6_wright_RTI_assessm..

Transcription

RTI Toolkit: A Practical Guide for Schools
RTI: Assessment & Progress-Monitoring
Jim Wright, Presenter
August 2009
Hudson River Teacher Center
Yorktown Heights, NY
Jim Wright
364 Long Road
Tully, NY 13159
Email: [email protected]
Resources from Workshop Available at:
http://www.interventioncentral.org/RTIToolkit.php
6
CBM Reading Assessment
www.interventioncentral.org
2
‘RTI-Ready’ Literacy Measures: A Guide for Schools
GR
Initial Sound Fluency (Phonemic Awareness)
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
: 3 minutes Administration: 1:1
Description: The student is shown a collection of 4 pictures, each depicting an object that begins with a different letter sound. The examiner gives the student a
letter sound and asks the student to select from the collection the picture of the object that begins with that letter sound. The process is repeated with new sets of
pictures for the duration of the monitoring period.
Sources for This Measure
DIBELS (https://dibels.uoregon.edu/).[Free]. Administration Range: Pre-K through middle of Kindergarten.
Phoneme Segmentation (Phonemic Awareness)
GR
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
: 1 minute Administration: 1:1
Description: The student is read a list of words containing 2 or more phonemes. For each word, the student is asked to recite all of the phonemes that make up the
word.
• DIBELS (https://dibels.uoregon.edu/).[Free]. Administration Range:
• AimsWeb (http://www.aimsweb.com/). [Pay]. Administration Range:
Middle of Kindergarten through end of Grade 1.
Middle of Kindergarten through middle of Grade 1.
• Easy CBM (http://www.easycbm.com/).[Free]. Administration Range:
Kindergarten and Grade 1.
Letter Naming Fluency (Alphabetics)
GR
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Description: The student is presented with a list of randomly arranged letters. The student names as many letters as possible.
Beginning of Kindergarten through beginning of Grade 1.
• Intervention Central (http://www.rti2.org/rti2/letterNamings).[Free]. Site
Beginning of Kindergarten through beginning of Grade 1.
provides an online application (‘Letter Naming Fluency Probe Generator’)
that creates randomly generated sets of uppercase, lowercase, and
mixed-case letters in English and Spanish for Letter Naming Fluency
assessments.
3
Letter Sound Fluency (Alphabetics)
GR
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Description: The student is presented with a list of randomly arranged letters. The student gives the sounds of as many letters as possible.
• EdCheckup (http://www.edcheckup.com/). [Pay]. Administration Range:
Information unavailable.
Middle of Kindergarten through beginning of Grade 1.
Nonsense Word Fluency (Alphabetics)
GR
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Description: The student is shown a list of short nonsense words. For each word, the student is to read the word or give the sounds that make up the word.
Middle of Kindergarten through middle of Grade 2.
Middle of Kindergarten through end of Grade 1.
Word Identification Fluency (Alphabetics)
GR
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Description: The student is presented with a list of words randomly selected from a larger word list (e.g., Dolch Wordlist). The student reads as many words as
possible.
Kindergarten through Grade 3.
• Intervention Central (http://www.interventioncentral.org).[Free].
Site provides an online application (‘CBM List Builder’) that creates
randomly generated Word Identification Probes based on the Dolch
Wordlist.
4
Oral Reading Fluency (Fluency With Text)
GR
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Description: The student reads aloud from a passage and is scored for fluency and accuracy. Passages are controlled for level of reading difficulty.
Grade 1 through Grade 8.
Middle of Grade 1 through Grade 6.
• iSteep (http://www.isteep.com/).[Pay] Administration Range: Grade 1
through Grade 5 (progress-monitoring)
• Intervention Central (http://www.rti2.org/rti2/oralReadings).[Free].
Site provides an online application that creates an oral reading fluency
probe based on text typed in by the user.
Maze (Comprehension)
GR
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
: 1-3 minutes Administration: Group
Description: The student is given a passage in which every 7th word has been removed. The student reads the passage silently. Each time the student comes to a
removed word, the student chooses from among 3 replacement words: the correct word and two distractors. The student circles the replacement word that he or
she believes best restores the meaning of the text.
• AimsWeb (http://www.aimsweb.com/). [Pay] Administration Range:
• iSteep (http://www.isteep.com/). {Pay] Administration Range: Grade 1
through Grade 6 (progress-monitoring)
• Intervention Central (http://www.rti2.org/rti2/mazes).[Free].
Site provides an online application that creates a maze passage probe
based on text typed in by the user.
5
Evaluate the ‘RTI Readiness’ of Your School’s Academic Measures
Directions. Use the questionnaire below to evaluate the ‘RTI readiness’’ of any academic measure. Note that
questions on the form are hierarchically organized: If items earlier in the survey are endorsed ‘no’, the measure
probably cannot be used for more advanced applications that appear later in the survey. Use the table Interpreting the
Results of This Survey below to identify the appropriate uses for your measure in the RTI problem-solving process..
Name of Measure: _________________________________________________________________________________
Item #
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Progress-Monitoring
Y
Goal-Setting
NO
Baseline
YES
Background
Rating Item
Background: Validity.
1. Content Validity. Does the measure provide meaningful information about the
academic skill of interest?
2. Convergent Validity. Does the measure yield results that are generally consistent
with other well-regarded tests designed to measure the same academic skill?
3. Predictive Validity. Does the measure predict student success on an important
future test, task, or other outcome?
Baseline: Reliability.
4. Test-Retest/Alternate-Form Reliability. Does the measure have more than one
version or form? If two alternate, functionally equivalent versions of the measure are
administered to the student, does the student perform about the same on both?
5. Interrater Reliability. When two different evaluators observe the same student’s
performance and independently use the measure to rate that performance, do they
come up with similar ratings?
Benchmarks & Goal-Setting
6. Performance Benchmarks. Does the measure include benchmarks or other
performance criteria that indicate typical or expected student performance in the
academic skill?
7. Goal-Setting. Does the measure include guidelines for setting specific goals for
improvement?
Progress-Monitoring and Instructional Impact
8. Repeated Assessments. Does the measure have sufficient alternative forms to
assess the student weekly for at least 20 weeks?
9. Equivalent Alternate Forms. Are the measure’s repeated assessments (alternative
forms) equivalent in content and level of difficulty?
10. Sensitive to Short-Term Student Gains. Is the measure sensitive to short-term
improvements in student academic performance?
11. Positive Impact on Learning. Does research show that the measure gives teachers
information that helps them to make instructional decisions that positively impact
student learning?
Interpreting the Results of This Survey of Your Academic Measure:
• YES to Items 1-3. Background. The measure gives valid general information about the student’s academic skills
and performance. While not sufficient, the data can be interpreted as part of a larger collection of student data.
• YES to Items 4-5. Baseline. The measure gives reliable results when given by different people and at different
times of the day or week. Therefore, the measure can be used to collect a current ‘snapshot’ of the student’s
academic skills prior to starting an intervention.
• YES to Items 6-7. Goal-Setting. The measure includes standards (e.g., benchmarks or performance criteria) for
‘typical’ student performance (e.g., at a given grade level) and guidelines for estimating rates of student progress.
Schools can use the measure to assess the gap in performance between a student and grade level peers—and
also to estimate expected rates of student progress during an intervention.
• YES to Items 8-11. Progress Monitoring. The measure has the appropriate qualities to be used to track student
progress in response to an intervention.
6
Comparing Reading Measures for ‘RTI Readiness’
School: _________________________________ Date: _______________ Person(s) Completing Ratings: __________________________________________
Phonemic Awareness/Alphabetics
Fluency With Text
Vocabulary
Comprehension
Directions: Use this form to compare reading measures in your school for qualities of ‘RTI readiness’. Put an ‘X’ in a column if the measure has that measurement quality.
(Consult the form Evaluate the ‘RTI Readiness’ of Your School’s Academic Measures for a more detailed description of each measurement quality.)
Background: Validity
Name of Measure
Baseline: Reliability
Content
Validity.
Convergent
Validity
Predictive
Validity
Test-Retest/
Alternate Form
Reliability
1
2
3
4
Goal-Setting
Progress-Monitoring
Interrater
Reliability
Performance
Benchmarks
GoalSetting
Repeated
Assessments
Equivalent
Alternate
Forms
5
6
7
8
9
Sensitive to
Short-Term
Student
Gains
Positive
Impact on
Learning
10
11
7
Administration of CBM reading probes
The examiner and the student sit across the table from each other. The
examiner hands the student the unnumbered copy of the CBM reading passage. The
examiner takes the numbered copy of the passage, shielding it from the student's
view.
The examiner says to the student:
When I say, 'start,' begin reading aloud at the top of this page.
Read across the page [demonstrate by pointing]. Try to read each
word. If you come to a word you don't know, I'll tell it to you.
Be sure to do your best reading. Are there any questions?
[Pause] Start.
The examiner begins the stopwatch when the student says the first word. If the
student does not say the initial word within 3 seconds, the examiner says the word
and starts the stopwatch. As the student reads along in the text, the examiner
records any errors by marking a slash (/) through the incorrectly read word. If the
student hesitates for 3 seconds on any word, the examiner says the word and marks
it as an error. At the end of 1 minute, the examiner says, Stop and marks the
student's concluding place in the text with a bracket ( ] ).
Scoring
Reading fluency is calculated by first determining the total words attempted
within the timed reading probe and then deducting from that total the number of
incorrectly read words.
The following scoring rules will aid the instructor in marking the reading
probe:
Words read correctly are scored as correct:
--Self-corrected words are counted as correct.
--Repetitions are counted as correct.
--Examples of dialectical speech are counted as correct.
--Inserted words are ignored.
Mispronunciations are counted as errors.
Example
Text: The small gray fox ran to the cover of the trees.
Student: "The smill gray fox ran to the cover of the trees."
Substitutions are counted as errors.
8
Example
Text: When she returned to the house, Grandmother called for Franchesca.
Student: "When she returned to the home, Grandmother called for
Franchesca.
Omissions are counted as errors.
Example
Text: Anna could not compete in the last race.
Student: "Anna could not in the last race."
Transpositions of word-pairs are counted as 1 error.
Example
Text: She looked at the bright, shining face of the sun.
Student: "She looked at the shining bright face of the sun."
Words read to the student by the examiner after 3 seconds have
gone by are counted as errors.
9
Student Record Form: Curriculum-Based Measurement: Oral Reading Fluency
Student Name: ____________________________ Grade/Classroom: ________________ Rdng Skill Level: _________
Step 1: Conduct a Survey-Level Assessment: Use this
section to record the student’s reading rates in progressively
more difficult material.
Date:_______ Book/Reading Level: ____________
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
C. ______
______
______
______
Table 1: CBM Oral Reading Fluency Norms (Hasbrouck &
Tindal, 2005)
Start-of-Yr/Fall
Mid-Yr/Winter
End-of-Yr/Spring
GR 25%ile 50%ile 25%ile 50%ile 25%ile
50%ile
1
--12
13
28
53
2
25
51
42
72
61
89
3
44
71
62
92
78
107
4
68
94
68
94
98
123
5
85
110
99
127
109
139
6
98
127
111
140
122
150
7
102
128
109
136
123
150
8
106
133
115
146
124
151
Note: To interpret student reading fluency probe scores for any
grade level text (Shapiro, 2008):
• below 25th percentile = frustration range
• between 25th - 50th percentiles = instructional range
• above the 50th percentile = mastery range
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
Step 2: Compute a Student Reading Goal
1. At what grade or book level will the student be monitored?
(Refer to results of Step 1:Survey-Level Assessment)
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
3.
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
C. ______
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
_______________________________________
What is the student’s baseline reading rate (# correctly read
words per min)? ________CRW Per Min
When is the start date to
begin monitoring
the student in reading? _____ / _____ / _____
When is the end date to
stop monitoring
How many instructional weeks are there between the start
and end dates? (Round to the nearest week if necessary):
_______ Instructional Weeks
What do you predict the student’s average increase in
correctly read words per minute will be for each instructional
week of the monitoring period? (See Table 2):
_________ Weekly Increase in CRW Per Min
What will the student’s predicted CRW gain in reading
fluency be at the end of monitoring?
(Multiply Item 5 by Item 6): ______________
What will the student’s predicted reading rate be at the end
of the monitoring
period? (Add Items 2 & 7): ______ CRW Per Min
References
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., Walz, L., & Germann, G. (1993). Formative evaluation of academic progress: How much growth
can we expect? School Psychology Review, 22, 27-48.
Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. (2005). Oral reading fluency: 90 years of measurement. Eugene, OR: Behavioral Research & Teaching.
Retrieved from http://www.brtprojects.org/tech_reports.php
Shapiro, E. S. (2008). Best practices in setting progress-monitoring goals for academic skill improvement. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes
(Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 141-157). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
10
Student Name: ____________________________________________ Grade/Classroom: ______________________________
6.
Baseline 1
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
7.
Baseline 2
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
8.
