MTSS and School Psychology: How a Multi-tiered Approach Can be Implemented to
Create School-Wide Success
1
MTSS and School Psychology: How a Multi-tiered Approach Can be Implemented to
Create School-Wide Success
The failure of the public school system to close the achievement gap is a commonly
discussed issue in society. Our educational system is designed to prepare students to succeed in
the workforce as well as higher education. If our k-12 education system fails to adequately
prepare its students, we do our society a disservice by producing alumni that lack the knowledge
and skills they need to succeed. Something educators have come to realize is that students’
academics are very much interconnected with their psycho-social well-being, so schools are
beginning to develop systems too address all of these issues, with the overall goal of supporting
academic development through supporting the student as a whole. As a result of this need, the
idea of Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) has emerged and is now the driving framework
for successfully addressing all of students’ diverse needs.
MTSS is a multi-tier, school-wide prevention and intervention model, designed to
support students’ academic, social-emotional, and behavioral needs (Schaffer, 2022) Perhaps the
most familiar way to explain MTSS would be to compare it to a house. MTSS has some key
components of a house: a foundation, framework and walls. These components come together to
form a holistic system of supports that address not only students’ academic needs, but their
socio-emotional and behavioral needs, to best support the student to succeed in their education.
A key concept of MTSS is preventing academic, behavioral, and social-emotional difficulties
through early identification and, therefore, early intervention (Braun et al., 2020). Early
identification is made possible through frequent assessments of a student’s school-based
functioning. Interventions are targeted, evidence-based, and require continuous collection of data
so that data-based decision-making can be implemented (Loftus-Rattan et al., 2023).
2
The Foundation of MTSS: Six Foundational Principles
MTSS’ foundation consists of six principles. First, MTSS assumes that all children can
achieve grade-level expectations. Second, the MTSS model is proactive and emphasizes early
identification of students in need of support based on their academic, behavioral, or socialemotional needs. Third, MTSS emphasizes the use of evidence-based interventions and
instruction. Fourth, MTSS utilizes data collection to enable data-based decision-making
regarding instruction, intervention planning, allocation of resources, and the overall effectiveness
of school practice. Fifth, instruction under MTSS must be individualized to meet each child’s
unique needs. Finally, sixth, along with promoting school-wide learning for all students, MTSS
gives districts an opportunity to revise and revolutionize their school culture (Schaffer, 2022).
The Four Pillars of the MTSS House
Now that a solid foundation has been established, we can examine the next step to
forming a successful MTSS house- the four pillars. The first pillar consists of varying levels of
evidence-based supports (Schaffer, 2022). This is a three-tiered approach, with supports
intensifying as the student moves down the tiers. These interventions are supplementary and are
not meant to replace the Tier 1 supports (Loftus-Rattan et al., 2023). This means students receive
support in addition to their general instruction, not instead of it.
The second pillar of the MTSS house is universal screening. Universal screening
measures are an essential part of an MTSS model, as they allow for early identification of, and
therefore early intervention for, struggling students. Universal screening measures should take
place three times a year (fall, winter, spring) and should be used to predict students who are atrisk of poor learning, behavioral, or social-emotional outcomes (Malone & Turner, 2022). These
3
measures should be brief (less than eight minutes) and do not need to tell us everything about a
student, rather, they serve as a quick indicator as to whether there is a potential concern
(Schaffer, 2022).
The third pillar that forms the MTSS house is progress monitoring. Progress monitoring
is a type of formative assessment that allows educators to determine if the interventions being
implemented are beneficial to the student (Schaffer, 2022). At Tier 2, progress monitoring should
take place on a bimonthly basis, while at Tier 3 progress monitoring should occur either weekly
or biweekly (Nguyen 2022; Schaffer, 2022). Frequent assessment is necessary because it enables
educators to ensure that a student is not kept in an intervention that is not working, nor are they
kept in an intervention that is no longer needed (Braun et al., 2020). Regular review of data is
essential to ensure that students are receiving the correct type and amount of support that they
need to succeed.
The fourth and final pillar of the MTSS house is data-based decision making. Data-based
decision making is a continuous process of gathering and analyzing screening, progress
monitoring and other data points (grades, behavioral incidents, etc.) to make decisions about
whether an intervention is beneficial for the student receiving it. If data shows that a student is
not responding to the interventions, more intense interventions may be required. With data-based
decision making, we can make quick, effective choices about our interventions so that we do not
waste time implementing an intervention that is not working.
The Walls of the MTSS House
There are four walls that make up the MTSS House. Each wall represents a multi-tiered
system of supportive and intervention services designed to support every student in achieving
4
academic success. The systems that comprise the MTSS house are: Response to Intervention,
School-Wide Positive Behavior Support, Social-Emotional RTI & Trauma-informed Practices,
and Suicide Prevention and Intervention. These service-delivery models are designed to address
the child as a whole- academically, behaviorally, and social-emotionally (Schaffer, 2022). The
MTSS framework is built upon the idea that prevention is preferable to remediation.
