Assessment 101 – Everything you need to know to efficiently collect academic data in your system

Corey D. Pierce, Ph.D. 1

Assessment 101 – Everything you need to know to efficiently collect academic data in your

system

CBOCES Professional Development Series 2011/12

Session #2November 4, 2011

Loveland, CO

Problem Solving

If we can really understand the problem, the answer will come out of it, because the answer is not separate from the problem.

-Krishnamurti


When You Think About Assessment-

1. What are the questions that need to be answered?

2. What information do you need to obtain from your evaluation to answer the questions you have?

3. What will you do to get the information you need?

4. How will you use the information you gathered for instructional or curricular purposes?

4

Continuous Improvement Cycle

6

Eligibility Testing

Not Eligible Eligible

SPED IntensiveTreatment

Non Responders Responders

?

General Ed.-Scientifically Validated -Supplemental Treatments: T2 - 3


SPED Eligibility Evaluation

Not Eligible Eligible

SPED Intensive Treatment

Monitor

Monitor


Non - SPED Intensive Treatment

Recycle

ReferralHistorical System

Universal ScreeningEffective Educational Systems

Adapted from Fletcher, ’05, Used with Permission

Assessments in Effective Educational Systems• Screening and Benchmark (at grade level)

Universal measures that give a quick read on whether students have mastered critical skills.

• Progress Monitoring (typically at instructional level)Determines whether adequate progress is made based on individual goals regarding critical skills.

• Diagnostic Individually administered to gain more in-depth information and guide appropriate instruction or intervention plans in the area of concern.

• Outcome/Summative Provides an evaluation of the effectiveness of instruction and indicate student year-end achievement when compared to grade-level performance standards.

7


Effective systems focus on a process forachieving higher levels of academic and behavioral success for all

students through:

High Quality Instructional Practice

Continuous Review of Student Progress (multiple measures)

Collaboration


A Systemic Approach forConstant Inquiry

Continuous Review of Student Progress

To Assess:• How all students are performing (screening)• How they are responding to differentiated core instruction (ongoing

assessment)• How they are responding to intervention/additional supports (monitoring

progress)


Balanced Assessment SystemKey Components:• Continuum of assessments

• Multiple users

• Multiple information sources, used to create a complete picture of student progress

• Each assessment type has a primary purpose, as well as strengths and limitations

Corey D. Pierce, Ph.D.

Balanced Assessment System

Formative Benchmark Summative

Daily Ongoing Evaluation Strategies Periodic Diagnostic/Progress Assessments Large-Scale Standardized Assessments

Immediate Feedback Multiple Data Points Across Time Annual Snapshot

Student-Centered Classroom/School-Centered School /District/State-Centered

11


CLASSROOM INTERIM LARGE SCALE What do I learn from this assessment?

What learning comes next for this student? How are students progressing? How well is this program working?

How are schools, districts, and/or states progressing?

Who will use the information?

Primary Users Students Teachers

Primary Users Students Teachers/ Teaching teams Parents Schools/Districts

Primary Users Secondary Users Schools/Districts Teachers State Parents Federal Students Independent Evaluators

What is the frequency of the assessment?

Short Cycle - occurring within and between lessons

Medium Cycle - occurring within and between instructional units

Long Cycle – occurring annually or bi-annually

What action will be taken with the results?

Within the instructional activity, information is used to change or adjust teaching

Students receive frequent and meaningful feedback on their performance

Teachers engage students in the monitoring of their own learning

Re-teach decisions

Professional learning communities use data to identify strengths and gaps in instruction and curriculum

Curriculum may be changed/refined Teachers may modify instruction for

individuals and groups of students based on their progression towards outcome goals (selected, targeted options)

Strategic long term evaluation of curriculum/programming

Determination of Adequate Yearly Progress

What professional development is needed for the primary users?

