RtI Progress Monitoring Assignment is available

HERE.

 Please complete a three page summary of the RTI/MTSS Progress Monitoring process. Upload to the dropbox marked RTI.  

The “HERE” button is supposed to send you the Attached document Labeled “RTI MTSS”. I need this to be High Quality and Quickly submitted. 

High-Leverage Practices and Evidence-Based Practices: A Promising Pair1

High-Leverage Practices and Evidence-Based Practices:
A Promising Pair

Erica D. McCray, Margaret Kamman, Mary T. Brownell
University of Florida

Suzanne Robinson
University of Kansas

High-leverage practices (HLPs) and evidence-based practices (EBPs) when used together can
become powerful tools for improving student outcomes. This brief is designed to show the promise
of these practices in advancing educator preparation and practice and, subsequently, outcomes for
students with disabilities and those who struggle. We begin by defining HLPs and EBPs and sharing
examples of how educator preparation programs are integrating them in their candidates’ learning
opportunities and conclude with an illustration of how they can be seamlessly integrated into
instruction provided as part of multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS).

High-Leverage Practices:
What Are They and Why Are They Important?
Educator preparation programs have come under sharp criticism in recent years for failing to
demonstrate the impact of their graduates on the achievement of their students. Teachers and
leaders are key to improving outcomes of students with disabilities. Preparation experiences must
include well-supervised opportunities for candidates to practice with feedback about what they are
learning in coursework. Field placements should be carefully selected to reinforce what candidates
have learned in coursework. To move in the direction of tightly structured learning opportunities
for teacher candidates, scholars in general and special education (Ball & Forzani, 2011; McLeskey
& Brownell, 2015) have argued that teacher educators need to identify a critical set of practices
that are essential to improving student learning and behavior and can be learned in coursework,
deliberately practiced in field experiences carefully structured by faculty (e.g., tutoring small groups
of students in identified practices), and generalized to more loosely structured field experiences.

These critical practices, also known HLPs, should be those that research has demonstrated can
impact student achievement and be used across different content areas and grade levels. These
HLPs should also be those that teacher candidates can learn through practice and feedback. They
would form a “common core of professional knowledge and skill that can be taught to aspiring
teachers across all types of programs and pathways” (Ball & Forzani, 2011, p. 19). HLPs can provide
infrastructure to support effective teaching and consistent learning for every student to succeed.

CEEDAR
C E N T E R

October 2017

High-Leverage Practices and Evidence-Based Practices: A Promising Pair2

Specialized Practices
To extend the HLPs that Deborah Ball and her colleagues developed for special education, the
CEEDAR Center, the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC), and the Teacher Education Division
of CEC supported a group of experts to generate HLPs for special education teachers in grades
K-12. This High-Leverage Practices Writing Team developed HLPs in four domains: (a) collaboration,
(b) assessment, (c) social/emotional and behavioral support, and (d) instruction (see below). The
identified HLPs were supported by research on student learning or policy/legal foundations in the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

HLPs for Special Education
Collaboration
�� Collaborate with professionals to increase student success
�� Organize and facilitate effective meetings with professionals and families
�� Collaborate with families to support student learning and secure needed services

Assessment
�� Use multiple sources of information to develop a comprehensive understanding of a student’s
strengths and needs
�� Interpret and communicate assessment information with stakeholders to collaboratively design
and implement educational programs
�� Use student assessment, analyze instructional practices, and make necessary adjustments that
improve student outcomes

Social/Emotional and Behavioral Support
�� Establish a consistent, organized, and
respectful learning environment
�� Provide positive and constructive feedback to
guide students’ learning and behavior
�� Teach social behaviors
�� Conduct functional behavioral assessments to
develop individual student behavior support
plans

Instruction
�� Identify and prioritize long- and short-term
learning goals
�� Systematically design instruction toward a
specific goal
�� Adapt curriculum tasks and materials for
specific learning goals
�� Teach cognitive and metacognitive strategies
to support learning and independence
�� Provide scaffolded supports

Resources: Practice-Based Opportunities
and High-Leverage Practices in General and
Special Education

Practice-Based Opportunities Brief: outlines
essential features for providing high-quality,
structured, and sequenced opportunities to
practice within teacher preparation programs.

CEEDAR HLP Review: identifies the need to
identify high-leverage practices unique to special
education.

High-Leverage Practices: describes high-leverage
practices for general education.

High-Leverage Practices in Special Education:
outlines high leverage practices in special
education.

