Choosing a Progress Monitoring Tool That Works for You

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
(No Transcript)
15
Implementation Information
16
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

17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
Next Steps

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

21
National Center on Student Progress Monitoring
Website and Tools Chart
22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
Which Tool Should I Choose? A Look at Possible
Decision Making Scenarios
29

• Im 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

30

•   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.

31

• 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

32

• 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?

• 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)

33

• 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

34
Decisions Related to Developing Early Intervening
/ Response to Intervention Models

• Are we even asking the
• right questions?

35
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?

36
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

37
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

38
What is our scope?

• Academic or academic plus behavior?
• Which academic subjects?
• What grades?
• What schools?
• What districts?

39
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?

40
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?

41
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

42
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?

43
For More Information, please visitwww.studentpr
ogress.org
Email us at studentprogress_at_air.org Or call
toll-free 1-866-770-6111