Introduction

Sweeping changes have occurred in the last 15 years in the area of accountability and educational reform. Educators in the 21st century have been charged with ensuring high levels of learning for all students (DuFour, 2004), and progress toward this goal is now measured and publicly reported in the form of statewide accountability tests. Countless debates have occurred and numerous "reform initiatives" have been studied to try to discover the best way to improve our public education system. In an attempt to respond to the charge of improving outcomes for all learners, our nation's schools have been subjected to a constant stream of new programs, initiatives, and frameworks to solve the problem, with little success. Results from the 2017 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP; National Center for Education Statistics, 2017) indicate a continued need to accelerate student growth in both reading and math. In the area of reading, 35% of fourth graders and 35% of eighth graders were "proficient" or "advanced" in reading. Results from the 2017 NAEP in the area of math indicated that 40% of fourth graders and 33% of eighth graders were "proficient" or "advanced" in math. Additionally, achievement gaps continue to persist between racial and ethnic groups.

According to Kastberg, Chan, and Murray (2016), results from the 2015 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) indicate that the average scores of U.S. 15-yearolds in reading literacy were lower than the averages in 14 educational systems, higher than in 43, and not measurably different than in 12 educational systems and the OECD average. In math literacy, the U.S. average was lower than more than half of the other education systems (36 of 69) as well as the OECD average, higher than 28 education systems, and not measurably different than 5.

Finally, significant gaps in academic performance exist between the general school population and subgroups of students, such as those with disabilities, members of minority groups, and children living in poverty.

The response-to-intervention (RTI) or multi-tiered systems of supports (MTSS) framework has quickly emerged as a methodology for improving outcomes for all students through high-quality instruction tailored to student needs within a data-based decision-making model. In fact, a recent national survey of K–12 administrators indicated that 61% of respondents are either in full implementation or in the process of districtwide implementation of an RTI/MTSS framework, up from 24% in 2007 (Spectrum K–12 School Solutions, 2010). Although it is promising that so many school districts around the country are beginning to implement the RTI/MTSS framework, we have observed that many districts implementing this framework immediately try to intervene and provide supplemental services and supports to all students who are not meeting grade-level expectations (e.g., Tier 2 and Tier 3 services). While we agree it is a natural tendency to focus on helping students who are at risk, we believe that a critical first step is to evaluate the effectiveness of the universal tier (e.g., Tier 1, core instruction). Most school districts in this country do not have the resources to intervene their way out of ineffective universal instruction. The universal tier is the first intervention for all students and is our largest opportunity to have an impact on student achievement. We hope that this book will bring the attention back to quality universal instruction to prevent large numbers of students from falling off track and needing additional services and supports.

DEFINITION OF THE UNIVERSAL TIER

Universal instruction is what "all" students receive in the form of academic and social–emotional instruction and supports. Universal instruction focuses on the implementation of the district's core curriculum and is aligned with state academic content standards. It is differentiated to ensure that this instruction meets the needs of students. The amount of time dedicated to content-area learning and the focus of instruction are based on the needs of the students in a particular school. Some schools require more time than others in particular core curriculum areas, based on student demographics (readiness, language, economic factors) and student performance levels, to ensure that all students reach and/or exceed state proficiency levels. Schools spend significant amounts of time and money and enlist a significant number of personnel to make sure that universal instruction is well designed and based on empirical research documenting what works.

Teaching staff must receive sufficient and ongoing professional learning to deliver the universal instructional program in the way it was designed. The expectation is that if the universal tier is implemented with a high degree of integrity by highly trained teachers, then most of the students receiving this instruction will show outcomes upon assessment that indicate a level of proficiency that meets minimal benchmarks for performance in the skill area. The universal tier is more than a single textbook. It is all the materials and instruction used to provide the main classroom instruction in a particular content area — or, simply put, whatever it takes to get most students meeting grade-level standards!

EVOLUTION OF THE UNIVERSAL TIER

To understand what the universal tier is and its role in MTSS, it is important to dig into the history of factors that influence our current definition of universal tier. In addition, to continue improving the universal tier over time, it is also important to understand the factors that are likely to influence MTSS in the future. Such factors are likely to include key findings from research, influential policies, and our collective experiences as we work to meet the needs of all students by providing a common set of learning experiences.

Where We Have Been

An extensive review of the history of public education in the United States is beyond the scope of this book. However, developments in the last 30–40 years do provide a helpful perspective on what has preceded the current-day realities of education. In particular, there were several social, political, and educational forces in the 1970s and 1980s that, in many ways, started separately but have served as the precursor for a convergence of efforts into what we know today as the universal tier in MTSS. These efforts included individual student problem solving, standards-based reform, as well as several federal policies.

Individual Student Problem Solving

Individual student problem solving in education evolved from the late 1970s through the early 2000s. In many ways, it evolved because the approach of identifying students who...