High-Leverage Practices and Evidence-Based Practices: A Promising Pair3

�� Use explicit instruction

�� Use flexible grouping
�� Use strategies to promote active student engagement
�� Use assistive and instructional technologies
�� Provide intensive instruction
�� Teach students to maintain and generalize new learning across time and settings
�� Provide positive and constructive feedback to guide students’ learning and behavior

McLeskey and Brownell (2015) noted that (a) many of the general HLPs are appropriate for all
teachers, and (b) many of the HLPs identified for special education vary only in intensity and focus.
Table 1 illustrates commonalities and distinctions across the two sets of HLPs. Understanding the
increasingly intensified practices needed as special and general education teachers teach students
with disabilities is important.

Table 1. Commonalities and Distinctions Across HLPs

High-Leverage Practices (from Teaching Works) High-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Explaining and modeling content, practices, and
strategies

�� Use explicit instruction

�� Teach cognitive and metacognitive strategies to
support learning and independence

Diagnosing particular common patterns of student
thinking and development in a subject-matter domain

�� Systematically design instruction toward a specific
learning goal

�� Adapt curriculum tasks and materials for specific
learning goals

Coordinating and adjusting instruction during a lesson �� Scaffold instruction

Setting up and managing small-group work �� Use flexible grouping

�� Use strategies to promote active student
engagement

Specifying and reinforcing productive student behavior �� Provide positive and constructive feedback to guide
students’ learning and behavior

Evidence-Based Practices:
What Are They and Why Are They Important?
EBPs for special education are instructional strategies backed by research and professional
expertise to support the learning and behavior of students with disabilities (Cook, Tankersley, &
Harjusola-Webb, 2008). EBPs are often content focused and appropriate for students at different
developmental levels. For instance, teaching students strategies for summarizing text is a powerful
strategy, but the strategy is best taught in third grade and beyond.

At the CEEDAR Center, experts have identified the evidence in specific content areas (e.g., reading,
writing, mathematics, behavior). These EBPs are described in innovation configurations (ICs)
available on the CEEDAR Center’s website. Faculty can use these ICs to determine the extent to
which their programs are providing teacher candidates opportunities to learn and practice the most
critical EBPs—some of which are also considered HLPs.

High-Leverage Practices and Evidence-Based Practices: A Promising Pair4

HLPs and EBPs: A Promising Pair
Many states and districts are implementing MTSS to increase the success of all students. MTSS is a
framework for instruction that focuses on prevention and intervention. All students receive evidence-
based instruction in core (or Tier 1) curriculum and increasingly specialized instruction (Tier 2) with
intensive and individualized intervention (Tier 3) as needed (see Figure 1). HLPs and EBPs are ideal
complementary practices for implementing MTSS. HLPs can be used to teach EBPs in specific
content areas.

Multi-Tiered Prevention System

Universal

Targeted

Intensive

HLPs/EBPs to deliver
core instruction

HLPs/EBPs to deliver
supplemental/targeted instruction

HLPs/EBPs to deliver
individualized instruction

Focus: All students
Instruction: District curriculum and instructional practices that are
evidence-based, align with state or district standards, and incorporate
differentiated instruction
Setting: General education classroom
Assessments: Screening, continual progress monitoring, and outcome
measures

Focus: Students identified (through screening) as at risk for poor learning
outcome
Instruction: Targeted, supplemental instruction delivered to small groups.
Setting: General education classroom or other general education location
within the school
Assessments: Progress monitoring, diagnostic

Focus: Students who have not responded to universal or targeted
instruction
Instruction: Intensive, supplemental instruction delivered to small groups or
individually
Setting: General education classroom or other general education location
within the school
Assessments: Progress monitoring, diagnostic

Grand Valley State University (Michigan) Example
Grand Valley State University (GVSU) in Michigan has been working to embed HLPs for general
and special education into their educator preparation programs. The faculty believe that all
beginning teachers should be prepared to teach all learners on day one. This initiative addresses
an educator equity issue—all children deserve a skilled teacher. Historically, districts and
universities speak about instruction in vague terms. HLPs provide precision and focus to teaching
and the expectations for teachers. GVSU just completed its first year of a professional learning
community (PLC), which included their faculty and field coordinators and cooperating teachers and
teacher leaders from the partnering district. The group collaborated to accomplish several goals.
First, they analyzed the HLPs in general and special education to unpack the terms and practices.
Then, the group tackled the pedagogy of teaching HLPs to teacher candidates and beginning
teachers. The PLC developed common language and understanding, which was lacking prior to
establishing the PLC. The PLC provided a structure for agreeing on and institutionalizing HLPs for
teacher candidates and beginning teachers and streamlining their roles as teacher educators at the
pre- and in-service levels.

