Designing Tier 2 and Tier 3 Reading Intervention at the Secondary Level

9th Apr 2026

A practical framework for administrators building MTSS for middle and high school readers.

Multi-Tiered Systems of Support were developed, refined, and largely deployed at the elementary level. The result is that most secondary administrators inherit an MTSS framework that was designed for second graders and bolted onto a high school schedule. It does not fit, and the data shows it.

The 2024 NAEP reading results gave administrators an honest mirror. A third of eighth graders, 33 percent, scored below NAEP Basic, the largest share since the assessment began. The declines were concentrated among the lowest-performing students. If your district’s tier 2 and tier 3 secondary structures were already strained, the post-pandemic data did not invent the problem. It exposed how long the problem has been growing.

The good news is that the research base for adolescent literacy intervention, while smaller than the elementary base, is real and increasingly specific. This post lays out a practical framework administrators can use to design or rebuild MTSS at secondary, anchored in what the evidence actually supports.

Start with screening you can act on

Most secondary universal screening relies on a single comprehension or Lexile-based measure. That is not enough. A student can score "below grade level" in comprehension for at least three distinct reasons: weak decoding, weak fluency, or weak language comprehension. Each reason calls for a different intervention. A single screener that does not distinguish among them gives you a roster, not a plan.

The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) practice guide on adolescent literacy is explicit on this point: intensive intervention requires diagnostic information that goes beyond a comprehension score. At minimum, secondary screening should include a brief measure of oral reading fluency, a measure of decoding of multisyllabic words, and a measure of vocabulary or comprehension. The screening data then drives placement, not just identification.

Tier 1: get core instruction right first

The temptation in a struggling building is to invest in tier 2 and tier 3 while leaving tier 1 untouched. The research is consistent: when tier 1 is weak, no intervention system can scale. Tier 1 at secondary should look different from tier 1 at elementary, but the rigor bar is the same.

Timothy Shanahan, in his 2025 Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy article, frames it this way: "Tier 1 instruction would focus on higher levels of structured literacy like morphology, while phonics instruction may be necessary for some students." For administrators, that translates into four core tier 1 commitments: explicit vocabulary and morphology instruction in ELA, disciplinary literacy strategies embedded in content classes, structured discussion of text, and protected independent reading time.

Tier 2: small group, targeted, and time-protected

Tier 2 at secondary should target the specific skill gap surfaced by screening. The common failure mode is a generic "reading lab" period where mixed-need students cycle through a packaged program. That structure can work, but only when the program is matched to a clear diagnostic profile and the instructor is trained.

The minimum design specs that the research supports look something like this:

  • Small group instruction, typically three to six students.
  • Thirty to forty-five minutes, three to five days per week.
  • Tightly matched to the screening profile: a fluency group looks different from a vocabulary group looks different from a morphology group.
  • Progress monitored every two to four weeks with a measure that maps to the target skill.
  • Texts that are accessible at the student’s level but age-appropriate in content. Hi-lo materials exist for this exact purpose.

Tier 3: intensive, individualized, and specialist-delivered

Tier 3 is where most secondary systems collapse, because the students at tier 3 typically need decoding instruction that the secondary staff was never trained to deliver. This is the population Shanahan describes as falling "below a decoding threshold," and the population the IES guide says requires intervention from "trained specialists."

The implication is operational, not just instructional. Districts that succeed at tier 3 at secondary tend to do four things consistently: they invest in deep professional learning for a small number of secondary reading specialists, they protect a daily intervention block on the master schedule, they use a structured literacy program with evidence of effect for older students, and they pair intensive decoding instruction with age-respectful texts so the student can apply emerging skills to material they actually want to read.

“Students who fall below a decoding threshold fail to benefit from other kinds of reading instruction... These students are likely to need support in the reading and spelling of multisyllabic words and words with common morphological elements.”

Timothy Shanahan, Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy (2025)

Texts are part of the intervention

One element of intervention design is consistently underweighted in MTSS planning: the texts themselves. A tier 2 group built around fluency cannot run without enough connected, accessible, age-appropriate text. A tier 3 group built around decoding multisyllabic words cannot run without enough decodable but age-respectful practice material. In both cases, the texts are not a supplement. They are the instructional material.

This is one place where the hi-lo category, including the Saddleback catalog, plays a specific role. Hi-lo titles let interventionists give a fourteen-year-old material they can actually read, about content that is appropriate to their age and social world. That combination is hard to find outside the category, and its absence is one of the quiet reasons secondary intervention often stalls.

What administrators can do this year

A full MTSS overhaul is a multi-year initiative. A meaningful first year is not. Three moves are within reach for most districts in the next twelve months.

  • Add a decoding and fluency measure to the secondary universal screen, so placement reflects the actual skill gap.
  • Audit your tier 2 and tier 3 master schedules. Are intervention blocks protected daily, or do they compete with electives and lunch?
  • Audit your tier 2 and tier 3 text inventory. Are striving readers being handed material they can both read and respect?

The bottom line

Secondary MTSS is not elementary MTSS with older students in the seats. It requires different screening, different tier 1 commitments, different intervention designs, and different texts. The 2024 NAEP data made clear that the cost of not doing this work is now landing in eighth- and twelfth-grade scores. The cost of doing it well is a system that catches students before high school graduation makes the problem permanent.

 

Sources