Baseline 3
Step 3: Collect Baseline Data: Give 3 CBM reading assessments
within a one-week period using monitoring-level probes.
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
Date:_______ Book/Reading Level: ___________
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
9.
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
10.
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
11.
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
12.
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
C. ______
Step 4: Complete CBM Progress-Monitoring Weekly or More
Frequently: Record the results of regular monitoring of the
student’s progress in reading fluency.
1.
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
2.
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
3.
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
C. ______
4.
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
______
______
______
C. ______
5.
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
B. ______
C. ______
______
______
______
Table 2: Predictions for Rates of Reading Growth by Grade
(Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, Walz, & Germann, 1993)
Increase in Correctly Read Words Per Minute for Each Instructional
Week
Realistic Weekly Goal
Grade Level
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.85
0.5
0.3
Ambitious Weekly
Goal
3.0
2.0
1.5
1.1
0.8
0.65
11
CBA Reading Probes: Harcourt Brace Signatures Series Book 4-1
Rare Finds
One hundred years ago in Paris, when theaters and music halls
11
drew traveling players from all over the world, the best place to
23
stay was at the widow Gateau’s, a boardinghouse on English
33
Street. Acrobats, jugglers, actors, and mimes from as far away
43
as Moscow and New York reclined on the widow’s feather
53
mattresses and devoured her kidney stews. Madame Gateau
61
worked hard to make her guests comfortable, and so did her
72
daughter, Mirette. The girl was an expert at washing linens,
82
chopping leeks, paring potatoes, and mopping floors. She was
91
a good listener too. Nothing pleased her more than to overhear
102
the vagabond players tell of their adventures in this town and
113
that along the road.
117
Harcourt Brace Signatures Series 1999
Level 4-1 Rare Finds
Mirette on the High Wire pp. 87
Special Education Department
Syracuse City School District Syracuse, NY
12
Rare Finds
One hundred years ago in Paris, when theaters and music halls
drew traveling players from all over the world, the best place to
stay was at the widow Gateau’s, a boardinghouse on English
Street. Acrobats, jugglers, actors, and mimes from as far away
as Moscow and New York reclined on the widow’s feather
mattresses and devoured her kidney stews. Madame Gateau
worked hard to make her guests comfortable, and so did her
daughter, Mirette. The girl was an expert at washing linens,
chopping leeks, paring potatoes, and mopping floors. She was
a good listener too. Nothing pleased her more than to overhear
the vagabond players tell of their adventures in this town and
that along the road.
Mirette on the High Wire pp. 87
13
Rare Finds
Someone is lost in the woods. He might be hurt, or the weather
13
could turn bad. It is important to find him as fast as possible.
26
But he didn’t follow a trail, and footprints don’t show on the
38
forest floor. What to do? Call in the search and rescue dogs.
50
Dogs have a very fine sense of smell. They can find people lost
63
by following their scents, because each person has his or her
74
own, unique scent. Panda is a Newfoundland dog trained to
84
locate lost people. She and her owner, Susie Foley, know how
95
to search through the woods, under the snow, or in the water.
107
Hugger to the Rescue pp. 143-144
14
Rare Finds
In the busy rain forest of Malaysia, a grasshopper leaps into a
12
spray of orchids. Suddenly, one of the “flowers” turns on the
23
grasshopper. An orchid mantis, with wings like petals, grips it
33
tightly. For the grasshopper, there will be no escape. The
43
orchid mantis is a master of camouflage – the art of hiding while
55
in plain sight. Camouflage enables predators like the orchid
64
mantis to hide while they lie in wait for their prey. For other
77
animals, camouflage is a method of protection from their
86
enemies. Animals blend into the background in several ways.
95
Their colors and patterns may match their surroundings.
103
Hiding Out pp. 270
15
CBM Reading: Graphing Exercise for Jared M.: 4th-Grader
Background. Your RTI Problem-Solving Team has completed a CBM survey-level screening in
reading for Jared M., a 4th grader. According to his teacher, Jared reads at the beginning 2nd-grade
level. An initial RTI Team meeting is held on Monday, January 20th. At that meeting, an
intervention is designed in which Jared will be paired with a volunteer adult tutor for a reading
intervention that takes place daily for 30-minute sessions using the Paired Reading strategy. Your
team schedules a follow-up RTI Team meeting for Monday, March 10th, six instructional weeks
from the date of the initial meeting.
CBM Practice Items. Attached is a CBM Student Record that contains Jared’s CBM reading data.
Complete the practice items below to gain experience in interpreting and charting CBM data.
1. Survey-Level Assessment. On Jared’s attached CBM Student Record Form, review the
Survey-Level assessment results. For each level of CBM probe administered, circle the
median Correctly Read Words (CRWs), Errors (E), and Percentage of Correctly Read Words
(%CRWs). Consult Table 1 on the Record Form to identify the student’s Mastery, Instructional,
and Frustration levels of reading.
Note: Use the “Mid-Yr/Winter’ Norms from table 1 to interpret Jared’s survey-level assessment
results. To interpret Jared’s reading fluency probe scores for any grade level text (Shapiro,
2008), use these guidelines:
• Scores below the 25th percentile = frustration range
• Scores between 25th - 50th percentiles = instructional range
• Scores above the 50th percentile = mastery range
2.
Set up the graph. At the top of your monitoring graph, put in these date-spans for each of the
instructional weeks during which Jared will be monitored:
Baseline: 1/13-1/17
Week 1: 1/20-1/24
Week 2: 1/27-1/31
Week 3: 2/3-2/7
Week 4: 2/10-2/14
Week 5: 2/24-2/28
Week 6: 3/3-3/7
Week 7: 3/10-3/14
Week 8: 3/17-3/21
Week 9: 3/24-3/28
Week 10: 3/31-4/4
Week 11: 4/7-4/11
Week 12: 4/14-4/18
3. Determine & chart the student’s baseline reading rate. On the Record Form, review Jared’s
Baseline assessment information.
• Circle the median CRW and E for each of the Baseline observations.
• On the progress-monitoring graph, chart the median CRWs and Es for all 3 observations.
• Of the Baseline values that you charted, disregard the highest and lowest CRWs. The
middle CRW should be assumed to be the best estimate of the student’s starting, or
baseline, reading rate. Circle this middle (‘Baseline’) data point on your chart.
4. Set a performance goal. To compute Jared’s performance goal in reading:
• Use Table 2 on the Record Form to identify the rate of progress that Jared should make
each week in goal-level (3rd-Grade) reading material.
16
•
•
You will recall that your RTI Team has decided to monitor Jared’s reading for six weeks
before holding a follow-up meeting. To compute how much Jared’s reading rate should
increase in that time, multiply his expected weekly progress by the number of weeks that
he will be monitored.
Add Jared’s expected reading progress to his baseline reading rate. This combined figure
is Jared’s reading goal.
5. Plot the ‘Aim-Line’. To graph a 6-week ‘aim-line’:
• Draw a vertical dividing line (‘start-line’) at the point where the intervention will begin
(start of Week 1).
• Draw a second dividing line on the graph (‘end-line’) that marks the conclusion of six
weeks of monitoring (end of Week 6).
• On the start-line, mark an ‘X’ at the point that is equal to the value of your circled
baseline data point.
• Mark Jared’s reading goal with an ‘X’ at the appropriate spot on the end-line.
• Now draw a straight line between the start-line and end-line ‘X’s. This is your chart’s
aim-line.
6. Plot Jared’s progress-monitoring data. Review Jared’s CBM data for the first six weeks of
progress-monitoring. Circle the median CRWs and Es and plot them on the chart. What
conclusions do you draw from the chart? Based on these data, should the RTI Team
recommend changing Jared’s intervention? Keep it in place with no changes? Why?
7. Continue with progress monitoring. Assume that your RTI Team met for the follow-up
meeting and decided to keep the current intervention in place because it appears to be
effective. The team plans to monitor for another 6 weeks.
• Compute a new baseline for Jared by looking at his most recent 3 CRW data points and
circling the median value. Compute how much Jared’s reading rate should increase after 6
additional weeks of intervention and add this amount to his new baseline reading rate. This
is Jared’s revised reading goal.
• Set up a new ‘aim-line’:
o Draw a vertical dividing line (‘start-line’) at the point where the revised intervention
begins (start of week 7).
o Draw a second dividing line on the graph (‘end-line’) that marks the conclusion of 6
more weeks of monitoring (end of Week 12).
o On the new start-line, mark an ‘X’ at the point that is equal to the value of the circled
baseline data point.
o Next, mark Jared’s revised reading goal with an ‘X’ at the appropriate spot on the endline.
o Now draw a straight line between the start-line and end-line ‘X’s. This is your chart’s
revised aim-line.
8. Plot the rest of Jared’s progress-monitoring data. Identify Jared’s ‘median’ reading data for
the final 6 weeks of progress-monitoring (see Weeks 7-12 on the Student Record Form). Plot
these values on the chart. What conclusions do you draw from the chart? Based on these data,
should the RTI Team recommend changing Jared’s intervention? Keep it in place with no
changes? Why?
17
References
Shapiro, E. S. (2008). Best practices in setting progress-monitoring goals for academic skill
improvement. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 141157). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
18
Student Record Form: Curriculum-Based Measurement: Oral Reading Fluency
4/Mrs. Legione Rdng Skill Level: _________
Mid-Gr.2
Jared M. __________________ Grade/Classroom: Gr.
Student Name: __________
________________
Step 1: Conduct a Survey-Level Assessment: Use this
section to record the student’s reading rates in progressively
more difficult material.
Th 12/5 Book/Reading Level: ____________
GR 2-Bk 2-P 1
Date:_______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. __77
____
__3____
__74
____
_96
_____
64
4
60
94 __
______
______
____
B. ______
99 __
____
__1____
__78
____
____
C. __79
Th 12/5 Book/Reading Level: _GR
3-Bk 1-P1
Date:_______
___________
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
103
2
101
A. ______
______
______
__98
____
84
3
81
______
______
__96
____
B. ______
2 __
C. ___78
___
____
___76
___
__97
____
12/5 Book/Reading Level: ____________
GR 3-Bk 2-P1
Date:_Th
______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
62
4
58
A. ______
______
______
__94
____
4 __
___
____
___77
___
__95
____
B. ___81
73
3
70
96
______
______
______
C. ______
12/5 Book/Reading Level: ___________
GR 4-P1 _
Date:_Th
______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
58
5
53
91 __
A. ______
______
______
____
61 _
__5____
___56
___
__92
____
B. _____
64
6
58
______
______
__91
____
C. ______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
D. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
E. ______
______
______
______
F. ______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
G. ______
______
______
______
H. ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
I. ______
Table 1: CBM Oral Reading Fluency Norms (Hasbrouck &
Tindal, 2005)
Start-of-Yr/Fall
Mid-Yr/Winter
End-of-Yr/Spring
GR 25%ile 50%ile 25%ile 50%ile 25%ile
50%ile
1
--12
13
28
53
2
25
51
42
72
61
89
3
44
71
62
92
78
107
4
68
94
68
94
98
123
5
85
110
99
127
109
139
6
98
127
111
140
122
150
7
102
128
109
136
123
150
8
106
133
115
146
124
151
Note: To interpret student reading fluency probe scores for any
grade level text (Shapiro, 2008):
• below 25th percentile = frustration range
• between 25th - 50th percentiles = instructional range
• above the 50th percentile = mastery range
Step 2: Compute a Student Reading Goal
1. At what grade or book level will the student be monitored?
(Refer to results of Step 1:Survey-Level Assessment)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
_______________________________________
What is the student’s baseline reading rate (# correctly read
words per min)? ________CRW Per Min
When is the start date to
begin monitoring
When is the end date to
stop monitoring
How many instructional weeks are there between the start
and end dates? (Round to the nearest week if necessary):
_______ Instructional Weeks
What do you predict the student’s average increase in
correctly read words per minute will be for each instructional
week of the monitoring period? (See Table 2):
_________ Weekly Increase in CRW Per Min
What will the student’s predicted CRW gain in reading
fluency be at the end of monitoring?
(Multiply Item 5 by Item 6): ______________
What will the student’s predicted reading rate be at the end
of the monitoring
period? (Add Items 2 & 7): ______ CRW Per Min
References
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., Walz, L., & Germann, G. (1993). Formative evaluation of academic progress: How much growth
can we expect? School Psychology Review, 22, 27-48.
Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. (2005). Oral reading fluency: 90 years of measurement. Eugene, OR: Behavioral Research & Teaching.
Retrieved from http://www.brtprojects.org/tech_reports.php
Shapiro, E. S. (2008). Best practices in setting progress-monitoring goals for academic skill improvement. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school
psychology V (pp. 141-157). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
19
Student Name: _____________Jared M.________ Grade/Classroom: ______Gr 4/Mrs. Legione_________
Baseline 1
Step 2: Collect Baseline Data: Give 3 CBM reading assessments
within a one-week period using monitoring-level probes.