Need for a solid understanding of learning progressions and the feedback loop

Concrete examples of formative assessment strategies

Collaborative work time to share effective teaching strategies

Opportunities to practice and perfect usage Collaboration time plan for assessments

If district or school developed – identification of learning outcomes and time to develop items

If using a commercial product – time to learn features of the tool and how the results link to district curriculum and state standards

Time to disaggregate and interpret data Collaborative work time to share effective

teaching strategies

Understanding and interpretation of large scale assessment

Time to disaggregate data and evaluate progress at building level and grade level

Opportunities for revising instructional practices and/or curriculum

What is the connection to content standards?

Lessons are connected to the broader curriculum Curriculum is linked to grade level standards Grade level standards are linked to the framework

Examples Examples: feedback questioning, interviews, exit questions observations discussions un-graded class work

Examples: end of unit assessments district assessments (6-traits) benchmark assessments commercial products (See

www.studentprogress.org))

Examples: CSAP NAEP MAPS?


Summative/ Large-Scale

• Purpose :• To determine how students in schools,

districts, and states are progressing

• To inform curriculum and instruction

• To determine Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)


Benchmark Assessment

• Purpose:• To determine to what extent all students are

progressing (screening)

• To determine how well additional supports or services are working before too much time passes (monitoring progress)


Formative Assessment

• Purpose:

• To consider what learning comes next for students

• To improve learning while there is still time to act – before the graded event


Benchmark Assessment: Screening

• Definitions• Purposes/Rationale• Strengths and Limitations• Common features• Research• Resources for getting started: Academics & Behavior


Screening: Definition

• Screening is characterized by fast, inexpensive, repeatable data collection about critical skills, beliefs, or behaviors.

• Screening usually identifies students who need further assessment or provides information for future planning activities.


Screening: Purposes/Rationale

• The purpose of screening is to identify students who are “at-risk” of a poor outcome

• Rationale: Use a screener with strong statistical properties along with other data to identify students you want to learn more about

• Don’t wait until it’s too late. CSAP is a poor screener for this reason.


Screening: Strengths & Limitations

• By definition, easy, quick, repeatable

• Immediate results• Guide programming• Predictive validity

• Diagnostically• Guiding instruction

– Administrators– Teachers

• Absent good PM and Formative Asmt.

• Statistical limitations

Strengths Limitations: How Misused


Selected Research on Screening• Jenkins, J. R., Hudson, R. F., & Johnson, E. S. (2007). Screening for service

delivery in an RTI framework: Candidate measures. School Psychology Review, 36, 560-82.

• Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103) New York: Macmillan.

• Riedel, B. W. (2007). The relationship between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban first-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 546–567.

• Ritchie, K. D., & Speece, D. L. (2004). Early identification of reading disabilities: Current status and new directions. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 29(4), 13–24.

• Snellen Eye Chart (1862).


Resources for Screening

• BASC• CBCL• Office Referrals• Teacher Nomination

• Go to National Center on RtI (http://www.rti4success.org/screeningTools)

• Also see The ABCs of CBM by Hosp etc.

Behavioral Screening Academic Screening

http://www.rti4success.org/screeningTools

http://www.rti4success.org/screeningTools


Formative (Ongoing) Assessment

• Definitions• Purposes/Rationale• Strengths and Limitations • Common features• Research• Resources for getting started: Academics & Behavior



Definition:“Formative assessment is an intentional and systematic

process used by teachers and students during instruction that provides feedback to adjust on-going teaching and learning to improve students’ achievement of the intended instructional outcomes.”

CCSSO, 2007



• intentional • systematic • process • feedback • adjust • on-going • intended instructional outcomes


Purpose:• To consider what learning comes next for the

student• To improve learning while there is still time to

act – before the graded event




• Examples: • Teacher observations• Teacher questioning & class discussions• Analysis of student work (graded & non-graded)• Exit questions• Teacher feedback• Student self-assessment• KWLs• Student Journals


Strengths:• Informs day-to-day instruction• Informs intervention• Instant information• Student self-assessment• Provides information about on-going student progress• Designed & evaluated by those who know the students best• Provides a huge volume of qualitative, descriptive data




Limitations:• Time• Informal/not standardized• Overabundance of information• May be challenging to ‘grade’• When used to the exclusion of other types of

assessment



Essential components of effective formative assessment:

• Learning Progressions: clearly articulate the sub-goals of the ultimate learning goal

• Learning Goals and Criteria for Success: clearly identified and communicated to students

• Descriptive Feedback: provided to studentswith evidence-based feedback that is linked to the intended instructional outcomes and criteria for success.

