Transcript Document

Response to Intervention
Evaluating the ‘RTI
Readiness’ of School
Assessments
Jim Wright
www.interventioncentral.org
www.interventioncentral.org
Response to Intervention
www.interventioncentral.org
2
Response to Intervention
Interpreting the Results of This Survey…
•
•
•
•
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.
www.interventioncentral.org
3
Response to Intervention
Background: Validity
• Content Validity. Does the measure provide meaningful information
about the academic skill of interest?
• Convergent Validity. Does the measure yield results that are
generally consistent with other well-regarded tests designed to
measure the same academic skill?
• Predictive Validity. Does the measure predict student success on an
important future test, task, or other outcome?
www.interventioncentral.org
4
Response to Intervention
Baseline: Reliability
• 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?
• 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?
www.interventioncentral.org
5
Response to Intervention
Benchmarks & Goal-Setting
• Performance Benchmarks. Does the measure include benchmarks
or other performance criteria that indicate typical or expected
student performance in the academic skill?
• Goal-Setting. Does the measure include guidelines for setting
specific goals for improvement?
www.interventioncentral.org
6
Response to Intervention
Progress-Monitoring and Instructional Impact
• Repeated Assessments. Does the measure have sufficient
alternative forms to assess the student weekly for at least 20
weeks?
• Equivalent Alternate Forms. Are the measure’s repeated
assessments (alternative forms) equivalent in content and level of
difficulty?
• Sensitive to Short-Term Student Gains. Is the measure sensitive to
short-term improvements in student academic performance?
• 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?
www.interventioncentral.org
7
Response to Intervention
Team Activity: Evaluate the ‘RTI Readiness’ of Your
School’s Academic Measures
Directions: Select one important literacy
measure used by your school. On the form
Evaluate the ‘RTI Readiness’ of Your School’s
Academic Measures (next page), evaluate the
‘RTI readiness’ of this measure. Be prepared to
share your results with the group.
www.interventioncentral.org
8
Response to Intervention
A Review of RTI
Literacy Assessment/
Monitoring Tools
Jim Wright
www.interventioncentral.org
www.interventioncentral.org
Response to Intervention
RTI Literacy: Assessment & Progress-Monitoring (Cont.)
•
•
•
To measure student ‘response to instruction/intervention’ effectively, the RTI Literacy
model measures students’ reading performance and progress on schedules matched
to each student’s risk profile and intervention Tier membership.
Benchmarking/Universal Screening. All children in a grade level are assessed at
least 3 times per year on a common collection of literacy assessments.
Strategic Monitoring. Students placed in Tier 2 (supplemental) reading groups are
assessed 1-2 times per month to gauge their progress with this intervention.
Intensive Monitoring. Students who participate in an intensive, individualized Tier 3
reading intervention are assessed at least once per week.
Source: 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.
www.interventioncentral.org
11
Response to Intervention
Curriculum-Based Measurement: Advantages as a Set of Tools to
Monitor RTI/Academic Cases
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Aligns with curriculum-goals and materials
Is reliable and valid (has ‘technical adequacy’)
Is criterion-referenced: sets specific performance levels for specific tasks
Uses standard procedures to prepare materials, administer, and score
Samples student performance to give objective, observable ‘low-inference’
information about student performance
Has decision rules to help educators to interpret student data and make appropriate
instructional decisions
Is efficient to implement in schools (e.g., training can be done quickly; the measures
are brief and feasible for classrooms, etc.)
Provides data that can be converted into visual displays for ease of communication
Source: Hosp, M.K., Hosp, J. L., & Howell, K. W. (2007). The ABCs of CBM. New York: Guilford.
www.interventioncentral.org
13
Response to Intervention
www.interventioncentral.org
16
Response to Intervention
CBM Literacy Measures: Sources
•
•
•
•
•
•
DIBELS (https://dibels.uoregon.edu/)
AimsWeb (http://www.aimsweb.com)
Easy CBM (http://www.easycbm.com)
iSteep (http://www.isteep.com)
EdCheckup (http://www.edcheckup.com)
Intervention Central (http://www.interventioncentral.org)
www.interventioncentral.org
17
Response to Intervention
Reading: 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Alphabetics
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension
www.interventioncentral.org
18
Response to Intervention
Initial Sound Fluency (ISF)
• “standardized, individually administered
measure of phonological awareness that
assesses a child’s ability to recognize and
produce the initial sound in an orally
presented word. The examiner presents four
pictures to the child, names each picture, and
then asks the child to identify
(i.e., point to or say) the
picture that begins with the
sound produced orally by the
examiner.