Th 12/5 Book/Reading Level:_Gr
3: Bk 2-P1
Date:_______
_________
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
58
62
4
A. ______
______
______
___94
___
77 _
4 __
B. ___81
___
____
_____
___95
___
70 _
3 __
___
____
_____
___96
___
C. ___73
Baseline 3
Baseline 2
M 12/9
Date:_______ Book/Reading Level: _Gr 3: Bk 2-P2__
TRW
E
CRW
E
___3___
___2___
___2___
7.
%CRW
A. ___56
___
__4____
___52
___
__93
____
70
3
67
96
B. ______
______
______
______
4 __
___
____
___77
___
__95
____
C. ___81
12/11 Book/Reading Level: _Gr 3: Bk 2-P3__
Date:W
_______
TRW
A. ___75
___
B. ___71
___
___
C. ___76
F 3/7
CRW
___72
___
69
______
74
______
%CRW
__96
____
97 _
_____
97 _
_____
8.
9.
Step 3: Complete CBM Progress-Monitoring Weekly or More
Frequently: Record the results of regular monitoring of the
student’s progress in reading fluency.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1/22 Book/Reading Level: ____________
3 Gr Bk 2-P4
Date:_W
______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
89
3
86
A. ______
______
______
__97
____
95 _
___
___4___
___71
___
_____
B. ___75
74
4
70
95 _
______
______
_____
C. ______
rd
“
1/29 Book/Reading Level: __________
–P5 __
Date:_W
______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ___69
___
__1____
___68
___
__99
____
106
3
103
97
______
______
______
B. ______
2 __
___
____
___77
___
__97
____
C. ___79
2/3 Book/Reading Level: _________
″-P6 ___
Date:_M______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ___80
___
__3____
___77
___
__96
____
78
3
75
96
______
______
______
B. ______
___
__4____
___74
___
__95
____
C. ___78
2/13Book/Reading Level: _________
″-P7 ___
Date:_Th
______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
77
2
75
A. ______
______
______
__97
____
79
1
78
______
______
__99
____
B. ______
67
6
61
91
______
______
______
C. ______
Th 2/27 Book/Reading Level: ________
″-P8____
Date:_______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
75 _
74 _
99 __
A. _____
__1____
_____
____
80 _
__1____
___79
___
__99
____
B. _____
81
2
79
98
______
______
______
C. ______
″-P9
Book/Reading Level: ____________
6. Date:_TR______
W
E
CRW
%CRW
10.
11.
12.
72 _
69 _
A. _____
__3____
_____
__96
____
___
__1____
___82
___
__99
____
B. ___83
C. ___85
___
__1____
___84
___
__99
____
M 3/10 Book/Reading Level: __________
″-P10 __
Date:_______
TRW
A. ____87
__
__
B. ____87
C. ____82
__
E
2_
_____
____3__
____4__
CRW
____85
__
____84
__
____78
__
%CRW
___98
___
97
______
95
______
″-P11 __
Date:_F______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ____89
__
___1___
____88
__
___99
___
4_
__
_____
____82
__
___95
___
B. ____86
82
4
78
95
______
______
______
C. ______
″-P12 __
Date:_T______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
3_
A. ____82
__
_____
____79
__
___96
___
1_
__
_____
____69
__
___99
___
B. ____70
100
2
98
98
______
______
______
C. ______
″-P13 __
Date:_W
______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
3_
A. ____89
__
_____
____86
__
___97
___
63
3
60
95
______
______
______
B. ______
__
____3__
____89
__
___97
___
C. ____92
4/8 Book/Reading Level: ___________
″-P14 _
Date:_T______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
A. ____97
__
___3___
____94
__
___97
___
105
6
99
94
______
______
______
B. ______
2_
__
_____
____87
__
___98
___
C. ____89
T 4/15 Book/Reading Level: __________
″-P15 __
Date:_______
TRW
E
CRW
%CRW
99
4
95
A. ______
______
______
___96
___
103
6
97
______
______
___94
___
B. ______
2_
C. ____78
__
_____
____76
__
___97
___
Table 2: Predictions for Rates of Reading Growth by Grade
(Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, Walz, & Germann, 1993)
Increase in Correctly Read Words Per Minute for Each Instructional
Week
Realistic Weekly Goal
Grade Level
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.85
0.5
0.3
Ambitious Weekly
Goal
3.0
2.0
1.5
1.1
0.8
0.65
20
Student: _____________________ Classrm/Grade: ________________ Monitoring Level: ____________
WEEK 1 WEEK 2
BASELINE
______-____ ___-___ ___-___
______-____ ___-___ ___-___
WEEK 3 WEEK 4
___-___ ___-___
___-___ ___-___
WEEK 5
___-___
___-___
WEEK 6 WEEK 7
___-___ ___-___
___-___ ___-___
WEEK 8 WEEK 9
___-___ ___-___
___-___ ___-___
WEEK 10 WEEK 11 WEEK 12
___-___ ___-___ ___-___
___-___
___-___ ___-___
100
80
60
40
Direct assessment and intervention (2nd ed ) New York: Guilford
120
(Grade Norms from Shapiro, E. S. (1996). Academic skills problems:
Correctly Read Words Per Minute
140
20
0
BASELI
NE
M T W T F M T W TF M T W T F M T W TF M T W T F M T W TF M T W T F M T W TF M T W T F M T W TF M T W T F M T W TF
Instructional Days
Reading 140-12 ©2003 Jim Wright www.interventioncentral.org
21
CBM Math Assessment
22
RTI-Ready Methods to Monitor Student
Academics
Math: Early Math Fluency
Quantity Discrimination Fluency
: 1 minute
Administration: 1:1
Description: The student is given a sheet with number pairs. For each number pair, the student
must name the larger of the two numbers.
Where to get materials:
• AimsWeb http://www.aimsweb.com/
• Intervention Central http://www.interventioncentral.org (Numberfly Early Math Fluency Probe
Creator)
Missing Number Fluency
: 1 minute
Administration: 1:1
Description: The student is given a sheet containing numerous sets of 3 or 4 sequential numbers.
For each number series, one of the numbers is missing. The student must name the missing
number.
Creator)
Number Identification Fluency
: 1 minute
Administration: 1:1
Description: The student is given a sheet with numbers in random order. The student gives the
name of each number.
Creator)
Oral Counting Fluency
: 1 minute
Administration: 1:1
Description: The student counts aloud as many words in sequence as possible, starting from zero
or one.
• The student does not require materials for this assessment. The examiner can make a sheet
with numbers listed sequentially from 0-100 to record those numbers that the student can
recite in sequence.
23
Math: Computation
Math Computation Fluency
: 2 minutes
Administration: Group
Description: The student is given a worksheet with single-skill or mixed-skill math computation
problems. The student works independently to complete as many problems as possible. The
student receives credit for each correct digit appearing in his or her answer.
• Intervention Central http://www.interventioncentral.org (Math Worksheet Generator)
• SuperKids http://www.superkids.com/aweb/tools/math/ (This website allows you to create
math computation worksheets for more advanced areas such as fractions, percentages,
decimals, and more)
Math: Applied Problems
Math Concepts & Applications
: 6-8 minutes
Description: Students are given assessment booklets with a mix of applied problem types
appropriate to that grade level. (Assessments are available for grades 2-6). A mix of applied
problems is included in each assessment, sampling the typical math curriculum for the student’s
grade (e.g., money skills, time-telling, etc.)
• MBSP: Monitoring Basic Skills Progress: Basic Math Kit – Second Edition developed by Drs.
Lynn & Dough Fuchs, Vanderbilt University.
Available through Pro-Ed: http://www.proedinc.com/
Math: Vocabulary
Math Vocabulary Probes (Howell,
: 5 minutes
2008)
Description: Students are given a math vocabulary probe consisting of 20 vocabulary items. There
are two versions commonly used: (1) The sheet contains vocabulary terms on one side of the
sheet and the definitions of those terms—in scrambled order—on the other. The student connects
term to its correct definition; (2) The sheet contains only definitions. The student must read each
definition and write the correct corresponding vocabulary term.
• Math vocabulary probes are developed by the school. Teachers create ‘vocabulary pools’ that
contain the key vocabulary items to be included in probes. From that larger pool, vocabulary
items are randomly sampled to create individual probes.
References
Hosp, M.K., Hosp, J. L., & Howell, K. W. (2007). The ABCs of CBM. New York: Guilford
Howell, K. W. (2008). Best practices in curriculum-based evaluation and advanced reading. In A.
Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 397-418). Bethesda, MD:
National Association of School Psychologists.
24
Curriculum-Based Measurement Administration & Scoring
Guidelines for Math Computation
CBM MATH
Description
There are 2 types of CBM math probes, single-skill worksheets (those containing like problems)
and multiple-skill worksheets (those containing a mix of problems requiring different math operations).
Single-skill probes give instructors good information about students' mastery of particular problem-types,
while multiple-skill probes allow the teacher to test children's math competencies on a range of
computational objectives during a single CBM session.
Both types of math probes can be administered either individually or to groups of students. The
examiner hands the worksheet(s) out to those students selected for assessment. Next, the examiner reads
aloud the directions for the worksheet. Then the signal is given to start, and students proceed to complete
Figure 5: A Sampling of Math Computational Goals for Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication, and Division (from Wright,
2002).
Addition
Two 1-digit numbers: sums to 10
Two 3-digit numbers: no regrouping
1- to 2-digit number plus 1- to 2-digit number: regrouping
Subtraction
Two 1-digit numbers: 0 to 9
2-digit number from a 2-digit number: no regrouping
2-digit number from a 2-digit number: regrouping
Multiplication
Multiplication facts: 0 to 9
2-digit number times 1-digit number: no regrouping
3-digit number times 1-digit number: regrouping
Division
Division facts: 0 to 9
2-digit number divided by 1-digit number: no remainder
2-digit number divided by 1-digit number: remainder
Wright, J. (2002) Curriculum-Based Assessment Math Computation Probe Generator: Multiple-Skill Worksheets in
Mixed Skills. Retrieved August 13, 2006, from http://www.lefthandlogic.com/htmdocs/tools/mathprobe/allmult.shtml
as many items as possible within 2 minutes. The examiner collects the worksheets at the end of the
assessment for scoring.
Creating a measurement pool for math computational probes
The first task of the instructor in preparing CBM math probes is to define the computational skills to
be assessed. Many districts have adopted their own math curriculum that outlines the various computational
25
skills in the order in which they are to be taught. Teachers may also review scope-and-sequence charts that
accompany math textbooks when selecting CBM computational objectives.
The order in which math computational skills are taught, however, probably does not vary a great
deal from district to district. Figure 5 contains sample computation goals for addition, subtraction,
multiplication, and division.
Instructors typically are interested in employing CBM to monitor students' acquisition of skills in
which they are presently being instructed. However, teachers may also want to use CBM as a skills checkup to assess those math objectives that students have been taught in the past or to "preview" a math
group's competencies in computational material that will soon be taught.
Preparing CBM Math Probes
After computational objectives have been selected, the instructor is ready to prepare math probes.
The teacher may want to create single-skills probes, multipleskill probes, or both types of CBM math
worksheets.
Creating the Single-skill Math Probe
As the first step in putting together a single-skill math probe, the teacher will select one
computational objective as a guide. The measurement pool, then, will consist of problems randomly
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 6: Example of a single-skill math probe: Three to five 3- and 4-digit numbers: no regrouping
+
+
|
|
|
|
|
105
600
293
2031
+ 531
+ 2322
|
|
|
|
|
+
+
111
717
260
|
|
|
|
|
634
+ 8240
+ 203
|
|
|
|
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
constructed that conform to the computational objective chosen. For example, the instructor may select the
following computational objective (Figure 6) as the basis for a math probe.
The teacher would then construct a series of problems that match the computational goal, as in Figure 6. In
general, single-skill math probes should contain between 80 and 200 problems, and worksheets should
have items on both the front and back of the page. Adequate space should also be left for the student's
computations, especially with more complex problems such as long division.
Creating the Multiple-skill Math Probe
To assemble a multiple-skill math probe, the instructor will first select the range of math operations
and of problem-types that will make up the probe. The teacher will probably want to consult the district math
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 7: Example of a multiple-skill math probe:
Division: 3-digit number divided by 1-digit number: no remainder
Subtraction: 2-digit number from a 2-digit number: regrouping
Multiplication” 3-digit number times 1-digit number: no regrouping
Division: Two 3-digit numbers: no regrouping
9/431
|
|
|
|
|
20
-18
|
|
|
|
|
113
x 2
|
|
|
|
|
+
+
+
106
172
200
600
|
|
|
|
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26
curriculum, appropriate scope –and sequence charts, or the computational-goal chart included in this
manual when selecting the kinds of problems to include in the multiple-skill probe. Once the computational
objectives have been chosen, the teacher can make up a worksheet of mixed math facts conforming to
those objectives. Using our earlier example, the teacher who wishes to estimate the proficiency of his 4thgrade math group may decide to create a multiple-skills CBM probe. He could choose to sample only those
problem-types that his students have either mastered or are presently being instructed in. Those skills are
listed in Figure 7, with sample problems that might appear on the worksheet of mixed math facts.
