Worked example · Tier 3 · Seventh grade
What a Tier 3 student looks like (academic and behavior)
Grace is a seventh grader with both academic and behavioral needs. Two domains rate Significant — curriculum and behavior — and that second live domain lifts her to Tier 3. It's also where the rubric first asks for a real judgment call, the Tier 2-versus-3 edge.
The student
Grace is a seventh grader identified under Emotional Disturbance. Her IEP documents specialized academic instruction, a behavioral support service, and counseling as a related service — academic goals and behavior goals both. The plan is built around two things at once: keeping Grace accessing instruction, and supporting regulation through the school day. Two genuinely live areas of need — a recognizable profile for a middle-school student carrying both learning and behavioral support.
What jumps out first
No override. Two domains are live — Curriculum & Instruction and Behavior — and both carry real service. So this is a two-domain rating: the empty three get set aside quickly, and the work is in how the two live domains land.
The domains that matter
Curriculum & Instruction. Factor B is the high one — her academic instruction requires a SPED teacher with targeted competencies → Significant. Factors A and C are Moderate. (Curriculum & Instruction domain)
| Factor | What the IEP requires | Level |
|---|---|---|
| A — type/frequency | Recurring specialized academic instruction | Moderate (2) |
| B — credentials | SPED teacher with targeted competencies | Significant (3) |
| C — ratio | Small-group resource ratio | Moderate (2) |
| D — equipment | No specialized equipment required | None (0) |
Behavior. Factors A, B, and D all reach Significant — intensive, individualized behavioral support requiring specialized staff and supports → Significant. (Behavior domain)
| Factor | What the IEP requires | Level |
|---|---|---|
| A — type/frequency | Intensive, individualized behavioral support | Significant (3) |
| B — credentials | Specialized behavior staff | Significant (3) |
| C — ratio | No special ratio required | Minimum (1) |
| D — equipment | Individualized behavioral supports | Significant (3) |
By highest-wins, two domains at Significant — Curriculum and Behavior.
The empty domains
Communication, Independent Functioning, and Personal Care/Health have no direct service — one line.
The tier
Tier 3, by the ladder. Two Significant domains sum to a total that lands at Tier 3. The honest judgment note: the Tier 2–3 boundary is where two careful raters can land a step apart. Grace's Behavior domain is solidly Significant — three of its four factors reach it — so her case isn't especially borderline. But a student with a thinner second domain (one factor reaching Significant, the rest low) is exactly where the 2-vs-3 call gets made differently by different raters, and the rubric expects you to name that rather than fake a crisp number.
Service groups
The separate read. Grace's counseling and behavioral support are both related services. Summed across the six-week period — counseling 30 min/wk plus behavioral support 90 min × 2/wk = 1,260 minutes per six weeks — they clear the 540-minute threshold, placing her in Service Group 3. She has no dedicated 1:1, so no group 4–5. (If a district documents behavioral support as instructional SDI rather than a related service, only the counseling minutes count and the group drops — a documentation call worth noting.)
What this example shows
Tier 3, Service Group 3. What this example shows: a second live domain moves a student up the ladder, and the Tier 2-to-3 step is the first place the rubric leans on a judgment a second rater might make differently. The example names that edge rather than pretending it's crisp.
Related examples
- One live domain instead of two — Casey Huang, Tier 2 with a single Significant domain. Grace's second Significant domain (behavior) is what lifts her to Tier 3.
- A third and fourth domain come live — Christian Garcia, what the ladder does as more domains turn on, the next step past two.
- The Tier 2/3 judgment call, discussed — the edge this example sits on.