quality ieps, making the connections for academic...

Quality IEPs,

Making the Connections for Academic &

Functional Goals

[email protected]‐919‐5160

Your Goal

Training Goals

Usedatato towritestrongPLAAFPstatementsto__________________theIEP.

____________________student‐focusedGoals,ObjectivesandBenchmarks(GOBS)tothePLAAFP.

2

Legal Implications Related to PLAAFPs

Reference Information Notes

1

OSEP Letter, 1987 211 IDELR 464

OSEP explained why a district cannot lawfully prepare IEPs with the same statement of current levels of performance for all students in a specific program. It noted that while some children within a category of disability may share some relevant behavior characteristics and education needs, the possibility of finding sufficient clusters of children with identical behavior characteristics, identical levels of educational performance, and identical educational needs is remote. Consequently, it is impermissible for districts to have the IEP for each student in a class contain identical statements of present levels of educational performance.

2 Maryland, 1996 24 IDELR 654

A Maryland district’s IEP team failed to take into account an elementary student’s needs related to her learning disability. By missing those problems, the remainder of the IEP was defective – lacking a full set of goals and an inadequate description of the range of services she needed.

3 Delaware, 2001 35 IDELR 149

The court found that the district’s description of the present levels of educational performance for a middle school student with a learning disability were adequate. It included standardized test scores for three of the student’s areas of need and nonstandardized assessments for the more specific objectives

4 New York, 2001 36 IDELR 223

A New York review officer rejected the proposed IEP for a student with a learning disability because it contained only a number of conclusory statements about her academic performance and needs, such as “has moderate academic deficits.”

5 Illinois, 2002 36 IDELR 283

The district’s reliance on report card grades in its statement of present performance levels with respect to the progress of a high school student in the general curriculum was found to be inadequate. The hearing officer said the district should have used assessment techniques such as criterion-referenced tests, standard achievement tests and diagnostic tests.

6 Minnesota, 2004 40 IDELR 231

The district’s IEPs failed to adequately provide the student’s present levels of performance and objective criteria against which achievement could be measured. The PLOP sections of the IEPs contained only conclusory statements about the student’s abilities, and the IEPs did not fully explain how his disability affected his involvement in the educational process.


A New York review officer rejected the parent’s procedural-based allegations that the IEP committee did not consider the student’s final quarterly report and that it lacked objective data to determine present performance levels. He concluded that the parents participated in committee meetings and received current educational progress reports. Additionally, evidence indicated the district used both objective and subjective data to measure progress.

3


Fine and gross motor delays were noted in the PLAAFP, but it did not identify the specific difficulty the student would face as a result of these conditions. No information was provided as to the severity of the conditions. The descriptions of the child’s communication and social skills contained similar deficiencies.

9 California, 2009 109 LRP 69459

The PLAAFP in the IEP of a transfer student was too vague to be useful. The new district remedied the problem by assessing reading skills and including detailed information about reading abilities in the new IEP.

10 Illinois, 2009 52 IDELR 177

The PLAAFP was inadequate because it did not include objective, measurable data. It only contained general statements about the 13-year-old like being shy in social situations and difficulty expressing ideas in front of peers in the school setting.

11 Dist of Col, 2010 54 IDELR 188

The IEP did not include a PLAAFP. It was determined that without that information the staff would be unable to determine whether the student made progress and received FAPE.

12 Ohio, 2011 112 LRP 7208

The IEP was determined to be appropriate because current classroom data, observations, the evaluation, and assessments from the classroom were used to help develop the IEP. The goals and objectives had a direct relationship to the PLAAFP and the PLAAFP was directly related to the student’s unique needs.

13

Ohio, 2011 112 LRP 2646

It was found that the IEP failed to provide data-based documentation as to why the goals selected were made a priority or why other areas of need were not selected. It was also found that there was a lack of baseline data to provide a framework for true data-based progress monitoring. As a result of these findings, the district was ordered to develop a complete and accurate IEP including a data based and accurately detailed PLAAFP, measureable goals and objectives which match identified areas of need, and a description of specially designed instruction containing sufficient detail as to be understood and replicated by a different school district.