Materials needed for giving CBM math probes
Student copy of CBM math probe (either single- or multiple-skill)
Stopwatch
Pencils for students
Administration of CBM math probes
The examiner distributes copies of one or more math probes to all the students in the group. (Note:
These probes may also be administered individually). The examiner says to the students:
The sheets on your desk are math facts.
If the students are to complete a single-skill probe, the examiner then says: All the problems are [addition or
subtraction or multiplication or division] facts.
If the students are to complete a multiple-skill probe, the examiner then says: There are several types of
problems on the sheet. Some are addition, some are subtraction, some are multiplication, and some are
division [as appropriate]. Look at each problem carefully before you answer it.
When I say 'start,' turn them over and begin answering the problems. Start on the first problem on the left on
the top row [point]. Work across and then go to the next row. If you can't answer the problem, make an 'X'
on it and go to the next one. If you finish one side, go to the back. Are there any questions? Say, Start.
The examiner starts the stopwatch. While the students are completing worksheets, the examiner and any
other adults assisting in the assessment circulate around the room to ensure that students are working on
the correct sheet, that they are completing problems in the correct order (rather than picking out only the
easy items), and that they have pencils, etc.
After 2 minutes have passed, the examiner says Stop. CBM math probes are collected for scoring.
Scoring
Traditional approaches to computational assessment usually give credit for the total number of
correct answers appearing on a worksheet. If the answer to a problem is found to contain one or more
incorrect digits, that problem is marked wrong and receives no credit. In contrast to this all-or-nothing
marking system, CBM assigns credit to each individual correct digit appearing in the solution to a math fact.
On the face of it, a math scoring system that awards points according to the number of correct
digits may appear unusual, but this alternative approach is grounded in good academic-assessment
research and practice. By separately scoring each digit in the answer of a computation problem, the
instructor is better able to recognize and to give credit for a student's partial math competencies. Scoring
computation problems by the digit rather than as a single answer also allows for a more minute analysis of a
child's number skills.
Imagine, for instance, that a student was given a CBM math probe consisting of addition problems,
sums less than or equal to 19 (incorrect digits appear in boldface and italics):
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Figure 8: Example of completed problems from a single-skill math probe
+
+
105
600
293
988
|
|
|
|
|
2031
+ 531
+ 2322
4884
|
|
|
|
|
111
+ 717
+ 260
1087
----------------- Jim-----------------------------------------------------------------------Wright,
Presenter
|
|
|
|
|
634
+ 8240
+ 203
9077
---
|
|
|
|
|
27
If the answers in Figure 8 were scored as either correct or wrong, the child would receive a score of 1
correct answer out of 4 possible answers (25 percent). However, when each individual digit is scored, it
becomes clear that the student actually correctly computed 12 of 15 possible digits (80 percent). Thus, the
CBM procedure of assigning credit to each correct digit demonstrates itself to be quite sensitive to a
student's emerging, partial competencies in math computation.
The following scoring rules will aid the instructor in marking single- and multiple-skill math probes:
•
Individual correct digits are counted as correct.
Reversed or rotated digits are not counted as errors unless their change in position makes them
appear to be another digit (e.g., 9 and 6).
•
Incorrect digits are counted as errors.
Digits that appear in the wrong place value, even if otherwise correct, are scored as errors.
Example
"873" is the correct answer to this problem, but no
credit can be given since the addition of the 0
97
pushes the other digits out of their proper placex9
8730
value positions.
•
The student is given credit for "place-holder" numerals that are included simply to correctly align
the problem. As long as the student includes the correct space, credit is given whether or not a "0"
has actually been inserted.
Example
55
x 82
110
4400
4510
Since the student correctly placed 0 in the "placeholder" position, it is given credit as a correct digit.
Credit would also have been given if the space
were reserved but no 0 had been inserted.
•
In more complex problems such as advanced multiplication, the student is given credit for all
correct numbers that appear below the line.
Example
33
x 28
Credit is given for all work below the line. In this
264
example, the student earns credit for 9 correct
660
digits.
924
•
Credit is not given for any numbers appearing above the line (e.g., numbers marked at the top of
number columns to signify regrouping).
Example
1
Credit is given for the 2 digits below the line.
46
However,
the carried "1" above the line does not
+ 39
receive credit.
85
Reference: Wright, J. (n.d.). Curriculum-based measurement: A manual for teachers. Retrieved September 23, 2006,
from http://www.jimwrightonline.com/pdfdocs/cbaManual.pdf
28
Appendix D: Computational Goals
APPENDIX D: List of computational goals
COMPUTATIONAL GOALS OF MATH CURRICULUM (ADAPTED FROM SHAPIRO, 1989)
The computational skills listed below are arranged in ascending order of difficulty. Please identify(1)
the skills which you have instructed in the classroom, (2) the skills that the student has mastered, and
(3) the skills with which the student is currently having difficulty.
MASTERED : Place a check under the M column indicating the skills which the student has mastered.
INSTRUCTED
DIFFICULTY
difficulty.
M
I
__
__
__
__
: Place a check under the I column indicating the skills which you have instructed.
: Place a check under the D column indicating the skills with which the student is having
D
Grade 1
__
__
1. Add two one-digit numbers: sums to 10.
2. Subtract two one-digit numbers: combinations to 10.
Grade 2
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Add two one-digit numbers: sums 11 to 19.
Add a one-digit number to a two-digit number--no regrouping.
Add a two-digit number to a two-digit number--no regrouping.
Add a three-digit number to a three-digit number--no regrouping.
Subtract a one-digit number from a one- or two-digit number:
combinations to 18.
8. Subtract a one-digit number from a two-digit number--no regrouping.
9. Subtract a two-digit number from a two-digit number--no regrouping.
10. Subtract a three-digit number from a three-digit number--no
regrouping.
11. Multiplication facts--0's, 1's, 2's.
Grade 3
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
__
__
__
18.
__
__
__
19.
__
__
__
20.
__
__
__
21.
Add three or more one-digit numbers.
Add three or more two-digit numbers--no regrouping.
Add three or more three- and four-digit numbers--no regrouping.
Add a one-digit number to a two-digit number with regrouping.
Add a two-digit number to a two-digit number with regrouping.
Add a two-digit number to a three-digit number with regrouping
from the units to the tens column only.
from the tens to the hundreds column only.
from the units to the tens column and from the tens to the hundreds
column.
Add a three-digit number to a three-digit number with regrouping
Add a three-digit number to a three-digit number with regrouping
from the tens to the hundreds column only.
CBM Workshop Manual
Jim Wright
Appendix D-1
29
M
I
D
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
22. Add a three-digit number to a three-digit number with regrouping
from the units to the tens column and from the tens to the hundreds
column.
23. Add a four-digit number to a four-digit number with regrouping in
one to three columns.
24. Subtract two four-digit numbers-no regrouping.
25. Subtract a one-digit number from a two-digit number with
regrouping.
26. Subtract a two-digit number from a two-digit number with
regrouping.
27. Subtract a two-digit number from a three-digit number with
regrouping from the units to the tens column only.
regrouping from the tens to the hundreds column only.
regrouping from the units to the tens column and from the tens to
the hundreds column.
30. Subtract a three-digit from a three-digit number with regrouping
31. Subtract a three-digit number from a three-digit number with
regrouping from the tens to the hundreds column only.
32. Subtract a three-digit number from a three-digit number with
regrouping from the units to the tens column and from the tens to
the hundreds column.
33. Multiplication facts--3 to 9.
Grade 4
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
34. Add a five- or six-digit number to a five- or six-digit number with
regrouping in any columns.
35. Add three or more two-digit numbers with regrouping.
36. Add three or more three-digit numbers with regrouping
with regrouping in any columns.
37. Subtract a five- or six-digit number from a five- or six-digit
number with regrouping in any columns.
38. Multiply a two-digit number by a one-digit number with no
regrouping.
39. Multiply a three-digit number by a one-digit number with no
regrouping.
40. Multiply a two-digit number by a one-digit number with no
regrouping.
41. Multiply a three-digit number by a one-digit number with regrouping.
42. Division facts--0 to 9.
43. Divide a two-digit number by a one-digit number with no remainder.
44. Divide a two-digit number by a one-digit number with remainder.
45. Divide a three-digit number by a one digit number with remainder.
46. Divide a four-digit number by a one-digit number with remainder.
CBM Workshop Manual
Jim Wright
Appendix D-2
30
M
I
D
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
Grade 5
47. Multiply a two-digit number by a two-digit number with regrouping.
48. Multiply a three-digit number by a two-digit number with
regrouping.
49. Multiply a three-digit number by a three-digit number with
regrouping.
List of computational goals taken from Shapiro, Edward S. (1989). Academic
skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention. New York: Guilford
Press.
CBM Workshop Manual
Jim Wright
Appendix D-3
31
Curriculum-Based Assessment Mathematics
Multiple-Skills Computation Probe: Student Copy
Student:
727,162
+30,484
146,569
+532,260
Date: ____________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,286
-29,756
33,516
-21,366
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
156
x623
192
x371
|
|
|
|
|
52/2207
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43/4742
|
|
|
|
|
32
Curriculum-Based Assessment Mathematics
Multiple-Skills Computation Probe: Examiner Copy
Item 1:
6 CD/6 CD Total
ADDITION: 5- to 6digit number plus 5to 6-digit number:
Regrouping in any
column
727,162
+ 30,484
757,646
Item 5:
6 CD/49 CD Total
ADDITION: 5- to 6digit number plus 5to 6-digit number:
Regrouping in any
column
146,569
+532,260
678,829
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 2:
5 CD/11 CD Total
SUBTRACTION: 5digit number from
5-digit number:
regrouping in any
column
42,286
- 29,756
12,530
Item 6:
5 CD/54 CD Total
SUBTRACTION: 5digit number from
5-digit number:
regrouping in any
column
33,516
- 21,366
12,150
Item 3:
17 CD/28 CD Total
MULTIPLICATION: 3digit number times
3-digit number:
regrouping
|
|
|
|
|
156
x 623
468
312936-97,188
Item 4:
15 CD/43 CD Total
DIVISION: 4-digit number
divided by 2-digit
number: remainder
|
|
|
|
|
Item 7:
18 CD/72 CD Total
MULTIPLICATION: 3digit number times
3-digit number:
regrouping
|
|
|
|
|
192
x 371
192
1344576-71,232
|
|
|
|
|
42 r23
52/2207
-208
127
-104
23
Item 8:
13 CD/85 CD Total
DIVISION: 4-digit number
divided by 2-digit
number: remainder
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110 r12
43/4742
-43
44
-43
12
33
Early Math Fluency CBM Probe: Quantity Discrimination
This introduction to the Quantity Discrimination probe provides information about the preparation,
administration, and scoring of this Early Math CBM measure. Additionally, it offers brief guidelines
for integrating this assessment into a school-wide ‘Response-to-Intervention’ model.
Quantity Discrimination: Description (Clarke & Shinn, 2005; Gersten, Jordan & Flojo, 2005)
The student is given a sheet containing pairs of numbers. In each number pair, one number is
larger than the other. The numbers in each pair are selected from within a predefined range (e.g.,
no lower than 0 and no higher than 20). During a one-minute timed assessment, the student
identifies the larger number in each pair, completing as many items as possible while the examiner
records any Quantity Discrimination errors.
Quantity Discrimination: Preparation
The following materials are needed to administer Quantity Discrimination (QD) Early Math CBM
probes:
•
Student and examiner copies of a QD assessment probe. (Note: Customized QD probes can
be created conveniently and at no cost using Numberfly, a web-based application. Visit
Numberfly at http://www.interventioncentral.org/php/numberfly/numberfly.php).
•
A pencil, pen, or marker
•
A stopwatch
Quantity Discrimination: Directions for Administration
1. The examiner sits with the student in a quiet area without distractions. The examiner sits at a
table across from the student.
2. The examiner says to the student:
“The sheet on your desk has pairs of numbers. In each set, one number is bigger than the
other.”
“When I say, 'start,' tell me the name of the number that is larger in each pair. Start at the top
of this page and work across the page [demonstrate by pointing]. Try to figure out the larger
number for each example.. When you come to the end of a row, go to the next row. Are there
any questions? [Pause] Start. “
3. The examiner begins the stopwatch when the student responds aloud to the first item. If the
student hesitates on a number for 3 seconds or longer on a Quantity Discrimination item, the
examiner says, “Go to the next one.” (If necessary, the examiner points to the next number as
a student prompt.)
34
Jim Wright
2 of 4
4. The examiner marks each Quantity Discrimination error by marking a slash (/) through the
incorrect response item on the examiner form.
5. At the end of one minute, the examiner says, “Stop” and writes in a right-bracket symbol ( ] ) on
the examiner form after the last item that the student had attempted when the time expired.
The examiner then collects the student Quantity Discrimination sheet.
