Tiered instruction frameworks have become a cornerstone in addressing diverse student needs in early literacy. 

Two widely used models, Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) and Response to Intervention (RtI), provide structured approaches to delivering interventions and improving literacy outcomes. 

In a 2023 survey featured on Education Week, 60% of participating districts and schools said that they had well established MTSS systems or were in the beginning phases of implementing. 

Another 36% said that they were currently in the midst of rolling out such a system, indicating the framework’s soaring popularity in recent years. 

Literacy was the biggest focus of the framework, beating out other types of interventions, such as math, behavior, attendance and social-emotional learning. 

RtI is very popular itself, with another survey indicating that approximately 70% of school districts with elementary schools implement them, primarily for literacy.

With tiered instruction widely embraced in early literacy, this blog breaks down its key aspects. 

It clarifies the difference between tiered and differentiated instruction, explores the relationship between MTSS and RtI, and unpacks the three-tiered pyramid structure of these models. 

Finally, it covers the evidence-based for these frameworks, before going into actionable strategies at each tier.

Understanding Tiered Instruction and Differentiated Instruction

Tiered instruction adjusts the instructional approach based on group size.

Tiered instruction includes whole-class instruction for all students, small-group support for those at risk, and individualized instruction for students with ongoing challenges. Each tier serves a distinct purpose and looks very different in practice.

Differentiated instruction on the other hand, consists of varying the instruction by either content, process, assessment or learning environment. 

It’s a topic covered extensively by Sprig Learning because of its large scope, and because of the many ways instruction can be differentiated to meet diverse student needs.

Differentiated instruction is not restricted to any particular tier in tiered instruction. Instruction can be differentiated at any tier.

Tiered instruction can be thought of as only one example of differentiated instruction, where differentiation occurs by varying the group size in which students are taught.

Deciphering the Relationship Between MTSS and RtI Frameworks.

Both the MTSS and RtI frameworks share a three-tiered structure and a commitment to continuous progress monitoring and data-informed practices.

MTSS is a comprehensive framework that integrates academic, behavioral, and social-emotional supports to ensure all students succeed. 

It emphasizes proactive and preventive measures, data-driven decision-making, and collaboration among educators.

RtI, often considered a subset of MTSS, focuses primarily on academic interventions. 

It identifies struggling students early and provides increasingly intensive support to meet their needs.

So at first glance, MTSS and RtI are very similar with MTSS encompassing RtI and extending beyond it, making MTSS the more comprehensive framework. 

However, choosing a specific approach matters for schools, which is why we examine the tiers that are associated with the two frameworks.

 

What are the Different Tiers in MTSS and RtI?

In MTSS, schools typically implement three tiers for academic support, with parallel tiers available for behavior:

Tier 1

Research-based core instruction provided to all students, emphasizing prevention and early intervention.

Tier 2

Targeted interventions for students at risk, featuring rapid response strategies and frequent progress monitoring.

Tier 3

Intensive interventions designed for individual students, incorporating diagnostic assessments and high-intensity support.

 

Examples of RtI three tier pyramids are very similar to the MTSS pyramids with its three tiers. 

 The difference lies in the scope of each of the tiers. 

 In RtI, it’s the students who receive support, in MTSS, everyone including teachers and support staff receive support. 

 Also, in RtI, the focus is on students, whereas in MTSS, the focus is on the school system, and even outside the system, which includes the home of the student and the community. 

 Regarding what should be used, Dr. Adena Miller, who has managed both MTSS and RtI models at the state and district level, has the following advice, published on McREL, a non-profit, non-partisan education research and development organization.

 “If your educators see RtI as a means for getting students into special education, then a shift to MTSS is probably significant. However, if your implementation looks a lot like the definition of MTSS (integrated, preventative, problem-solving approach), then the shift is likely mere semantics.”

Evidence Supporting MTSS and RtI Frameworks

 

works

Regardless of a school’s preferred tiered instruction framework, research says that both the MTSS and RtI models are effective, if they are used in the right way. 

MTSS has had positive effects on academic outcomes. RtI has helped students achieve grade-level benchmarks. 

