculum Based Measurement (CBM). The gap between current performance and expected performance will be calculated. Baseline data is collected in the area of suspected deficit.

· A GOAL will be developed based on current performance and expected rate of performance.

· The goal relates to the data collected in the Problem Analysis stage.

· Interventions are selected that match the suspected area of weakness

4. Plan Implementation : The PST plan will be implemented over a pre-determined timeline. The plan will include:

· Specific skill area addressed

· Number of days/week

· Number of minutes/session

· Goal and expected rate of improvement

5. Plan Evaluation : The PST team will review and decide whether the plan is effective for the student. CBM data and rate of improvement will be used to determine if the student is anticipated to reach his/her goal.


Burns, Matthew K., and Kimberly Gibbons. Implementing Response-to-intervention in Elementary and Secondary Schools: Procedures to Assure Scientific-based Practices. New York: Routledge, 2012.

Oregon Response to Intervention: available at Oregon RtI Website (click to open link)

Thomas, Alex, and Jeff Grimes. Best Practice in Instructional Consultation and Instructional Consultation Teams. Best Practices in School Psychology. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists, 2008.

Updated 8/2014

RTI Mulit-level Support System: Problem-Solving Teams Overview

Purpose: The Problem-Solving Team (PST) process is a systemic approach to facilitate informed, data-driven decisions by school personnel about supporting students to meet Tier 1 targets through differentiation at Tier 1 and/or through formal interventions in Tier 2 and Tier 3.


PST Process Handout:

School District of Elmbrook Problem Solving Team.pdf

PST Checklist: Necessary Elements for High Functioning Teams

PST Critical Component Checklist- revised 3-14.pdf

Guiding Questions PST's can ask about progress monitoring data:

Progress Monitoring Guidelines and Requirements.pdf

Universal Screening Tools: The district has identified universal screening measures to assist in identifying students that may be experiencing academic or behavioral difficulties. These screening measures are consistent by grade level and are identified in the table below:

Elementary Schools

Middle Schools

High Schools






MAP (Grade Spring)

MAP (K-5)


WKCE (Grade 10)

WKCE (3-5)

Core Course Grades (Quarterly)

Course Grades (3 Weeks)

Running Records (K-5)

Reading Fluency:

Word Reading (grade 1)

Passage (grades 1-5) - first grade passage fluency only in spring. Grades 2-5 fall, winter, spring)







Office Discipline Referrals

Office Discipline Referrals

Office Discipline Referrals

Health Room Visits

Health Room Visits

Health Room Visits

Tier 1 Targets: The district has established Tier 1 Targets, equated with proficiency, for each of the Academic Screening Tools above. Tier 1 Target Scores can be accessed in theSDE RtI Table. (Note: Tier 1 Targets for course grades are ‘C’ or better)

Tier 2 Triggers: The district has established Tier 2 Triggers to identify students that appear to be achieving well-below the Tier 1 Target. Tier 2 Trigger Academic Trigger Scores can be accessed in theSDE RtI Table. (Note: Tier 2 Triggers for course grades are ‘D’ or ‘F’). Tier 2 Behavioral Triggers are identified in the table below.

Students that meet the Tier 2 Trigger points below are referred to the Problem-Solving Team. This list will be generated inInfinite Campus RtI Tab.

Elementary Schools

Middle Schools

High Schools


Trigger Points

Reading: 2+ Triggers

Math: 1+ Trigger

Other: Referred Using an Elementary PST Referral form. (in development).

Reading: 2+ Triggers (Including MAP/WKCE)

Math: 2+ Triggers

Other: Multiple D/F may be referred to PST

2+ Triggers

Other: Referred Using the High School PST Referral Form.


Trigger Points

Attendance: 10+ (per year)

ODR: 3 + (per year)

HR Visits 5+ (per year)

Attendance: 10+ (per year)

ODR: 3 + (per year)

HR Visits 5+ (per year)

Attendance: 3+ (per term)

ODR: 5+ (per year)

HR Visits 5+ (per term)

A student triggering in any one behavioral area above will be referred to a PST.