*Figure adapted from www.rti4success.org

High-Leverage Practices and Evidence-Based Practices: A Promising Pair5

Figure 1. Multi-Level Prevention System

A Case Example: How to Integrate HLPs and EBPs
The following case example illustrates reading instruction using HLPs (see bold text below) and
EBPs (see italicized, underlined text below) for Reading K-5 (Lane, 2014) and Writing Instruction
(Troia, 2014) across tiers. Specific examples are included below:

High-Leverage Practices
�� Teach cognitive and metacognitive
strategies (HLP14)
�� Scaffold supports (HLP15)
�� Use instructional technology (HLP19)
�� Use active student engagement (HLP18)
�� Use flexible grouping (HLP17)
�� Provide positive feedback (HLP22)
�� Provide explicit instruction (HLP16)
�� Provide intensive instruction (HLP20)
�� Adapt curriculum tasks (HLP13)

Evidence-Based Practices
�� Provide vocabulary instruction (RP6.6)
�� Teach making inferences (RP7.5)
�� Teach modeling (RP7.6)
�� Teach paraphrasing (RP7.3)
�� Teach process: Outlining (W2.1)

Tier 1: Universal
A third-grade teacher, Ms. Lexicon, has planned a lesson to provide opportunities to practice
writing skills with a complementary focus on expanding students’ use of sophisticated vocabulary
words. The lesson begins with Ms. L reading a passage to the class while displaying the text on
the Smartboard. First, Ms. L uses explicit instruction and Text Talk (Beck, McKeown, & Kucan, 2013),
an evidence-based strategy, to help students understand what a vivid verb is and why it is important
to use when writing. Students are then prompted to look and listen for vivid verbs as she reads. After
Ms. L completes the passage, she asks students to identify the vivid verbs and infer meaning. As
the class discusses the sophisticated words, Ms. L asks them to think about how they might use
those words, making linkages to familiar words, in their own stories later in the day.

Tier 2: Supplementary
Ms. Lexicon has identified a group of students who need targeted supplemental instruction. Ms. L
uses flexible grouping to model thinking about a vivid vocabulary word. First, Ms. L and the group
chorally read a portion of the text. Then, Ms. L focuses the students on one word: “blurting.” She
allows for active student engagement by pausing and asking students what they think it means
when a word is blurted out. As students provide answers, Ms. L provides positive feedback. After
students tell what blurting means, Ms. L states explicitly that if the author used the word “said”
instead of “blurting,” the reader could not visualize the interruption. She then tasks the group to
practice locating vivid vocabulary by independently reading the remainder of the text and identifying
vivid vocabulary, just as they did as a group.

Tier 3: Intensive
Ms. Lexicon was certain that one of her Tier 3 students, Adam, would need more intensive

High-Leverage Practices and Evidence-Based Practices: A Promising Pair6

support beyond the small-group instruction. When she dismissed the group to continue reading
independently, she asked Adam to stay with her for more explicit instruction. Ms. L provided more
modeling by reading the passage aloud to Adam. Then, she segmented the passage into shorter
chunks for Adam to read to her. Ms. L had Adam summarize the segments in his own words and
write down his ideas and vocabulary words. This intentional discussion ensured Adam had an outline
prepared for the writing assignment later in the day.

As the case example demonstrates, the coupling of HLPs and EBPs can be powerful when providing
increasingly intensive instruction and intervention for students with disabilities and those who
struggle. Using these practices for effectively implementing MTSS has the potential to transform
teaching and learning to ensure that every student succeeds.

To improve outcomes for students with disabilities and those who struggle, teachers must be
equipped with knowledge and skill that they can consistently use to meet the variety of needs that
their students present. HLPs and EBPs show great promise when implemented well and can be a
solid foundation for educator preparation programming in general and special education.

Questions about CEEDAR tools and resources? Please contact the CEEDAR Center at
http://www.ceedar.org

References
Ball, D. L., & Forzani, F. M. (2011, Summer). Building a common core for learning to teach and connecting professional
learning to practice. American Educator, 17-21, 38-39.

Beck, I., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2013). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction (2nd ed.). New York,
NY: Guilford Press.

Cook, B. G., Tankersely, M., & Harjusola-Webb, S. (2008). Evidence-based special education and professional wisdom:
Putting it all together. Intervention in School and Clinic, 44(2), 105-111.

