Q&A Highlights from the Webinar Coherence by Design: A Conversation with Knox County
In our latest webinar, we dove deeper into one district’s journey to improve student outcomes by strengthening coherence across their intervention program. Two instructional leaders from Knox County Public Schools shared their experiences, challenges, and wins with Devon Gadow and Nick Denton-Brown, two of TNTP’s team members who supported this work. Our audience responded with so many questions that we had to keep the conversation going. Here are the top questions from the webinar with answers from our leading coherence experts.
What does “using aligned curricula” across all tiers and supports mean?
While this looks different by grade and subject, aligned curricula generally means using intervention materials that follow the same scope and sequence, terminology, and routines as in Tier I instruction.
This avoids introducing isolated supplemental programs that can confuse students and place additional burdens on teachers. When unrelated supplemental materials must be used, districts or schools need to invest time and resources to align scope, terminology, and representations with core instruction.
Examples include:
- Foundational skills: Using curriculum-embedded diagnostics to identify a student’s earliest weakness (e.g., r-controlled vowels), then using Tier I-aligned materials to address that need.
- Secondary literacy: Previewing upcoming Tier I texts (or texts on related topics) during intervention to build background knowledge and vocabulary in preparation for upcoming Tier I learning.
- Math: Using Tier I materials during intervention to address critical prerequisites for upcoming grade-level content, sometimes supplemented with aligned intervention programs that can similarly be used to teach key prerequisites.
What does instructional coherence look like for students with disabilities or IEPs?
There is no one-size-fits-all approach for students with disabilities, but instructional coherence means addressing variability within a shared, grade-level instructional experience—not through separate or fragmented systems.
In a coherent system, students with IEPs access grade-level content with specially designed instruction (SDI), accommodations, and scaffolds integrated into core instruction. This requires special educators to be consistently involved—co-analyzing data, shaping decisions about supports and grouping, and co-designing instruction alongside general educators.
In practice, this looks like:
- One instructional experience: Interventions and supports connect directly to core instruction.
- IEPs as instructional tools: Goals, accommodations, and SDI are tied to grade-level learning and used in daily planning.
- Aligned tiers: Students with IEPs engage in Tier II or Tier III supports when appropriate, with those supports aligned to and reinforcing Tier I learning—avoiding the misconception that Tier III equals special education.
- Shared ownership: General and special educators jointly plan, deliver, and are accountable for outcomes.
- Consistent expectations with flexible access: Grade-level rigor is maintained, while supports expand access.
- Connected data use: Teams use shared data to monitor progress across settings.
What does instructional coherence look like for multilingual learners?
Instructional coherence for multilingual learners (MLs) will vary across contexts, but ML supports should generally begin from alignment to core instructional needs. ML designations indicate English language proficiency, not grade-level proficiency or deficiency.
Educators should balance language development needs with grade-level content supports. ML specialists should be involved when decisions about intervention and grouping are made, so they can inform whether a multilingual learner should receive Tier II or Tier III intervention—or needs a different type of support.
How should schools schedule and staff students’ intervention time?
While schedules vary, several guiding principles apply:
- Intervention should be in addition to, not instead of, Tier I instruction. Students should not be pulled from core instruction.
- The highest-need students should be served first.
- The most highly qualified instructors should work with the students with the greatest needs.
In Knox County, intervention was led by a combination of Tier I teachers and trained interventionists.
What does coherent intervention look like for students who are multiple grade levels behind?
Coherence is especially important for the students who are furthest behind. In Knox County, students in the bottom 10 percent made the largest gains under a coherent intervention model.
The district used curriculum-embedded diagnostics to identify each student’s earliest skill gap and addressed that specific need using Tier I-aligned materials—even if the skill was traditionally taught in an earlier grade. Because foundational skills are sequential, addressing the earliest gap is essential.
In other contexts:
- Math: Focus on critical prerequisites to support access to upcoming grade-level work rather than remediating every skill gap a student presents.
- Secondary literacy: Address the most significant barriers to comprehension and writing, whether foundational skills, vocabulary, knowledge, or fluency.
Are universal screeners bad?
No. Universal screeners are valuable for identifying students who need additional support. However, they should not be the only data source used to group students or plan intervention.
Districts should use data sources that:
- Identify students most at risk
- Are valid and reliable for the local student population
- Pinpoint specific skill gaps
- Align to the taught curriculum
Often, the strongest approach combines universal screening with curriculum-embedded diagnostics.
How would you approach coherence when policy pushes against it?
Policy decisions made at the state or district level often unintentionally create incoherence. For example, a state policy may determine which materials districts can adopt in Tier I and intervention but provide different adoption lists for each. Districts should first distinguish between what state policies require and what they recommend.
Even when materials cannot change, stronger diagnostics and better grouping can improve coherence. When using third-party supplemental programs, instructors should do their best to align instruction to Tier I content (for instance, by identifying and teaching key prerequisites for upcoming Tier I math work). Schools can also make decisions to strengthen collaboration between intervention and Tier I teachers and better leverage core content during intervention.
How did Knox County build buy-in and shift mindsets?
Knox County started with four pilot schools, selected because they had strong leadership and represented different types of schools in the district (e.g., small rural, large urban, lower-performing, etc.). Early on, district leaders brought these schools together to explain the process and rationale behind the work, build shared understanding of instructional coherence, highlight data showing that the previous approach to intervention wasn’t working for students, and emphasize a learner’s mindset.
Teachers and school leaders at the four schools received training, tools, and ongoing support to implement the new model. TNTP’s team met frequently with school leaders to troubleshoot challenges. Leaders regularly observed intervention instruction, responding with additional training, support, and tools as needed. Survey data showed that teachers, leaders, and coaches strongly preferred the new coherent intervention model. Once the study results demonstrated that students in coherent intervention grew significantly more than students in Knox County’s prior model, demand for the new model rapidly grew districtwide.
Watch the recording of Coherence by Design: A Conversation with Knox County, or learn more about how TNTP can help your school or system strengthen instructional coherence.