Meta-analysis studies published in reputed journals confirm that small-group or individual interventions that include a foundational reading skills component, when provided to students with reading difficulties in Grades K-3, are likely to positively impact these students’ reading comprehension ability.

Also, given that MTSS and RtI are both tiered systems, research emphasizes the effectiveness of such systems in improving literacy outcomes.

The Institute of Education Sciences in their practice guide lists the following recommendations for multi-tier intervention in the primary grades that has strong or moderate evidence for improving literacy outcomes:

1)Screen all students in the beginning of the year and again in the middle of the year. Regularly monitor the progress of students who are at risk of not reading at grade level.

2) Provide intensive, systematic instruction on three foundational reading skills in small groups to students who score below the benchmark score on universal reading, three to five times a week for 20 to 40 minutes. 

Thus, there is strong evidence supporting the use of both MTSS and RtI in early literacy, along with clear research-backed guidelines on their effective implementation.  

Speaking of which, the next section explores best practices for each tier in depth.

 

Strategies for Enhancing Each Tier in MTSS and RtI

Tier 1: Strengthen Core Instruction

Core instruction is the foundation of tiered support. To enhance Tier 1:

• Implement evidence-based literacy programs.

Renowned early literacy scientist, Dr.Louisa Moats says in her paper on existing approaches helping goals of tiered instruction, “successful implementation of RtI depends on educators’ understanding of scientific research in reading psychology, linguistics, educational measurement, and instruction.”

• Use universal screeners to identify students at-risk early. Monitor progress of these students along with the whole class to identify others needing support.

• Incorporate differentiated instructional strategies to address diverse learning needs.

Tier 2: Enhance Small Group Instruction

For students requiring targeted support:

• Use diagnostic assessments to identify reading skill gaps. 

• Use progress monitoring assessments to pinpoint specific skill areas that students need more practice or instruction in. 

• Group students by similar needs to maximize instructional impact.

 

Tier 3: Intensify Interventions and Monitoring

Tier 3 requires the most intensive support and frequent monitoring:

• Conduct individualized assessments to tailor interventions.

• Increase intervention frequency and duration of interventions as necessary by constantly monitoring progress.

 

Successfully Applying Tiered Instruction At Your School

Hopefully, this article was useful in better understanding MTSS and RtI. Both provide evidence-based frameworks that empower schools to meet the diverse needs of their students. 

By following the advice in the previous sections, it’s possible to strengthen instruction and intervention in all three tiers.

Tools like Sprig Reading streamlines the assessment process at each tier, and makes progress monitoring quick and intuitive for teachers.

Monitoring progress at tier 3 may seem obvious, given the urgency of each of those cases. But what about tiers 1 and 2? Is core instruction sufficient, or is differentiated instruction required? 

If differentiated instruction is needed, assessment data is essential for making informed decisions. What type of assessment data?

In tier 2, point-in-time or snapshot assessment data from screeners or even diagnostic assessments will likely not be enough to make timely decisions. For example, the student is not showing any improvements, they may need individualized support more urgently. 

But for this, more frequent and immediate information is needed, which can only come from progress monitoring.

Similarly at tier 1, while strong evidence-based core instruction can be delivered to all students, there is a high likelihood that some students will need more help than others in certain foundational skills. They may even need to be grouped together to receive small-group instruction.

Unaddressed needs in tier 1 can push students into tier 2 over time. But without progress monitoring in tier 1, how will educators know when intervention is needed?

Whether proactively preventing students from slipping through the tiers or ensuring they receive timely support at the right tier, progress monitoring is essential in any tiered instruction framework.

Early-grade literacy assessments have come under increased scrutiny, with mandated screeners now required across much of the U.S. and Canada, typically administered one to three times a year.

This introduces a level of accountability with mandated checkpoints on early literacy throughout the year. It also adds responsibility to take action for students who struggle based on results of the first screener, ensuring support between the first and second, and potentially second and third screeners.

By addressing key questions about the necessary information and potential actions, the right early literacy assessment strategy can be thoughtfully developed. 

A detailed list of such questions, along with possible actions informed by the answers, is provided in the article “What To Do With Early Literacy Assessments.”