CCSSO, 2008



Research•Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards Through Classroom AssessmentBy Paul Black and Dylan Wiliam (1998)

•New assessment beliefs for a new school missionBy Rick Stiggins (2004)

•Implementing Formative Assessment at the District Level: An Annotated Bibliography (New England Comprehensive Center)



• Getting started: Academics & Behavior– Set learning goals and criteria for success– Select assessment techniques (teacher and

students)– Determine how feedback is provided– Organize information from formative assessment

(teacher and students)



“Assessment FOR learning turns the classroom assessment process and its results into an instructional intervention designed to increase, not merely monitor, student learning.”

Richard Stiggins


Benchmarks: Progress Monitoring

• Definitions• Purposes/Rationale• Strengths and Limitations • Common features• Research• Resources for getting started: Academics & Behavior


Progress Monitoring: Definition

• Progress monitoring (PM) is a scientifically-based practice used to assess student performance and evaluate the effectiveness of instruction.


PM: Purposes/Rationale

• PM has two purposes:– Determine whether students are progressing

appropriately from additional supports and intervention

– Build more effective supports and interventions

• Rationale: Use PM to closely monitor whether what we’re doing is effective!

36

20 1822 21

24 2225

3026

2830

2831

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

Wor

ds C

orre

ct P

er M

in

School Weeks

Bart

Tier 2: Strategic -PALS

Tier 3: Intensive - 1:1 instruction, 5x/week, Problem-solving Model to Target Key Decoding Strategies, Comprehension Strategies

Aimline= 1.50 words/week

Trendline = 0.95 words/week

Gap Analysis• A critical factor in determining whether a

student is making sufficient progress is conducting a Gap Analysis.

Example:Benchmark vs. Current Level of Performance = Gap

90 wpm/40 wpm = 2.252+ = Significant Gap and signifies a need for intervention to close the Gap between student and peers


PM: Strengths & Limitations

• High frequency• Sensitive to change• Guide programming more

than screening

• May have to make your own PM tools

• Improper tools give invalid, unreliable results

• Used in isolation

Strengths Limitations: How Misused


Research on Progress Monitoring

• A substantial research literature• Support a wide range of educational decisions• Beginning in 1977 as Data-Based Program

Modification (Deno & Mirkin, CEC)• "Developments in Curriculum-Based

Measurement" by S.L. Deno, 2003, The Journal of Special Education, 37. 3., 184-192.


Resources for PM

• Frequency of difficulties in school

• Self-rating• Parent/teacher rating

• Go to National Center on RtI (http://www.rti4success.org/progressMonitoringTools )

• Also see The ABCs of CBM by Hosp

Behavioral PM Academic Screening

http://www.rti4success.org/progressMonitoringTools



41

Available Screening and Progress Monitoring ToolsTitle/

PublisherMaterials Grade Website

AIMSweb Early Literacy/ Reading, Spelling, Numeracy/ Math

Pre – 8 www.edformation.com

DIBELS Early Literacy/ Reading Pre – 6 dibels.uoregon.edu

Measuring Basic Skills Progress

Reading, mathematics1 – 6 www.pro-ed.com

Progress Monitoring

All areas Pre – 12

www.studentprogress.org

Information Central

Reading software 1 – 12 www.interventioncentral.org

National Center on RtI

Ratings and uses for assessments

K-12 www.rti4success.org

http://www.edformation.com/

How to make a CBM/Progress Monitoring Assessment

1. Examine curriculum to select slice of material to be covered

2. Plan the test3. Sequence the content, behaviors, and

conditions and arrange into a table4. Examine table grid to determine which will

be used for objectives5. You may weight a column, row, or square

Making a CBM cont.

