MTSS Isn’t Magic—It’s Infrastructure: Fidelity, UFLI, and the Pedagogical Reality We Keep Ignoring
If I had a dollar for every time a school said they “have MTSS,” I could retire early and fund my own literacy nonprofit.
Because the truth is this: most schools do not actually have MTSS.
They have the vocabulary of MTSS, the meetings of MTSS, sometimes even the screeners of MTSS—but not the structural conditions necessary to make MTSS work.
Let’s strip away the buzzwords and talk about what MTSS actually is, what it demands, and where so many schools—despite good intentions—go off the rails.
What MTSS Is, and What It Is Not
MTSS (Multi-Tiered System of Supports) is an infrastructure for coordinated instructional support. Not a program. Not a binder. Not a PLC agenda item.
At its core:
Tier 1 is content.
Grade-level instruction. Universal access. High-quality, evidence-aligned, and delivered to all students.Tier 2 is content catch-up.
Short-term, targeted, strategic instruction meant to close immediate skill gaps so students can fully access Tier 1 instruction.Tier 3 is remediation.
Intensive, diagnostic, individualized intervention—not delivered by the classroom teacher, but by a specialist trained in deep intervention design.
Read that last line again.
Tier 3 is not the classroom teacher’s responsibility.
Nor should it be.
Yet in many schools today, we are asking classroom teachers to simultaneously:
✔ teach Tier 1
✔ run Tier 2 groups
✔ design Tier 3 supports
✔ collect continual data
✔ and document every move
This is impossible. It is pedagogical madness masquerading as “efficiency.”
We blame teachers when the system was never structurally sound.
UFLI as Curriculum: What It Can Do—and What It Cannot
Let’s talk UFLI, because its meteoric rise has been both exciting and concerning.
UFLI is exceptional when used as intended.
The University of Florida Literacy Institute created a beautifully structured, systematic phonics curriculum—tight routines, clear scaffolds, mastery-based progression, and a deep alignment with the science of reading.
But fidelity matters.
And UFLI was not designed as an all-purpose intervention tool for every age and every need.
Appropriate Use Cases
1st–2nd Grade: Core or strong supplemental curriculum
If implemented with fidelity, it’s gold. These grades are exactly what the program was built for.3rd–4th Grade: Intervention
When older students have foundational phonics gaps, UFLI can support structured catch-up work as an intervention, not as a replacement for grade-level ELA.
Where UFLI does not belong
Beyond Grade 5 as Tier 2/3 intervention for non-SPED students
At that point, we are no longer dealing with typical phonics gaps. The instructional needs are diagnostic, complex, and require a specialist—often targeting morphology, advanced phonics, fluency, and language comprehension together.
The Screener Problem: When Tools Become Tokens
Screeners are only as useful as the curriculum you pair them with.
Right now, many schools use the UFLI Foundations Foundational Skills Screener even when they are not using UFLI materials with fidelity. This creates data that appears actionable but isn’t.
Why?
Because the UFLI screener is curriculum-linked.
It tells you where students fall within the UFLI sequence, not where they stand relative to all possible phonics expectations.
So what should schools use universally?
The Core Phonics Survey.
A neutral, curriculum-agnostic screener that establishes a baseline for every student—regardless of what core program a school uses.
Use it first.
Then use curriculum-linked screeners only when appropriate.
Why MTSS Fails in Real Schools (and How to Fix It)
1. Classroom teachers are expected to run all three tiers.
This alone guarantees burnout and inconsistent implementation.
Fix:
Rebuild staffing structures so that Tier 3 is owned by trained specialists—not general education teachers.
2. Curriculum is misaligned to developmental stages.
When UFLI is used outside its intended grade bands, fidelity breaks down and outcomes plummet.
Fix:
Adopt grade-level-appropriate core instruction and reserve UFLI for the grade bands where it is strongest.
3. Screeners are used symbolically, not diagnostically.
The “checklist” approach to screening leads to false confidence and incorrect placements.
Fix:
Use a universal screener (Core Phonics) for all students and reserve curriculum-linked screeners for fidelity-aligned classrooms.
4. MTSS is treated as an initiative—not a system.
Schools implement parts in isolation rather than designing the infrastructure needed to support it.
Fix:
Schedule, staffing, PD, materials, progress monitoring, and intervention delivery must be redesigned as a single integrated system.
When Readers Arrive in Middle School Without Skills: A Tiered System Requires a Tiered Solution
The hardest gap to talk about is the one we see most:
students in grades 5–8 who cannot decode, cannot read fluently, and cannot access grade-level text—but who have no IEP.
