Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
TeachWell-- BuildRelationships:MonitoringStudents'ProgressinanRTIModel
L.Crawford,PhDM.Faggella-Luby,PhD
TeachWell--BuildRelationships• Academic&Behavioral/FamilySupportfocused• Fall2016:TeachWell.
– What?Backwarddesignplanningforacademicdiversity– How?Continuumofevidence-basedinstruction– Whatnext?Usingassessmenttoguideinstructionaldecisionmaking
• MonthlyCycle– MeetatTCU– Followuponline:Twitter– Visityourschool– Weekoff
TWBRTeamisGrowing!Endia Lindo,PhD
- AssistantProfessor- [email protected] (817)257-6781
KathyRyan,[email protected](817)257-5884
DavidKinney,[email protected](817)257-5884
KathleenStrickland-Cohen,PhD– AssistantProfessor– [email protected]– (817)257-6778
KathleenKyzar,PhD– AssistantProfessor– [email protected]– (871)257-6079
LindyCrawford,PhD– Director,Professor– [email protected]– (817)257-4645
MichaelFaggella-Luby,PhD– AssociateProfessor– [email protected]– (817)257-4355
WhatquestionsdoyouhaveaboutRtI?
AdditionalResources:*ANSERSWebinarSeries
*ArticleinSession4:Materials
*TEA’sRtIApp:RtIFramework
Today:ProgressMonitoringinanRtIModel
Placing Progress Monitoring in Context
Howdoweknowiftheyarelearningit?
Whatdowedoiftheyarenotlearning?
Whatdowewantstudentstolearn?
EntireCourseorYear’s
Curriculum
AnnualQuarterlyClassroom
InterveneProgressMonitor
CBMs
Traditional Tests “versus” Progress Monitoring
• Traditional Testing Cycle– Teach-test-teach-test
– Did students learn what was taught during a particular lesson or unit?
• Progress Monitoring– Probe frequently to monitor student progress in the entire year’s
curriculum or within a particular domain
– Use of brief, timed probes to measure this progress
– Probes represent a random sample of the curriculum (even material that has not been taught yet)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Traditionaltesting ProgressMonitoring
WhyProgressMonitor?Inordertomeasuretheeffectivenessofourinterventions.
Tomaketimelydecisionsbasedonstudentprogressandresponsetointerventions.
PMmeasuresaresensitivetostudentgrowth.
PMmeasuresarepredictiveoffutureachievement.
Helwig,etal.(2002).JournalofSpecialEducation
PredictingStateTestScoresJohnson, E. S., Galow, P. A., & Allenger, R. (AEI, 2013)
7th and 8th grade studentsCBMs in Algebrar = .67-.68 with Idaho Standardized Assessment Test
Roland Good (DIBELS; PCRC-2002)First-grade reading rate
89% of students who orally read 40 cwpm in the spring passed the statewide assessment in fifth-grade!
84% of students who read 50 nonsense words in one minute passed the statewide assessment in fifth-grade
Crawford, Tindal, and Stieber (2001; Ed. Assessment)Second-grade reading rate
82% of students reading below 54 cwpm failed the state math test in third-grade
100% (51/51) students who read at least 72 cwpm in winter of 2nd grade passed state reading test in 3rd grade
WhentoProgressMonitor?
Collectformativedatadependingonextentofstudents’interventions
Asstudentsreceivemorefrequentorintensiveinterventions,measurementoftheirprogressalsobecomesmorefrequent
Weekly Probes"Intensive" Group
Weekly Probes"Intensive" Group
Monthly Assessments"Strategic" Group
Weekly Probes"Intensive" Group
Weekly Probes"Intensive" Group
Monthly Assessments"Strategic" Group
Fall
Weekly Probes"Intensive" Group
Weekly Probes"Intensive" Group
Monthly Assessments"Strategic" Group
Weekly Probes"Intensive" Group
Monthly Assessments"Strategic" Group
Winter
Weekly Probes"Intensive" Group
Weekly Probes"Intensive" Group
Monthly Assessments"Strategic" Group
Weekly Probes"Intensive" Group
Weekly Probes"Intensive" Group
Monthly Assessments"Strategic" Group
Spring
Screening Assessments3x per year
All Students - Tier One
HowtoProgressMonitor?Useofgeneraloutcomemeasures(GOMs)
- Reading- MathFactFluency
Useofcontent-basedprobes- Vocabulary- StoryStarters
Focusonfluency- timed
HowtoProgressMonitor?• UseofPsychometricallyValidatedMeasures
• AIMSWeb• easyCBM• DIBELS
ProgressMonitoringData
TierOne
TierOne:ScreeningData
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Count
25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250CWPM
Histogram
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
Units
CWPM
Box Plot
Tier1:ScreeningDataAcrossGrades
12
11
10
9
ProgressMonitoringData
TierTwo
Tier2:Monthly(Strategic)Data
12
11
10
9
Sept JanJune
ProgressMonitoringData
TierThree
Tier3:Weekly(Intensive,InstructionalLevel)Data
Lacey-9th Gr.