Response to Intervention: RTI
RTI is a triangular, three-tiered intervention service delivery model that is part of the
general education curriculum. The focus of RTI is on providing quality evidence-based
instruction and remediating academic deficits for students. (Schaffer, 2022). RTI is based on the
concept that all students should be ensured high-quality instruction and that universal screening,
early identification, and evidenced-based interventions can reduce and prevent future learning
delays (Schaffer, 2022). Tier 1 of RTI is designed to deliver academic interventions and supports
to all students in the general education classroom resulting in approximately 80%–85% of
students responding to the intervention. In Tier 2, supplemental instruction that is more rigorous
and intense than Tier 1 instruction is given to approximately 10%–15% of students who have
been identified at-risk for not meeting proficiency. This supplemental instruction tends to
involve either providing groups of 5–8 students push-in or pull-out support delivered by a
content specialist or teacher. If students do not respond to Tier 2 interventions, they move to Tier
3. Interventions at Tier 3 are delivered in exceedingly small pull-out groups of one to three
students by a content specialist or special education teacher (Nguyen, 2022; Schaffer, 2022).
5
School Wide Positive Behavioral Supports (SWPBS)
School-Wide Positive Behavior Support (SWPBS) focuses on preventing and intervening
in children who present with externalizing behaviors. Like the other intervention service delivery
models, SWPBS employs a multi-tiered continuum of supports and interventions to prevent and
address challenging behaviors in children. Tier 1 of SWPBS typically involves school staff
working together to foster, embrace, and model school expectations, routines, and mottos, and
approximately 80% of students should respond to this model (Schaffer, 2022). Those who don’t
respond move to Tier 2. Students at Tier 2 greatly benefit from interventions that offer them
explicit expectations and feedback. Tier 2 supports can include interventions such as behavior
contracts or Check-in Check-out (CICO) routines. The 1-5% of students who do not respond to
Tier 2 interventions tend to have constant and severe maladaptive behavior patterns that may
endanger themselves or others wind up in Tier 3 (Schaffer, 2022). Tier 3 supports are designed to
address the function of the behavior and require a behavior support team to meet up and outline
the individual needs, preferences, and strengths/weaknesses of the student (Loftus-Rattan et al.,
2023). A Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) may be complete to determine why a student
in engaging in the behavior and a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) may be developed in
response to the FBA (Schaffer, 2022). This would likely be performed by a school psychologist;
in fact, a school psychologist would likely be instrumental in supporting all tiers of SWPBS.
Social-Emotional RTI and Embedding Trauma-Informed Practices
Social-emotional RTI consists of three tiers with a specific focus of teaching students
mental wellness strategies and providing support for social-emotional concerns (Schaffer, 2022).
Tier 1 of social-emotional RTI is similar to Tier 1 of SWPBS, in that a central component of
both is the creation of a warm, welcoming, and caring school environment that fosters safety and
6
security in students (Malone et al, 2022). Supports at Tier 2 are designed to be short-term and
typically last between six to t welve weeks (Schaffer, 2022). Tier 2 programs might include
group counseling, Cognitive-Behavioral Interventions, or social-emotional CICO with a teacher
or trusted staff. Students at Tier 3 require intensified supports that are specific to their needs and
areas of deficit. Tier 3 services are designed to treat children who present with the highest mental
health care needs outside of special education (Schaffer, 2022). At this level, the intervention
would likely be provided by the school psychologist, and a treatment plan would be developed.
Suicide Prevention and Intervention
Suicide prevention and intervention endorses the idea that not all children who are
experiencing social-emotional concerns or engaging in self-injurious behaviors are suicidal
(Schaffer, 2022). As with the other ‘walls’ of the MTSS house, Suicide Prevention and
Intervention operates using a three-tiered model. Tier 1 of suicide prevention and intervention
builds on universal supports already in place through school-wide positive behavior support
(SWPBS) and social-emotional response to intervention, including the creation of a culture that
models and emphasizes respect, empathy, and kindness for one another (Schaffer, 2022).
Supports at this level also include ‘gatekeeper training’, or educating staff regarding youth
suicide. If a student expresses Suicidal ideation, but does not yet have a concrete plan and has
not attempted, the student is moved to the second tier. In Tier 2, a risk-assessment is typically
performed by the school psychologist or another qualified professional, and a support/safety plan
is developed. In addition, psychoeducational interventions and information on community-based
service providers who may further assist the child can be provided. Students who are at high-risk
for committing suicide are placed in Tier 3. These students may have a documented history of
suicide attempts, self-identify as suicidal, or may have been identified by others as high risk due
7
to suicidal thoughts and behaviors. The biggest difference between a student at Tier 2 and one at
Tier 3 is that a student at Tier 3 is at imminent risk of committing suicide, has a detailed method
to complete the act, has access to materials to attempt suicide, and is showing one or more of the
warning signs. Tier 3 efforts consist of school-based mental health practitioners and
administrators working with the local hospital, community mobile mental health unit, or outside
mental health agency to ensure the child is connected with outside support. At this step, the
school psychologist’s role is critical in guiding administration, the student, and the family down
the correct path.