Lane, H. (2014). Evidence-based reading instruction for grades K-5 (Document No. IC-12). Retrieved from University of
Florida, Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability, and Reform Center website: http://ceedar.
education.ufl.edu/tools/innovation-configurations/

McLeskey, J., & Brownell, M. (2015). High-leverage practices and teacher preparation in special education (Document
No. PR-1). Retrieved from University of Florida, Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability, and
Reform Center website: http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/tools/best-practice-review/

Troia, G. (2014). Evidence-based practices for writing instruction (Document No. IC-5). Retrieved from University of
Florida, Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability, and Reform Center website:
http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/tools/innovation-configuration/

This content was produced under U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No.
H325A120003. Bonnie Jones and David Guardino serve as the project officers. The views expressed herein do not
necessarily represent the positions or policies of the U.S. Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S.
Department of Education of any product, commodity, service, or enterprise mentioned in this content is intended or should
be inferred.

SPE 501
Summer, 2020
IEP writing

Summer 2020

Module 3

Dr. Pam Jessee

A student profile with formal evaluations and academic achievement.
The beginning dates of the program and its duration.
A statement of special instructional factors that are to be addressed in the IEP.
A statement of transportation needs.
A statement of opportunities to participate with nondisabled peers.
2

A statement of frequency and method of progress reports.
The signature page that provides a statement of least restrictive environment.
Behavior Improvement Plan (BIP), if needed.
Transition plans included in the IEP for students age
14 ½ and over.
Benchmark pages for students taking alternative state assessments.
3

IEP Goals
The IEP goals pages are the most important section of the document. They focus on the specific areas that need special education services and include the following:
Present level of performance statements,
Measurable annual goals,
Evaluations used to measure annual goals,
Benchmarks to be achieved to meet goals (If student is taking an alternative state assessment), and
Special education and related services needed to achieve the annual goals.
4

Present levels of Performance
Student Strengths
Parental Educational concerns
Academic Functioning
Functional Behavior

PLOP: Academic Functioning
Things to consider:
ANSWER THE TWO IMPORTANT QUESTIONS:
Is the child making progress?
How do they compare to typically developing peers?
AND: What is the evidence?

OTHER THINGS YOU CAN CONSIDER
Learning style.
Attention strengths or deficits.
Organization skills.
Social skills.
Creative thinking abilities.
Logical reasoning.
Physical abilities (fatigue, sensory issues, etc.)

PLOP example:
Sara is quiet in the classroom. Her visual memory and visual processing scores are above average, so she learns easily through pictures and images. She is ahead of her peers in science and social studies, as well as in writing and reading.
Sara’s standardized reading composite test score is at the 73rd percentile. Her writing composite is at the 69th percentile. Sara struggles with math. Her standardized scores for math computation are at the 12th percentile. Her math reasoning scores are at the 18th percentile.
Sara requires a lot of support to stay on task, especially to complete her math problems. She does better when she is provided a number-line or calculator. Otherwise, Sara is happy, and seems eager to please her teachers by doing her best work.

Long Term Objective
Written for 1 year
Reviewed and revised at the Annual Review
Best guess of how much progress the child can make in one year’s time

Smart Goal Format

Smart Goal Format
Specific
What do I want the child to achieve?

Measurable How will I know they have achieved it?
Attainable Is the goal attainable? Is it too easy? Is it too hard?
Relevant Is it essential to help the student navigate in a nondisabled world?
Is it meaningful to the student?

Time Bound What is the timeline for achieving the goal?
What are the benchmarks along the way that will show we are making progress?

Three short Term objectives:
Breaks the goal into smaller units for attainment.
Objective:
Evaluation Criteria
 
_____ % Accuracy
__/___ # of Attempts
_____ Other Evaluation Procedures
 
___ Observation Log
___Data Charts
___Tests
___Other Schedule for Determining Progress
 
___Daily
___Weekly
___Quarterly
___Semester
___Other Dates Reviewed/Extent of Progress (optional)

Short Term Objectives
Roadmap to meeting the long term goal
Breaks the skills down into smaller, measureable parts or benchmarks
Describes levels of increasing performance
Increases in scoring like CBMs
Decreases the amount and type of assistance that may be needed
Increases the complexity of the task

Example of a Long term goal: Student will improve oral reading fluency as measured on CBM increasing scores to the 35th percentile by the end of the year.
By the end of Quarter 1 the student will perform at the 20th percentile as measured on the CBM assessment for Oral Reading Fluency.
By the end of Quarter 2 the student will perform at the 25th percentile as measured on the CBM assessment for Oral Reading Fluency.
By the end of Quarter 3 the student will perform on at the 30th percentile as measured on the CBM assessment for Oral Reading Fluency.