6. Decide on the format you will use, then select or write items for the squares you identified on the table.

7. Establish a CAP (Criteria for Acceptable Performance).

Example CBM Development Table

Content Behaviors ConditionsSingle digit addition Watch for sign Vertical and sideways

Single digit subtraction Watch for sign Vertical and sideways

Double digit addition (under 10)

Right to left

Double digit subtraction (under 10)

Right to left

Double digit addition (over 10)

Carrying

Double digit subtraction (over 10)

Borrowing

Guidelines for identifying a good CBM1. Assessment and curriculum must be aligned2. Assessment instrument must be easy to use3. Assessment must have a clearly defined purpose4. Assessments should be standardized5. Assessments should sample clearly defined domains6. Assessments should sample relevant types of information7. Collect raw data8. Collect an adequate sample of student performance9. Test should use appropriate scoring rules10. Assessments should be as complex and interactive as possible

Steps to Initial Implementation of Progress Monitoring

1. Identify classrooms or grades to measure2. Determine skill/curriculum area to measure3. Develop/acquire measures4. Screen in the Fall5. Rank students by grade/class and develop norms6. Identify students at-risk as determined by capacity and cut-

scores7. Set year-end goals for each student8. Monitor targeted students progress weekly and graph results9. Evaluate progress continuously, systematically (same time,

same way each time)10. Make changes to instructional programming/intervention as

needed

• Repeat steps to create winter and spring benchmarks


Progress Monitoring Self-Assessment

• Review the PM Self-Assessment materials from DWW

Decision Rules Based on Progress Monitoring Data

• 3 to 4 data points below goal line: make an intervention change

• 6 consecutive data points above goal line: goal is too low, revise upward

• If neither of these apply, continue doing what you are doing

– NOTE: The CDE recommends having a minimum of 8 data points before making educational decisions.

Ongoing Progress Monitoring

Example:

• For a third-grade student with a learning disability and an IEP math goal, curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is collected each week (e.g., 25 problems sampling the 3rd-grade mathematics concepts and applications curriculum).


Example:• For a third-grade student with a learning disability and

an IEP math goal, curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is collected each week (e.g., 25 problems sampling the 3rd-grade mathematics concepts and applications curriculum).

• Take baseline and set year-end goal. Draw goal line to represent performance level expected each week of the school year.

0

10

20

30

40

50

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May

Michael T. Applications 3

POINTS

G

Wait. Not enough scores for decision.You need at least 8 scores to make a decision.

CtNCNNMeMnCGFrDeACWP


Example:• For a third-grade student with a learning disability and an IEP math

goal, curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is collected each week (e.g., 25 problems sampling the 3rd-grade mathematics concepts and applications curriculum).


• Special education involves five 30-minute math tutoring sessions per week in dyads. Initial program is a validated tutoring protocol. Weekly progress monitoring continues.


Example:• For a third-grade student with a learning disability and an IEP math goal,

curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is collected each week (e.g., 25 problems sampling the 3rd-grade mathematics concepts and applications curriculum).


• Special education involves five 30-minute math tutoring sessions per week. Initial program is a validated tutoring protocol. Weekly progress monitoring continues.

• After 8 weeks, the student’s progress is evaluated against the goal line. The special educator determines whether a revision to the program is needed to boost the student’s rate of improvement. If so, an instructional feature, based on a well researched instructional principle, is added to the validated protocol.

0

10

20

30

40

50


Michael T. Applications 3

POINTS

T

G

Uh-oh! Make a teaching change.Student's rate of progress is less than the goal line.


Ongoing Progress MonitoringExample:• For a third-grade student with a learning disability and an IEP math goal, curriculum-based

measurement (CBM) is collected each week (e.g., 25 problems sampling the 3 rd-grade mathematics concepts and applications curriculum).