14

Missouri, 2012 112 LRP 7162

The parent alleged that the IEP was not accurate or complete because it was not based on objective data. The hearing officer found that the PLAAFP contained details regarding the strengths of the student, a description of changes in student functioning since the last IEP was developed, areas of student improvement, results from the triennial evaluation, and the impact of the disability affecting progress in the general education curriculum. The hearing officer went on to say that the purpose of the PLAAPF is to assist educators in developing measurable goals and objectives for a student with a disability. In this case, the student's IEP team was able to create 15 goals with 40 objectives that were based on the PLAAFP. It was determined that the PLAAFP satisfied the requirements of IDEA.

4

PLAAFP

5

PLAAFP Process

Need Focus Data

(1)Need (2)Focus (3)Data

Writing Forms letters Engages in scribbling and can verbally assign meaning

PLAAFP Statement : STUDENT is working on/developing his/her skills in the area of (1), specifically with an instructional focus in (2). STUDENT is currently (3 with condition/s). EXTRA CREDIT: This will hinder STUDENT’s access to the general curriculum because ___________ or Typical students at this age/grade can _____________________ or This will limit independent functioning in home, community or school settings because/by ___________.


Gross Motor Skills Walking Can successfully take 3-5 steps holding an adult’s hand.

PLAAFP Statement: STUDENT is working on/developing his/her skills in the area of (1), specifically with an instructional focus in (2). STUDENT is currently (3 with condition/s). EXTRA CREDIT: This will hinder STUDENT’s access to the general curriculum because ___________ or Typical students at this age/grade can _____________________ or This will limit independent functioning in home, community or school settings because/by ___________.

6


Emotional Development

Controlling emotional outbursts

Throws self on floor and bangs head when given a directive 4 out of 5 times.

PLAAFP Statement : STUDENT is working on/developing his/her skills in the area of (1), specifically with an instructional focus in (2). STUDENT is currently (3 with condition/s). EXTRA CREDIT: This will hinder STUDENT’s access to the general curriculum because ___________ or Typical students at this age/grade can _____________________ or This will limit independent functioning in home, community or school settings because/by ___________.


Independent Living Toileting Uses toilet when prompted, requires assistance with redressing

PLAAFP Statement STUDENT is working on/developing his/her skills in the area of (1), specifically with an instructional focus in (2). STUDENT is currently (3 with condition/s). EXTRA CREDIT: This will hinder STUDENT’s access to the general curriculum because ___________ or Typical students at this age/grade can _____________________ or This will limit independent functioning in home, community or school settings because/by ___________.

7

PLAAFP Process

Need


PLAAFP Statement: STUDENT is working on/developing his/her skills in the area of (1), specifically with an instructional focus in (2). STUDENT is currently (3 with condition/s). EXTRA CREDIT: This will hinder STUDENT’s access to the general curriculum because ___________ or Typical students at this age/grade can _____________________ or This will limit independent functioning in home, community or school settings because/by ___________.


PLAAFP Statement

Data Focus

8


PLAAFP Statement: : STUDENT is working on/developing his/her skills in the area of (1), specifically with an instructional focus in (2). STUDENT is currently (3 with condition/s). EXTRA CREDIT: This will hinder STUDENT’s access to the general curriculum because ___________ or Typical students at this age/grade can _____________________ or This will limit independent functioning in home, community or school settings because/by ___________.


9

Common PLAAFP Mistakes

1

2

3

17

Case #1: Jeremy (Math)

Jeremy is a 10th grader who likes computers and music. He has expressed interest in pursuing a career that incorporates music and computers. His teachers report that his quality of work, effort, motivation, and work with small groups are satisfactory. He has excellent attendance and does not have any issues regarding being on time for class. Jeremy reports that music helps him concentrate with working independently on assignments or tests.

Jeremy scored a 61 in Geometry for the 2nd 6 weeks reporting period, and is currently not passing for the fall semester. When using a calculator, he can independently compute whole numbers, fractions, decimals and integers and understands the idea of a variable, solves both one and two-step algebraic equations, graphs ordered pairs on the coordinate plane, recognizes geometry terms and symbols and understands congruency as related to geometric figures. He took the TAKS assessment for math in the spring of 2010 and scored a 2219 (raw score of 36). When he took Algebra I last year, he did not pass the spring semester.

What score was obtained on the PLAAFP rubric? ________

Enrolled Grade Level Standard 19 TAC §111.34. (a) (1) Geometry Basic understandings. Foundation concepts for high school mathematics. As presented in Grades K-8, the basic understandings of number, operation, and quantitative reasoning; patterns, relationships, and algebraic thinking; geometry; measurement; and probability and statistics are essential foundations for all work in high school mathematics.