• Time: About 3 minutes
SOURCE: Good et al. (2002) DIBELS administration and scoring guide. https://dibels.uoregon.edu/measures/files/admin_and_scoring_6th_ed.pdf
www.interventioncentral.org
19
Response to Intervention
Reading: 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Alphabetics
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension
www.interventioncentral.org
20
Response to Intervention
Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF)
• “assesses a student’s ability to segment three- and fourphoneme words into their individual phonemes fluently. The PSF
task is administered by the examiner orally presenting words of
three to four phonemes. It requires the student to produce
verbally the individual phonemes for each word.”
• Time: 1 minute
SOURCE: Good et al. (2002) DIBELS administration and scoring guide. https://dibels.uoregon.edu/measures/files/admin_and_scoring_6th_ed.pdf
www.interventioncentral.org
21
Response to Intervention
Reading: 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension
www.interventioncentral.org
22
Response to Intervention
Letter Naming Fluency (LNF)
• “Students are presented with a page of upper- and lower-case
letters arranged in a random order and are asked to name as
many letters as they can.”
• Time: 1 minute
SOURCE: Good et al. (2002) DIBELS administration and scoring guide. https://dibels.uoregon.edu/measures/files/admin_and_scoring_6th_ed.pdf
www.interventioncentral.org
23
Response to Intervention
Reading: 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension
www.interventioncentral.org
24
Response to Intervention
Reading: 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension
www.interventioncentral.org
25
Response to Intervention
Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF)
• Tests the “alphabetic principle – including letter-sound correspondence
and of the ability to blend letters into words in which letters represent
their most common sounds. The student is presented a sheet of paper
with randomly ordered VC and CVC nonsense words (e.g., sig, rav, ov)
and asked to produce verbally the individual letter sound of each letter or
verbally produce, or read, the whole nonsense word.”
• Time: 1 minute
SOURCE: Good et al. (2002) DIBELS administration and scoring guide. https://dibels.uoregon.edu/measures/files/admin_and_scoring_6th_ed.pdf
www.interventioncentral.org
26
Response to Intervention
Reading: 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension
www.interventioncentral.org
27
Response to Intervention
Reading: 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics
• Fluency with Text/General Outcome Measure
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension
www.interventioncentral.org
28
Response to Intervention
Oral Reading Fluency (ORF)
• “Student performance is measured by having students read a
passage aloud for one minute. Words omitted, substituted, and
hesitations of more than three seconds are scored as errors.
Words self-corrected within three seconds are scored as
accurate. The number of correct words per minute from the
passage is the oral reading fluency rate.”
• Time: 1 minute
SOURCE: Good et al. (2002) DIBELS administration and scoring guide. https://dibels.uoregon.edu/measures/files/admin_and_scoring_6th_ed.pdf
www.interventioncentral.org
29
Response to Intervention
Reading: 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension/General Outcome Measure
www.interventioncentral.org
30
Response to Intervention
Comparison of RTI Assessment/Monitoring Systems
DIBELS [Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills]
• Initial Sound Fluency: Preschool > Middle K
• Letter Naming Fluency: Beginning K > Beginning Gr 1
• Phoneme Segmentation Fluency: Middle K > End Gr 1
• Nonsense Word Fluency: Middle K > Beginning Gr 2
• Oral Reading Fluency: Middle Gr 1 > Gr 6
www.interventioncentral.org
31
Response to Intervention
Comparison of RTI Assessment/Monitoring Systems
Easy CBM
• Letter Naming Fluency: K > Gr 1
• Letter Sound Fluency: K > Gr 1
• Phoneme Segmentation Fluency: K > Gr 1
• Word Reading Fluency: K > Gr 3
• Oral Reading Fluency: Gr 1 > Gr 8
www.interventioncentral.org
32
Response to Intervention
Comparison of RTI Assessment/Monitoring Systems
AimsWeb
• Letter Naming Fluency: Beginning K > Beginning Gr 1
• Letter Sound Fluency: Middle K > Beginning Gr 1
• Phoneme Segmentation Fluency: Middle K > Middle Gr 1
• Nonsense Word Fluency: Middle K > End Gr 1
• Oral Reading Fluency: Gr 1 > Gr 8
• Maze (Reading Comprehension Fluency): Gr 1 > Gr 8
www.interventioncentral.org
33
Response to Intervention
Comparison of 2 RTI Assessment/Monitoring Systems
DIBELS
AimsWeb
•
•
•
Initial Sound Fluency:
Preschool > Middle K
Letter Naming Fluency:
Beginning K > Beginning Gr 1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Phoneme Segmentation Fluency:
Middle K > End Gr 1
Nonsense Word Fluency:
Middle K > Beginning Gr 2
Oral Reading Fluency:
Middle Gr 1 > Gr 6
•
•
•
•
Letter Naming Fluency:
Beginning K > Beginning Gr 1
Letter Sound Fluency:
Middle K > Beginning Gr 1
Phoneme Segmentation Fluency:
Middle K > Middle Gr 1
Nonsense Word Fluency:
Middle K > End Gr 1
Oral Reading Fluency:
Gr 1 > Gr 8
Maze (Reading Comprehension Fluency):
Gr 1 > Gr 8
www.interventioncentral.org
34
Response to Intervention
‘Elbow Group’ Activity: ‘RTI-Ready’ Literacy Measures
In your ‘elbow groups’:
•
Review the set of CBM literacy
assessment tools in the handout.