• Special education involves five 30-minute tutoring sessions in dyads on calculation and word problem skills, deficit areas for the student. Initial program is a validated tutoring protocol. Weekly progress monitoring continues.

• After 8 weeks, the student’s progress is evaluated against the goal line. The special educator determines that a revision to the program is required to boost the student’s rate of improvement. If so, an instructional feature, based on a well researched instructional principle, is added to the validated protocol.

• This iterative process recurs over time so that the teacher uses the progress-monitoring data to formatively design an individualized, appropriate instruction (i.e., scientifically-based and intensive special education and related services) that addresses the general education curriculum.

0

10

20

30

40

50


Amanda M. Applications 3

POINTS

G

Wait. Not enough scores for decision.You need at least 8 scores to make a decision.


• A critical factor in determining whether a student is making sufficient progress in Tier I is conducting a Gap Analysis.

Example:Benchmark vs. Current Level of Performance = Gap

90 wpm/40 wpm = 2.252+ = Significant Gap and signifies a need for Tier II or Tier III intervention to close the Gap between student and peers

Gap Analysis

58

Case Examples

• Thanks to George Batsche, Joe Kovaleski and Ed Shapiro for the case examples

• PA State-wide RtI Initiative

60

LISA

50

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


School Weeks

Wor

ds C

orre

ct P

er M

in

Benchmark

61

Decision Model at Tier 1- General Education Instruction

• Step 1: Screening• ORF = 50 wcpm, fall benchmark for some risk = 44

wcpm• Comprehension skills are judged as at levels equal to

ORF by her teacher • Is this student at risk?• Current Gen Ed Instruction is Working

No YesMove to Tier 2: Strategic Interventions

Lisa

Continue Tier 1 Instruction

62

Rita• Second grade student• Beginning of school year• Regular Education• Scores at 20 wcpm in second grade material• Teacher judges (based on in-class observation/evaluation)

comprehension to not be substantially different from ORF

63

Rita

20

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


School Weeks

Wor

ds C

orre

ct P

er M

in

Benchmark

64


• Step 1: Screening• ORF = 20 wcpm, fall benchmark for some risk = 44

wcpm• Comprehension deficits in all 4 of 5 areas are noted• Current Gen Ed Instruction is NOT Working• Is this student at risk?

No YesMove to Tier 2: Strategic InterventionsRita

Rita


65

Decision Model at Tier 2- Strategic Interventions & Instruction

• Supplemental, small group instruction (3-4 students with similar skill levels)

• Standard protocol intervention• 3x per week, 30 minutes each• Team selects PALS (Peer Tutoring Strategy)• Implemented by 2 different available instructional personnel• Implemented for 8 weeks• Progress monitoring once every 2 weeks

http://kc.vanderbilt.edu/kennedy/pals/index.html

66

Rita- Tier 2

2024

28

35 34

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


School Weeks

Wor

ds C

orre

ct P

er M

in




67

Decision Model at Tier 2- Strategic Intervention & Instruction• ORF = 34 wcpm, winter benchmark (still 8 weeks away)

for some risk = 52 wcpm• Target rate of gain over Tier 1 assessment is 1.5

words/week • Actual attained rate of gain was 1.85 words/week• Gains above benchmark in 4 of 5 comprehension areas• Student on target to attain benchmark• Step 2: Is student responsive to intervention?

NoYesMove to Tier 3: Intensive Interventions

Rita

Continue monitoring or return to Tier 1

68

Steven• Second grade student• Beginning of school year• Regular Education• Scores at 20 wcpm in second grade material• Teacher judges (based on in-class observation/evaluation)


69

Steven

20

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


School Weeks

Wor

ds C

orre

ct P

er M

in

Benchmark

70


– Step 1: Screening• ORF = 20 wcpm, fall benchmark for some risk = 44

wcpm• Comprehension screen also shows deficits in all 5 areas• Current Gen Ed Instruction is NOT Working• Is this student at risk?