Annual Goal By the 2011-2012 annual ARD, Jeremy will continue to build on the K-8 Math, Algebra I, and Geometry foundations as he expands his understanding through other mathematical experiences as evidenced by mastery of the following objectives.

Short-term Objectives/Benchmarks 3rd STO/B

Jeremy will use geometric approaches to solve problems from a variety of disciplines with at least 70% accuracy as measured by pre and post testing, written assignments, physical demonstration, oral questioning, criterion/curriculum testing and grades.

2nd STO/B

Jeremy will use graphical approaches to solve problems from a variety of disciplines with at least 70% accuracy as measured by pre and post testing, written assignments, physical demonstration, oral questioning, criterion/curriculum testing and grades.

1st STO/B

Jeremy will use algebraic approaches to solve problems from a variety of disciplines with at least 70% accuracy as measured by pre and post testing, written assignments, physical demonstration, oral questioning, criterion/curriculum testing and grades.

10

Case #2: Paulo (Science) Paulo is a 10th grade student diagnosed with an Autism Spectrum Disorder and a moderate cognitive disability. Paulo performed in the below average range on cognitive assessments targeting Crystallized Knowledge (Gc). The depth and breadth of his ability to understand oral communication, language and vocabulary significantly impacts his ability to understand concepts in biology due to the large amount of content area vocabulary and oral instruction. On teacher developed multiple choice unit tests (with the supports listed below), Paulo scores range from 45% - 73% correct and average approximately 55%. The passing standard for these assessments for same aged peers is 70%. On a recent district developed benchmark (with the supports listed below) Paulo obtained a score of 73%. On the multiple choice section he correctly answered 20 out of the 25 questions correctly. On the short answer section he answered 2 of the 5 questions correctly. His difficulties with language and vocabulary impact his ability to understand the concepts presented during lecture and scientific investigations. Ultimately this manifests itself in difficulty communicating his understanding of concepts through summaries and responses to questions related to the investigation/lesson. In addition, this impacts his ability to develop and follow multi-step processes, identify solutions to problems with evidence, understand complex vocabulary and sentence structure, and express his knowledge through written reports. During biology lab investigations, Paulo’s lab journal entries indicate that he is able to independently provide accurate responses to portions of questions related to the investigation topic. On two journal entries without the supports listed below, Paulo was able to correctly answer questions in his journal with approximately 20% accuracy. When Paulo is provided the following supports during lab investigations is able to demonstrate an understanding of the investigation concepts in his journal at approximately 50% accuracy. Supports needed include: a bulleted list of the steps to follow in the lab investigation with icon supports, deletion of extraneous vocabulary, simplified sentence structure, and specific questions related to the lab investigation with three choices for the answer to the investigation questions and a lab report template in cloze format with a word bank to support his documenting information learned during the investigation. What score was obtained on the PLAAFP rubric? ________

11

Paulo (Continued)

Enrolled Grade Level Standard 19 TAC §112.34. (c)(2)(H) Scientific processes. The student uses scientific methods and equipment during laboratory and field investigations. The student is expected to: communicate valid conclusions supported by the data through methods such as lab reports, labeled drawings, graphic organizers, journals, summaries, oral reports, and technology-based reports.

Annual Goal By Paulo’s 2012 annual ARD, given a bulleted list of the steps to follow in the lab investigation with icon supports, deletion of extraneous vocabulary, simplified sentence structure, a lab report template in cloze format with word bank, and specific questions related to the lab investigation with three answer choices Paulo will communicate an understanding of the investigation concepts as evidenced by responses to questions in lab journals as evidenced by scoring an average of 75% correct across investigation journal responses.

Short-term Objectives/Benchmarks 3rd STO/B

By the end of Paulo’s 3rd reporting period , given a bulleted list of the steps to follow in the lab investigation with icon supports, deletion of extraneous vocabulary, simplified sentence structure, a lab report template in cloze format with word bank, and specific questions related to the lab investigation with three answer choices Paulo will communicate an understanding of the investigation concepts as evidenced by responses to questions in lab journals as evidenced by scoring an average of 65% correct across investigation journal responses.