•
Select a ‘starter’ set of literacy
measures by grade level that you would
like your school to adopt. (If your school
already has a standard set of CBM
literacy/tools, discuss ways to optimize
its use.)
www.interventioncentral.org
35
Response to Intervention
CBM: Developing a
Process to Collect
Local Norms
Jim Wright
www.interventioncentral.org
www.interventioncentral.org
Response to Intervention
RTI Literacy: Assessment & Progress-Monitoring
•
•
•
To measure student ‘response to instruction/intervention’ effectively,
the RTI model measures students’ academic performance and
progress on schedules matched to each student’s risk profile and
intervention Tier membership.
Benchmarking/Universal Screening. All children in a grade level are
assessed at least 3 times per year on a common collection of
academic assessments.
Strategic Monitoring. Students placed in Tier 2 (supplemental)
reading groups are assessed 1-2 times per month to gauge their
progress with this intervention.
Intensive Monitoring. Students who participate in an intensive,
individualized Tier 3 intervention are assessed at least once per week.
Source: 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.
www.interventioncentral.org
37
Response to Intervention
Local Norms: Screening All Students (Stewart & Silberglit,
2008)
Local norm data in basic academic skills are collected at least
3 times per year (fall, winter, spring).
• Schools should consider using ‘curriculum-linked’ measures
such as Curriculum-Based Measurement that will show
generalized student growth in response to learning.
• If possible, schools should consider avoiding ‘curriculumlocked’ measures that are tied to a single commercial
instructional program.
Source: Stewart, L. H. & Silberglit, B. (2008). Best practices in developing academic local norms. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes
(Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 225-242). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
www.interventioncentral.org
38
Response to Intervention
Local Norms: Using a Wide Variety of Data
(Stewart & Silberglit, 2008)
Local norms can be compiled using:
• Fluency measures such as Curriculum-Based
Measurement.
• Existing data, such as office disciplinary referrals.
• Computer-delivered assessments, e.g., Measures of
Academic Progress (MAP) from www.nwea.org
Source: Stewart, L. H. & Silberglit, B. (2008). Best practices in developing academic local norms. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes
(Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 225-242). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
www.interventioncentral.org
39
Response to Intervention
Measures of
Academic Progress
(MAP)
www.nwea.org
www.interventioncentral.org
40
Response to Intervention
Applications of Local Norm Data (Stewart & Silberglit, 2008)
Local norm data can be used to:
• Evaluate and improve the current core instructional
program.
• Allocate resources to classrooms, grades, and buildings
where student academic needs are greatest.
• Guide the creation of targeted Tier 2 (supplemental
intervention) groups
• Set academic goals for improvement for students on
Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions.
• Move students across levels of intervention, based on
performance relative to that of peers (local norms).
Source: Stewart, L. H. & Silberglit, B. (2008). Best practices in developing academic local norms. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes
(Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 225-242). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
www.interventioncentral.org
41
Response to Intervention
Local Norms: Supplement With Additional
Academic Testing as Needed (Stewart & Silberglit, 2008)
“At the individual student level, local norm data are just the first
step toward determining why a student may be experiencing
academic difficulty. Because local norms are collected on brief
indicators of core academic skills, other sources of information
and additional testing using the local norm measures or other
tests are needed to validate the problem and determine why the
student is having difficulty. … Percentage correct and rate
information provide clues regarding automaticity and accuracy of
skills. Error types, error patterns, and qualitative data provide
clues about how a student approached the task. Patterns of
strengths and weaknesses on subtests of an assessment can
provide information about the concepts in which a student or
group of students may need greater instructional support,
provided these subtests are equated and reliable for these
purposes.” p. 237
Source: Stewart, L. H. & Silberglit, B. (2008). Best practices in developing academic local norms. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes
(Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 225-242). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
www.interventioncentral.org
42
Response to Intervention
Steps in Creating Process for Local Norming Using
CBM Measures
1. Identify personnel to assist in collecting data. A range
of staff and school stakeholders can assist in the school
norming, including:
• Administrators
• Support staff (e.g., school psychologist, school social
worker, specials teachers, paraprofessionals)
• Parents and adult volunteers
• Field placement students from graduate programs
Source: Harn, B. (2000). Approaches and considerations of collecting schoolwide early literacy and reading performance data.