One such question was, “In what components of literacy do students need additional support?”

It’s so important to know where help is needed for each student. 

Another related question was, “What supplemental instruction is required for students?”

It is equally important to know what that help may look like in the form of supplemental instruction which could be enhanced or personalized.

This article further examines these questions as it has to do with the topic of content coverage in early literacy assessments. 

It defines assessment content coverage and its properties, and the effect it can potentially have on early readers.

 

Definition of Assessment Content Coverage.

Assessment coverage refers to the content evaluated in early literacy assessments. When selecting assessments, it’s crucial they align with your existing curriculum or standards. 

Otherwise, there’s a risk of overlooking critical content areas, skills and competencies, leading to gaps in accountability and students potentially not meeting expectations.

If the curriculum or standards fall short of evidence-based early literacy practices, assessments can serve as an enhancing tool. They can prompt teachers to evaluate areas overlooked by the curriculum, offering a backup method of instruction. This ensures that essential skills, even if not covered in the original syllabus, are explicitly taught and assessed.

Thus, strong content coverage can both complement and enhance existing curriculum or standards.

 

What is Measured in Early Literacy Assessments? 

 

Early literacy assessments should measure developmentally appropriate knowledge domains necessary for successful reading by a certain age, typically by the end of Grade 3. 

This is the critical point when students transition from learning to read to reading to learn. 

These domains encompass both breadth and depth, which are explored in the following section.

 

Number of Different Reading Domains (Breadth)

Breadth refers to the range of different domains covered by early literacy assessments. 

Each large domain encompasses several subdomains, which may further branch into more specific areas of focus. 

For example, reading comprehension is a large domain that can be divided into smaller domains of word reading and decoding. These domains can be further subdivided into skill sets like phonics, phonological awareness, etc.

Breadth ensures that assessments capture a comprehensive picture of a child’s literacy development, addressing all critical components required for reading proficiency.

 

Larger Concepts and Smaller Concepts in Each Domain (Depth)

Depth refers to the thoroughness with which each domain is explored in early literacy assessments. 

The most comprehensive domains are fewer in number, but each delves deeply into multiple topics of learning. 

These topics, in turn, branch out into various sub topics, ensuring a detailed and nuanced understanding of a child’s literacy development. 

Depth allows educators to assess not just surface-level skills but the underlying competencies essential for reading success.  

For example, if reading comprehension issues arise, word reading may be assessed. If word reading is adequate, phonological awareness can be assessed. If phonological awareness is also fine, the issue may lie in a specific skill, such as phoneme blending, which must also be assessed.

 

How Does it Affect  Early Readers?

The breadth and depth of the reading domains together constitute the content coverage of early literacy assessments. 

It is extremely important for early readers because every school must measure the right domains which actually lead to reading success and can be affected by effective reading instruction.

Thus, schools have to make sure that the content coverage is broad enough, at the very least that it covers the main foundational reading skill sets such as phonological awareness, reading comprehension and oral reading fluency. 

The Reading League’s Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines recommend that assessments address both word recognition and language comprehension.

Schools must also ensure that the content coverage is deep enough, meaning each of the foundational skill sets have enough skills underneath them so that the smallest unit of learning can be measured. 

This truly identifies any gaps that may be holding students back.

 

Content Coverage in Early Literacy Assessments. Especially Relevant for Progress Monitoring.

This article establishes the importance for content coverage in early literacy assessments. 

It is applicable for all types of assessments, be it benchmark screeners, diagnostic assessments, progress monitoring assessments or end-of-the-year outcome assessments.

It is especially applicable for progress monitoring assessments because compared to all other assessment types, its recommended application is most frequent. 

They are ideally conducted multiple times per week, if not daily.

Thus, due to its repetitive nature, it can quickly reveal insights on students and groups of students that are not revealed in other types of assessments.  

But these insights are only as good as what is being measured, hence adequate content coverage of early literacy assessments proves to be so important.

Strong content coverage in early literacy assessments goes beyond adequacy, significantly enhancing the effectiveness of progress monitoring!

