Assessment-Based Goal Development and Progress Monitoring

I.               Evaluation Results

Briefly summarize Henry’s evaluation results. 

Reviewing Henry’s evaluation report submitted at the end of the school year shows that there are some encouraging trends in his math calculation and fluency abilities and also in his writing samples, for which he stood within the average range. On the other hand, it is glaring apparent that he has quite low or low average scores in reading and comprehension, usage of words, phonics, and composing a written text as well as fluency; this is because most of the scores fall within the low or low average range. Similarly, also his cognitive ability and those skills related to working memory span are also in the red despite reasonable low scores, which means that attentional and the speed of information processing are issues (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006). Regardless of the steps taken which included individualized reading, writing and spelling practice programs so as to ensure that Henry’s rate of learning was not lower than that which he was learning in the class, underlying problems especially in reading related tasks persisted. He is advised on how to avoid problems of unfinished learning through increased support for reading which teaching vocabulary strategies and monitoring his progress quantitatively 

II.             Present Levels of Performance 

From the outcomes of the assessment of Henry, it is apparent that the student has both merits and deficiencies in his academic works.

Strengths:

Math Calculation and Fluency: In the domain of mathematics, Henry performs at average scoring in math calculation (95) and math fluency (90). The results suggest that he is able to carry out some low level arithmetic and rote mathematical operations, doing so reasonably well (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; Tomlinson, 2017).

Writing Samples: The writing samples subtest was passed by Henry, though he was scored in the average range of 92 being able to come up with sentences on the use of visual and auditory stimuli which is normal for his grade level (Brown-Chidsey & Steege, 2010).

Areas of Need:

Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary: Concerning his reading comprehension as well as vocabulary, Henry performs at average level, with Passage Comprehension scoring 77 and Reading Vocabulary 76 posing nowhere near-average challenges. The performance in these areas, as well as in writing fluency (82), emphasizes the importance of focusing on reading and language comprehension remediation (Wiliam, 2011; Hosp et al., 2016).

Phonetic Skills: On the other hand, lower than average performance (87) on the Word Attack subtest which belongs to the nursery indicates a specific phonological weakness. This skill is necessary if effective reading is to take place. This handicap is probably affecting his reading performance and comprehension in relation to some reading materials (Shinn, 2012).

Verbal Comprehension and Working Memory: Lastly, regarding specific domains of the WISC-V, the results illuminate difficulties with verbal comprehension (95) and with working memory (77). He very low on processing speed (PSI: 78) indicates that there are certain cognitive tasks which can overcome Henry Hence additional recommendations are needed in regards to activities that involve paying attention and processing information at a relatively fast pace (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; Tomlinson, 2017).

To sum up, positive aspects related to systematic math and writing samples strengthen the line for success, but negative factors in reading performance, phonological awareness, verbal comprehension, working memory will need serious correction and constant follow up in order to guarantee progression in academics for Henry.

III.           Annual Goals

Restate created goals from this week’s DB post; these should be aligned with levels of performance. 

Data Collection and Management System Alignment

IV.           How will the student’s progress be measured? 

The goals of the study have been separated between three: 

Goal 1: Academic Goal (Reading Comprehension)

Assessment Tools:

a. Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM): Based in North Carolina, this weekly CBM will be implemented to evaluate Henry’s reading comprehension skills focusing on his identification of the main idea and the supporting information on given short paragraphs. It must be emphasized that in reading progress monitoring, CBM provides this regular opportunity to change instruction if necessary (Hosp et al, 2016).

b. Woodcock-Johnson Passage Comprehension Subtest: This primary assessment tool will be administered quarterly expected to aid in assessing Henry’s reading for fluency and comprehension and how this changes over time (Shinn, 2012).

Goal 2: Social-Emotional Goal (Class Participation)

Assessment Tools:

a. Behavioral Observation: It will be used to categorize the daily behavior if Henry takes part in any class or group work within classes and the target was for him to say three times or more in a week. Such data gathered will incorporate observational data which aims to capture social classroom activities and participation (Tomlinson, 2017).

b. Student Self Assessment: These self-assesments are a way for Henry to complete focus on how often he participates during class and presentation over the course of the week and therefore put it as much as he can comfortably allow. Promoting self assessment is helpful in developing social-emotional growth as people learn to express conviction and take responsibility over their actions (Wiliam, 2011).

