When large numbers of students rely on Tier 2 support to be successful, it raises an important question about Tier 1 instruction.
Tier 2 is meant to support a subset of students with targeted needs. But when it starts carrying the weight of widespread learning gaps, disengagement, or unfinished skills, something upstream deserves a closer look.
Educators feel this tension every day. Teachers are trying to move learning forward while also rebuilding skills students were once expected to already have. Focus drifts more quickly. Students struggle to manage their workload independently. Lessons land in the moment but do not always stick.
These challenges aren’t limited to a few students in a small group. They show up across entire classrooms. And when that happens, Tier 2 systems begin to stretch beyond what they were designed to do.
Put simply, strong MTSS frameworks depend on a well-defined foundation. Tier 1 instruction needs to work well for most students.
Targeted interventions and tutoring matter. When used well, they help students close gaps and regain confidence. But they cannot compensate for a Tier 1 experience that is misaligned with students’ current needs.
Schools often see the same signs when Tier 1 is under strain:
(Sound familiar?)
Over time, intervention becomes the default response. Not because it works so well, but because Tier 1 gaps push more and more students into Tier 2 support.
Most districts are already using data to understand where students are. Academic assessments highlight skill gaps. SEL and behavior screeners surface trends related to engagement and readiness. These tools provide incredibly valuable insight.
But the harder questions are waiting just around the corner.
Which of these needs belong in Tier 1 instruction rather than intervention? How should teachers address them while still moving grade-level learning forward? And who is responsible for ensuring those approaches stay consistent across classrooms?
Without shared priorities and visibility, Tier 1 efforts can drift. Teachers make thoughtful adjustments on their own, but students experience very different expectations from class to class.
When academic, SEL, and cognitive data are viewed together in one place, schools are significantly better equipped to move from isolated responses to coordinated action—and that’s huge.
Looking at learning through a cognitive lens helps explain why some students struggle even when instruction is strong.
Think about a student in your class who participates in discussions and understands new concepts, but struggles to stay organized or complete independent work. Or a student who stays focused and follows directions, yet has trouble recalling material from one week earlier.
Across schools, these patterns are common. Student strengths vary widely, and there is no single profile that fits every classroom.
At the same time, certain needs consistently rise to the surface at the Tier 1 level. These needs affect many students, not just those receiving intervention. Understanding those patterns helps schools focus their energy where it will matter most.
Difficulty getting started, staying focused, and monitoring their own progress. For many students, these challenges show up throughout the school day, not just during independent practice.
And teachers often see the behavior before they see the cause. At the Tier 1 level, supportive routines tend to be more effective than reactive consequences. When classrooms share structures that help students focus and self-monitor, students benefit from that consistency throughout the day.
Simple strategies such as chunking lessons, building in intentional breaks, and reducing distractions can make a noticeable difference, especially when they’re used schoolwide.
Students frequently understand new concepts during instruction, yet struggle to remember them later. You teach the new material on Monday, students practice it successfully, and the discussion feels productive. By the following week, that same content needs to be reintroduced as if it were new. Teachers know this moment well.
Effective Tier 1 instruction prioritizes the most essential content and gives students repeated opportunities to practice it. Spaced review and explicit strategies for remembering information help learning stick, reducing the need for constant reteaching.
Flexible thinking affects how students respond to feedback, adjust their approach, and manage multi-step tasks.
Think about a student who completes an assignment using the first strategy they learned, even after receiving feedback to try a different approach. Or a student who becomes frustrated when directions change mid-task and struggles to regroup, despite understanding the content.
When these skills are underdeveloped, students may appear resistant or disengaged, even when they are trying.
Clear expectations, patience, and, again, consistency across classrooms help students build flexibility over time. When expectations shift from teacher to teacher, students struggle to apply these skills in new settings.
The most meaningful Tier 1 improvements come from alignment.
When schools agree on priorities, support teachers with clarity, and use data to monitor progress, Tier 1 instruction becomes more responsive to student needs. In turn, Tier 2 support becomes more focused and sustainable (an added bonus, no doubt).
Together, Otus and MindPrint support this work by helping schools:
MindPrint is independently validated by Johns Hopkins University and aligned with ESSA evidence standards, confirming its ability to accurately identify students who may need support through MTSS, gifted services, or special education and enabling schools to make confident, well-informed decisions.
When Tier 1 is strong, Tier 2 can do what it was designed to do: provide targeted, timely support to the students who truly need it.