According to ONlit, a resource hub provided by the Ontario Ministry of Education, progress toward research-backed goals can vary in meaning, from mastering multiple sub-skills to meeting curriculum-based reading outcomes throughout the year. 

Strong content coverage covers all these dimensions of progress monitoring goals! 

It gives the early literacy team a chance to measure the rate of improvement towards these goals and take appropriate actions if the progress is not deemed sufficient.

By providing a comprehensive view of each student’s progress, it enables educators to measure the impact of instructional strategies that are prescribed for these  foundational literacy skills.

Thus, both interventions and differentiated instruction are covered!

Many research studies and state education departments recommend such a process for effectively using progress monitoring, which actually stands on having solid content coverage in early literacy assessments!

Looking for a progress monitoring tool that helps teachers assess all the research-backed foundational skill sets? Visit Sprig Reading. 

Reading assessments are a big part of evidence-based literacy instruction. While foundational reading skills like phonics and phonological awareness often dominate discussions, the assessment of these skills do not get as much airtime.

Especially in the early years, assessing students’ reading development does not automatically equip educators to translate those results into effective instructional decisions.

As a matter of fact, schools often find it difficult to effectively use assessment and accurately interpret their results to enhance reading outcomes. 

Even with high-quality instruction, the absence of robust assessment planning can deepen inequities in access to effective reading instruction for students who need them most.

School-wide reading assessments are now more prevalent and a required component of multi-tiered systems of supports (MTSS). It’s high time that early literacy teams receive clear guidance about their usage.

This article guides early literacy teams in selecting the right assessments to meet learning goals and maximizing the impact of their assessments. 

In order to do this, it proposes the framework: Information. Action. Deliberation. 

Information.

What Questions Are Early Literacy Teams Trying to Answer?

Interpreting assessment results without understanding their purpose can lead to misguided actions for students. 

Therefore, it’s crucial for literacy teams to first identify the key questions they need answered. 

To effectively use current tools or consider adopting new tools, teams must analyze the information needs thoroughly. 

Research on various assessment tools touch on the following information needs.

 

Information Needs

• How many students at each grade are proficient in reading?

 

• Which students need additional support to meet end-of-year expectations?

 

• What specific reading skills do students need additional instruction in?

 

• What specific supplemental instruction is required for students?

 

• Are students making progress toward meeting research-based expectations?

 

• Are students receiving appropriate interventions at the various tiers, making progress towards their learning goals?

 

Action

What Decisions will Answering These Questions Allow Early Literacy Teams To Take? 

If an information needs analysis proves challenging, then the literacy team can think about the decisions that they are looking to make with the information. 

In other words, if formulating questions proves difficult, focus on how the answers to those questions benefit the early literacy team and their students.

This approach strengthens the information needs analysis, helping to choose the right assessment tools for specific purposes.

To demonstrate, the previous question examples have now been paired with their corresponding actions:

 

How many students at each grade are proficient in reading?

Answer helps to: Understand progress towards strategic objectives, evaluate current curriculum and classroom resources.

 

Which students need additional support to meet end-of-year expectations?

Answer helps to: Allocate resources and time for those students currently performing below standard.

 

What specific reading skills do students need additional instruction in?

Answer helps to: Identify targeted tier 2 and tier 3 classroom instruction, to ensure children are receiving the support they need, when they need it.  

 

What specific supplemental instruction is required for students?

Answer helps to: Provide teachers with evidence-based instructional practices that help provide personalized instruction for every student.  

 

Are students making progress toward meeting research-based expectations?

Answer helps to: Ensure students are on track with learning the foundational reading skills and support teachers to continue or intensify their existing instructional practices. 

 

Are students receiving appropriate interventions at the various tiers, making progress towards their learning goals?

Answer helps to: Identify the need to continue, intensify, fade or modify their existing intervention approach. 

_________________________________________________________________________

Note how certain answers help to decide binary actions, that is whether to do something or not, while others help to get clarity over making individual or group decisions for students. 

This is expected.

Actions vary, some target school-wide strategies, while others focus on specific classroom and/or student-level interventions.

These distinctions must be considered when deciding how to use early literacy assessments.