Goal #3: Functional Goal (Organization and Time Management)

Assessment Tools:

      a. Teacher Checklist: Teachers will keep a mother-tongue assessment standard, by using a checklist to assess how Henry has utilized his planner in registration of assignments and dates of submission. This will be done weekly so as to make sure that Henry is developing the other components of executive functioning, in this case, organization (Fuchs and Fuchs 2006) .

        b. Portfolio Assessment: Every week, a portfolio of the tasks that Henry has submitted on completion will be kept whereby this will show how the learner has improved in submitting completed work on time with the required quality. Such evaluations work well because they are clear and provide satisfactory feedback on areas achieved as well as areas worked on (Brown-Chidsey and Steege 2010).

Thus such tools will help the team to use data based planning to implement the lessons and also follow up on Henry if he is achieving the set goals properly.

V.             How often will progress be measured? 

Measures of Henry’s progress will include a combination of weekly, monthly and quarterly assessments in order to track his progress with all goals in a timely and precise manner.

Academic Goal (Reading Comprehension)

Weekly: Assessment of growth in the targeted skill of reading comprehension will use Curriculum-Based Measurements (CBM) every week where short reading passages on main ideas and details will be given to Henry aiming to determine how well he captures the essence and supporting facts.

Quarterly: Administration of the Woodcock-Johnson Passage Comprehension Subtest will be done at the end of every quarter with the aim of measuring reading comprehension in the long haul.

Graduate studies in new and emerging technologies and management

Social-Emotional Goal (Class Participation)

Daily/Weekly: This will be done daily in class and reported on a weekly period to recap Henry’s participation in class discussions and group works. Teachers will monitor the frequency in which he participates in the activity doing at least three activities in a week.

Weekly: Finally, it is anticipated that Henry will complete self-assessment reflections every week in order to establish the level of his own engagement and progression as well as measure this engagement from other sources.

Functional Goal (Organization and Time Management):

Weekly: The school staff will check Henry’s planner on a weekly basis using a checklist to assess whether students’ homework is recorded and completed on the due date or not.

Monthly: Adherence to deadlines will periodically be evaluated based on a portfolio of assigned and completed tasks.

By carrying out a progress measure at these intervals, the IEP team will be able to alter any supports as said in the amendment to minimize challenges that may hinder Henry’s progress.

VI.           Data collection process: Where and when will assessments occur?  

The procedure of collecting data regarding the aspects and features of Henry’s level of progress for improvement will take place in different time frames and locations for all objectives of such holistic and correct appraisal.

Academic Goal (Reading Comprehension):

Where: During independent or small group reading instructions in the classroom.

When:

Weekly: Curriculum based measurements (CBM) will also be carried out every week using independent reading and CBM during the literacy block, during which Henry’s comprehension skills will be evaluated in progress.

Quarterly: A special education teacher or an assessment coordinator will administer the Woodcock-Johnson Passage Comprehension Subtest in a quiet controlled setting such as the resource classroom or school assessment room.

Social-Emotional Goal (Class Participation):

Where: In class while discussion takes place or students are divided to work in groups.

When:

Daily/Weekly: There will be audio and video taped sessions conducted in class involving participating children . Teachers upon resumption to their desks will enter data into participatory logs during these periods and will collate the data at the close of every week.

Weekly: Once a week, boys and girls will be asked to fill out unity self-reflections regarding If there is a brief period during this activity or in the resource room when Henry can concentrate on his output this would occur after class.

Functional Goal (Organization and Time Management of the ELC):

Where: In the classroom, observing Henry’s time management and task completion through the planner.

When:

Weekly: Diary entries and assignments in the weekly planner will be revised every week in class or during other activities weekly or in the last lesson of the week (for example on Friday afternoons) to check the homework due dates are all written down.

Monthly: Teachers will review one month’s worth of assignments written and completed by Henry once a month by having a meeting with Henry, his general education teacher, and his special educator, probably in a resource room or quiet classroom.