2nd STO/B

By the end of Paulo’s 2nd reporting period , given a bulleted list of the steps to follow in the lab investigation with icon supports, deletion of extraneous vocabulary, simplified sentence structure, a lab report template in cloze format with word bank, and specific questions related to the lab investigation with three answer choices Paulo will communicate an understanding of the investigation concepts as evidenced by responses to questions in lab journals as evidenced by scoring an average of 60% correct across investigation journal responses.

1st STO/B

By the end of Paulo’s 1st reporting period, given a bulleted list of the steps to follow in the lab investigation with icon supports, deletion of extraneous vocabulary, simplified sentence structure, a lab report template in cloze format with word bank, and specific questions related to the lab investigation with three answer choices Paulo will communicate an understanding of the investigation concepts as evidenced by responses to questions in lab journals as evidenced by scoring an average of 55% correct across investigation journal responses.

12

0 1 2 3 Total

Does the PLAAFP identify the same disability condition that is reported in the FIE?

PLAAFP does not identify the disability condition

Disability condition is included (Student is LD)

Specific information included if possible (LD in reading

comprehension)

Includes cognitive processing information(LD in reading

comprehension with deficits in lexical knowledge)

Does the PLAAFP reflect information from the FIE about how the disability impacts access and progress in the general education curriculum?

No information about how the disability impact access and

progress

General reference to the subject area that may be

affected

Reference to specific skills within a subject that are

affected

Specific subject areas, skill areas, and cognitive

processing areas are listed

Is there a review or summary of the previous year’s IEP?

No reference to previous year's IEP

General statement that the student made progress

Information provided about the goals and objectives that were mastered, continued, or

discontinued

The information includes the degree to which the goals and objectives were mastered and

other areas of the IEP

Is progress noted through informal, criterion referenced, curriculum based and norm referenced data?

Does not contain data Contains only one type of data Contains two types of data

Contains the three-four types of data (norm referenced data might not be included if there

was not a recent FIE)

Is there evidence of change in performance from last year? If not, is an explanation provided?

No information about changes in performance

General statement (student improved, limited progress

was made)

Evidence of change stated, but no explanation provided

Evidence of change stated and explanation provided

Is "with and without" information provided?

Is there "with and without" information that provides a justification for why the accommodation or modification is included in the IEP?

No data regarding the use of accommodations or

modifications

Data provided for "with" or "without" but not both

"With and without" data is referenced generally (Student

performed better with accommodations)

Quantifiable data is presented both "with and without"

accommodations or modifications

Does the PLAAFP reflect a review of the FIE and incorporation of FIE data?

Rubric for Evaluating Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance (PLAAFP)

Is there information about the amount of progress over the past year?

© 2012 Region 4 ESC. All rights reserved13

0 1 2 3 Total

Is there a complete and accurate picture of the student?

PLAAFP does not reflect current student functioning

The PLAAPFP contains mostly general information

The PLAAFP has accurate and specific information but does not address all critical areas of

need

There is complete and accurate information that provides an good overall

picture of the student

Is parent information documented?No parent information included in the PLAAFP

General information (Parent is pleased with progress)

Some specific information included

Detailed information included

Are student preferences and interests documented?

Student preferences are not documented in the PLAAFP

General information (student likes school)



If the information varies or is contradictory, is there an explanation?

Contradictory information is not acknowledged

The contradictory information is acknowledged, but not

explained

The contradictory information is acknowledged, but the

explanation is not plausible

The contradictory information is acknowledged and

explained

Is baseline data included? No baseline data includedBaseline data included, but

does not match the measurement of the goal

Baseline data included and is the same as the measurement

used in some of the goals


used in each goal

Is the data observable and measurable = can you see it and count it?

No observable or measureable data is included

The PLAAFP has observable data, but it is not quantified

The PLAAFP has a limited amount of observable and

measurable data

The PLAAFP has clearly defined observable and

measurable data

Is there information about what the enrolled grade level peers are doing?

No information about what enrolled grade level peers are

doing

Information included, but does not directly relate to the curriculum areas impacted by

the disability

Some information included that directly relates to

curriculum area(s) impacted and critical area(s) of need

Information included that directly relates to all


If reporting scores obtained on benchmark tests, grades, etc, is there information about how same aged peers performed?

No information about how same aged peers performed

Benchmark scores, etc. reported but no information

about same aged peers

Benchmark scores, etc. reported but only information

about same aged peers (performed comparably)

Benchmark scores, etc. reported along with

information about the performance of same aged

peers

Does the PLAAFP reflect the strengths and critical areas of need in the enrolled grade level curriculum?