School Psychologists as Instruments of Change in the MTSS System
The implementation of MTSS in schools presents school psychologists with many
opportunities to expand their roles and take responsibilities across different domains. School
Psychologists are trained to be critical readers of research and can be instrumental in determining
if there is quality research to support a teaching method. They can also collaborate with leaders
on the interventions of various subgroups of students (Loftus-Rattan et al., 2023). In urban
settings, where schools may face high turnover and more inexperienced teachers, leadership
needs to step in to help prepare teachers to meet the diverse needs of their students (Braun et al.,
2020). School psychologists can be a critical part of this leadership team, providing critical
evidence-based supports to ensure we have high-quality teachers in our classroom who are wellprepared and well-supported.
Universal Design Learning
Universal Design for Learning (UDL), is based on the idea that “what is essential for
some, is good for all”. In the classroom, this means that the teaching strategies that might be
8
necessary for facilitating comprehension for students with disabilities are beneficial for all
students, regardless of their disability status. This approach increases the likelihood that students
will understand a concept, by guiding classroom education to respond to individual student
learning styles and interests (Murawski & Scott, 2019). UDL also removes barriers to learning
by providing accommodations, support, and additional challenges when needed (Nguyen, 2022).
The three principles are the engagement, representation, and action/expression. Engagement is
the idea that motivated, purposeful learners will be more interested and driven to learn.
Representation creates resourceful, knowledgeable learners by presenting the material in
different ways. Finally, Action and Expression creates strategic, goal-directed learners by
providing different options for students to express what they know (Murawski & Scott, 2019).
How Does UDL Impact Placement Along the Tiered System?
UDL is a highly effective instructional pedagogy and, if correctly implemented, should
result in approximately 80% of students being successful with Tier 1 supports (Edyburn, 2021;
Murawski & Scott, 2019). Therefore, UDL can be instrumental in supporting the RTI wall of the
MTSS house, as it can assist in supporting the diverse academic needs of the students in the
general education classroom. Without a robust, evidence-based pedagogy like UDL driving
curriculum design and instruction, students will be more likely to struggle or need increasing
levels of support to achieve academic success. The multi-tiered MTSS framework cannot
function correctly without an effective service model to ensure students are placed in the correct
tiers and that most students (approx.. 80%) are able to be supported with Tier 1 interventions
(Edyburn, 2021; Murawski & Scott, 2019). For academics, UDL is an effective instructional
pedagogy to ensure the tiered-model functions appropriately.
9
Conclusion
MTSS has created a framework to assist educators in making data-driven decisions
through the monitoring of student progress, thereby strengthening instructional supports and the
likelihood that a student will succeed (Braun et al., 2020). By providing multi-tiered academic,
behavioral, and social-emotional interventions a school effectively addresses its students’ diverse
needs and fosters an environment that sets students and teachers up for success. Furthermore,
when teachers implement an effective instructional pedagogy like UDL, students are more likely
to be distributed appropriately along the tiered-model of supports, which is critical to the success
of the MTSS framework-based systems.
10
Works Cited
Braun, Kumm, S., Brown, C., Walte, S., Hughes, M. T., & Maggin, D. M. (2020). Living in Tier
2: educators’ perceptions of MTSS in urban schools. International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 24(10), 1114–1128. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1511758
Edyburn, D. L. (2021). Universal Usability and Universal Design for Learning. Intervention in
School and Clinic, 56(5), 310–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220963082
Loftus-Rattan, Wrightington, M., Furey, J., & Case, J. (2023). Multi-Tiered System of Supports:
An Ecological Approach to School Psychology Service Delivery. Teaching of
Psychology, 50(1), 77–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283211024262
Malone, Wycoff, K., & Turner, E. A. (2022). Applying a MTSS framework to address racism
and promote mental health for racial/ethnic minoritized youth. Psychology in the
Schools, 59(12), 2438–2452. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22606
Murawski, W. W., & Scott, K. L. (2019). What Really Works With Universal Design for
Learning. SAGE Publications, Inc.
(US). https://online.vitalsource.com/books/9781544338699
Nguyen, M. (2022). Lesson 1: Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS)
https://nationalu.brightspace.com//content/enforced/46460-PED614-106882301/Module%201/Lesson%201/Lesson%201.pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=KgiH6OHd6khJY
CFZ9W70Rf8M4&ou=46460
Nguyen, M. (2022). Universal Design for Learning (UDL).
https://nationalu.brightspace.com//content/enforced/46460-PED614-106882301/Module%202/content/index.html?ou=46460#/lessons/fG0A_4V68Vgf7saq0RYa
RA426Eihc1sM
O’Neill, John L. (2021). Accessibility for all abilities: How universal design, universal design for
learning, and inclusive design combat inaccessibility and ableism. Journal of Open
Access to Law, 9(1), 1–15.
Schaffer, G. E. (2022). Multi-Tiered Systems of Support. SAGE Publications, Inc.
(US). https://online.vitalsource.com/books/9781071831120
Scheuermann, Brenda, K. et al. Positive Behavioral Supports for the Classroom. Available from:
VitalSource Bookshelf, (4th Edition). Pearson Education (US), 2021.