The methodology here is aimed to address adult functional profiles by collecting data in the classroom and in more structured environments that paint a complete and accurate view of Henry’s development targets involving academics, social-emotional development, and functional skills.

VII.         Who is responsible for collecting and managing this data?  

The responsibility for collecting and managing Henry’s data will be distributed among the hard-to-get core and for monitoring and taking suitable actions where needed.

General Education Teacher :

Responsibilities: The general education teacher Mr. Franklin will bear sniffing for every day/ every week data about how much of Henry’s classes he attends and how much he uses his planner and how many assignments are completed. They will also prepare and supervise behavioral observation logs and record his progress in reading and group activities.

Data Collected: Class participation, planner, assignments, and routine class activities.

Special Education Teacher :

Responsibilities: The special educator will administer formal assessments such as the Woodcock-Johnson Passage Comprehension Subtest and progress monitor children in Tier 3 types of interventions. In addition, they will contribute to the collection of data arising from individual lessons as regards the students’ reading comprehension as well as the writing.

Data Collected: Results from formal assessments, CBM data for reading comprehension, and intervention progress.

Resource Teacher (if applicable):

Responsibilities: The teacher resource may help attain organizational objectives such as appointments where Henry’s planner and portfolio assignments will be used to monitor completion of exercises and time management. They may also help in collecting data related to intervention strategies employed by the special education teacher.

Data Collected: Weekly planner checks, portfolio reviews, and any supplemental intervention data.

School Psychologist or Assessment Coordinator (proceed only if applicable):

Responsibilities: This individual will provide and supervise more extensive evaluation processes such as administering the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children 5th edition WISC-V among other common assessments that are part of Henry’s IEP.

Data Collected: Results of standardized testing as well as any general cognitive or educational evaluations.

Henry:

Responsibilities: Henry will administer social skills self-evaluations focused on participation and organization in class. This will prompt him to think and reflect more while increasing his sense of responsivity towards his own improvement.

Data Collected: Self assessment forms that document his weekly participation and organizational skills performance.

Involving different stakeholders in the data collection and management process enables different perspectives providing a holistic view of Henry’s development and progress with regards to academic, social-emotional and functional areas.

VIII.        Where will these data be stored? 

The information obtained in this way concerning Henry will be deposited in different secured areas for the purpose of access, security as well as the school policies and legal regulations. This is how the data will be stored:

Student Information System (SIS):

What: Formal assessment results of Henry as well as standardized test scores (Woodcock-Johnson, WISC-V) and progress report which goes along with the IEP goals for the child.

Where: The secure digital student information system (SIS) of the school whereby authorized personnel have access to academic records, assessment results and intervention data. Hence there are ways to view his progress over the years by various members of the team including the general education teacher and the special education teacher in particular.

IEP Management System:

What: Henry’s IEP documents which include both his short term and long term as well as progress on IEP goals, data on interventions and notes from the meetings held. Similarly, this system will store the data collection results from Curriculum Based Measurement (CBM) out to other assessments that are related to Henry’s individual educational plan.

Where: The school’s computer based IEP management system, examples are SEIS, PowerSchool Special Programs. These are secure and password protected systems that access is restricted to authorized staff such as the IEP team where the data is needed for abuse and monitoring.

Physical Records (if applicable):

How: Hard copies of behavioral observation logs, checklists for planner usage, the portfolio assessments and the Henry’s weekly self – assessment interviews.

Where: These physical records will be kept in a locked cupboard in the special education resource area or teacher’s office. This facilitates the availability of hard copy data collection tools without risking widening the scope of confidentiality.

Teacher Files:

What: Teacher checklists designed to facilitate participation in class exercises as well as other related assignments and classroom observation reports of students.

Where: These will be housed in the general education and special education teachers’ logbooks (hard copy or electrical) in their storage areas (neat or clean) as per the teacher’s comfort. Digital copies of these records will be saved in a password protected school computers while hard copies kept in an organized manner will be managed in conditions of security.

Shared Drive (if available):

What: Non-critical data that is to be shared and build e.g. information recorded during a team meeting and goals achieved during team planning meetings.