University of Oregon: Retrieved from https://dibels.uoregon.edu/logistics/data_collection.pdf
www.interventioncentral.org
43
Response to Intervention
Steps in Creating Process for Local Norming Using
CBM Measures
2. Determine method for screening data collection. The
school can have teachers collect data in the classroom or
designate a team to conduct the screening:
•
•
•
•
In-Class: Teaching staff in the classroom collect the data over a
calendar week.
Schoolwide/Single Day: A trained team of 6-10 sets up a testing area,
cycles students through, and collects all data in one school day.
Schoolwide/Multiple Days: Trained team of 4-8 either goes to
classrooms or creates a central testing location, completing the
assessment over multiple days.
Within-Grade: Data collectors at a grade level norm the entire grade,
with students kept busy with another activity (e.g., video) when not
being screened.
Source: Harn, B. (2000). Approaches and considerations of collecting schoolwide early literacy and reading performance data.
University of Oregon: Retrieved from https://dibels.uoregon.edu/logistics/data_collection.pdf
www.interventioncentral.org
44
Response to Intervention
Steps in Creating Process for Local Norming Using
CBM Measures
3. Select dates for screening data collection. Data
collection should occur at minimum three times per year in
fall, winter, and spring. Consider:
• Avoiding screening dates within two weeks of a major
student break (e.g., summer or winter break).
• Coordinate the screenings to avoid state testing periods
and other major scheduling conflicts.
Source: Harn, B. (2000). Approaches and considerations of collecting schoolwide early literacy and reading performance data.
University of Oregon: Retrieved from https://dibels.uoregon.edu/logistics/data_collection.pdf
www.interventioncentral.org
45
Response to Intervention
Steps in Creating Process for Local Norming Using
CBM Measures
4. Create Preparation Checklist. Important preparation steps
are carried out, including:
• Selecting location of screening
• Recruiting screening personnel
• Ensure that training occurs for all data collectors
• Line up data-entry personnel (e.g., for rapid computer
data entry).
Source: Harn, B. (2000). Approaches and considerations of collecting schoolwide early literacy and reading performance data.
University of Oregon: Retrieved from https://dibels.uoregon.edu/logistics/data_collection.pdf
www.interventioncentral.org
46
Response to Intervention
Team Activity: Draft a Plan to Conduct an Academic
Screening in Your School or District
Directions:
• Discuss a process for collecting screening data
three times per year in your school.
• What are resources in your school that can
assist with these screenings?
• What challenges do you anticipate—and how
can you overcome them?
www.interventioncentral.org
47
Response to Intervention
Monitoring Student
Progress at the Secondary
Level
Jim Wright
www.interventioncentral.org
www.interventioncentral.org
Response to Intervention
Universal Screening at Secondary Schools: Using Existing
Data Proactively to Flag ‘Signs of Disengagement’
“Across interventions…, a key component to promoting
school completion is the systematic monitoring of all
students for signs of disengagement, such as attendance
and behavior problems, failing courses, off track in terms of
credits earned toward graduation, problematic or few close
relationships with peers and/or teachers, and then following
up with those who are at risk.”
Source: Jimerson, S. R., Reschly, A. L., & Hess, R. S. (2008). Best practices in developing academic local norms. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes
(Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 1085-1097). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. p.1090
www.interventioncentral.org
49
Response to Intervention
Mining Archival Data: What Are the ‘Early Warning Flags’
of Student Drop-Out?
•
•
•
•
A sample of 13,000 students in Philadelphia were tracked for 8
years. These early warning indicators were found to predict
student drop-out in the sixth-grade year:
Failure in English
Failure in math
Missing at least 20% of school days
Receiving an ‘unsatisfactory’ behavior rating from at least one
teacher
Source: Balfanz, R., Herzog, L., MacIver, D. J. (2007). Preventing student disengagement and keeping students on the graduation
path in urban middle grades schools: Early identification and effective interventions. Educational Psychologist,42, 223–235. .
www.interventioncentral.org
50
Response to Intervention
What is the Predictive Power of These Early
Warning Flags?