Problem-Solving Team Membership: While universal screening tools assist us in easily identifying students who may be struggling academically or behaviorally, identifying the root cause of those struggles and developing a plan to support the student is typically a complex task that involves collaboration among a number of individuals. The district has identified the following guidelines for PST Membership to ensure that the resulting plans are thorough provide ownership to all those supporting the student in their quest for success.PST members will have full access to the RTI Tab in Infinite Campus. Teachers will have read only rights to RTI Plans in Infinite Campus for the students they are educating.

Elementary Schools

Middle Schools

High Schools

Building Principal

Building Principal/Associate

*Building Principal/Associate

School Psychologist

School Psychologist

*School Psychologist

Primary Classroom Teacher

Core Classroom Teachers

*Guidance Counselor

Reading Specialist

Guidance Counselor

*Support Teacher (As Needed)


Reading Specialist

Intervention Teachers

Social Worker (As Needed)


GT Coordinator

Support Teacher (As Needed)

Social Worker (As Needed)

Social Worker

Nurse/Assistant (As Needed)

Support Teacher (As Needed)

Classroom Teachers (As Needed)

Nurse/Assistant (As Needed)

Nurse/Assistant (As Needed)

Upon convening the Problem-Solving Team, it is suggested that the team determine who will take on various role within the meeting (i.e. Meeting Facilitator, Data Reviewer, Note-taker, …)

Universal Screening

Universal Screening Process

DISTRICT RESOURCES (Target/Trigger Tables):

Universal Screening Resources

2017 Tiers of Performance- Aligned with Wisconsin Forward Proficiency (NEW 2017)
* Oral Reading Tiers of Performance
* Oral Reading Fluency Discontinuation Process
* MathFactFluencyTargets.pdf
* DRAFT-Writing Rubric Targets and Triggers-10/2015
* PALS Proposed Proficiency Guidelines- (locally developed)
* TC Benchmark Levels K-8 (UPDATED 8/16)



English-Language Arts



PALS (K5-2)


Oral Reading Assessment
All: Grades 1-3 (selected 4, 5)
Grade 1: Winter/Spring: Passage Reading Fluency
Grades 2-3: Passage Reading Fluency
Grades 4-5- Passage Reading Fluency- see discontinuation process

Teachers College Running Record- (K-5)

Writing- Teachers College Prompt/Rubric

Math Fluency (1-5)




Teachers College Running Record



NWEA-MAP (selected)

ACT Aspire (9-10)

ACT (Grade 11)

NWEA-MAP (selected)

ACT Aspire (9-10)

ACT (Grade 11)

Score Range Descriptions and Rationale:

On all district guiding documents (see first table on this page), the following color coding will be used.
Red: Warning indicator (trigger) or below
Yellow: Above Trigger but below Target
Green: Proficient or above (met or exceeded Target)
Blue: Well above Target or exceeding

Seasonal targets and triggers were determined based on the following rationale and are color coded in the following manner:

White column: Score to Predict ACT score of 24 (MAP-RIT Score): Theaker and Johnson (2011) provided Fall RIT scores that were likely to result in ACT scores of 24. Based on Elmbrook ACT results along with evidence indicating 24 results in adequate college and career readiness, this column was included.


Blue- A score or level that is well above the proficiency target.

Green- Tier 1 Target - Proficiency scores were obtained based on the 2017 NWEA Linking Study. The study used an equalization method to provide target scores for each grade and season. Students meeting or exceeding target scores are likely to obtain proficient scores on the Forward Exam.

Yellow- National 50th Percentile (MAP-RIT score) : Based on the National RIT Scale Norms Study from 2015 (NWEA), the 50 th percentile score was presented for each season of each grade level. This provides a national perspective for teachers and parents.