Where: In a secure password protected unit of the school shared drive in which the IEP members can work together to view safely contained and relevant information pertaining to Henry’s progress.

Apart from their physical health safety, the institution also places great importance on the data stored within the folders pertaining to Henry because of the risks that come with no stored teachers data.

IX.           How will these data be communicated to the IEP team?  How will it be shared with parents/guardians? 

Reports about Henry B’s progress will be sent to the IEP team and the related parents/guardians will receive them in other communicable and safe methods to maintain concern and respect of people’s privacy.

Communication with the IEP Team:

Regular IEP Team Meetings:

Frequency: The IEP team will meet at least quarterly or as needed to evaluate Henry’s progress towards the set goals. In these meetings, data will be provided by the teachers and specialists in terms of assessments, behavioral observations, and interventions conducted.

Format: Relevant team members will present various reports (SIS, IEP management system, data, item assessment results, physical files) on Henry’s performance targets based on academic, social and functional skills. Quantitative and qualitative information, such as assessment results and behavior logs which had been collected earlier, will be presented for discussion. The meetings will hence create an opportunity for effective revision on why and when all the changes to Henry B’s IEP will be made.

Communication Tools: Use of digital presentations, data summaries, and projections, promises and use of IEP systems, and sharing of strategies will make sure that all members of the team are in the possession of current information while meetings are being held.

Email and Internal Communication Systems:

Frequency: Communication between the General education teacher, special education teacher, and other specialists will take place on an as need basis during the course of teaching and learning especially when a critical issue has to be addressed. In this case measures will be taken to avoid unnecessary delay in case there was a need to make some changes.

Format: Weekly emails or instant messages will be utilized to communicate and share notifications, progress reports or any updates or informal feedback about the project through school’s internal communication mechanism (Microsoft teams, google work space etc.)

IEP Updates:

Frequency: They will issue Written progress reports concomitant with Report cards issued starting from the second semester whereby every term report targets are illustrated based on the data collected. The reports will explain how well Henry performed toward his goals based on the data collected.

Format: Such reports will be kept in the IEP system and shared with the entire team with emphasis on the goals achieved and corrective actions if necessary changes to the goals are required.

Communication with Parents/Guardians:

Parent-Teacher Conferences and IEP Meetings:

Frequency: Formal IEP meetings in which parent(s)/guardians will participate and also address the issues of henry as an annual meeting but this cannot be less than once a year will take place. Additional conferences can be scheduled as required by the family or team.

Format: In this respect, the IEP team will analyze the assessment data and the results of interventions and achievements regarding the IEP goals. Teachers and specialists will explain the data and all next steps as well. A progress report will be handed, either via postal mail or electronically to the parents.

Collaborative Approach: The IEP meeting will include a section for parents to ask questions and suggest changes to the IEP to ensure that they remain adequately updated and engaged.

Quarterly Progress Reports:

Frequency: Henry’s parents/guardian will on every quarter receive a written report concerning the IEP goals’ progress of Henry. Report cards are provided with these reports, which allow database measurement of progress such as CBM and behavior observations.

Format: For reporting, parents will choose to either receive the reports digitally via emails embed documents or they will be hardcopy sent to them depending on their choice.

Parent Communication (Emails and Phone Calls):

Frequency: Teachers will prefer to call or email parents to provide such updates and address concerns that require immediate attention. This will also apply in cases when the child is doing well, struggling, or there are changes in the intervention plan.

Format: Summary emails or summary phone calls will be provided whenever there are significant changes, interventions will be discussed, or there is a need to arrange a meeting. This is to ensure effective relations between the school and the home.

Online Parent Portal (if available):

Frequency: Parents can find up to date information pertaining to Henry’s assignments, grades and attendance if the school operates an online parent portal, as for instance, PowerSchool or Schoology.

Format: Parents will log in to the secure portal to view any summaries of assessments and assignments, and teacher’s comments relevant to the individual education program (IEP).

Compliance with these structured communication channels by the IEP team aims at enhancing coverage by making sure that all relevant information concerning Henry’s progress is shared openly with other educators, parents inclusive, who work with him to facilitate the acquisition of new skills.