Wk1 Wk2 Wk4Wk3 Wk7Wk6Wk5 Wk8 Wk9
RANKED SCORES - ComputationTeacher: Mrs. SmithReport through 3/17
Name Score Growth
Samantha Spain 57 +1.89Aroun Phung 56 +1.60Gary McKnight 54 +1.14Yasmine Sallee 53 +1.34Kathy Taylor 53 +1.11Jung Lee 53 +1.23Matthew Hayes 51 +1.00Emily Waters 48 +1.04Charles McBride 43 +1.12Michael Elliott 42 +0.83Jenna Clover 42 +0.78Becca Jarrett 41 +1.14David Anderson 38 +0.79Cindy Lincoln 36 +1.04Kaitlin Laird 35 +0.71Victoria Dillard 34 +0.64Vicente Gonzalez 29 +0.28Adam Qualls 26 +0.60Michael Sanders 25 +0.70Jonathan Nichols 25 +2.57Amanda Ramirez 23 +0.85Anthony Jones 19 +0.05Erica Jernigan 18 +0.23Icon 0 +0.00
Use of Progress Monitoring Data inA Dual Discrepancy Model
LynnandDougFuchsNationalCenteronStudentProgressMonitoring
ScoreDiscrepancyCriterion:26.9
GrowthDiscrepancyCriterion:+0.45
CLASS STATISTICS: ComputationTeacher: Mrs. SmithReport through 3/17
Sco reAverage score 39.5Standard deviation 12.6Discrepancy criterion 26.9
SlopeAverage slope +0.98Standard deviation 0.53Discrepancy criterion +0.45
Students identified with dual discrepancy criterion
Score SlopeAnthony Jones 19.0 +0.05Erica Jernigan 18.0 +0.23
LynnandDougFuchsNationalCenteronStudentProgressMonitoring
Use of Progress Monitoring Data inA Dual Discrepancy Model
InSummaryProgressmonitoringisanessentialpieceintheRtI puzzle.
Thefrequencyandspecificityofthemeasuresusedinprogressmonitoringvaryaccordingtothelevelofinterventionreceivedbythestudent.
Inordertousedataeffectively,itisimportanttounderstandthebigpictureaswellastheneedsofeachstudent.
ProgressMonitoringData
GraphingStudentProgress
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1/2 1/4 1/6 1/8 1/10 1/12 1/14 1/16 1/18 1/20 1/22 1/24 1/26
GRAPHING CONVENTIONS USING CBM
Aim Line: Shows the rate of progress a student must make to reach performance goal.
Intervention: Change of instruction; line indicates when change occurred.
Score: These points on the graph show the score student received on each particular date.
Trend Line: Drawn through a series of student scores to indicate average progress over time. If trend line falls below aim line, teacher implements intervention.
Date: Shows the calendar date the measure was completed. Dates should remain equal distances apart.
Metric: The scale for student's score to be recorded. For example, correct digits or correct words per minute.
Goal Line: The performance goal set for student. The goal student should reach by end of year or semester.
Baseline: After collecting three days of data, create aim line using middle day, middle rate.
ProgressMonitoringWebsites
WebsiteActivity
• Form3GroupsbyContentorLevelofStdt.Need
• Eachgroupreviewsonewebsitebelow• After20minutes,eachgrouppresentskeyfinding(s)• Eachgroupwillconductreviewoftwosites
WebsiteActivity• Ingroups,exploreoneofthesitesbelowand
presentononetopicorprovideoverviewofsite
• Stayfocusedonprogressmonitoring• InterventionCentral:CBMWarehouse• IRISModulesatVanderbilt
• Resources• RtI orMTSSorProgressMonitoring
• FloridaCenterforReadingResearch• CenteronResponsetoIntervention• NationalCenteronIntensiveIntervention
WebsiteActivity• Group1:NationalCenteronIntensiveIntervention
• "ProgressMonitoring"• "Modules"• "UsingAcademicProgressMonitoringforIndividualInstructionalPlanning
(DBITrainingSeries-Module2;Handout1and2)"
• Group2: CenteronResponsetoIntervention• "ProgressMonitoring"(ingraphonhomepage)
• "CenterResources"• ProgressMonitoringBriefs
• Group3:NationalCenteronIntensiveIntervention• "ProgressMonitor"(ingraphonhomepage)
• "ToolsCharts"• "AcademicProgressMonitoring"
SurveysandFocusGroups• Atbeginningofyearweaskedyoutocompletethreebriefsurveysasfollows:– TeachingEfficacy– AcademicKnowledge– Demographics
• Todayweareaskingthatyoucompletetheknowledgesurveyagain,nowthatwehavespentsometimeonthistopic.
• Then,wewillconducttwosimultaneousfocusgroups.
FocusGroupsUsingtheNominalGroupTechnique
JacquelineHuscroft-D’AngeloLindyCrawford
11-10-14
THENOMINALGROUPTECHNIQUE(NGT)
Thenominalgrouptechniqueisastructuredprocessthecanbeusedtoidentifyandrankmajorproblemsor
issuesthatneedtobeaddressed.
Characteristics
• Involvesonetopic
• Focusesonindividualwork
• Facilitatesgroupdecision-makingorconsensus
• Obtainimmediateresults
• Allowsforaquantitativeelement
• Reducesresearcher/participantbias
Delbecq&VandeVen,1971
Stages
Gray,2013
FacilitatorRoles• Briefoverviewofstudyortopicisprovided
• Questionisaskedtoparticipants
• Allowtimeforindividualstoconstructideas
• Assistwithclarificationandconsolidationofideas
• Instructparticipantstoreducelisttotopfive
• Askindividualstorankorderitems
• Analyzeresults
BenefitsofNGT
Gray,2013
Prioritized
WhentouseNGT
MoreUseful• EvaluationandDecision-
Making
• Onetopictoexplore
• Whentherearediverseparticipantsinthegroup(e.g.,expertstonovice)
LessUseful• Investigatingbroador
generalexperiences
• Multipleorcomplextopics
• Balancedgroup
Varga-Atkins,2012
Resources
ClassroomObservations!
• Pleasesignupasap.
• Focusononeoftheinstructionalorassessmentstrategieslearnedthissemester.
• Letusknowyourplaninadvance.
Spring2017TWBRDates
• Wednesday,January25th• Wednesday,February22nd• Wednesday,March22nd• Wednesday,April26th
• Allsessionsrunfrom9:00a.m.to3:00p.m.