Red- Warning Indicator: When possible, the 25th percentile or below was used as a warning indicator or 'trigger' score. On TC running records, triggers was established using levels indicating students were below expectations. Furthermore, Fletcher, Lyon, Fuchs, and Barnes (2007) indicated that the 25 th percentile is typically the level at which students begin to be considered at-risk for reading or math disorders and/or require consideration for intervention.

Average RIT Gains: (MAP-RIT Scores)- Based on the National RIT Scale Norms Study from 2015 (NWEA), the average growth from Fall to Winter, Winter to Spring, Fall to Spring, and Fall to Fall of the following year were listed. These scores provide estimates of expected growth. This way, teachers, parents and possibly students, can establish goals how to move up from one range to another. For example, moving up from the 25th percentile to the 50th percentile in a realistic manner based on expected growth.

References for Tiers of Performance:

The School District of Elmbrook Academic Universal Screening measures are:

Northwest Evaluation Association
Measures of Academic Progress® (MAP®) given three times per year (Oct, Jan and May) for K-8 and selected high school students

NWEA_2015_Full_Norming_Study.pdf (new, used for updated targets/triggers)

  • MAP Reading and Math will be assessed during the fall, winter, and spring test windows.

2017 Wisconsin NWEA Linking Study

Oral Reading CBM: easyCBM Word Reading and aimsweb Passage Reading Fluency curriculum based measures (CBM)

Teachers College of Reading and Writing: Running Records

Wisconsin Forward: Grades 3-8 and 10

Additional Notes:

Reading Fluency: aimsweb Oral Reading Fluency

Reading Fluency will be assessed using passages from aimsweb. Students in grades one through five will be asked to read three passages. Words read correctly in a minute will be recorded along with the student's accuracy.

eachers College of Reading and Writing:

Classroom teachers administer these assessments to students individually. These assessments help teachers identify which level of texts students can read independently and will therefore be able to practice all the reading strategies they are learning during the Reading Workshop.

Universal Screening Resources and References:

Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Fuchs, L. S., & Barnes, M. A., (2007) Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention . New York: Guilford Press.

Interpreting the easyCBM Progress Monitoring Test Results. (2013). Riverside. (resources are available on the 'lite' side of the easyCBM website, click to access)

Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA). (2011).RIT scale norms study. Available at: port_01.17.2012_2.pdf

Linking the Wisconsin Forward Assessments to NWEA MAP Tests (2017).

Theaker, R. S. & Johnson, C. S. (2001). Measuring growth toward college readiness: Using MAP (Measures of Academic Progress) scores to predict success on the ACT test benchmark scores: Kingsbury Center.

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. Wisconsin Forward Score Ranges. Retrieved from:



All presentations will be listed here with the most recent listed first:

Accuracy of Universal Screening Cut-Scores Across Changes in State Assessments- Summer 2017 at American Psychological Association Conference

March 2017: Presentation at National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) in San Antonio: More Positives than Negatives, A University-School District Partnership.

October 2016: Presentation to speech and language pathologists at Childrens' Hospital of WI

Collaboration resource for private schools interested in RTI/MTSS

March 2, 2016 Data Based Decision Making Using CBM - WASDA Data Summit, Green Bay, WI

October 16, 2015 AWSA Elementary Principals' Convention- click for link

March 5, 2015 RTI Summit in Green Bay, WI

Universal Screening Process.pdf

December 8, 2014 New Teacher MTSS Presentation

MTSS update- new teachers.pdf

Link to survey or exit- click here

Gifted and Talented Parent Advisory Board: 10/15/2014

GT PAB Presentation.pdf

Quality Educators Conference Presentation from June 2014


Teaching and Learning Committee Update from 10/2013 with glossary of terms from WI-RTI Center:

TL RTI Presentation (3).pdf

Glossary - RtI Complete v2- WIRTI Center.pdf