Number of ‘Early Warning Flags’ in
Student Record
Probability That Student Would
Graduate
None
56%
1
36%
2
21%
3
13%
4
7%
Source: Balfanz, R., Herzog, L., MacIver, D. J. (2007). Preventing student disengagement and keeping students on the graduation
path in urban middle grades schools: Early identification and effective interventions. Educational Psychologist,42, 223–235. .
www.interventioncentral.org
51
Response to Intervention
Breaking Down Complex Academic Goals
into Simpler Sub-Tasks: Discrete
Categorization
www.interventioncentral.org
Response to Intervention
Identifying and Measuring Complex Academic
Problems at the Middle and High School Level
• Students at the secondary level can present with a
range of concerns that interfere with academic success.
• One frequent challenge for these students is the need
to reduce complex global academic goals into discrete
sub-skills that can be individually measured and tracked
over time.
www.interventioncentral.org
53
Response to Intervention
Discrete Categorization: A Strategy for Assessing
Complex, Multi-Step Student Academic Tasks
Definition of Discrete Categorization: ‘Listing a number of
behaviors and checking off whether they were performed.’
(Kazdin, 1989, p. 59).
• Approach allows educators to define a larger ‘behavioral’ goal for
a student and to break that goal down into sub-tasks. (Each subtask should be defined in such a way that it can be scored as
‘successfully accomplished’ or ‘not accomplished’.)
• The constituent behaviors that make up the larger behavioral
goal need not be directly related to each other. For example,
‘completed homework’ may include as sub-tasks ‘wrote down
homework assignment correctly’ and ‘created a work plan before
starting homework’
Source: Kazdin, A. E. (1989). Behavior modification in applied settings (4th ed.). Pacific Gove, CA: Brooks/Cole..
www.interventioncentral.org
54
Response to Intervention
Discrete Categorization Example: Math Study Skills
General Academic Goal: Improve Tina’s Math Study Skills
Tina was struggling in her mathematics course because of poor study skills. The RTI
Team and math teacher analyzed Tina’s math study skills and decided that, to study
effectively, she needed to:
Check her math notes daily for completeness.
Review her math notes daily.
Start her math homework in a structured school setting.
Use a highlighter and ‘margin notes’ to mark questions or areas of confusion in her
notes or on the daily assignment.
 Spend sufficient ‘seat time’ at home each day completing homework.
 Regularly ask math questions of her teacher.




www.interventioncentral.org
55
Response to Intervention
Discrete Categorization Example: Math Study Skills
General Academic Goal: Improve Tina’s Math Study Skills
The RTI Team—with teacher and student input—created the following
intervention plan. The student Tina will:
 Approach the teacher at the end of class for a copy of class note.
 Check her daily math notes for completeness against a set of teacher
notes in 5th period study hall.
 Review her math notes in 5th period study hall.
 Start her math homework in 5th period study hall.
 Use a highlighter and ‘margin notes’ to mark questions or areas of
confusion in her notes or on the daily assignment.
 Enter into her ‘homework log’ the amount of time spent that evening
doing homework and noted any questions or areas of confusion.
 Stop by the math teacher’s classroom during help periods (T & Th only)
to ask highlighted questions (or to verify that Tina understood that
week’s instructional content) and to review the homework log.
www.interventioncentral.org
56
Response to Intervention
Discrete Categorization Example: Math Study Skills
Academic Goal: Improve Tina’s Math Study Skills
General measures of the success of this intervention include (1) rate
of homework completion and (2) quiz & test grades.
To measure treatment fidelity (Tina’s follow-through with sub-tasks of the
checklist), the following strategies are used :
 Approached the teacher for copy of class notes. Teacher observation.
 Checked her daily math notes for completeness; reviewed math notes, started math
homework in 5th period study hall. Student work products; random spot check by study
hall supervisor.
 Used a highlighter and ‘margin notes’ to mark questions or areas of confusion in her notes
or on the daily assignment. Review of notes by teacher during T/Th drop-in period.
 Entered into her ‘homework log’ the amount of time spent that evening doing homework and
noted any questions or areas of confusion. Log reviewed by teacher during T/Th drop-in
period.
 Stopped by the math teacher’s classroom during help periods (T & Th only) to ask
highlighted questions (or to verify that Tina understood that week’s instructional content).
Teacher observation; student sign-in.
www.interventioncentral.org
57