This webinar challenges current thinking about how to set appropriately ambitious and measurable behavioral goals in light of the 2017 Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District decision by the United States Supreme Court. Dr. Teri A. Marx from the National Center on Intensive Intervention and the PROGRESS Center, as well as Dr. Faith G. Miller from the University of Minnesota—Twin Cities, share how to set ambitious behavioral goals for students by using a valid, reliable progress monitoring measure, and how to write measurable and realistic goals focused on the replacement behavior.
Implementation Guidance and Considerations
In this webinar, Drs. Tessie Rose Bailey and Zach Weingarten from the National Center on Intensive Intervention and the PROGRESS Center, as well as Thom Jones from the Wyoming Department of Education and Justine Essex from Freedom Elementary School in Cheyenne, Wyoming shared how to set ambitious goals for students by selecting a valid, reliable progress monitoring measure, establishing baseline performance, choosing a strategy, and writing a measurable goal.
The purpose of this guide is to provide an overview of behavioral progress monitoring and goal setting to inform data-driven decision making within tiered support models and individualized education programs (IEPs).
The 2017 Supreme Court decision Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District highlighted the importance of monitoring students’ progress toward appropriately challenging individualized educational program (IEP) annual goals and making changes to students’ educational programs when needed. In this guide, we explain how educators can establish IEP goals that are measurable, ambitious, and appropriate in light of the student's circumstances.
In this video, Amy McKenna, a special educator in Bristol Warren Regional School District shares her experience with data-based individualization (DBI). Amy discusses how she learned about DBI, the impact her use of the DBI process had on students she worked with, and how DBI helped changed her practice as a special educator.
This is part 1 of the larger module, “Informal Academic Diagnostic Assessment: Using Data to Guide Intensive Instruction.” This part is intended to provide an overview of common general outcome measures (GOM) used for progress monitoring in reading and mathematics, with guidance on selecting an appropriate measure.
This training module, includes four sections that (a) provide an overview of administering common general outcome measures for progress monitoring in reading and mathematics, (b) review graphed progress monitoring data, and (c) provide guidance on identifying what type of skills the intervention should target to be most effective in reading and mathematics.
This tool is designed to help educators collect and graph academic progress monitoring data across multiple measures as a part of the data-based individualization (DBI) process. This tool allows educators to store data for multiple students (across multiple measures), graph student progress, and set individualized goals for a student on specific measures.
This module focuses on behavioral progress monitoring within the context of the DBI process and addresses: (a) methods available for behavioral progress monitoring, including but not limited to Direct Behavior Rating (DBR), and (b) using progress monitoring data to make decisions about behavioral interventions.
This is part 4 of the module, “Informal Academic Diagnostic Assessment: Using Data to Guide Intensive Instruction.” This part of the module is intended to provide participants with guidance for identifying skills to target in reading and math interventions.