Decreasing levels of assistance needed
to achieve the goal

Example based on grade level curriculum

Complexity of the task
Long Term goal: Student will write a 3 paragraph essay using
graphic organizers as measured through a classroom
Assignment rubric with 70% accuracy by May 31, 2021.
STO #1: Student will use a graphic organizer to outline notes and ideas to be included in the introduction, Body and concluding paragraph with 90% accuracy as measured .
STO #2: Student will create an introductory and concluding paragraph using a graphic organizer for paragraphs of 3 to 4 sentences as measured on the classroom assignment rubric with 80% accuracy.
STO#2: Student will write the body of the essay using a graphic organizer to identify 3 main ideas and writing 2 sentences for each idea as measured on the classroom rubric with 75% accuracy.

Curriculum Based Measurement
Seeking success for all

Dr. Pam Jessee

National Louis University

Fall, 2020

1

One Perspective on History
Our education system has grown up through a process of “Disjointed Incrementalism” (Reynolds, 1988)
The current
Education
System’s
Programmatic
Evolution
K-12 Education
Gifted
Title 1
SPED
Migrant
ELL
At Risk

2

Unintended Effects
Conflicting programs
Conflicting funding streams
Redundancy
Lack of coordination across programs
Nonsensical rules about program availability for students
Extreme complexity in administration and implementation of the programs

3

Responsiveness to Intervention
Definition: A problem solving model to monitor the progress of all students on academic targets
Uses: Identify struggling students and intervene with research based methods
Legal mandate: By the year 2010 all school districts in the State of Illinois will employ a Responsiveness to Intervention model to determine the severity of academic deficiency and the need for specially designed instruction.
Not a SPECIAL EDUCATION INTIATIVE. Although it will be used to assist in the identification of students with disabilities, the main use of RtI is to identify struggling students and intervene with research based methods

4
4

Three-tiered system
Tier One: Universal Screening- Administer CBMs three times a year: Fall, Winter, Spring
Tier Two: Research- Based Intervention, generally in the general education classroom and Progress Monitoring using CBMs.
Tier Three: Intensive, Individual instruction with progress monitoring using CBMs

5
5

6

Why RtI?
Requires schools to monitor progress and identify students who are at risk
Guarantees intervention to all students who are struggling
Provides schools the tools for data driven educational decision making and goal setting for all students

7
7

Once Behind – Always behind UNLESS you intervene
Research:
“The probability of remaining a poor reader at the end of 4th grade, given a child was a poor reader at the end of 1st grade was .88.” (Juel, 1994)
74% of children who are poor readers in 3rd grade remain poor readers in 9th grade. (Francis, et al, 1996)

8
There have been many studies conducted to follow the outcome of children who struggle
These 2 studies are frequently cited:
The first study was conducted in 1994 by Connie Juel
She found that the probability of being a poor reader in 4th grade for children who leave 1st grade behind is 88% – that’s very, very likely
David Francis and colleagues at the University of Houston found 2 years later (in 1996) that the trajectory established early continues
Not only are students who are behind in first grade also behind in 4th grade
But 74% of the students behind in 3rd grade are still behind in 9th grade
This body of converging findings during the mid-1990’s led to a shift in research focus
what it takes to change a student’s nearly assured outcome of problems
This evidence is what led to focusing on designing assessment instruments that can help us find children early – before they are on a path of failure

Who has an extra two hours !!
According to the NICHD Branch of the National Institutes of Health
It takes 4 times as long to intervene in 4th grade as it does to intervene in late Kindergarten
2 hours per day
15/30mins.day
Late K
4th grade

9
Another body of research studied the effectiveness of intervention offered at many different points in time
The result is that
Although it is possible to intervene later and still teach children to read
It is less efficient
It takes 4 times as long to intervene in 4th grade as in late kindergarten
Another way to look at this is that it takes 2 hours per day of intervention in 4th grade to move a student’s skills the same distance as if we had provided 30 minutes per day in K
And it is sometimes less effective
Dr. Joseph Torgesen from Florida and others have been raising concerns about difficulties in helping students achieve fluency even if they can be taught to accurately decode words IF the intervention comes later

New Model
Prediction and Prevention
Old Model – Wait to Fail
intervention instruction was tied to special education qualifications
Services tied to achieving an IQ-Achievement discrepancy
Many children failed to qualify until 3rd grade or later
New Model – Preventive and an RTI approach
Help is not tied to special education
Receive intervention instruction as soon as they red flag
Diagnostic testing only after the student’s lack of progress in intervention
Enables help to be given immediately – early

10

Grade level corresponding to age
1 2 3 4
Reading grade level

4
3
2
1

5

2.5
5.2
Early Intervention DOES Change Reading Outcomes
At Risk on Early Screening
Low Risk on Early Screening

