Writing Measurable Goals based on

Document Sample
Writing Measurable Goals based on Powered By Docstoc
Measurable Goals
   based on

      Early Childhood
  Administrator Conference
         Fall 2006
(dare you…)

 Dr. Dawn McGrath
 ICAN/ISTAR Project Director
                   Foundations to
                 Indiana Academic
                   Standards and
                Functional Indicators


  Learning                               Continuous
 Experiences                            Assessment of
     and                                   Student
Interventions                              Progress
In the category of:
“Yes, we already know this…”

  ISTAR is provided by the Division of Exceptional
  Learners, Indiana Department of Education.

  It utilizes teacher ratings to measure the progress
  of students

  It is not a “test” but rather was developed as an
  authentic measure of continuous progress.

  The assessment elements are aligned to the
  Foundations and the Academic Standards for K-9.
But, did you know…
 The State of Indiana received a federal grant to
 study the alignment of ISTAR indicators to
 AEPS and to the Indiana Academic Standards.

 This effort is in collaboration with First Steps
 with the intention of creating an integrated
 system that measures the progress of students
 from Part C to Part B, simplifying transition

 Effort is continuing on the “other end” with
 employability skill certification.
And can you believe…. ?
 ISTAR was designed with the intention
 of streamlining various data
 management and decision making

 It was intended to make progress
 monitoring more meaningful.

 It was intended to make our jobs
A Matter of Scale

               Writing Measurable Goals:
               Seeing the leaves on the
               trees in the forest
Indiana GSEG

 General Supervision Enhancement
  Grant awarded through the US
  Department of Education, Office
  of Special Education and
  Rehabilitative Services, Office of
  Special Education (OSEP)
Indiana GSEG:
Outcome Measures
    Focus Area One: Developing or
     enhancing Part B State outcomes
     indicators and methods to collect and
     analyze Part B outcome indicator

    Focus Area Two: Developing or
     enhancing Part C State outcome
     indicators and methods to collect and
     analyze Part C outcome indicators
Indiana GSEG: Comprehensive
Statewide Assessment

 Serving multiple accountability

   Part B pre-academic, academic and
   functional skills standards

   Part C assessment domains: social-
   emotional, cognitive, physical,
   communication and self-help
Indiana GSEG:
Accountability Measures
   State performance Plan (SPP) and
   Annual Performance Report (APR)

     Social-emotional skills

     Acquisition and use of knowledge and

     Use of appropriate behaviors to meet
     their needs
GSEG Objectives
 Alignment – Align performance indicators to

 Validation – Establish reliability and validity
 of performance indicators

 Reporting – implement web-based reporting

 Training – Statewide training and
 professional development
Project Advisory Group:

Stakeholders representing Part B
and C service providers, special
education and related services
personnel, Part C ICC, state
assessment and standardization
specialists, Institute of Higher
Education, parents of children and
youth with disabilities, advocates
and others
Validation Activities
 Enhancement of Basic 1 and Basic 2 for
 children birth through three years.
 Establish norms for typically developing
 children and children with disabilities.
 Analyze reliability of ISTAR ratings.
 Analyze the overall integrity of the ISTAR
 with regard to identifying which items or
 clusters of items best measure academic
 standards, Part C developmental domains
 and SPP/APR performance indicators.
Plan of implementation –
Assessment & Validation

 Recruit Part C Eligibility Determination
 Teams to administer instruments and
 collect assessment data

 Stratified sample – 350 typically
 developing children and 350 infants,
 toddlers and children with disabilities
 served in Part c and Part B-619
 programs (N=700)
Reporting Activities

Implementation of a web-based reporting
system capable of monitoring the progress
of infants, toddlers and children with
disabilities in critical SPP/APR performance
indicator areas as well as within the context
of state academic standards and Part C
assessment requirements.