Student strengths and weaknesses are not reflected

in the PLAAFP

The PLAAFP provides minimal information about the

strengths and needs within the curriculum

The PLAAFP provides strengths or weaknesses

within the curriculum but not both

The PLAAFP provides strengths and weaknesses

within the curriculum

Total: (of 45)

Is it clear how the disability affects involvement and progress in the same curriculum as nondisabled students?

Are measurable/observable baseline data included?

Is there information from a variety of sources in a variety of different settings?

14

0 1 2 3 Total

Does the PLAAFP identify the same disability condition that is reported in the FIE?

PLAAFP does not identify the disability condition

Disability condition is included (Student is LD)

Specific information included if possible (LD in reading

comprehension)

Includes cognitive processing information(LD in reading

comprehension with deficits in lexical knowledge)

Does the PLAAFP reflect information from the FIE about how the disability impacts access and progress in the general education curriculum?

No information about how the disability impact access and

progress

General reference to the subject area that may be

affected

Reference to specific skills within a subject that are

affected

Specific subject areas, skill areas, and cognitive

processing areas are listed

Is there a review or summary of the previous year’s IEP?

No reference to previous year's IEP

General statement that the student made progress

Information provided about the goals and objectives that were mastered, continued, or

discontinued

The information includes the degree to which the goals and objectives were mastered and

other areas of the IEP

Is progress noted through informal, criterion referenced, curriculum based and norm referenced data?

Does not contain data Contains only one type of data Contains two types of data

Contains the three-four types of data (norm referenced data might not be included if there

was not a recent FIE)

Is there evidence of change in performance from last year? If not, is an explanation provided?

No information about changes in performance

General statement (student improved, limited progress

was made)

Evidence of change stated, but no explanation provided

Evidence of change stated and explanation provided

Is "with and without" information provided?

Is there "with and without" information that provides a justification for why the accommodation or modification is included in the IEP?

No data regarding the use of accommodations or

modifications

Data provided for "with" or "without" but not both

"With and without" data is referenced generally (Student

performed better with accommodations)

Quantifiable data is presented both "with and without"

accommodations or modifications

Does the PLAAFP reflect a review of the FIE and incorporation of FIE data?

Rubric for Evaluating Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance (PLAAFP)

Is there information about the amount of progress over the past year?

© 2012 Region 4 ESC. All rights reserved15

0 1 2 3 Total

Is there a complete and accurate picture of the student?

PLAAFP does not reflect current student functioning

The PLAAPFP contains mostly general information

The PLAAFP has accurate and specific information but does not address all critical areas of

need

There is complete and accurate information that provides an good overall

picture of the student

Is parent information documented?No parent information included in the PLAAFP

General information (Parent is pleased with progress)



Are student preferences and interests documented?

Student preferences are not documented in the PLAAFP

General information (student likes school)



If the information varies or is contradictory, is there an explanation?

Contradictory information is not acknowledged

The contradictory information is acknowledged, but not

explained

The contradictory information is acknowledged, but the

explanation is not plausible

The contradictory information is acknowledged and

explained

Is baseline data included? No baseline data includedBaseline data included, but

does not match the measurement of the goal


used in some of the goals


used in each goal

Is the data observable and measurable = can you see it and count it?

No observable or measureable data is included

The PLAAFP has observable data, but it is not quantified

The PLAAFP has a limited amount of observable and

measurable data

The PLAAFP has clearly defined observable and

measurable data

Is there information about what the enrolled grade level peers are doing?

No information about what enrolled grade level peers are

doing

Information included, but does not directly relate to the curriculum areas impacted by

the disability

Some information included that directly relates to


Information included that directly relates to all


If reporting scores obtained on benchmark tests, grades, etc, is there information about how same aged peers performed?

No information about how same aged peers performed

Benchmark scores, etc. reported but no information

about same aged peers

Benchmark scores, etc. reported but only information

about same aged peers (performed comparably)

Benchmark scores, etc. reported along with

information about the performance of same aged

peers

Does the PLAAFP reflect the strengths and critical areas of need in the enrolled grade level curriculum?

Student strengths and weaknesses are not reflected

in the PLAAFP

The PLAAFP provides minimal information about the

strengths and needs within the curriculum

The PLAAFP provides strengths or weaknesses

within the curriculum but not both

The PLAAFP provides strengths and weaknesses

within the curriculum

Total: (of 45)

Is it clear how the disability affects involvement and progress in the same curriculum as nondisabled students?