3.2
Control
With research-based core but without extra instructional intervention

4.9
Intervention
With substantial instructional intervention
Slide from Reading First Leadership Academy

11
At-risk students randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups:
control group – improved classroom reading program only
or a group that received more intensive reading instruction in first and second grade.
Let’s see what happened
[click] The dotted red line shows the progress of the children who did not receive extra instructional intervention, and you can see that improved classroom instruction produced slightly better outcomes for them than in the earlier study in the same schools – 3.2 reading level vs. 2.5
[click] However, the children who were identified by the screening tests and received substantial instructional intervention did almost as well as average children by the end of fourth grade.
Improved classroom instruction will help our most at-risk children learn to read better, but most will require more intensive interventions if we expect them to read at grade level by the end of fourth grade.

Curriculum Based Measurements are….

Formative assessments that monitor progress of math, reading and writing skills
A repeated assessment that measures a specific skill the same way over a period of time
Valid, reliable and normed on large populations of students

12

Things to remember about CBMs
Serve as signs of general achievement
Measure skills not knowledge
Are standardized tests
Are reliable, valid and normed on thousands of students across the country
Quick and easy to administer and score
Provide information for decision making

13

Progress Monitoring
We want to answer two questions?
Is the child showing progress?
How does the child compare to his peers?

14

Tools for Monitoring Progress
Chart where the child starts (baseline)
Chart where we want the child to be at the end of the intervention period (aimline)
Chart scores on the CBM

15

BASELINE
Beginning point for monitoring progress
Administer three prompts
Two methods:
Let’s say that a student scores a 5, 8, 7 on the prompts
Average the three scores
Baseline = 5 + 8 + 7 = 20 20 ÷ 3 = 6.7 ( 7 rounded)
Take the score in the middle
Of the three scores 7 is the one in the middle

16

Charting the Baseline

23
21
19
17
15
13
11
9
7 ☻

B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Aimline
This is where we predict how much progress we want the student to make during the intervention period.
Compute:
Weeks of intervention × progress each week
Example: 8 weeks of intervention and increase score by 2 each week (8 × 2 = 16)
Add to Baseline 7 + 16 = 23
Plot the end score and draw the line

Here’s what aimline would look like on a chart

23 ☻
21
19
17
15
13
11
9
7 ☻ AIMLINE

B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Progress Monitoring
Once the aim line has been plotted, the student’s score is marked after each assessment.
The next slide illustrates the scores of a student after several measurements have been charted.

Progress Monitoring
Students Scores

Week #1 9
Week #2 11
Week #3 15
Week #4 12
Week #5 19
Week #6 17
Week #7 21

Chart the progress

23 ☻
21 ☻
19 ☻
17
15 ☻
13
11 ☻ ☻
9 ☻
7 ☻ AIMLINE

B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Question #1

Is the student making progress?

Question #2
How does the student compare to his same age peers?

Growth Tables
Aimsweb provides growth tables that show
Scores at the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th & 90th percentiles
Scores and percentiles at each grade level
Scores and percentiles for Fall, Winter and Spring testing
Rate of Improvement information

Winter testing: 4th grader Score 12
How does this student compare to his peers?

Sample Classroom Data Chart

A word about this process
It is not about the testing
It is about the interventions you are doing to help kids improve
The testing is tool to help you validate that what you are doing is working
Important to continually review the interventions that you are using and change direction if kids are not making progress

This may really be a way that we can insure that we leave no child behind!

CBM areas
READING MAZE: comprehension task

MATHEMATICS COMPUTATION: ability to add, subtract, multiply and divide

31

Aimsweb READING MAZE
TEACHER KEY

Alan was a very brave and adventurous boy. He enjoyed learning new things and (exploring) the land behind his house. One (morning) before he went exploring, he packed (his) backpack. He put many things inside. (He) packed a flashlight, a candle, matches, (a) compass, popcorn, a hard hat, and (his) lunch. Then he journeyed into the (woods) to his new secret spot.
 
STUDENT PROMPT:
Alan was a very brave and adventurous boy. He enjoyed learning new things and (adventure, backpack, exploring) the land behind his house. One (learned, morning, things) before he went exploring, he packed (him, his, it) backpack. He put many things inside. (One, He, It) packed a flashlight, a candle, matches, (a, an, or) compass, popcorn, a hard hat, and (went, his, he) lunch. Then he journeyed into the (hard, woods, candle) to his new secret spot

32

Reading Maze Practice Test
Recommended for first time testing especially with younger children as they may not understand the task.
Use administration manual for script and directions
You model the first sentence
You do the second sentence together
You have students do the third sentence independently and you check for accuracy

The dog (apple, broke, ran) after the cat. The cat ran (fast, green, for) up the hill. The dog barked (in, at, is) the cat.
 