This objective builds upon the state‟s
current comprehensive system of web-
based monitoring and reporting.
Indiana GSEG selected
ISTAR because it:

  Builds on previous work
  Is authentic assessment for „ALL‟ children
  Supports on-going assessment
  Provides parents and teachers with graphic
  representation of the progress of the child
  Is aligned to Foundations for Young Children
  and Academic Standards
  Helps guide instruction
  Can assist the IEP team in forming IEP goals


Categories of Reporting

  Maintained peer level

  Achieved peer level

  Improved near peer

  Improved not near peer

  Did not Improve
OSEP Outcomes
Aligned to ISTAR
Positive social-emotional skills
  Social-Emotional in Functional
Acquisition and use of knowledge and
  Language Arts
Use of appropriate behaviors to meet
  Physical Skills in Functional
  Personal Care Skills in Functional
Aligning Outcome Areas
Social /    Language      Physical
Emotional   Mathematics   Personal Care

Social      Language      Meeting
            Cognition     needs

Social /    Listening /   Speech
Emotional   Speaking      Intelligibility
ISTAR Content
Extensions to the Standards
 Four levels of progress prior to

   Basic 1 (B1) Birth to two years of age

   Basic 2 (B2) Two years of age

   Foundations 1 (F1) Three years of age

   Foundations 2 (F2) Four years of age
B1   B2   F1   F2
Annual Goals: statements in measurable
terms that describe what the student can
reasonably be expected to accomplish in a
12-month period. (i.e. broad statement of
Short Term Objectives: measurable,
intermediate steps between present levels of
performance and the annual goals
Benchmarks: major milestones or
incremental time frames
Goal Writing

  Nothing much new since 1970‟s
    RtI: Accountability for intervention
    Technology for data management
    Emphasis on peer standards

  Good goal writing takes into account the
  long-range vision and states it in short-range

  Good goal writing is essentially the same
  challenge regardless of the “form”.
Articulate measurable goals

Goals must be directly related to the student
needs as identified in the present level data.

Goals are positive statements of student

Goals must address reasonable, broader

Goals provide the logical connection between
student needs and service implications.
Common Errors in
Writing Goals and Objectives

   Too specific to be meaningful
   Too broad to be measurable
   Too many to be manageable
   Too few to be comprehensive
   Too arbitrary to be relevant
   Too boilerplate to be
Operationalize goals to be
scientific in quality.

 What does the performance/behavior look like?
   How will you know when you see it?

 What will be the means for measuring progress?
   What is the mechanism for recording and displaying
   Will you be recording incidents? Intervals? Frequency?

 What is the intended outcome?
   How will you know when the goal is attained?
Criteria for Good
Rubric Criteria
    Does it define a product or performance?
    Does the product or performance have broad utility across
    Does everyone understand the terms and criteria used?
    Is it concrete and observable?
    Is it easy for both teachers and students to use?
    Is it written in positive language?
    Is the information useful for planning instruction?
    Could students use it to self-assess?
 Technical Quality/Fairness:
    Would different raters give the same score?
    Do the ratings represent what students can do?
    Is it accessible to all students?
    Is it free from bias?
Three methods, depending on the
target performance:

The standard indicator       Add nothing.
is observable and             Use default
measurable as is?             rubric.
The collection of
statements could be          Add a scale to
universally measurable?       the header.
Each indicator requires
a unique explanation
how it will be               Use the rubric
measured?                     editor.
If the standard indicator is
observable and measurable as is

    F2:   Identifies 5 common signs
              and symbols

    B1:   Removes articles of clothing,
             like socks or shoes

    PS:   Turns pages of a book, one at
              a time
Statements of
Progress (default)
Introductory: No progress is evident

Emergent: Early stages of development

Developing: Progress is evident

Ongoing: Advanced stages of development

Demonstrated: Performed under direction or

Applied: Used independently to complete
    complex task or solve problems
The collection of statements
could be universally measurable
       B2 Gives more when asked

       F1 Names objects from a picture book

       SE Works alongside a peer using the same
          materials without a conflict

PLACE IN HEADER at the top of ICAN Template:
Assessed Through: Given classroom assessments, the student will
demonstrate proficiency 80% of the time on the following academic skills:
Each indicator requires
a unique explanation on
how it will be measured

FA.2.1            Demonstrates drinking skills

Introduced:    Is unable to drink without assistance.

Developing:    Gets a drink with limited assistance or some

Demonstrated: Independently picks up cup, tips drink into
              mouth, keeps liquid entirely in cup or mouth,
              sets cup down on surface.
   Once a case conference is finalized, the individual
goal sheet that was created from the standard set of
items turns into an ISTAR-like assessment screen
where you can update the progress on the student
specific objectives at any time.
   Clicking on the magnifying glass allows you to see
the rubric descriptors to describe the item in a more
observable and measurable way. All data goes back
into the student‟s progress record and shows up in
the ISTAR assessment!