In most schools, this group is large, underserved, and silently drowning.
And the solution is not to give them first-grade texts, worksheets, or decodables.
It’s not to pull them from core instruction for “Tier 3 with your ELA teacher.”
And it’s definitely not to assume novel studies will magically teach decoding.
We need adolescent-appropriate foundational intervention that preserves dignity AND accelerates skill development.
What Middle Schoolers Need: Age-Up Content + Skill-Down Instruction
Foundational Skills (Tier 3 specialists—not classroom teachers)
Intervention for adolescents with decoding gaps must be explicit, diagnostic, and age-respectful. Appropriate programs include:
REWARDS (grades 4–12 multisyllable decoding—fast, effective)
Just Words (Wilson) (ideal for Tier 2/3 foundational gaps)
SRA Corrective Reading: Decoding (for severe skill deficits)
Heggerty Bridge the Gap (for older students needing phonemic awareness)
These address phonics, morphology, and fluency without infantilizing students.
Content & Comprehension (Tier 1 & Tier 2)
Students still need access to grade-level ideas, topics, and discourse. Use:
Amplify Knowledge or Wit & Wisdom with scaffolds
Newsela leveled nonfiction (but keep discussion grade-level)
CommonLit 360
Paired texts, text sets, and article-of-the-week structures
Middle school MTSS requires two parallel lanes:
Grade-level content in class
Targeted foundational intervention outside core instruction
Not one instead of the other.
Scheduling Matters: Intervention Must Not Replace Core Instruction
Effective scheduling models include:
WIN blocks (“What I Need”)
Advisory-period intervention
Rotations in electives (if non-stigmatizing and equitable)
After-school or extended-day programming
Summer acceleration programs
Middle schoolers need daily, high-dosage intervention for 8–12 weeks, followed by re-screening and strategic next steps.
Middle School Morphology: The Missing Link
By grade 5, over 60% of unfamiliar words are morphologically decodable.
Middle school interventions must teach:
Greek/Latin roots
Prefix/suffix patterns
Multisyllabic decoding
Academic vocabulary structures
Derivational morphology
This is where UFLI is not the right tool—it wasn’t designed for linguistically complex adolescent needs.
Identity Safety Is Non-Negotiable
Middle schoolers must experience intervention without shame.
That means:
No babyish clip-art
No “Level C Readers”
No primary-color decodables
No public charts of “levels”
Use teen-facing nonfiction, contemporary topics, and dignity-preserving materials.
You can remediate skills without degrading identity.
The Goal: Acceleration, Not Endless Intervention
A well-run middle school MTSS system follows this sequence:
Universal baseline with Core Phonics
Diagnostic placement
Intensive 8–12 week intervention (daily, specialist-delivered)
Re-screening
Return to Tier 1 with supports—or continue Tier 2
Consider SPED only when persistent disability is evident
This prevents both over-identification and neglect.
What True MTSS Feels Like
When MTSS is properly implemented:
Tier 1 is strong enough that most students progress naturally.
Tier 2 is brief, targeted, efficient, and successful.
Tier 3 is specialized and deeply effective.
Teachers feel supported, not overwhelmed.
Students experience success early—and often.
Data reflects learning, not chaos.
This isn’t magic.
It’s design.
We owe our students—and our teachers—the version of MTSS that works.
Closing Thought: Pedagogy Must Be Ferocious
The feral pedagogy is unafraid to call things what they are.
MTSS is only powerful when implemented with fidelity, integrity, and respect for developmental realities.
We cannot remediate our way out of weak Tier 1.
We cannot ask teachers to do the work of entire departments.
And we cannot keep pretending that more screeners equal better instruction.
Let’s build the system our students deserve
|Sources|
1. MTSS Structure & Roles (Tier 1, 2, 3)
MTSS requires differentiated responsibilities; Tier 3 should be specialist-delivered.
National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII)
Intensive Intervention & MTSS Framework
https://intensiveintervention.org
(They explicitly state Tier 3 must be delivered by trained specialists using data-based individualization.)Center on Multi-Tiered System of Supports at AIR
https://mtss4success.org
(Defines Tiers clearly, including that Tier 1 = core instruction and Tier 3 = individualized intervention.)Fuchs & Fuchs (2006)
Introduction to Response to Intervention: What, Why, and How Valid Is It?
(RTI is the foundation of MTSS—clearly distinguishes intensity and roles.)
https://doi.org/10.1037/e695692007-001National Center on Response to Intervention (NCRTI)
Essential Components of RTI (2010).