33

READING MAZE
DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING
Whole group or individually administered
Students read the passage to themselves and choose the word that best fits into the sentence
3 minute time limit
Script is in your handout!
SCORING
Correct answer: matches the scoring template
Number of correct answers
Record: Correct Responses/Errors i.e. 24/2
See the handout or the website for more information!

34

Aimsweb Mathematics
Grade levels 1-12
Single process
Addition
Subtraction
Multiplication
Division
Double Process:
Addition/Subtraction
Multiplication/Division
All Facts

35

Mathematics
Directions for administration
Whole group or individually administered
2 minutes for grade 1-3
4 minutes for grades 4-8
Script is in your handout!
Scoring
CORRECT DIGITS (not correct answers)

36

Mathematics Scoring
Scoring Key:

Student prompt:

37

Math scoring
Correct Digits – Each correct digit that a student writes is marked with an underline and counted
Incomplete Problems – Sometimes students don’t finish a problem. Score for the number of correct digits that are
written
X-ed Out Problems – Sometimes students start a problem and then cross it out. Sometimes students go back and write answers for problems they have crossed out. Ignore the X and score what you see.

38

Math Scoring
Legibility and Reversed or Rotated Numbers – Sometimes trying to figure out what number the student wrote can be challenging, especially with younger students or older students with mathematics achievement problems. To make scoring efficient and reliable, we recommend attention to three rules.
1. If it is difficult to determine what the number is at all, count it wrong.
2. If the reversed number is obvious, but correct, count it as a correct digit.
3. If the numbers 6 or 9 are potentially rotated and the digit is currently incorrect, count it as an incorrect digit.

39

Error Analysis
Error Analysis is looking at the types of mistakes the student is making in order to determine what needs to be taught and retaught!
What kinds of errors are these?
5 + 0 = 0
37 314
+23 +397
6 × 5 = 11 14 601

40

Comments
Questions

Chart1

0 0
Baseline Baseline
Wk1 Wk1
Wk2 Wk2
wk3 wk3
wk4 wk4
wk5 wk5
wk6 wk6
wk7 wk7
wk8 wk8
wk9 wk9
wk10 wk10

16
16
19
19
22
17
25
22
28
26
31
28
34
30
37
37
40
36
43
46

Sheet1

Baseline Wk1 Wk2 wk3 wk4 wk5 wk6 wk7 wk8 wk9 wk10
Aimline 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46
Sam 16 19 17 22 26 28 30 37 36
To resize chart data range, drag lower right corner of range.

Chart1

Sam Sam Sam
Alex Alex Alex
Gloria Gloria Gloria
Herbert Herbert Herbert
William William William
Susie Susie Susie
Tracy Tracy Tracy
Phil Phil Phil
Patricia Patricia Patricia
Walter Walter Walter
Ann Ann Ann
Thomas Thomas Thomas
Jose Jose Jose
Amanda Amanda Amanda
Lorene Lorene Lorene
Michael Michael Michael

Fall
Winter
Spring
15
40
21
62
39
80
21
59
21
63
22
39
39
99
37
65
38
74
42
81
34
66
29
43
58
95
62
79
19
47
25
42

Sheet1

Fall Winter Spring
Sam 15 40
Alex 21 62
Gloria 39 80
Herbert 21 59
William 21 63
Susie 22 39
Tracy 39 99
Phil 37 65
Patricia 38 74
Walter 42 81
Ann 34 66
Thomas 29 43
Jose 58 95
Amanda 62 79
Lorene 19 47
Michael 25 42

Sheet1

RtI/MTSS
SPE 501-Spring 2021
Module 6 Adapted Assignment

Progress Monitoring Summary:
Step One:
Review all components of the IRIS Module on Progress Monitoring :
IRIS

Step Two:
Write a three page typewritten double spaced summary of the Progress Monitoring process. Your summary does not need to include citations, just a clear summarization that shows your understanding of the process. Your summary should include the following points of the progress monitoring process.
A description of:
· The role of formative assessments
· The role of progress monitoring
· How progress monitoring measures are chosen
· The role of the graph of progress (hint: a goal line and a trend line (student’s progress) should be mentioned here)
· How data based instructional decisions are made
· How progress is communicated to pertinent staff and parents.