X.             How often will these data be shared and communicated with the IEP team? 

The information pertaining to Henry’s progress will be conveyed to the IEP team and updates shared periodically. This is intended to allow for the establishment of follow up procedures and making decisions regarding Henry in a timely manner. The quantity of such communications will depend upon the kind of data and the extent to which Henry’s progress has taken place. Below is an outline of how often these communications will occur:

1. Quarterly IEP Progress Meetings:

Frequency: Every quarter (about every 9 weeks).

Purpose: Information based on assessment data from tests and other sources will allow the teams and parents around this time to report progress that Henry has made towards his I.E.P goals. The team will make recommendations for any changes that are necessary on his goals, interventions, or services.

Communication Tools: Progress reports, framework assessment summary reports, periodical clinical records, and reports of interventions (in many cases, performance measures (CBM) will be transmitted face to face or electronically within the patient's care meetings.

2. Ongoing Informal Communication:

Frequency: As needed (in days) (weekly or biweekly) depending on Henry’s progress or any other matters that emerge.

Purpose: If any of Henry’s behavioral concerns has improved or if difficulties in his performance has been observed, the general education teacher, special education teacher, and resource teacher will send the message through email or open school messaging system. It also enables addressing those issues as swift as they occur in case interventions are necessary.

Communication tools: Emails, messaging applications, university notice boards, and any other means of communication aimed at informing students and/or teachers about class behaviour, assignment completion, or other related matters.

3. Weekly Progress Monitoring:

Frequency: Weekly.

Purpose: This is to ascertain what gains normally occur and provide the teachers especially the special education teacher and the general education teacher to collaboratively review and discuss important issues concerning Henry’s progress with a particular emphasis on reading comprehension, participation in class, and being organized. There are some strategies that are reviewed and modified on evidence of the need in between the consultations that are aimed at them.

Communication tools: There will be no appropriate channels of reporting weekly reports, logs from behavior observations, behavior checklist, planner checks and contribution of more data in the summary assessment of the CBM and hence such contributions will be done on emails, face-to-face forums or IEP system where the team will be able to see and review.

4. Annual Speech and Language IEP Review Meeting:

Frequency: Once each year.

Purpose: The purpose of this meeting will be formally interactive within the IEP team because, in addition to conducting the formal meeting, participants will also review the IEP of Henry and his progress in every area every three months. During this meeting, all the information gathered during the course of the year will be analyzed, and recommendations about the revisions needed in his IEP in the following school year will be agreed on.

Communication Tools: At the end of the previous year, a detailed report on the annual developments of Henry will be made on that date. This report will be kept in the IEP management system and disseminated to all the members of the team.

5. Emergency or Interim Meetings(as needed):

Frequency: As needed.

Purpose: Should Henry experience major setbacks, or go a long time without any improvement at all, then the case manager may convene an emergency or interim meeting wherein the IEP team will determine the additional assistance he might require or changes in his goals and services. Just as any other, if Henry should progress to the extent that the level of services provided is no longer sufficient to meet his needs, then, considered a level of functioning of the child, a meeting may be called.

Communication Tools: This meeting would be used to present formal updates and data on Henry’s progress along with other team members and continue to discuss recommendations on any revisions to the plan if necessary.

Consistent patterns of communication give the IEP team assurance that Henry’s progress is being tracked regularly and any intended or unintended problems are addressed when required.

XI.           How will you use these data to drive your instructional practices?  

The information that has been gathered regarding Henry’s development and progression will be utilized in transforming and refining the approaches that will be used to address his learning needs in a timely manner during each lesson in order to meet his educational, social and emotional as well as functional goals.

1. Adapting Instruction on the Basis of Assessment Data:

Learning Outcomes, Language Arts- Reading Comprehension: Curriculum Based Measurement (CBM) data every week will show, in terms of reading comprehension, how well Henry is learning how to answer questions focusing on the main idea or supporting details of the text. If Henry is continuously failing to do well on a particular type of passage or question, I will change the mode of teaching him by incorporating more precise reading skills such as guided reading or utilizing visual aids. Alternatively, I may collapse such more complicated contents into smaller chunks to create step ladders to his teaching.