Are measurable/observable baseline data included?

Is there information from a variety of sources in a variety of different settings?

16

Annual Goals and Short Term Objectives/Benchmarks Essential Elements

Annual Goals and Short-term Objectives/Benchmarks

Jere

my

Paul

o

Are Annual Goals aligned to the PLAAFP?

Does the IEP include an annual goal for each area of critical need noted in the PLAAFP? Ensure that any area of critical need identified in the PLAAFP has a corresponding goal that will measure the student’s progress.

Are all required components in each annual goal? Are they measurable and observable?

All annual goals must contain a timeframe, condition, behavior and criteria.

Could someone else read the goal and implement as intended? If the goal can be mastered without any observable change in behavior by the student, then it is not a measurable goal. For example, refrain from hitting peers does not require the student to demonstrate a skill or behavior that could be observed or counted.

Does the Annual Goal contain short-term objectives/ benchmarks?

All short-term objectives/benchmarks must contain a timeframe, condition, behavior and criteria.

When writing short-term objectives/benchmarks, there must be a minimum of two for any annual goal. Do they clearly communicate the progress that is expected to occur in order to meet the annual goal?

Is a timeframe included?

Is the timeframe for all annual goals clearly identified? Are the short-term objectives/benchmark timeframes actually “short-term?” Are the timeframes within the duration of the annual goal and clearly specified using a measure such as: number of weeks, grading period, or date?

Is a condition included?

Does the condition listed identify the specific resources that must be present for a child to reach the goal?

Are the conditions aligned to the needed supports/services/strategies outlined in the PLAAFPs? Do they make sense given the behavior within the goal?

The condition can be an accommodation or modification that will be provided during instruction and when the annual goal or short-term objective/benchmark is measured.

Is a behavior included?

Has the performance that will be monitored been clearly identified? Can it be directly observed and measured?

For academic goals, is it aligned or linked to the enrolled grade level TEKS?

Is a criterion included?

80% mastery in 4 of 5 trials is detailed, but still might not be specific or clear enough. Remember, including a percent or a trial does not necessarily make the goal observable or measurable.

Measure the annual goal the same way the baseline performance is measured in the PLAAFP.

Think about how the data sheet will look. Would two different people understand the goal and measure it the same way? Can it be measured without additional information?

18

Writing Observable and Measurable Goals, Objectives and Benchmarks

Observable – a behavior which can be seen or heard by an observer. Behaviors have a beginning and an end. Measurable – an observer has to do something to be able to measure the behavior (count, weigh, watch, etc). Measurable goals, objectives and benchmarks (G-O-B)can be measured as written, allows multiple evaluators to repeat the same measurement, and provides data to demonstrate progress.

Use Doing Words: Avoid Slippery Words:

Add Pours Apply Answers Puts on /Takes Off Appreciate Circle Reaches Be able to Classify Remains Believes Complete Removes Communicate Copies Seeks Comprehends Counts Selects Demonstrates Cuts Sign Enjoy Draw Sing Grasp/Understand Gives Smile Identify Groups Sort Increases Initiates State Know Jumps Touch Maintains List Type Manipulates Locates Underline Participates Looks Walk Realizes Names Write Recognize Paint Zips Solve Perform Tolerate Pick up Tries/Attempts Places Uses Point to Value

Slippery words can be used if the author of the G-O-B describes “how” – how will the student manipulate, how will they participate, etc.

Observable Not Observable

Matching author to book title Appreciating art

Reading orally Enjoying literature

Constructing a timeline Understanding history

Dressing one’s self Becoming independent

Speaking to adults without vulgarities Respecting authority

Pointing, drawing, writing, etc Improving, feeling, knowing

Bateman, Barbara D., and Cynthia M. Herr. "Part I: About GO/Bs." Writing Measurable IEP Goals and Objectives. Verona, Wisc.: IEP Resources, 2006. 19. Print.