Quantity Discrimination: Scoring Guidelines
Correct QD responses include:
•
•
Quantity Discriminations read correctly
Quantity Discriminations read incorrectly but corrected by the student within 3 seconds
Incorrect QD responses include:
•
•
•
•
The student’s reading the smaller number in the QD number pair
Correct QD responses given after hesitations of 3 seconds or longer
The student’s calling out a number other than appears in the QD number pair
Response items skipped by the student
To calculate a Quantity Discrimination fluency score, the examiner:
1. counts up all QD items that the student attempted to answer and
2. subtracts the number of QD errors from the total number attempted.
3. The resulting figure is the number of correct Quantity Discrimination items completed.(QD
fluency score).
Quantity Discrimination Probes as Part of a Response to Intervention Model
• Universal Screening: To proactively identify children who may have deficiencies in
development of foundation math concepts, or ‘number sense’ (Berch, 2003), schools may
choose to screen all kindergarten and first grade students using Quantity Discrimination
probes. Those screenings would take place in fall, winter, and spring. Students who fall below
the ‘cutpoint’ of the 35th percentile (e.g., Jordan & Hanich, 2003).of the grade norms on the QD
task would be identified as having moderate deficiencies and given additional interventions to
build their ‘number sense’ skills.
•
Tier I (Classroom-Based) Interventions: Teachers can create Quantity Discrimination probes
and use them independently to track the progress of students who show modest delays in their
math foundation skills.
•
Tier II (Individualized) Interventions. Students with more extreme academic delays may be
referred to a school-based problem-solving team, which will develop more intensive,
specialized interventions to target the student’s academic deficits (Wright, 2007). Quantity
Discrimination probes can be used as one formative measure to track student progress with
Tier II interventions to build foundation math skills.
35
Jim Wright
3 of 4
Quantity Discrimination: Measurement Statistics
Test-Retest Reliability Correlations for Quantity Discrimination Probes
Time Span
Correlation
Reference
13-week interval
0.85
Clarke & Shinn (2005)
26-week interval
0.86
Predictive Validity Correlations for Quantity Discrimination Probes
Predictive Validity Measure
Correlation
Reference
Curriculum-Based Measurement Math
0.67
Computation Fluency Probes: Grade 1
Addition & Subtraction (Fall Administration of
QD Probe and Spring Administration of Math
Computation Probe)
0.79
Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement:
Applied Problems subtest (Fall Administration
of QD Probe and Spring Administration of WJACH subtest)
Number Knowledge Test
0.53
Chard, Clarke, Baker, Otterstedt,
Braun & Katz.(2005) cited in
Gersten, Jordan & Flojo (2005)
References
Chard, D. J., Clarke, B., Baker, S., Otterstedt, J., Braun, D., & Katz, R. (2005). Using measures of
number sense to screen for difficulties in mathematics: Preliminary findings. Assessment For
Effective Intervention, 30(2), 3-14.
Clarke, B., & Shinn, M. (2004). A preliminary investigation into the identification and development
of early mathematics curriculum-based measurement. School Psychology Review, 33, 234–248.
Gersten, R., Jordan, N.C., & Flojo, J.R. (2005). Early identification and interventions for students
with mathematics difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 293-304.
Jordan, N. C. & Hanich, L. B. (2003). Characteristics of children with moderate mathematics
deficiencies: A longitudinal perspective. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18(4), 213221.
Berch, D. B. (2003). Making sense of number sense: Implications for children with mathematical
disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 333-339..
Wright, J. (2007). The RTI toolkit: A practical guide for schools. Port Chester, NY: National
Professional Resources, Inc.
36
Early Math Fluency CBM Probe: Missing Number
This introduction to the Missing Number probe provides information about the preparation,
Missing Number: Description (Clarke & Shinn, 2005; Gersten, Jordan & Flojo, 2005)
The student is given a sheet containing multiple number series. Each series consists of 3-4
numbers that appear in sequential order. The numbers in each short series are selected to fall
within a predefined range (e.g., no lower than 0 and no higher than 20). In each series, one
number is left blank (e.g., ‘1 2 _ 4’).During a one-minute timed assessment, the student states
aloud the missing number in as many response items as possible while the examiner records any
Missing Number errors.
Missing Number: Preparation
The following materials are needed to administer Missing Number (MN) Early Math CBM probes:
•
Student and examiner copies of a MN assessment probe. (Note: Customized MN probes can
•
•
A stopwatch
Missing Number: Directions for Administration
“The sheet on your desk has sets of numbers. In each set, a number is missing.”
“When I say, 'start,' tell me the name of the number that is missing from each set of numbers.
Start at the top of this page and work across the page [demonstrate by pointing]. Try to figure
out the missing number for each example.. When you come to the end of a row, go to the next
row. Are there any questions? [Pause] Start. “
3. The examiner begins the stopwatch when the student reads the first number aloud. If the
student hesitates on a number for 3 seconds or longer on a Missing Number item, the
examiner says the correct number aloud and says, “Go to the next one.” (If necessary, the
examiner points to the next number as a student prompt.)
4. The examiner marks each Missing Number error by marking a slash (/) through the incorrect
response item on the examiner form.
37
Jim Wright
2 of 3
the examiner form after the last item that the student had attempted when the time expired.
The examiner then collects the student Missing Number sheet.
Missing Number: Scoring Guidelines
Correct MN responses include:
•
•
Missing numbers read correctly
Missing numbers read incorrectly but corrected by the student within 3 seconds
Incorrect MN responses include:
•
•
•
Missing numbers read incorrectly
Missing numbers read correctly after hesitations of 3 seconds or longer
Response items skipped by the student
To calculate a Missing Number fluency score, the examiner:
1. counts up all MN items that the student attempted to read aloud and
2. subtracts the number of MN errors from the total number attempted.
3. The resulting figure is the number of correct Missing Number items completed.(MN fluency
score).
Missing Number Probes as Part of a Response to Intervention Model
choose to screen all kindergarten and first grade students using Missing Number probes.
Those screenings would take place in fall, winter, and spring. Students who fall below the
‘cutpoint’ of the 35th percentile (e.g., Jordan & Hanich, 2003).of the grade norms on the MN
•
Tier I (Classroom-Based) Interventions: Teachers can create Missing Number probes and use
them independently to track the progress of students who show modest delays in their math
foundation skills.
•
specialized interventions to target the student’s academic deficits (Wright, 2007). Missing
Number probes can be used as one formative measure to track student progress with Tier II
interventions to build foundation math skills.
Missing Number: Measurement Statistics
Test-Retest Reliability Correlations for Missing Number Probes
Time Span
Correlation
13-week interval
0.79
Reference
38
Jim Wright
26-week interval
0.81
Predictive Validity Correlations for Missing Number Probes
Correlation
0.67
MN Probe and Spring Administration of Math
Computation Probe)
0.72
of MNF Probe and Spring Administration of
WJ-ACH subtest)
0.61
3 of 3
Reference
References
39
Early Math Fluency CBM Probe: Number Identification
This introduction to the Number Identification probe provides information about the preparation,
Number Identification: Description (Clarke & Shinn, 2005; Gersten, Jordan & Flojo, 2005)
The student is given a sheet containing rows of randomly generated numbers (e.g., ranging from 0
to 20). During a one-minute timed assessment, the student reads aloud as many numbers as
possible while the examiner records any Number Identification errors.
Number Identification: Preparation
The following materials are needed to administer Number Identification (NID) Early Math CBM
probes:
•
Student and examiner copies of a NID assessment probe. (Note: Customized NID probes can
•
•
A stopwatch
Number Identification: Directions for Administration
“The sheet on your desk has rows of numbers.”
“When I say, 'start,' begin reading the numbers aloud. Start at the top of this page and read
across the page [demonstrate by pointing]. Try to read each number. When you come to the
end of a row, go to the next row. Are there any questions? [Pause] Start. “
3. The examiner begins the stopwatch when the student reads the first number aloud. If the
student hesitates on a number for 3 seconds or longer, the examiner says, “Go to the next
one.” (If necessary, the examiner points to the next number as a student prompt.)
4. The examiner marks each Number Identification error by marking a slash (/) through the
incorrectly read number on the examiner form.
the examiner form from the point in the number series that the student had reached when the
time expired. The examiner then collects the student Number Identification sheet.
40
Jim Wright
2 of 3
Number Identification: Scoring Guidelines
Correct NID responses include:
•
•
Numbers read correctly
Numbers read incorrectly but corrected by the student within 3 seconds
Incorrect NID responses include:
•
•
•
Numbers read incorrectly
Numbers read correctly after hesitations of 3 seconds or longer
Numbers skipped by the student
To calculate a Number Identification fluency score, the examiner:
1. counts up all numbers that the student attempted to read aloud and
2. subtracts the number of errors from the total of numbers attempted.
3. The resulting figure is the number of correct numbers identified.(NID fluency score).
Number Identification Probes as Part of a Response to Intervention Model
choose to screen all kindergarten and first grade students using Number Identification probes.
Those screenings would take place in fall, winter, and spring. Students who fall below the
‘cutpoint’ of the 35th percentile (e.g., Jordan & Hanich, 2003).of the grade norms on the NID
•
Tier I (Classroom-Based) Interventions: Teachers can create Number Identification probes and
use them independently to track the progress of students who show modest delays in their
math foundation skills.
•
specialized interventions to target the student’s academic deficits (Wright, 2007). Number
Identification probes can be used as one formative measure to track student progress with Tier
II interventions to build foundation math skills.
Number identification: Measurement Statistics
Test-Retest Reliability Correlations for Number Identification Probes
Time Span
Correlation
Reference
13-week interval
0.85
26-week interval
0.76
41
Jim Wright
Predictive Validity Correlations for Number Identification Probes
Correlation
0.60
MN Probe and Spring Administration of Math
Computation Probe)
0.72
of NID Probe and Spring Administration of
WJ-ACH subtest)
0.58
3 of 3
Reference
References
42
CBM Writing Assessment
43
Written Expression
Description
CBM Writing probes are simple to administer but offer a variety of scoring
options. As with math and spelling, writing probes may be given individually or to
groups of students. The examiner prepares a lined composition sheet with a storystarter sentence or partial sentence at the top. The student thinks for 1 minute
about a possible story to be written from the story-starter, then spends 3 minutes
writing the story. The examiner collects the writing sample for scoring. Depending
on the preferences of the teacher, the writing probe can be scored in several ways
(see below).
Creating a measurement pool for writing probes
Since writing probes are essentially writing opportunities for students, they
require minimal advance preparation. The measurement pool for writing probes
would be a collection of grade-appropriate story-starters, from which the teacher
would randomly select a story-starter for each CBM writing assessment. Writing
texts are often good sources for lists of story-starters; teachers may also choose to
write their own.
Preparing CBM writing probes
The teacher selects a story-starter from the measurement pool and places it at
the top of a lined composition sheet. The story-starter should avoid wording that
encourages students to generate lists. It should also be open-ended, requiring the
writer to build a narrative rather than simply to write down a "Yes" or
Fig. 2.9: Example of a writing probe
CBM Written Language
Name_______________________
Grade____
Date_______
One day, I was out sailing. A storm carried me far out to sea and
wrecked my boat on a desert island. ______________________________
__________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
"No" response. The CBM writing probe in Figure 2.9 is a good example of how a
such a probe might appear. This particular probe was used in a 5th-grade classroom.
44
Materials needed for giving CBM writing probes
o Student copy of CBM writing probe with story-starter
o Stopwatch
o Pencils for students
Administration of CBM writing probes
The examiner distributes copies of CBM writing probes to all the students in
the group. (Note: These probes may also be administered individually). The
examiner says to the students:
I want you to write a story. I am going to read a sentence to you
first, and then I want you to write a short story about what
happens. You will have 1 minute to think about the story you
will write and then have 3 minutes to write it. Do your best
work. If you don't know how to spell a word, you should guess.
Are there any questions?
For the next minute, think about . . . [insert story-starter]. The
examiner starts the stopwatch.
At the end of 1 minute, the examiner says, Start writing.
While the students are writing, the examiner and any other
adults helping in the assessment circulate around the room. If
students stop writing before the 3-minute timing period has
ended, monitors encourage them to continue writing.
After 3 additional minutes, the examiner says, Stop writing.
CBM writing probes are collected for scoring.
Scoring
The instructor has several options when scoring CBM writing probes.
Student writing samples may be scored according to the (1) number of words
written, (2) number of letters written, (3) number of words correctly spelled, or (4)
number of writing units placed in correct sequence. Scoring methods differ both in
the amount of time that they require of the instructor and in the quality of
information that they provide about a student's writing skills. Advantages and
potential limitations of each scoring system are presented below.
1. Total words--The examiner counts up and records the total number of words
written during the 3-minute writing probe. Misspelled words are included in the
tally, although numbers written in numeral form (e.g., 5, 17) are not counted.