Step Three: RTI/MTSS Assignment – 501
The role of formative assessments is; this type of assessment occurs during instruction, that allows the teachers to decide if students are learning as the material distributed to the class. This intended process of assessing as learning is happening which permits teachers to adjust to the necessary instruction to meet the learning needs of their students.
Formative assessments provide vital information regarding a student’s progress toward particular learning objectives, her comprehension of skills or material being taught and any misinformation she has.
This assessment permits teachers to make informed decisions about when to revise or reteach material or skills or to adjust instruction. Also it identifies students who are constantly struggling.
Progress monitoring is a kind of formative assessment that is utilized within the elementary, middle and highschool environment. Progress monitoring permits teachers to;
⦁ “Frequently and constantly evaluate student learning.
⦁ Monitor the effectiveness of their instruction
⦁ Make instructional changes to improve student’s academic progress.”
There are two kinds of progress monitoring; mastery measurement (MM) and general outcome measurement (GOM) which is often referred to as a curriculum based measurement (CBM).The (GOM) model is most commonly used for progress monitoring. Even Though, scores from reading measures evaluate a student’s progress, the results aren’t used to assign grades. When students’ reading skills improve, so will their scores involving reading measures as well. Initially, the scores are low at the beginning of the year and scores progress over a period of time, which suggest they are learning.
There are many benefits to utilizing the (GOM). The role of progress monitoring also includes;
⦁ “Monitor student progress over time
⦁ Determine if the current instruction is assisting students to learn.
⦁ Determine if students are making adequate progress toward their learning goals
⦁ Identify students who aren’t progressing adequate toward their learning goals.
⦁ Predict student performance on the year-end assessment
⦁ Effectively communicate academic performance to students, parents, and other school professionals.”
Step one of progress monitoring is choosing a measure. The GOM reading measures are utilized to assess key reading skills for example; word identification and fluency. The reading program chosen by the school district including grade level progress monitoring. Certain GOM measures are chosen by the school district or state administrators. This happens when using MTSS or RTI framework regarding instruction. Teachers also have the authority to choose GOM measures to monitor student progress and make instructional decisions. After selecting the GOM measure one must use/ask these principles/questions;
⦁ “Does it correspond with grade level reading skills?
⦁ Is this measure reliable and valid?
⦁ Does the measure have sufficient alternate versions?
⦁ Is the measure quick, within one to eight minutes, and easy to give?
⦁ Is the measure designed to be delivered to individual students or to groups? However, group tests are often more convenient than individually administered ones.)
⦁ Are versions of this test available in languages other than English?”
The teacher decides which reading measure is developmentally adequate for the students.
Another reason for using the GOM measurement is if procedures for struggling students were included to identify the correct level of test. This measurement consists of students who aren’t performing at grade level.
1. Administer lhree PRF probes at the grade level at which the teacher expect the student to read competently by the end of the year. However, this may not be the student’s grade level.
The goal line is simply a line that connects a one student’s baseline performance to her expected mid-year or end of performance goal. When a goal line is created, it consists of establishing a baseline and determining the expected goal. The goal line indicates the students expected average weekly rate of growth or rate improvement (ROI) necessary to meet their end of the end of the year goal.
Data based decisions are made when at least 6 data points are collected. The teacher’s prepared to evaluate the student’s performance and decides if the student is prepared to meet their long or short term goals. Progress monitoring for a teacher who performs weekly, is equivalent to reviewing data and making instructional decisions around every 6 weeks.
One way teachers are able to evaluate the performance of a student is using the Four Point Method that consists of examining the relationship of the four most recent data points and the goal line located on the student’s graph. Deciding if the data the points are above, below or on the goal line allows the teacher to make a data based decision.
⦁ If the majority of points are higher than the goal line, the student’s performance is above expectations and requires a slightly more ambitious goal. Increase the goal line, if the students data is above the goal line
⦁ Change instruction if the majority of points are beneath the goal line of the student. then the student isn’t making progress. The teacher should attempt a different instructional approach and should continue to collect data. If the student data is beneath the goal line.
⦁ Don’t make any changes if the majority of the points are at the goal line, the students are on target to meet the year end goal and the instructional method is working. There shouldn’t be any changes to instruction.
Once the teacher evaluates the student’s performance and makes adjustments to the instruction provided by the graph, she shares vital information with the students, parents and other professionals. When the teacher shares the information with the students they become aware of their performance and begin to understand, students begin to appreciate the relationship between their efforts and performance.
The teachers show parents the student’s graph, they are able to show certain areas if a child is making progress or not, then changes must be made to address the issue.
Teachers can also find it necessary to communicate to other professionals regarding the student’s grades. This was before an IEP meeting the IEP team will have data on information/data on the student’s progress.

Submit to Dropbox