19

Ways to Demonstrate the Verbs Used in the STAAR Alternate Assessment Tasks

Assessment tasks for STAAR Alternate have been written very broadly to allow access for a wide range of student abilities. The verbs used in each assessment task are important in distinguishing between the three complexity levels – application, basic recall, and beginning awareness. The following color-coded chart offers a brief summary of each of the three complexity levels. In order to have a better understanding of the verbs used at each level, the information beginning on page three gives a definition of each verb and how it should be used for the standardized assessment task at that complexity level. In addition, this document offers examples of ways a student might respond to demonstrate performance at each level. Response modes among students may vary depending on the individual needs of each student and the nature of the disability; therefore, the example response modes are available as a resource but might not be appropriate for an individual student. Students assessed on STAAR Alternate assessment tasks should use the response modes that best reflect what is shown routinely during instruction and is a true demonstration of the skill. The information on page two of this document shows where and how to record student response modes.

Complexity Levels at a Glance

Level 3

Level 2

Level 1

Most complex – Application

Moderately complex – Basic Recall

Least complex – Beginning Awareness

Requires a Student to:

• internalize skills beyond basic recall • use higher-level thinking skills • arrive at answers “on his or her own”

as choices cannot be provided • gather information or demonstrate

skills using a wide array of materials


• demonstrate only a basic

understanding of information • recall or reproduce information • arrive at answers when at least three

choices are provided


• be aware of the task as it is

occurring • be aware of a change in stimuli but

not be required to act on the stimuli • be aware of information but not

make choices or decisions based on the information

Verbs Used at Level 3:

analyze answer* classify compare conclude conduct determine edit*

estimate evaluate execute generate justify locate measure organize

predict record revise* role play select solve


answer* arrange assist choose complete construct count edit*

examine identify match reproduce revise* share sort supply


acknowledge anticipate experience explore participate respond

* NOTE: This verb is used at more than one complexity level. Defining characteristics will be different at another complexity level.

20

Writing Goals

6 Ws Strategy

4 Components

Time Frame Condition Behavior Criterion

Goal:

By when? Who? Will do?

What? How well?

Under what conditions?

Goal:

21

Writing Goals

PLAAFP: Cathy is developing her skills in writing, specifically in the area of forming letters. Cathy currently engages in scribbling and can verbally assign meaning to her drawings given paper and crayons.

6 Ws Strategy

4 Components


Goal:


What? How well?


Goal:

22

Writing Goals

6 Ws Strategy

4 Components


Goal:


What? How well?


Goal:

23

Writing Goals

6 Ws Strategy

4 Components


Goal:


What? How well?


Goal:

24

GOBS – Goals, Objectives, Benchmarks

Objectives

Benchmarks

25

IEP’s According to Dr. Seuss

Author Unknown

Do you like these IEPs? I do not like these IEPs.

I do not like them, Jeeze Louise! We test, we check, we plan, we meet,

but nothing ever seems complete.

Would you, could you like the form? I do not like the form I see.

Not page 1, not 2, not 3. Another change, a brand new box, I think we all have lost our rocks.

Could you all meet here or there? We could not all meet here or there.

We cannot all fit anywhere. Not in a room. Not in a hall.

There seems to be no space at all.

Would you, could you meet again? I cannot meet again next week.

No lunch, no prep. Please here me speak. No, not at dusk and not at dawn.

At 4 p.m. I should be gone.

Could you hear while all speak out? Would you write the words they spout? I could not hear, I would not write.

This does not need to be a fight. Sign here, date there, mark this, check that,

beware the student’s ad-vo-cat(e).

You do not like them so you say. Try it again! Try it again! and then you may. If you let me be,

I’ll try again and you will see. Say! I almost like these IEPs.

I think I’ll write 6,003. And I will practice day and night.

Until they say, “You’ve got it right.”

26

Additional Training Opportunities

Face to Face sponsored by ESC 13‐ https://ecampus.esc13.net

IEP Best Practices: PLAAFP to Goal Writing

SU1325688, July 31, 2013

$40

IEP Best Practices: FIE to IEP (2 day)

FA1327324, Sept. 9 & 16, 2013

$90

Online Opportunities

IEP Best Practice: An e‐Learning Course

SP 1218112, ecampus.esc13.net

$90

Standards‐Based IEP Free Online Training Module

esc20.net> Special Education > Access to General Curriculum > AGC Statewide Leadership

FREE!!

Important Documents

Go to: esc20.net> Special Education > Access to General Curriculum > AGC Statewide

Leadership for the following:

Individualized Education Program (IEP) Annual Goal Development: Q & A Document

The Least Restrictive Environment (LRE): Q & A Document

Ann Jacobson [email protected]

Cyndi O’Toole [email protected]

Cathy Miller [email protected]

27