Calculating total words is the quickest of scoring methods. A drawback, however, is
that it yields only a rough estimate of writing fluency (that is, of how quickly the
student can put words on paper) without examining the accuracy of spelling,
punctuation, and other writing conventions. The CBM writing sample in Figure
45
2.10 was written by a 6th-grade student:
Fig. 2.10: CBM writing sample scored for total words
I woud drink water from the ocean.....07
and I woud eat the fruit off of.......08
the trees. Then I woud bilit a.......07
house out of trees, and I woud........07
gather firewood to stay warm. I......06
woud try and fix my boat in my........08
spare time. .........................02
Word total = 45
Using the total-words scoring formula, this sample is found to contain 45 words
(including misspellings).
2. Total letters--The examiner counts up the total number of letters written during
the 3-minute probe. Again, misspelled words are included in the count, but
numbers written in numeral form are excluded. Calculating total letters is a
reasonably quick operation. When compared to word-total, it also enjoys the
advantage of controlling for words of varying length. For example, a student who
writes few words but whose written vocabulary tends toward longer words may
receive a relatively low score on word-total but receive a substantially higher score
Fig. 2.11: CBM writing sample scored for total letters
spare time. .........................09
Letter total = 154
for letter-total . As with word-total, though, the letter-total formula gives only a
general idea of writing fluency without examining a student's mastery of writing
conventions. When scored according to total letters written, our writing sample is
found to contain 154 letters.
46
3. Correctly Spelled Words--The examiner counts up only those words in the
writing sample that are spelled correctly. Words are considered separately, not
within the context of a sentence. When scoring a word according to this approach, a
Fig. 2.12: CBM Writing sample scored for correctly spelled words
spare time. .........................02
Correctly Spelled Words = 39
good rule of thumb is to determine whether--in isolation--the word represents a
correctly spelled term in English. If it does, the word is included in the tally.
Assessing the number of correctly spelled words has the advantage of being quick.
Also, by examining the accuracy of the student's spelling, this approach monitors to
some degree a student's mastery of written language. Our writing sample is found
to contain 39 correctly spelled words.
4. Correct Writing Sequences--When scoring correct writing sequences, the
examiner goes beyond the confines of the isolated word to consider units of writing
and their relation to one another. Using this approach, the examiner starts at the
beginning of the writing sample and looks at each successive pair of writing units
(writing sequence). Words are considered separate writing units, as are essential
marks of punctuation. To receive credit, writing sequences must be correctly spelled
and be grammatically correct. The words in each writing sequence must also make
sense within the context of the sentence. In effect, the student's writing is judged
according to the standards of informal standard American English. A caret (^) is
47
used to mark the presence of a correct writing sequence.
Fig. 2.13: An illustration of selected scoring rules for correct writing sequences.
Since the first word is correct, it is marked
as a correct writing sequence.
^ It^ was^ dark^ .^ Nobody^
Because the period is
considered essential
punctuation, it is joined
with the words
before and after it to make
2 correct writing sequences.
could seen the^ trees^ of
^ the
forrest.
Grammatical or syntactical errors are
not counted .
Misspelled words are not counted.
The following scoring rules will aid the instructor in determining correct writing
sequences:
Correctly spelled words make up a correct writing sequence (reversed letters
are acceptable, so long as they do not lead to a misspelling):
Example
^ Is^ that^ a^ red^ car^ ?
Necessary marks of punctuation (excluding commas) are included in correct
writing sequences:
Example
Syntactically correct words make up a correct writing sequence:
Example
^ Is^ that^ a^ car
red?
48
Semantically correct words make up a correct writing sequence:
Example
^ Is^ that^ a
read car^ ?
If correct, the initial word of a writing sample is counted as a correct writing
sequence:
Example
Titles are included in the correct writing sequence count:
Example
^ The^ Terrible^ Day
With the exception of dates, numbers written in numeral form are not
included in the correct writing sequence count:
Example
^ The 14 soldiers^ waited^ in^ the^ cold^ .
^ The^ crash^ occurred^ in^ 1976^ .
Not surprisingly, evaluating a writing probe according to correct writing
sequences is the most time-consuming of the scoring methods presented here. It is
also the scoring approach, however, that yields the most comprehensive
49
information about a student's writing competencies. While further research is
Fig. 2.14: CBM Writing sample scored for correct writing
sequence (Each correct writing sequence is marked with a caret
(^)):
^I
woud drink^ water^ from^ the^ ocean...05
^ and^ I
woud eat^ the^ fruit^ off^ of.... 06
^ the^ trees^ . ^ Then^ I
woud bilit a....05
^ house^ out^ of^ trees,^ and^ I
woud .....06
gather^ firewood^ to^ stay^ warm^ .^ I.... 06
woud try^ and^ fix^ my^ boat^ in^ my .....06
^ spare^ time^ .
.........................03
Correct Word Sequences = 37
needed to clarify the point, it also seems plausible that the correct writing sequence
method is most sensitive to short-term student improvements in writing.
Presumably, advances in writing skills in virtually any area (e.g., spelling,
punctuation) could quickly register as higher writing sequence scores. Our writing
sample is found to contain 37 correct writing sequences.
50
Daily Behavior Report Cards
51
Daily Behavior Report Cards: A Convenient Behavior Monitoring
Tool
Daily Behavior Report Cards (DBRCs) are behavior rating forms that teachers use to evaluate the student’s
global behaviors on a daily basis or even more frequently. An advantage of DBRCs is that these rating
forms are quick and convenient for the teacher to complete. This section contains daily and weekly versions
of a generic DBRC, as well as a progress-monitoring chart to record cumulative DBRC ratings.
Increasing the Reliability of DBRCs. DBRCs rely heavily on teacher judgment and therefore can present a
somewhat subjective view of the student’s behavior. When a teacher's ratings on DBRCs are based on
subjective opinions, there is a danger that the teacher will apply inconsistent standards each day when
rating student behaviors. This inconsistency in assessment can limit the usefulness of report card data. One
suggestion that teachers can follow to make it more likely that their report card ratings are consistent and
objective over time is to come up with specific guidelines for rating each behavioral goal. For example, one
item in the sample DBRC included in this section states that "The student spoke respectfully and complied
with adult requests without argument or complaint." It is up to the teacher to decide how to translate so
general a goal into a rubric of specific, observable criteria that permits the teacher to rate the student on this
item according to a 9-point scale. In developing such criteria, the instructor will want to consider:
•
taking into account student developmental considerations. For example, "Without argument or
complaint" may mean "without throwing a tantrum" for a kindergarten student but mean "without loud,
defiant talking-back" for a student in middle school.
•
tying Report Card ratings to classroom behavioral norms. For each behavioral goal, the teacher may
want to think of what the typical classroom norm is for this behavior and assign to the classroom norm a
specific number rating. The teacher may decide, for instance, that the target student will earn a rating of
7 ('Usually/Always') each day that the student's compliance with adult requests closely matches that of
the 'average' child in the classroom.
•
developing numerical criteria when appropriate. For some items, the teacher may be able to translate
certain more general Report Card goals into specific numeric ratings. If a DBRC item rates a student’s
compliance with adult requests, for example, the teacher may decide that the student is eligible to earn
a rating of 7 or higher on this item on days during which instructional staff had to approach the student
no more than once about noncompliance.
Charting Report Card Ratings. Daily Behavior Report Card ratings can be charted over time to provide a
visual display of the student's progress toward behavioral goals. The sample DBRC (daily and weekly
versions) included in this section has its own progress-monitoring chart, which permits the teacher to graph
student behavior for up to 4 school weeks. The instructor simply fills in the bubble each day that matches
the numerical rating that he or she assigned to the student for the specific behavioral goal. As multiple
points are filled in on the graph, the instructor connects those points to create a time-series progress graph.
(Figure 1 contains an example of a completed progress-monitoring chart.) When enough data points have
been charted, the behavior graph can be used to judge the relative effectiveness of any strategies put in
place to improve the student's behavior.
Using DBRCs as a Self-Monitoring Intervention. DBRCs are primarily used as a behavior-monitoring
tool. However, teachers may also choose to use DBRCs as part of a student self-monitoring program, in
which the student rates their own behaviors each day. If teachers decide to use student behavior report
cards for self-monitoring, they should first identify and demonstrate for the student the behaviors that the
52
student is to monitor and show the student how to complete the behavior report card. Since it is important
that the student learn the teacher's behavioral expectations, the instructor should meet with the student
daily, ask the student to rate their own behaviors, and then share with the student the teacher's ratings of
those same behaviors. The teacher and student can use this time to discuss any discrepancies in rating
between their two forms. (If report card ratings points are to be applied toward a student reward program,
the teacher might consider allowing points earned on a particular card item to count toward a reward only if
the student's ratings fall within a point of the teacher's, to encourage the student to be accurate in their
ratings.)
Figure 1: Example of completed DBRC progress-monitoring form
During instructional periods, the student focused his or her attention on
teacher instructions, classroom lessons and assigned work.
9
Usually/Always 8
7
6
Sometimes 5
4
3
Never/Seldom 2
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1
M T W Th F
9
8 Usually/Always
7
6
5 Sometimes
4
3
2 Never/Seldom
M T W Th F
1
M T W Th F
M T W Th F
53
Daily Classroom Behavior Report Card
Student:
_______________________
Date:
__________________________
Teacher:
_______________________
Classroom:
_____________________
Directions: Review each of the Behavior Report Card items below. For each
item, rate the degree to which the student showed the behavior or met the
behavior goal.
During instructional periods, the student focused his or her attention on teacher
instructions, classroom lessons and assigned work.
The student interacted with classmates appropriately and respectfully.
The student completed and turned in his or her assigned class work on time.
The student spoke respectfully and complied with adult requests without argument
or complaint.
54
Weekly Classroom Behavior Report Card
Student:
________________________________________________
Teacher:
__________________
Classroom:
_________________
Directions: Review each of the Behavior Report Card items below. For each
item, rate the degree to which the student showed the behavior or met the
behavior goal.
Date
Behavioral Target
M
T
W
Th
F
During instructional periods, the student
focused his or her attention on teacher
instructions, classroom lessons and
assigned work.
The student interacted with classmates
appropriately and respectfully.
The student completed and turned in his
or her assigned class work on time.
The student spoke respectfully and
complied with adult requests without
argument or complaint.
Classroom Behavior Report Card
55
Progress-Monitoring Chart
During instructional periods, the student focused his or her attention on teacher
instructions, classroom lessons and assigned work.
The student interacted with classmates appropriately and respectfully.
Classroom Behavior Report Card
56
Progress-Monitoring Chart
The student completed and turned in his or her assigned class work on time.
The student spoke respectfully and complied with adult requests without
argument or complaint.
57
A Framework for Developing Special
Education ‘Eligibility Decision Rules’
Under RTI
58
Using Response to Intervention to Determine Special Education
Eligibility: Laying the Foundation
As school districts grow their capacity to provide RTI support to struggling students, they must also
develop the decision rules required to determine when students who fail to respond to generaleducation interventions may need special education support. While existing research gives us only
a partial roadmap for what the process will look like for diagnosing Learning Disabilities under RTI,
there are sufficient guideposts in place to allow districts to get started immediately in developing
their own capacity to use RTI information at special education eligibility meetings. Listed below are
factors for districts to consider:
Section 1: Building the Foundation. Before an effective set of decision rules can be developed to
determine student eligibility for special education, the school must first put into place these
foundation components and procedures.
Ensure Tier 1 (Classroom) Capacity to Carry Out Quality Interventions. The classroom
teacher is the ‘first responder’ available to address emerging student academic concerns.
Therefore, general-education teachers should have the capacity to define student academic
concerns in specific terms, independently choose and carry out appropriate evidence-based
Tier 1 (classroom) interventions, and document student response to those interventions.
(NOTE: See attached form Tier 1 (Classroom) Interventions: Building Your School’s Capacity
for an 8-step process to promote teacher intervention skills.)
Collect Benchmarking/Universal Screening Data on Key Reading and Math (and Perhaps
Other) Academic Skills for Each Grade Level. Benchmarking data is collected on all
students at least three times per year (fall, winter, spring). Measures selected for
benchmarking should track student fluency and accuracy in basic academic skills that are key
to success at each grade level.
Hold ‘Data Meetings’ With Each Grade Level. After each benchmarking period (fall, winter,
spring), the school organizes data meetings by grade level. The building administrator,
classroom teachers, and perhaps other staff (e.g., reading specialist, school psychologist)
meet to:
o review student benchmark data.
o discuss how classroom (Tier 1) instruction should be changed to accommodate the
student needs revealed in the benchmarking data.
o select students for Tier 2 (supplemental group) instruction/intervention.
Section 2: Creating Special Education Eligibility Decision Rules. Fuchs (2003) has formulated
the ‘dual discrepancy model’, an influential conceptual framework for defining Learning Disabilities
under RTI. According to this model, a student qualifies as LD only if (A) there is a significant
academic skill gap o between the target student and typical peers (discrepancy 1), and (B) the
target student fails to make adequate progress to close the skill gap despite appropriate
interventions (discrepancy 2). In line with RTI logic, then, the school makes the initial assumption
59
that students with emerging academic concerns have typical abilities and simply require the ‘right’
instructional strategies to be successful. Your district must develop decision rules that allow you to
evaluate data collected during successive intervention trials to identify with confidence those
students who are ‘non-responders’ to Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions and may require special
education services.
