1 / 43

Choosing a Progress Monitoring Tool That Works for You

Choosing a Progress Monitoring Tool That Works for You. Whitney Donaldson Kellie Kim Sarah Short. Goals. To describe who we are and what we do as a Center To describe the technical review process To review our website and learn how to maximize the use of the Tools Chart

marrim
Download Presentation

Choosing a Progress Monitoring Tool That Works for You

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Choosing a Progress Monitoring Tool That Works for You Whitney Donaldson Kellie Kim Sarah Short

  2. Goals • To describe who we are and what we do as a Center • To describe the technical review process • To review our website and learn how to maximize the use of the Tools Chart • To review the decision making process

  3. What is the National Center on Student Progress Monitoring? • Funded by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs • National technical assistance and dissemination center • Housed at the American Institutes for Research, in conjunction with researchers at Vanderbilt University

  4. Our Mission • To provide technical assistance to states and districts and disseminate information about progress monitoring practices proven to work in different academic content areas (Gr. K-5).

  5. Goals • Raise Knowledge and Awareness • Provide Implementation Support • Provide for National Dissemination

  6. Raise Knowledge and Awareness • Forming partnerships • States, • Districts, • Associations, • Technical assistance providers, • Institutions of higher education, • Other interested groups

  7. Provide implementation support • Technical Review Committee • Regional Trainers • Web Services www.studentprogress.org

  8. National Dissemination • Developing resources • Supporting on-going information sharing • Summer Institute • advanced web services • regional meetings

  9. Technical Review Committee and Review Process

  10. Technical Review Committee • Dr. Chris Espin, University of Minnesota • Dr. John Hintze, University of Massachusetts • Dr. Robert Linn, University of Colorado • Dr. Chris Schatschneider, Florida State University • Dr. Ed Shapiro, Lehigh University • Dr. Mark Shinn, National-Louis University

  11. Procedural Integrity • Disclose all contractual obligations or affiliations • Independent review by two reviewers for each tool • Discrepancies in preliminary review were discussed by conference call to reach consensus • Vendors were offered opportunities to respond to the initial review results Re-review of new/additional evidence

  12. Seven Core Standards of Technical Adequacy • Foundational Psychometric Standards • Reliability • Validity

  13. Seven Core Standards of Technical Adequacy (Continued) • Progress Monitoring Standards • Sufficient number of alternate forms • Sensitivity to learning • Evidence of instructional utility • Specification of adequate growth • Description of benchmarks for adequate end-of-year performance or goal setting process

  14. Implementation Information

  15. Decision Rule • Each standard is comprised of two or three essential components • Each and every component MUST demonstrate sufficient evidence to be rated as “sufficient” standard

  16. Next Steps • 2006 Review of SPM Tools in based on General Outcomes Measures, Mastery Measurement, or both is in progress

  17. National Center on Student Progress Monitoring Website and Tools Chart

  18. Which Tool Should I Choose?A Look at Possible Decision Making Scenarios

  19. I’m interested in monitoring student progress in mathematics in my district for grades 1-3.  Which tools would be appropriate? • AIMSWeb • Monitoring Basic Skills Progress (MBSP) • Yearly Progress Pro • STAR

  20. Which tools have probes that can be administered to students using paper-and-pencil? • AIMSWeb • Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) • EdCheckup • Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE) • Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency (TOSWRF) *Please note: In order to use the “full” features of each tool, such as graphing and generating reports, many tools require internet access.

  21. Which tools offer accommodations for students with special needs ( e.g. English Language Learners, hearing impaired)? • Dynamic Indicators of Early Basic Literary Skills (DIBELS) • EdCheckup • STAR

  22. AIMSWeb Dynamic Indicators of Early Basic Literary Skills (DIBELS) EdCheckup Monitoring Basic Skills Progress (MBSP) Yearly Progress Pro STAR Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE) Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency (TOSWRF) I am a teacher with 25 students in my classroom and cannot afford to set aside blocks of time to administer progress monitoring probes to selected students. Are there tools that can be administered by the paraprofessional in my classroom?

  23. I am interested in finding a tool that I can use to monitor my students’ progress weekly or even more frequently. Are there tools that have at least 20 alternate forms? • AIMSWeb • Dynamic Indicators of Early Basic Literary Skills (DIBELS) • EdCheckup • Monitoring Basic Skills Progress (MBSP) • Yearly Progress Pro • STAR

  24. Decisions Related to Developing Early Intervening / Response to Intervention Models Are we even asking the right questions?

  25. Some questions to consider • What is our purpose? • What is our scope? • How will we define and monitor students at risk? • What is our EI/RTI model? • How does our EI/RTI model relate to special education eligibility? • What hardware/software/internet configuration is available/works best for us?

  26. What is our purpose? • To reduce inappropriate referrals to special education or over-identification of students as students with disabilities • To identify students with reading or learning disabilities earlier • To move away from the IQ-Achievement discrepancy approach to LD identification • To determine whether students are responding to an intervention within an RTI model

  27. What is our purpose? (continued) • To maximize performance on end of year tests • To assist in establishing annual goals • To assist in reporting to parents • To monitor the progress of at risk students towards adequate yearly progress

  28. What is our scope? • Academic or academic plus behavior? • Which academic subjects? • What grades? • What schools? • What districts?

  29. How will we define and monitor students at risk? • Relates to your purpose. • What tools will we use for screening? • What progress monitoring tools will we use?

  30. What is our Early Intervening/Response to Intervention model? • How many tiers will we have? • Do we have a sound, research-based curriculum in place that meets the needs of students in the particular school? • Who will deliver services for each tier and what will they be? • How long is the intervention at each tier? • Can students repeat in a tier? How many times?

  31. How does our EI/RTI model relate to special education eligibility? • How will EI/RTI information be used in referral? • What other information will be gathered? • Does failure to achieve at the most intensive level of RTI equate to learning disability? • What are issues related to procedural safeguards

  32. What technology is available/works best for us? • MacIntosh compatibility • A dedicated, high-speed server • Secure access to the internet • Easy access to computers for teachers and students?

  33. For More Information, please visitwww.studentprogress.org Email us at studentprogress@air.org Or call toll-free 1-866-770-6111

More Related