No YesMove to Tier 2: Strategic InterventionsRita

Steven


71

Decision Model at Tier 2- Strategic Interventions & Instruction

• Supplemental, small group instruction in Rita’s group (3-4 students with similar skill levels)

• Standard protocol implementation• 3x per week, 30 minutes each• Team selects PALS (Peer Tutoring Strategy)• Implemented by 2 different available instructional personnel• Implemented for 8 weeks• Progress monitoring once every 2 weeks

72

Steven

20 1822 21

24

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


School Weeks

Wor

ds C

orre

ct P

er M

in




73

Decision Model at Tier 2- Strategic Intervention & Instruction

– Step 2: Is student responsive to intervention?• ORF = 24 wcpm, winter benchmark (still 8 weeks away)

for some risk = 52 wcpm• Target rate of gain over Tier 1 assessment is 1.5

words/week • Actual attained rate of gain was 0.55 words/week• Below comprehension benchmarks in 4 of 5 areas• Student NOT on target to attain benchmark• Is student responsive to intervention at Tier 2?

NoYesMove to Tier 3: Intensive Interventions

Steven


74

Decision Model at Tier 3- Intensive Interventions & Instruction

• Supplemental, 1:3, pull-out instruction• Individualized Problem-Solving, Targeted Instruction• Specific decoding and analysis strategies • Emphasis on comprehension strategies• 5x per week, 30 minutes each• Implemented by 2 different available instructional

personnel• Implemented for 8 weeks• Progress monitoring once every week

75

Steven

20 1822 21

2428

3136 35

42 4440

45

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


School Weeks

Wor

ds C

orre

ct P

er M

in




Trendline = 0.2.32 words/week

76

Decision Model at Tier 3- Intensive Intervention & Instruction

– Step 3: Is student responsive to intervention at Tier 3?• ORF = 45 wcpm, winter benchmark (still 4 weeks away) for some

risk = 52 wcpm• Target rate of gain over Tier 2 assessment is 1.5 words/week • Actual attained rate of gain was 2.32 words/week• At or above comprehension benchmarks in 4 of 5 areas• Student on target to attain benchmark• Step 3: Is student responsive to intervention?• Move student back to Strategic intervention

NoYesMove to Sp Ed Eligibility Determination

Steven


77

Bart• Second grade student• Beginning of school year• Regular Education• Scores at 20 wcpm in second grade material• Teacher judges (based on in-class observation/evaluation)


78

Bart

20 1822 21

24 2225

3026

2830

2831

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


School Weeks

Wor

ds C

orre

ct P

er M

in





79

Decision Model at Tier 3- Intensive Intervention & Instruction

– Step 3: Is student responsive to intervention at Tier 3?

• ORF = 31 wcpm, winter benchmark (still 4 weeks away) for some risk = 52 wcpm

• Target rate of gain over Tier 2 assessment is 1.5 words/week

• Actual attained rate of gain was 0.95 words/week• Below comprehension benchmarks in all areas• Student NOT on target to attain benchmark

NoYesMove to Sp Ed Eligibility Determination

Bart



Diagnostic Assessments

• When to use them– Used when you need more in-depth information in

a specific area of need– Need further triangulation of data– To guide instructional decision making

• How to choose the best one– Match the designed purpose of the test with the

information you need• Which are available through CBOCES?


How Does it Fit Together?

Addl.Diagnostic

AssessmentInstruction Results

Monitoring

IndividualDiagnostic

IndividualizedIntensive

weekly

All Students at a grade level

Fall Winter Spring

UniversalScreening

None ContinueWithCore

InstructionGuided byFormative

Assessment

SUMMATIVE•Grades•Discipline•AYP Measures

GroupDiagnostic

SmallGroupDifferen-tiatedBy Skill

2 times/month

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4

SupplementalServices

1-5%

5-10%

80-90%CoreInstruction

IntensiveSupport

Courtesy of Dave Tilley, Heartland AEA


Questions in Test Selection• How does this map to our data system?• Does this test have adequate technical properties for our

intended use?– Reliability & Validity– Frequency– Scale– Alignment with our curriculum

• How will we use the collected data? Don’t use a test outside of its how intended.