Establish the Minimum Number of Intervention Trials Required Prior to a Special
Education Referral. Your district should require a sufficient number of intervention trials to
definitively rule out instructional variables as possible reasons for student academic delays.
Many districts require that at least three Tier 2 (small-group supplemental) and/or Tier 3
(intensive, highly individualized) intervention trials be attempted before moving forward with a
special education evaluation.
Determine the Minimum Timespan for Each Tier 2 or Tier 3 Intervention Trial. An
intervention trial should last long enough to show definitively whether it was effective. One
expert recommendation (Burns & Gibbons, 2008) is that each academic intervention trial
should last at least 8 instructional weeks to allow enough time for the school to collect sufficient
data to generate a reliable trend line.
Define the Level of Student Academic Delay That Will Qualify as a Significant Skill
Discrepancy. Not all students with academic delays require special education services; those
with more modest deficits may benefit from general-education supplemental interventions
alone. Your district should develop guidelines for determining whether a student’s academic
skills should be judge as significantly delayed when compared to those of peers:
o If using local Curriculum-Based Measurement norms, set an appropriate ‘cutpoint’
score (e.g., at the 10th percentile). Any student performing below that cutpoint would
be identified as having a significant gap in skills.
o If using reliable national or research norms (e.g., reading fluency norms from
Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2004), set an appropriate ‘cutpoint’ score (e.g., at the 10th
percentile). Any student performing below that cutpoint would be identified as having
a significant gap in skills.
Define the Rate of Student Progress That Will Qualify as a Significant Discrepancy in
Rate of Learning. The question of whether a student has made adequate progress when on
intervention is complex. While each student case must be considered on its own merits,
however, your district can bring consistency to the process of judging the efficacy of
interventions by discussing the factors below and ensuring to the maximum degree possible
that your district adopts uniform expectations:
1. Define ‘grade level performance’. The goal of academic intervention is to bring student
skills to grade level. However, your district may want to specify what is meant by ‘grade
level’ performance. Local CBM norms or reliable national or research norms can be
helpful here. The district can set a cutpoint that sets a minimum threshold for ‘typical
student performance’ (e.g., 25th percentile or above on local or research norms). Students
60
whose performance is above the cutpoint would fall within the ‘reachable, teachable range’
and could be adequately instructed by the classroom teacher.
2. Set ambitious but realistic goals for student improvement. When an intervention plan is put
into place, the school should predict a rate of student academic improvement that is
ambitious but realistic (Hosp, Hosp, and Howell, 2007). During a typical intervention series,
a student usually works toward intermediate goals for improvement, and an intermediate
goal is reset at a higher level each time that the student attains it. The ultimate goal, of
course, is to move the student up to grade-level performance (defined above). The school
should be able to supply a rationale for how it set goals for rate of student improvement.
For example, a school may use research guidelines in oral reading fluency growth (Fuchs,
Fuchs, Hamlett, Walz, & Germann, 1993) to set a goal. Or the school may use local norms
to compute a weekly goal for improvement by (1) calculating the amount of progress that
the student needs to close to reach grade-level performance and (2) dividing that figure by
the number of weeks available for intervention.
3. Decide on a reasonable time horizon to ‘catch’ the student up with his or her peers.
Interventions for students with serious academic delays cannot be successfully completed
overnight. It is equally true, though, that interventions cannot stretch on without end if the
student fails to make adequate progress. Your district should decide on a reasonable span
of time in which a student on intervention should be expected to close the gap and reach
grade level performance (e.g., 12 months). Failure to close that gap within the expected
timespan may be partial evidence that the student requires special education support.
4. View student progress-monitoring data in relation to peer norms. When viewed in
isolation, student progress-monitoring data tells only part of the story. Even if students
shows modest progress, they may still be falling farther and farther behind their peers in
the academic skill of concern. Your district should evaluate student progress relative to
peers. If the skill gap between the student and their peers (as determined through
repeated school-wide benchmarking) continues to widen, despite the school’s most
intensive intervention efforts, this may be partial evidence that the student requires special
education support.
5. Set uniform expectations for how progress-monitoring data are presented at special
education eligibility meetings. Your district should adopt guidelines for schools in collecting
and presenting student progress-monitoring information at special education eligibility
meetings. For example, it is recommended that curriculum-based measurement or similar
data be presented as time-series charts. These charts should include trend lines to
summarize visually the student’s rate of academic growth, as well as a ‘goal line’ indicating
the intermediate or final performance goal toward which the student is working.
References
Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and
secondary schools. Routledge: New York.
61
Fuchs, L. (2003). Assessing intervention responsiveness: Conceptual and technical issues.
Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3), 172-186.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., Walz, L., & Germann, G. (1993). Formative evaluation of
academic progress: How much growth can we expect? School Psychology Review, 22, 27-48.
Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. (2004). Oral reading fluency: 90 years of measurement. Retrieved
March 4, 2009 from http://www.brtprojects.org/tech_reports.php
Hosp, M.K., Hosp, J. L., & Howell, K. W. (2007). The ABCs of CBM. New York: Guilford.
62
Creating an RTI Literacy Program at Tiers 1 & 2 That is
Responsive to the Needs of All Students
In order to create an RTI literacy program that addresses the needs of all learners, schools must
do much more than simply purchase an off-the-shelf instructional product. For example, RTI-ready
schools use data to determine the specific learning needs of their student population, ensure that
classroom teachers have the skills to instruct students with diverse reading needs, focus their
resources to provide the strongest reading instructional support in the early primary grades, and
constantly review their instructional practices to weed out those that are less-effective.
Below are 8 steps that schools can follow to build a strong RTI literacy program:
Verify that the School’s Reading Program is ‘Evidence-Based’.
Use Benchmarking/Universal Screening Data to Verify that the Current Core Reading
Program is Appropriate.
Establish a Breadth of Instructional Expertise in Reading.
Adopt Efficient Methods of Instructional Delivery and Time Management.
Mass Resources for Focused Literacy Instruction & Intervention in the Primary Grades.
Avoid Use of Less Effective Reading Instructional Strategies.
Adopt Evidence-Based Tier 2 (Supplemental) Reading Interventions for Struggling
Students.
Promote Ongoing Professional Development.
Verify that the School’s Reading Program is ‘Evidence-Based’.
The school has an evidence-based reading program in place for all elementary grades.
• The program is tied to a well-designed literacy curriculum and may consist of one or several
commercial reading-instruction products.
• The program is supported by research as being effective.
• Teachers implementing the reading program at their grade level can describe its effective
instructional elements.
Use Benchmarking/Universal Screening Data to Verify that the Current Core Reading
Program is Appropriate. The school uses benchmarking/universal screening data in literacy to
verify that its current reading program can effectively meet the needs of its student population at
each grade level--in the key areas of phonemic awareness, alphabetics (phonics), vocabulary,
reading fluency, and reading comprehension.
When evaluating its benchmarking/universal screening data, the school uses the cutpoint of “80%
student success” to determine whether its core reading program presently meets the needs of its
population:
•
In grades K-2, if fewer than 80% of students are successful in attaining benchmark or criterion
status on grade-appropriate reading measures of phonemic awareness and alphabetics
(phonics), it is recommended that the core reading program at that grade level be patterned
63
after direct instruction – with texts containing highly controlled student vocabulary and use of
explicit instruction to reinforce letter-sound correspondences. (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001)
•
In grades K-2, if more than 80% of students are successful on a gradewide phonemic
awareness and alphabetics screening, the school may choose to adopt a reading program that
provides “less direct instruction in sound-spelling patterns embedded in trade books
(embedded code)” (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; p. 205). ‘Less direct instruction’ can include a
greater number of general teacher-led ‘guided reading’ activities such as talking with students
about the content of a text, providing instruction in ‘strategic strategies’ to better access the
text, and so on (Kosanovich, Ladinsky, Nelson & Torgesen, n.d.).
Depending on its findings from the screening data, the school will select a reading program that
has more or fewer of the elements of direct instruction. In any classroom, however, core reading
instruction should always devote time to building general vocabulary, reading comprehension,
writing, and other essential literacy skills (Foorman, Breier, & Fletcher, 2003).
Establish a Breadth of Instructional Expertise in Reading. Teachers are knowledgeable about
the causes of reading delays. They understand that the most common explanation for deficiencies
in foundation reading skills for students entering kindergarten is that—prior to public school—those
delayed students did not have the same exposure to spoken vocabulary, phonemic awareness
activities, and print as did their more advanced classmates. Classroom teachers therefore possess
the appropriate knowledge and skills to provide Tier 1 literacy instruction to children with delays in
reading skills. Specifically, these general-education instructors have the instructional expertise to
teach children whose reading skills are up to 2 years below those of their classmates.
Adopt Efficient Methods of Instructional Delivery and Time Management. The teacher uses
an appropriate range of efficient instructional delivery and time-management methods to match
student readers to effective learning activities. Examples include:
• reading centers (Kosanovich et al., n.d.)
• using students as peer tutors (e.g. Mathes et al., 2003)
• incorporating paraprofessionals (Foorman, Breier, & Fletcher, 2003), adult volunteer tutors, or
other non-instructional personnel under teacher supervision to review and reinforce student
reading skills
• scheduling core literacy instruction at the same time for each grade level to allow students to
access reading instruction across classrooms as needed (cf. Burns & Gibbons, 2008).
Mass Resources for Focused Literacy Instruction & Intervention in the Primary Grades. The
school organizes its resources to provide the most intensive general-education literacy instruction
and intervention support at the early grades – Grades K through 2—because research suggests
that student reading deficits can be addressed in these primary grades with far less effort and with
better outcomes than for students whose reading deficits are addressed in later grades (Foorman,
Breier, & Fletcher, 2003).
Avoid Use of Less Effective Reading Instructional Strategies. Classrooms make minimal use
of inefficient instructional reading activities such as Round Robin Reading that can result in poor
modeling of text reading and reduced rates of actual student reading engagement--and may also
64
cause emotional distress for poor readers (Ash, Kuhn, & Walpole, 2009; Ivey, 1999). Furthermore,
the school has a clear and shared understanding that purposeful, focused reading interventions are
required to help struggling readers: The passive strategy of grade-retention has not been shown to
be an effective means of reading intervention (Foorman, Breier, & Fletcher, 2003).
Adopt Evidence-Based Tier 2 (Supplemental) Reading Interventions for Struggling Students.
The school has a range of evidence-based Tier 2 intervention options for those students who fail to
respond adequately to classroom literacy instruction alone. Group-based Tier 2 interventions are
capped at 7 students, and all children in those groups have the same general intervention need
(Burns & Gibbons, 2008). Tier 2 instruction is more explicit (e.g., contains more direct-instruction
elements), intensive (e.g., more teacher attention), and supportive (e.g., timely performance
feedback, praise, and encouragement) than the reading instruction that all children receive
(Foorman & Torgesen, 2001).
Promote Ongoing Professional Development. The school supports teachers with professional
development as they implement any reading program (Foorman, Breier, & Fletcher, 2003). Training
addresses such key topics as:
• understanding the underlying research, instructional objectives, and components of the
program
• managing the classroom during reading activities,
• moving at an appropriate instructional pace
• grouping students.
References
Ash, G. E., Kuhn, M. R., & Walpole, S. (2009). Analyzing “inconsistencies” in practice: Teachers' continued
use of round robin reading. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 25, 87-103.
Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary
schools: Procedures to assure scientific-based practices. New York: Routledge.
Foorman, B. R., Breier, J. Il, & Fletcher, J. M. (2003). Interventions aimed at improving reading success: An
evidence-based approach. Developmental Neuropsychology, 24, 613-639.
Foorman, B. R., & Torgesen, J. (2001). Critical elements of classroom and small-group instruction promote
reading success in all children. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 203-212.
Ivey, G. (1999). A multicase study in the middle school: Complexities among young adolescent readers.
Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 172-192.
Kosanovich, M., Ladinsky, K., Nelson, L., & Torgesen, J. (n.d.). Differentiated reading instruction: Small
group alternative lesson structures for all students. Florida Center for Reading Research. Retrieved on
November 5, 2008, from http://www.fcrr.org/assessment/pdf/smallGroupAlternativeLessonStructures.pdf
Mathes, P. G., Torgesen, J. K., Clancy-Menchetti, J., Santi, K., Nicholas, K., Robinson, C., Grek, M. (2003).
A comparison of teacher-directed versus peer-assisted instruction to struggling first-grade readers. The
Elementary School Journal, 103(5), 459–479.
65
Discussion Activity: What is Your School’s Capacity to… Verify that the
School’s Reading Program is ‘Evidence-Based’?
Directions: Read the quote and RTI Literacy goal statement below. Then discuss strengths,
limitations, and next steps that your school should follow to pursue this goal.
