Integrating multi‐tiered measurement outcomes for special education eligibility with sequential decision‐making methodology

Changes to federal guidelines for the identification of children with disabilities have supported the use of multi‐tiered models of service delivery. This study investigated the impact of measurement methodology as used across numerous tiers in determining special education eligibility. Four studies were completed using a sample of inner‐city children (N = 150) who were administered a reading screener twice and a reading measure adapted from the state high‐stakes reading test. A sub‐sample of children identified as At‐Risk were administered a comprehensive reading assessment and compared with a randomly selected control group, who were also administered a comprehensive reading assessment (n = 14). A model was developed to estimate the likelihood of special education eligibility based on both theoretical and empirical measurement parameters. Depending on the measurement assumptions of the multi‐tiered model, special education eligibility outcomes varied from a low of 0.2% to as high as 11%, depending on the type of measure used, decision‐making criteria used at each tier, and the number of tiers in the model. This study highlights the importance of measurement specification, explicit decision‐making criteria, and empirical investigation to fully understand outcomes associated with the implementation of multi‐tiered models. Implications for special education eligibility policy and practical implications for implementing comprehensive measurement practice in multi‐tiered systems at the school level are discussed. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.