(Highlights tiered roles and intensity.)
2. UFLI & Fidelity of Implementation
UFLI is a program with specific grade-level intentions; using its screener without curriculum fidelity is inappropriate.
UFLI Foundations: Professional Development Guide
University of Florida Literacy Institute
https://ufli.education.ufl.edu
(They state explicitly that screeners are aligned to their instructional sequence.)Denton (2012)
Fidelity of Implementation in Curriculum-Based Interventions.
Exceptional Children.
(Shows outcomes drop sharply when instructional programs are not delivered with fidelity.)Gersten et al. (2020)
The Importance of Curriculum Fidelity in Early Literacy Interventions
Reading Research Quarterly.
(Tied specifically to phonics and early reading.)
3. Universal Screening & Using Curriculum-Neutral Tools
Core Phonics Survey is recommended as a baseline because it’s not linked to a specific curriculum.
CORE (Consortium on Reaching Excellence in Education)
CORE Phonics Survey Technical Manual
https://www.corelearn.com
(States it is curriculum-agnostic, diagnostic, and intended as a universal foundational screener.)National Center on Improving Literacy (NCIL)
Screening for Reading Risk
https://improvingliteracy.org
(Recommends neutral screeners for Tier 1.)DIBELS 8th Edition Technical Manual
University of Oregon
(Shows curriculum-linked screeners should not replace universal screening.)
4. Adolescent Literacy Research (Grades 5–8)
Older students need age-appropriate materials and foundational skill intervention that does NOT infantilize.
Biancarosa & Snow (2006)
Reading Next: A Vision for Action and Research in Middle and High School Literacy.
Carnegie Corporation & Alliance for Excellent Education.
(Foundational document on adolescent literacy — emphasizes age-appropriate content + targeted instruction.)Shanahan & Shanahan (2008)
Teaching Disciplinary Literacy to Adolescents: Rethinking Content-Area Literacy.
Harvard Educational Review.
(Shows adolescents need grade-level content exposure even when foundational skills lag.)Vaughn et al. (2010)
Effectiveness of Intensive Reading Interventions for Older Struggling Readers.
Journal of Learning Disabilities.
(Notes that older readers need explicit decoding intervention AND parallel grade-level content.)Scammacca et al. (2007, 2015)
Interventions for Adolescent Struggling Readers: Meta-Analyses.
(Confirms need for explicit, intensive intervention delivered by specialists.)
5. Morphology Instruction for Upper Grades
Morphology is critical beyond Grade 5 and should be central for adolescent readers.
Goodwin & Ahn (2010)
A Meta-Analysis of Morphological Interventions.
Reading Research Quarterly.
(Shows robust effects on adolescent reading, fluency, and comprehension.)Nagy & Anderson (1984)
Morphological Families and Vocabulary Growth.
(Classic study showing morphology drives vocabulary learning in grades 4+.)Bowers & Kirby (2010)
Effects of Morphological Instruction on Literacy Skills.
(Strong evidence for morphology for struggling older readers.)
6. High-Dosage, Short-Term Intervention
8–12 weeks of daily intervention is more effective than long-term low-frequency support.
Nickow, Oreopoulos, & Quan (2020)
The Impressive Effects of Tutoring on PreK–12 Learning.
NBER Working Paper.
(Defines “high-dosage” as daily or near-daily, small-group or 1:1, with strong outcomes.)Wanzek & Vaughn (2007)
Research-Based Implications from Intensive Reading Interventions.
(Supports concentrated, intensive formats.)
7. Why Grade-Level Content Must Continue Even for Struggling Readers
Students cannot be removed from core content for foundational intervention.
Castles, Rastle, & Nation (2018)
Ending the Reading Wars.
Psychological Science in the Public Interest.
(Strong argument for simultaneous comprehension and decoding development.)Hiebert & Mesmer (2013)
Upping the Ante of Text Complexity in the Common Core Standards.
Reading Research Quarterly.
(Shows students need exposure to grade-level ideas, even if the text is scaffolded.)O’Connor et al. (2010)
General Education Intervention for At-Risk Readers.
(Shows that grade-level content access + targeted intervention is more effective than pullout-only models.)
8. Age-Respectful Materials for Middle School Readers
No baby books; adolescents need dignity-preserving content.
Association for Middle Level Education (AMLE)
The Successful Middle School: This We Believe
(Emphasizes psychological and social appropriateness in instructional materials.)International Literacy Association (ILA)
Standards for Middle and High School Literacy Professionals
(Calls for adolescent-appropriate text selection.)