 

Deliberation.

Provide Assessment Types for The Decision To Be Made. 

Performing steps one and two, that is, determining the right questions to gather information and the actions based on those answers are crucial for selecting the appropriate assessment tool.

This is because these questions and answers are internal, directly addressing the school’s specific needs and goals.

Every  assessment tool in the market has its own purpose. They are external, unless developed organically by the school. 

By understanding what is required first, an early literacy team can easily pick the assessment tool/s that best suits their purpose.

Deliberation is the final step.

The right early literacy assessment strategy and tools must be carefully deliberated on, so they provide the precise information needed to drive effective actions.

 

How Can You Do This?

 

• Understand What the Different Categories of Assessments Are. 

How many types of assessments do you need to meet all your objectives? Is one sufficient, or do you need multiple? Sprig Learning explores this topic in another blog. 

Recapping the major assessment categories’ description from 11 Key Questions for Selecting The Right Early Literacy Assessment(s) for Your School.

Universal Screening Assessments- Identifies students at risk. Helps to evaluate core instruction.

Diagnostic Assessments- Identifies strengths and areas of need. Helps to plan and implement instruction and intervention.

Progress Monitoring Assessments- Identifies if students are responding. Evaluates the extent to which students are on track to meet research-based targets.

 

• Understand Which Data From Selected Assessment/s Will Provide Most Value.

Vendors provide multiple scores in their assessment solutions, so it’s important to pick the right one that will be suited to the purpose.

For measuring growth, scaled scores should be used instead of grade-level scores. 

The grade-level metrics only reflect differences in text complexity, not the actual growth in students’ reading abilities. They are helpful for making classroom assessments.

For individual students, schools should focus on interpreting the scaled score specific to each assessment.

 

• Understand How to Set Decision Rules

For setting decision rules, there are two major components of determining if an intervention is required or if the current intervention is working. It can be at any tier of MTSS. 

1. Set a predetermined goal.
2. Establish criteria for evaluating whether the student/group/class is on track to meet the goal.

Decision rules must be set for every type of assessment. 

Let’s take progress monitoring as an example, as its high frequency of data collection provides a faster data-based decision cycle.

The Oregon Department of Education recommends the four point decision rule and the slope analysis. 

The former takes the four most recent data points to a pre-set research-backed goal line. If they are all below the goal line, the intervention is adjusted due to insufficient growth. If they are all above the goal line, the intervention is faded or a new line is set. If they are both above and below the line, the current intervention is continued.

There is also a slope-analysis where a linear trend is fit into existing data points to characterize the trend in their overall actual growth. The steepness of the student’s growth trend is compared to the slope of the goal line.

When setting decision rules, consider what’s needed to close a gap and realistically evaluate how much progress an intervention can achieve within a set timeframe. Goals for progress monitoring should account for both these factors.

 

• Understand The Needs of the End User.

Administrators use screening scores for scheduling and resource decisions, like identifying students needing extra support. These scores offer a general view of reading development but lack the detailed information teachers need for lesson planning.

Since a single assessment suite generates various scores, it’s important to determine which scores are most useful for each group. 

Aligning on these needs can enhance collaboration and support better student literacy outcomes.

 

Information. Action. Deliberation.

Apply It Today To Perfect Early Literacy Assessments Across All Tiers

The Reading League comments, if 85% of students are not proficient in foundational skills with a Tier 1 curriculum, the issue likely lies with the program or its implementation, not the students. 

But this is overwhelmingly the case for almost every school across the continent!

This is why many leading literacy organizations recommend in their curriculum evaluation guidelines that assessment data be used to differentiate instruction across a Multi-Tiered System of Supports based on student progress.

Core instruction and its assessment is just as important as any supplementary measures taken in any of the other tiers in MTSS.

So when deciding what to do with early literacy assessments, the framework outlined in this article of information, action and deliberation helps to gain an overall understanding of the needs of every student, and every end-user.

It resolves tension between the type of reading assessment scores that administrators and teachers find useful in their roles. 

It helps to methodologically think about all objectives that are in stake, and the information areas that are needed in order to meet them.