• If using for SLD, federal regulations § 300.304 require use “for the purposes for which the assessments or measures are valid and reliable”


Achieving Balance

Thinking about your assessment system…• Is your system balanced?

– If not, are you okay with imbalance? • How do the assessments support and inform one

another?• Do all users know the purpose, strengths and

limitations of the assessments?• What do you do with the results of the different

assessments?• Does everyone play an important role?• How to deal with disagreement? Collaborate!

All Students Receive

All Students Are Screened for Additional I nstructional

Needs (Fall, Winter & Spring DIBELS, DORF, TESA,

ODRs, etc.) Individualize Instruction Rule:

When students fail to progress af ter two (2) consecutive small group interventions

20% Decision Rule: Students below the 20th percentile in academic skills and/ or with chronic behavior needs* are placed in small group instruction

Refer for Special Education Evaluation Rule: When students fail to progress af ter two (2) consecutive individually-designed interventions

80% Decision Rule: I f less than 80% of students are not meeting benchmarks, review core program(s)

ALL STUDENTS RECEIVE QUALITY BEHAVIOR AND ACADEMIC

INSTRUCTION AND SUPPORT

Change Small Group or Individual Interventions Rule: When progress data is below aimline on three (3) consecutive days, or when six (6) data points produce a fl at or a decreasing trendline

I nterventions are f urther individual-

ized

DECISION RULES:

EBI S EARLY IDENTIFI CATION PROCESS Tigard- Tualatin School District, Tigard, Oregon

TEAMWORK TI MELINES: EBI S teams meet f all, winter & spring to review data and make decisions about school-wide progress. EBI S teams/Grade level teacher teams meet monthly to review data, plan and adjust interventions.

Small Group Interventions are

designed by teacher teams

with EBIS support

*More than 5 absences or more than 3 counseling or discipline ref errals in 30 days.

Meetings

Use each professional’s expertise to develop a “Super Plan” of intense service that will

benefit the student.

School wide success occurs when students receive purposeful and planned instruction

focused on one common goal from all professionals.


Data Meetings

• Review Data Analysis Meeting forms from DWW. (Page 11)

SLD: Evaluation & Body of Evidence

More focused than when we conducted a “comprehensive evaluation” (e.g., same battery of assessments for all referred)

Student assessed in all areas related to suspected disability Must be “sufficiently comprehensive” to identify all child’s

special education needs (whether or not commonly linked to primary disability)

Full and Individual Evaluation…

Key Question: What is a “Full and Individual” Evaluation that includes the required “Body of Evidence?”

In conducting an evaluation, the public agency must—

Use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information…

Not use any single measure or assessment as the sole criterion for determining whether a child is a child with a disability and for determining an appropriate educational program for the child…

-34CFR §300.304(b)

Evaluation

• Interviews (classroom, family)

• Observations in relevant settings (classroom)

• Analysis of work samples

• Performance of informal tasks

• Curriculum Based Measurements and/or

• Other progress monitoring strategies

Building a Body of Evidence: A “variety of assessment tools and strategies” (during RtI & evaluation) may include…

(Required at some point for SLD determination)

• Results from state and district assessments

• Functional Behavior Assessment

• Behavior Rating Scales

• Vocational assessments

• Norm-referenced assessment (focused, not full battery for

every child referred)

Building a Body of Evidence: A “variety of assessment tools and strategies” (during RtI & evaluation) may include…

(Required at some point for SLD determination)

SLD identification should be based on a convergence of data gathered throughout the RtI/problem-solving process as well as any further assessment data gathered as part of the evaluation for special education.

Body of Evidence (Converging Data)

Specifically, Colorado Rules require “a body of evidence demonstrating: academic skill deficit(s); and insufficient progress in response to scientific, research-based intervention” to determine that these two key criteria for SLD have been met.

Documents

Assessment 101 – Everything you need to know to efficiently collect academic data in your system