Writing Fluency and Vocabulary: According to his scores on the writing fluency test, I will utilize sentence starters, visual aids, and peer assisted writing activities in addition to other techniques I devise to enhance Henry’s confidence and fluency.

2. Adjusting Group and Individualized Instruction:

Social-Emotional Development: Data obtained about Henry’s class participation during behavioral observation will help determine how I plan group and social activities. When data show that he does not meet these goals, I will order more structured prompts during which he will be given specific tasks during group work or individual assistance will be provided to help him gain confidence in speaking.

Classroom Environment: Finally, since Henry is frequently reported to be doodling or being aloof to the group, I will think about taking them into small, easy discussion groups where he can build his confidence and becoming a group member more effectively with the people he is comfortable with.

3. Changing Overall Intervention Intensity:

Response to Intervention (RTI) Tiers: Weekly and quarterly intervention data concerning Henry’s area of reading and writing (Tier 1, 2 and 3) will help to establish if the current level of intensity of the interventions is appropriate. If there arises such data that indicates Henry is not making progress, I will increase the interventions through more frequent one-on-one tutoring session, or introducing new tools such as phonics programs or multisensory techniques into the interventions.

Immediate Feedback and Adjustments: Progress monitoring is real-time, and students perceive that it is constructive interaction. For instance, if a CBM indicates that Henry has problems with a certain phonetic structure, I will make sure to emphasize that structure on the next session or a subsequent one since the problem will be identified and correlated to his follow up lessons.

4. Data-Driven Differentiation:

Differentiated Instruction: Assessment data will be collected and used for purpose of determining how to vary instruction in the areas of reading, writing, and math. If for instance, Henry is strong in the area of mathematics, and hesitant to reading, I will use his practices of advanced mathematics to challenge him while at the same time offering slow instruction in literacy. This way, Henry is able to achieve the right complexity in all the subjects which boosts his self-assurance in the well-recognized areas and helps skill improvement in the low ones.

Flexible Grouping: This means that as more progress data will be collected, I will be changing the groupings within the classroom. For instance, let’s say because of the data, Henry is able to master certain reading skills then I will consider moving him upwards and placing him inside a group which is doing higher reading tasks while building on him, which has more difficult work.

5. Ongoing Reflection and Instructional Adaptation:

Continuous Reflection: I will analyze data and my instructional practices regularly such that it will be possible to say whether something works and should be kept or omitted. For example, if the data depicts gradual improvement in the area of reading comprehension but growth in vocabulary is becoming a problem, then there is a need to add vocabulary to the lesson plans, through games for example.

Collaborative Planning: I will work with the IEP team to present some data while looking for some further plans to change the instructional method. For example, if there is a mounted portfolio review indicating that there is a shift in organizational skills in Henry, the special education teacher and I may decide to use reminders or computers to assist Henry in meeting the submission requirements.

6. Using Data on Progress to Support Changes in Goals:

Moving Goals When Progress Has Been Made: In the event that Henry has accomplished any of the IEP goals sooner than the set aggression, I will liaise with the IEP team in revising the goals in a manner that they remain effective. Alternatively, if the data suggests that Henry is unable to acquire a given goal, I will engage with the team towards adjusting the goal, or preparing for/helpers towards that goal.

Data for future works: With time, it will be seen that a lot of data which has been collected, about Henry’s learning abilities and difficulties will be useful in the coming days to remember the paradigms of instruction design as well as help him transition to higher grade levels.

In conclusion, the interventions that will be established will be data driven so as to allow the personalization of interventions, use of flexible grouping, self – evaluation and feedback, and making changes to the instructional approaches as well as the IEP goals, all in the effort to avail optimal support to Henry during the school year.

References

Brown-Chidsey, R., & Steege, M. W. (2010). Response to intervention: Principles and strategies for effective practice(2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4

Hosp, M. K., Hosp, J. L., & Howell, K. W. (2016). The ABCs of CBM: A practical guide to curriculum-based measurement (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

Shinn, M. R. (Ed.). (2012). AIMSweb® training workbook: Progress monitoring and RTI system. Pearson.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms (3rd ed.). ASCD.

Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Solution Tree Press.