CHAPTER 2: dYSREgulATion To diSoRdER • 31aligned with the needs of the individual student being serviced. This level is intended to be
implemented for the smallest percentage of students, the 1% to 5% who continue to require
supports beyond those in the first two tiers (Stoiber, 2014).
The process of moving a student from Tier 1 to Tier 3 intervention involves unsuccessful
attempts at remediation at Tiers 1 and 2. The record of unsuccessful attempts at remediation
in both Tiers 1 and 2 is termed the Response to Intervention (RTI) process. The RTI process
is a problem-solving model that moves a student through the tiers of intervention in order
to offer the student the least restrictive placement and academic program while still meeting
the student’s academic, emotional, and behavioral needs. Often, assessment is interwoven
throughout the tiers so that the best fit can be made between the student’s needs and the inter-
vention of choice. For example, if a student was found to be struggling with self-regulation
(i.e., Joey often does not think before he speaks or interacts with others, gets in fights with
peers, and has a few discipline referrals), despite a school-wide SEL program, the student
might be selected to partake in a smaller mindfulness and yoga group for students with
impulsivity and anger management issues—designed to increased self-awareness and self-
regulation. Joey might respond positively to such a program and no longer need support. Or
Joey may not respond enough to the intervention (e.g., Joey is getting into fewer fights), war-
ranting increase frequency, duration, or intensity of the program. If those changes do not sup-
port behavioral change, Joey might be assessed by the school psychologist for consideration
for referral to another program or for a Tier 3 program that integrates more structure, a smaller
class size, and continued work on self-regulation. Ultimately, the goal of the three-tier system
and the individualized RTI model is to allow students like Alesha, Benjamin, and Joey to
remain in the least restrictive learning environment with the most appropriate level of support.
Tier 1: Approaches for the Promotion of Self-Regulation and Care and
intentional, Reflective Engagement
Tier 1 approaches for health and well-being promotion are interventions at the universal
level. In general, they are core instructional or social–behavioral programs that are imple-
mented for all students within the school and likely to be sufficient in meeting the needs
of the majority of students (Stoiber, 2014). For example, yoga might be offered school wide
as part of a school district’s social–emotional learning program. In this way, each student
takes part in a yoga class two to three times per week as part of his or her routine aca-
demic schedule. There is a long-standing history in the provision of universal programs
in education that illustrates the link between physical health and learning. For example,
school lunch programs were among the first interventions provided within the school set-
ting to address a foundational health need that was notably interfering with student learn-
ing (Cook-Cottone & Vujnovic, 2016; Cook-Cottone, Tribole et al., 2013). Since first initiated,
school-based programs to promote nutrition and physical health have grown substantially.
They now include large-scale, federally funded school lunch programs and integrated phys-
ical and health education. They also target all levels of well-being support from supportive
counseling services to family support. Current implementation issues hinge on funding,
challenges related to scheduling and time constraints, and finding evidence-based pro-
grams that meet school needs (Cook-Cottone & Vujnovic, 2016).
Beyond the provision of school lunches, there is emerging evidence that universal
practices designed to promote well-being and health are effective in schools (Cook-Cottone,