Progress Monitoring
Mirum: Vivamus est ipsum, vehicula nec,
feugiat rhoncus, accumsan id, nisl. Lorem
ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer
Recommendations
Data Collection
Use high quality passages
Standardize assessment conditions
Duration
๏ Collect data for two months of intervention
Schedules
๏ Consider carefully
Judge the validity of performances
๏ Observers should eliminate data if there were distractions,
low motivation, etc.
Other considerations:
๏ Fidelity of intervention procedures
๏ Dosage (days per week, minutes per day, attendance)
๏ Mastery measures as supplements to GOM data collection.
Data analysis and interpretation
Trend line (OLS) WITH visual analysis
๏ Do not use either alone!
Consider
๏ Extreme values: validity of each data point
๏
Confidence intervals
(c) 2015 Theodore J. Christ and Colleagues, LLC
1
03/20/2015
Decision Rules
Mirum: Vivamus est ipsum, vehicula nec,
feugiat rhoncus, accumsan id, nisl. Lorem
ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer
Trend Line Interpretation
Visually Analyze the Data
Extreme Values:
Especially on the ends of
the time series
Linearity of observations
Excessive Variability:
Evaluate why and
remediate, perhaps
assessment conditions or
student skills
3, 4, 5 Point Decision Rule
1
2
3
(c) 2015 Theodore J. Christ and Colleagues, LLC
2
03/20/2015
Statistical Interpretation
y = b0 + b1 + e
Intercept (b0 ): The lower the intercept, the less variability (smaller SEE) we expect.
Slope (b1): Expected Growth by Assessment Type
Oral Reading Fluency
Spelling (Words Correct)
Math (Correct Digits on
Grade-level Computation)
1.5 WRC/Week
1.0 Words/Week
.30 Digits/Week
(based on Fuchs & Fuchs, 1993)
Variability (e): Standard Error of the Estimate (SEE), calculated by taking the average absolute difference
between each predicted and observed value.
!
!! − !!
!
!
!"" =
SEE Categories:
Initial Level (b0 ) = 10
Initial Level (b0 ) = 50
Initial Level (b0 ) > 100
Very good
3
5
5
Good
5
8
10
Poor
8
12
15
Very poor
12
15
20
*categories based on expert synthesis of recent research
Standard error of the slope (SEb), calculated by dividing the SEE by the variability in duration.
!""
!"# =
∗ 7!
(!"! ∗ !)
**to minimize, extend duration and reduce SEE**
SEb typical magnitudes
Weeks of Progress Monitoring (Duration)
SEE
2
6
10
14
4
3.68
1.24
0.31
0.19
10
9.19
1.68
0.78
0.47
16
14.71
2.13
1.24
0.75
(from Christ, 2006)
(c) 2015 Theodore J. Christ and Colleagues, LLC
3
Reducing Unwanted Variability:
Improve Standardization
Monitor student’s attention,
interaction, interest/
motivation
Extreme values/outliers don’t submit data points you
know are wrong
Use subskill mastery to
supplement a general
outcome measure (GOM)
03/20/2015
Report Writing
Mirum: Vivamus est ipsum, vehicula nec,
feugiat rhoncus, accumsan id, nisl. Lorem
ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer
Examples
Local norms are used to compare one student’s performance to that of their peers.
The following is an example of an interpretive statement that reference local norms:
Reading: “When administered nine CBMs-R at the fourth grade level, Jimmy’s median/middle of
25 words read correctly per minute (WRC / min) with a range of 18 to 35 WRC/min across nine
probes. Typically functioning students in his fourth grade peer group performed within the
range of 110 and 160 WRC/min, which suggests Jimmy’s level of achievement is in the below
average range.”
Math: “When administered a CBM Math multiple skill fact probe (+, -, x, /) for four minutes at the
fourth grade level, Anna had 43 digits correct per minute. Typically functioning students in her
peer group usually obtain from 41-80 correct digits in four minutes, which suggests Anna’s level
of achievement is in the low normal range.”
Benchmarks are used to compare student performance to an established standard for
acceptable achievement. The following is an example of an interpretive statement
with references to benchmarks/criterion:
Reading: “When administered a CBM-R for one minute at the fourth grade, Jimmy performed 35
words read correctly per minute (WRC / min). Students at no risk perform at least 130 WRC/min
and students at some risk perform between 90 and 100 WRC/min, which suggests that Jimmy is
at high risk for low reading achievement.”
Math: “When administered a CBM Math multiple skill fact probe (+, -, x, /) for four minutes at the
fourth grade level, Anna had 43 digits correct per minute., Anna obtained 43 correct digits.
Students at no risk obtain at least 50 digits correct per minute and students at some risk perform
at least 41 correct digits, which suggests that Anna has yet to master math fourth grade math
facts and is at some risk for low math achievement.
Progress monitoring (self-referenced) is used to compare student performance
across multiple administrations or an expected rate of improvement. The following is an
example of an interpretive statement with reference to a goal and progress monitoring data:
Reading: “Ailsa’s academic goal was to improve (on average) by 5 word read correctly per
minute (WRC/min) when administered a second grade passage for each month for nine months.
On September 1st, Ailsa was administered a CBM-R at the second grade level and read 20 WRC/
min. On December 1st, Ailsa read 38 WRC/min, which suggests that Ailsa is making adequate
progress to meet her goal.”
Math: “Jamal’s academic goal was to improve (on average) by one correct digit per month for
nine months. On September 1st, Jamal was administered a CBM Math multiple skill fact probe (+,
-, x, /) for four minutes at the fourth grade level and obtained 40 correct digits. On December 1st,
Jamal obtained 45 correct digits, which suggests that Jamal continues to make progress toward
his goal.”
(c) 2015 Theodore J. Christ and Colleagues, LLC
4
03/20/2015
Process
Mirum: Vivamus est ipsum, vehicula nec,
feugiat rhoncus, accumsan id, nisl. Lorem
ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer
Problem Analysis
(c) 2015 Theodore J. Christ and Colleagues, LLC
5
03/20/2015
Intervention Plan
Mirum: Vivamus est ipsum, vehicula nec,
feugiat rhoncus, accumsan id, nisl. Lorem
ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer
Template
(c) 2015 Theodore J. Christ and Colleagues, LLC
6
03/20/2015