“Although commercially prepared programs and the subsequent manuals and materials are
inviting, they are not necessary. … A recent review of research suggests that interventions are
research based and likely to be successful, if they are correctly targeted and provide explicit
instruction in the skill, an appropriate level of challenge, sufficient opportunities to respond to and
practice the skill, and immediate feedback on performance…Thus, these [elements] could be used
as criteria with which to judge potential [school] interventions.” (Burns & Gibbons, 2008; p. 88).
RTI Literacy Goal: Verify that the School’s Reading Program is ‘Evidence-Based’.
The school has an evidence-based reading program in place for all elementary grades.
• The program is tied to a well-designed literacy curriculum and may consist of one or several
commercial reading-instruction products.
• The program is supported by research as being effective.
• Teachers implementing the reading program at their grade level can describe its effective
instructional elements.
What are strengths in your system that can help you to advance this goal?
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
What are possible limitations or challenges within your system that may impede ability to advance
this goal?
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
What are key ‘next steps’ that your school should pursue to advance the goal?
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and
secondary schools. Routledge: New York.
Foorman, B. R., & Torgesen, J. (2001). Critical elements of classroom and small-group instruction
promote reading success in all children. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 203-212.
66
Discussion Activity: What is Your School’s Capacity to… Use
Benchmarking/Universal Screening Data to Verify that the Current
Core Reading Program is Appropriate?
“…we want to emphasize that effective interventions for almost all children highly at risk for reading
disabilities should contain strongly explicit instruction in the knowledge and skills required for
learning to read words accurately and fluently, and that this instruction should be balanced and
integrated with explicit instruction in other language and reading skills that are also important for
good reading comprehension.” (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; p. 209).
RTI Literacy Goal: Use Benchmarking/Universal Screening Data to Verify that the Current
Core Reading Program is Appropriate. The school uses benchmarking/universal screening data
in literacy to verify that its current reading program can effectively meet the needs of its student
population at each grade level--in the key areas of phonemic awareness, alphabetics (phonics),
vocabulary, reading fluency, and reading comprehension. When evaluating its
benchmarking/universal screening data, the school uses the cutpoint of “80% student success” to
determine whether its core reading program presently meets the needs of its population.
Depending on its findings from the screening data, the school may adopt a reading program that
has more or fewer of the elements of direct instruction.
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
this goal?
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
67
Discussion Activity: What is Your School’s Capacity to… Establish a
Breadth of Instructional Expertise in Reading?
“Whitehurst and Lonigan (1998) recently identified two broad classes of emergent literacy skills that
children bring with them to school and that have a substantial impact on how easily they learn to read. One
group of skills, referred to as “inside-out” skills, includes phonological awareness and letter knowledge,
while the other group, called “outside-in” skills, includes vocabulary and conceptual knowledge. Skills like
phonemic awareness and letter knowledge are particularly important predictors of the ease with which
children acquire word-reading accuracy and fluency…, while broad oral language facility (vocabulary in
particular) becomes critically important to the growth of reading comprehension skills once children learn to
read words efficiently…” (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; p. 207)
RTI Literacy Goal: Establish a Breadth of Instructional Expertise in Reading. Teachers are
knowledgeable about the causes of reading delays. They understand that the most common explanation for
reading delays for students entering kindergarten is that—prior to public school—those delayed students
have not had the same exposure to spoken vocabulary, phonemic awareness activities, and print as their
more advanced classmates. Teachers therefore have the appropriate knowledge and skills to provide Tier
1 literacy instruction to children with delays in reading skills; classroom teachers have the instructional
expertise to teach children whose reading skills are up to 2 years below those of their classmates.
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
this goal?
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
68
Discussion Activity: What is Your School’s Capacity to… Adopt Efficient
Methods of Instructional Delivery and Time Management?
“The most effective early intervention is prevention—in the form of differentiated classroom instruction.
Many techniques and programs exist for helping classroom teachers with small-group instruction, such as
classwide peer tutoring…and cooperative grouping. But one of the persistent problems of differentiated
classroom instruction is how to engage classroom teachers in continuous progress monitoring and
translating the results of assessment to differentiated instruction.” (Foorman & Moats, 2004; p. 54).
RTI Literacy Goal: Adopt Efficient Methods of Instructional Delivery and Time Management.
The teacher uses an appropriate range of efficient instructional delivery and time-management
methods to provide effective reading instruction to a wide range of student readers. Examples
include:
• reading centers (Kosanovich et al., n.d.)
• using students as peer tutors (e.g. Mathes et al., 2003), incorporating Para-professionals
(Foorman, Breier, & Fletcher, 2003), adult volunteer tutors, or other non-instructional personnel
under teacher supervision to review and reinforce student reading skills
• scheduling core literacy instruction at the same time for each grade level to allow students to
access reading instruction across classrooms as needed (cf. Burns & Gibbons, 2008).
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
this goal?
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
Foorman, B. R., & Moats, L. C. (2004). Conditions for sustaining research-based practices in early
reading instruction. Remedial & Special Education, 25, 51-60.
69
Discussion Activity: What is Your School’s Capacity to… Mass Resources for
Intensive Literacy Instruction & Intervention in the Primary Grades?
“Risk for reading failure always involves the interaction of a particular set of child characteristics
with specific characteristics of the instructional environment. Risk status is not entirely inherent in
the child, but always involves a “mismatch” between child characteristics and the instruction that is
provided.” (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; p. 206).
Mass Resources for Focused Literacy Instruction & Intervention in the Primary Grades. The
school organizes its resources to provide the most intensive general-education literacy instruction
and intervention support at the early grades – Grades K through 2—because research suggests
that student reading deficits can be addressed in these primary grades with far less effort and with
better outcomes than for students whose reading deficits are addressed in later grades (Foorman,
Breier, & Fletcher, 2003),.
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
this goal?
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
Foorman, B. R., Breier, J. Il, & Fletcher, J. M. (2003). Interventions aimed at improving reading
success: An evidence-based approach. Developmental Neuropsychology, 24, 613-639.
70
Discussion Activity: What is Your School’s Capacity to… Avoid Use of
Less Effective Reading Instructional Strategies?
“Children’s status as readers is established early… Torgesen et al. (1997) showed that over 8 of 10
children with severe word reading problems at the end of the first grade performed below the
average at the beginning of the third grade. Such evidence supports the view that early reading
problems are the result of deficits rather than delay. In other words, the early childhood mantra
“Just wait; they’ll catch up” has no empirical basis.” (Foorman, Breier, & Fletcher, 2003; p. 626)
RTI Literacy Goal: Avoidance of Less Effective Reading Instructional Strategies. Classrooms
make minimal use of inefficient instructional reading activities such as Round Robin Reading that
can result in poor modeling of text reading and reduced rates of actual student reading
engagement--and may also cause emotional distress for poor readers (Ash, Kuhn, & Walpole,
2009; Ivey, 1999). Furthermore, the school has a clear and shared understanding that purposeful,
focused reading interventions are required to help struggling readers: The passive strategy of
grade-retention has not been shown to be an effective means of reading intervention (Foorman,
Breier, & Fletcher, 2003),
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
this goal?
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
71
Discussion Activity: What is Your School’s Capacity to… Adopt
Evidence-Based Tier 2 (Supplemental) Reading Interventions for
Struggling Students?
Directions: Read the RTI Literacy goal statement below. Then discuss strengths, limitations, and
next steps that your school should follow to pursue this goal.
RTI Literacy Goal: Adopt Evidence-Based Tier 2 (Supplemental) Reading Interventions for
Struggling Students. The school has a range of evidence-based Tier 2 intervention options for
those students who fail to respond adequately to classroom literacy instruction alone. Groupbased Tier 2 interventions are capped at 7 students, and all children in those groups have the
same general intervention need (Burns & Gibbons, 2008). Tier 2 instruction is more explicit (e.g.,
contains more direct-instruction elements), intensive (e.g., more teacher attention), and supportive
(e.g., timely performance feedback, praise, and encouragement) than the reading instruction that
all children receive (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001).
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
this goal?
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
72
Discussion Activity: What is Your School’s Capacity to… Promote
Ongoing Professional Development?
Directions: Read the RTI Literacy goal statement below. Then discuss strengths, limitations, and
next steps that your school should follow to pursue this goal.
RTI Literacy Goal: Promote Ongoing Professional Development. The school supports teachers
with professional development as they implement any reading program (Foorman, Breier, &
Fletcher, 2003). Training addresses such key topics as:
• understanding the underlying research, instructional objectives, and components of the
program
• managing the classroom during reading activities,
• moving at an appropriate instructional pace
• grouping students.
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
this goal?
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
• __________________________________ • __________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
•
__________________________________
73
Jim Wright
1
Building Capacity for Evidence-Based Assessment & Instruction
Under RTI: Recommended Internet Sites
Here are a range of websites with free resources that support curriculum development, assessment, and
instruction.
Recommended Instruction Practices
1A. National Reading Panel Report. The NRP was
NOTES:
established by Congress in 1997 to “to assess the status of
research-based knowledge about reading, including the
effectiveness of various approaches to teaching children to
read.” The Panel issued a report in 2000 that established a
shared vision of effective reading instruction.
http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org/
1B. National Math Advisory Panel Report. Issued by a
NOTES:
panel of math experts under the direction of the US
Department of Education, this recent report includes 45
recommendations and findings on best practices in math
instruction.
http://www.ed.gov/mathpanel
Progress-Monitoring Resources
2. National Center on Student Progress-Monitoring.
NOTES:
Supported by funding from the US Department of
Education, this site reviews and analyzes academic
assessments tools to track student response to
interventions. The ‘Tools’ section of the site compares
current assessment products to a set of objective progressmonitoring standards to evaluate their use to support RTI.
http://www.studentprogress.org/
3. Easy CBM. The Easy CBM site was developed by Dr.
NOTES:
Gerald Tindal and colleagues and provides free progressmonitoring materials and online data-storage and charting
services for teachers. Users must enter an email address
and minimal personal information to obtain a free log-in
account. (NOTE: Math assessment materials will be
available on this site soon.)
http://www.easycbm.com
74
Jim Wright
4. Intervention Central. The Intervention Central website
2
NOTES:
has a Reading Probe Generator for Oral Reading Fluency
probes and a Math Worksheet Generator that will create
CBM-friendly assessments in the basic math operations:
addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division.
Additionally, the site allows users to create several types of
Early Math Fluency probes to track the foundation
numeracy skills of children in grades K and 1. All
worksheets are computer-generated and unlimited in
number.
http://www.interventioncentral.org
5. SuperKids.
The SuperKids website allows users to
create a series of math computation probes—including
such areas as fractions, decimals, and percentages. All
worksheets are computer-generated, so any number can
be created.
NOTES:
http://www.superkids.com/aweb/tools/math/
Instructional Resources
6. What Works Clearinghouse. Probably the most
NOTES:
influential website for rating commercial products for
general instruction and intervention, this site is sponsored
by the U.S. Department of Education’s Institute of
Education Sciences. The WWC reviews existing research
on commercial products to determine if they show evidence
of being effective for instruction or supplemental
intervention with school-age populations.
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc
7. Florida Center for Reading Research. The Florida
Center for Reading Research (http://www.fcrr.org/) is a
great source of general information about early reading
instruction. The site also has reviewed a number of reading
programs for the primary grades. While the FCRR uses
different criteria than the WWC to judge the effectiveness
of reading programs, it does review research supporting
various reading programs and summarizes the results in
report format. Reports include detailed descriptions of the
reading programs as well as a listing of their specific
strengths and weaknesses. A full listing of reading
programs reviewed by the FCRR can be found at:
http://www.fcrr.org/FCRRReports/LReports.aspx
8. eNumeracy.com. Developed by Dr. Scott Methe of
NOTES:
East Carolina University, the eNumeracy site has begun to
offer research summaries and ideas to “help advance
75
Jim Wright
3
knowledge about how young children develop number
sense.”
http://www.enumeracy.com
9. Math.com. This website is one of the most popular
NOTES:
math instructional sites on the web. It offers ideas for
learning and teaching math for teachers, students, and
parents. Math topics covered range from basic arithmetic
operations to algebra and other advanced math areas.
http://math.com/
10. Mathwire. This site offers teachers and parents a
NOTES:
wide range of activities and worksheets that “support
the constructivist approach to learning mathematics
and the NCTM Standards.”
http://www.mathwire.com/
11. Algebra Help. This specialized site presents
comprehensive tutorials on aspects of algebra. The
site is especially suited for student use—and can also
be useful for math tutors.
NOTES:
http://www.algebrahelp.com/
76

6_wright_RTI_assessm..

Transcription

Similar documents

JIM PAGE …

Nobuhiro Tajima Sets a New Record at Pikes Peak Nobuhiro Tajima

2 The WrighT

to the brochure for 137 Trickey Pond

Company Profile

Announcements Show and Tell Huron Valley Woodturners

pope-leighey revisited

RSVP for the Auldbrass Plantation Dinner

Link to a partial finding aid for materials that