best practices in data-based decision making within an rti model gary l. cates, ph.d. illinois state...
TRANSCRIPT
Best Practices in Data-Based Decision Making Within an RTI
Model
Gary L. Cates, Ph.D.Illinois State University
GaryCates.net
Ben Ditkowsky, Ph.D.Lincolnwood School District 74
MeasuredEffects.Com
Acknowledgments
• Cates, Blum, & Swerdlik (2011). Authors of Effective RTI Training and Practices: Helping School and District Teams Improve Academic Performance and Social Behavior and this PowerPoint presentation. Champaign, IL: Research Press.
Response to Intervention Is Data Based, Decision Making
• Comprehensive system of student support for academics and behavior
• Has a prevention focus• Matches instructional needs with scientifically
based interventions/instruction for all students
• Emphasizes data-based decision making across a multi-tiered framework
Data Based Decision Making with Universal Screening Measures
Presentation Activity 1
• What have you heard about universal screening measures?
• What are your biggest concerns?
3 Purposes of Universal Screening
Predict which students are at risk for not meeting AYP (or long-term educational goals)
Monitor progress of all students over time
Reduce the need to do more in-depth diagnostic assessment with all students
Needed for reading, writing, math, and behavior
Rationale for Using Universal Screening Measures
It is analogous to medical check-ups (but three times a year, not once)
Determine whether all students are meeting milestone (i.e., benchmarks) for predicted adequate growth
Provide intervention/support if they are not
Characteristics of Universal Screening Measures
Brief to administer
Allow for multiple administration
Simple to score and interpret
Predict fairly well students at risk for not meeting AYP
Presentation Activity 2
• What universal screening measures do you have in place currently for:– Reading?– Writing?– Math?– Behavior?
• How do these fit with the characteristics of USM outlined on the previous slide?
Examples of Universal Screening Measures for Academic Performance (USM-A)
Curriculum-Based Measurement
Data-Based Decision Making with USM-A
Student Identification: Percentile Rank Approach
• Dual discrepancy to determine a change in intensity (i.e., tier) of service
• Cut Scores– Consider percentiles– District-derived cut scores are based on screening
instruments’ ability to predict state scores• Rate of Improvement
– Average gain made per day/per week?
sam
plin
g of
stu
den
tsal
l stu
den
ts in
clu
ded
Student TeacherFall
WRCWinter WRC
Winter Percentile
Rank Classification
S, A Smith 209 208 1.00 Well Above AverageK, D J ones 159 170 0.93 Well Above AverageF, M Smith 134 156 0.90 Above AverageH, A Smith 130 148 0.81 Above AverageE, S Smith 115 145 0.75 AverageP, A J ones 96 133 0.68 AverageK, C J ones 109 114 0.51 AverageS, D Armstrong 66 112 0.46 AverageB, C Armstrong 92 94 0.36 AverageE, A Armstrong 61 80 0.25 AverageA, B Smith 39 65 0.24 Below AverageR, P Armstrong 42 63 0.22 Below AverageM, W J ones 50 60 0.20 Below AverageG, S J ones 28 58 0.19 Below AverageJ , J Smith 20 54 0.17 Below AverageM, A Smith 38 51 0.15 Below AverageB, J J ones 47 48 0.14 Below AverageP, M Smith 47 45 0.10 Below AverageA, D Armstrong 38 45 0.10 Below AverageM, T J ones 42 41 0.08 Well Below AverageD, Z Armstrong 31 39 0.07 Well Below AverageM, M Smith 30 38 0.03 Well Below AverageD, A J ones 18 38 0.03 Well Below AverageK, A Armstrong 8 21 0.02 Well Below AverageA, J J ones 7 18 0.00 Well Below Average
Student Identification: Dual-Discrepancy Approach
• Rate of Improvement• Average gain made per day/per week?
• Compared to peers (or cut score) over time
sam
plin
g of
stu
den
tsal
l stu
den
ts in
clu
ded
Student TeacherFall WRC
Winter WRC
Winter Percentile
Rank ClassificationRate of Progress
Average Rate of Progress
S, A Smith 209 208 1.00 Well Above Average -0.1 1.3K, D Jones 159 170 0.93 Well Above Average 0.6 1.3F, M Smith 134 156 0.90 Above Average 1.2 1.3H, A Smith 130 148 0.81 Above Average 1.0 1.3E, S Smith 115 145 0.75 Average 1.7 1.3P, A Jones 96 133 0.68 Average 2.1 1.3K, C Jones 109 114 0.51 Average 0.3 1.3S, D Armstrong 66 112 0.46 Average 2.6 1.3B, C Armstrong 92 94 0.36 Average 0.1 1.3E, A Armstrong 61 80 0.25 Average 1.1 1.3A, B Smith 39 65 0.24 Below Average 1.4 1.3R, P Armstrong 42 63 0.22 Below Average 1.2 1.3M, W Jones 50 60 0.20 Below Average 0.6 1.3G, S Jones 28 58 0.19 Below Average 1.7 1.3J, J Smith 20 54 0.17 Below Average 1.9 1.3M, A Smith 38 51 0.15 Below Average 0.7 1.3B, J Jones 47 48 0.14 Below Average 0.1 1.3P, M Smith 47 45 0.10 Below Average -0.1 1.3A, D Armstrong 38 45 0.10 Below Average 0.4 1.3M, T Jones 42 41 0.08 Well Below Average -0.1 1.3D, Z Armstrong 31 39 0.07 Well Below Average 0.4 1.3M, M Smith 30 38 0.03 Well Below Average 0.4 1.3D, A Jones 18 38 0.03 Well Below Average 1.1 1.3K, A Armstrong 8 21 0.02 Well Below Average 0.7 1.3A, J Jones 7 18 0.00 Well Below Average 0.6 1.3
Dual Discrepancy
• Discrepant from peers (or empirically supported cut score) at data collection point 1 (e.g., fall benchmark)
• Discrepancy continues or becomes larger at point 2 (e.g., winter benchmark)– This is referred to a student’s rate of improvement
(ROI)
Resources as a Consideration
• Example of comparing percentile rank or some national cut score without considering resources
• You want to minimize:– False positives– False negatives
• This can be facilitated with an educational diagnostic tool
Correlations
• Direction (positive or negative)• Magnitude/strength (0 to 1)• If you want to understand how much overlap
(i.e., variance) between the two is explained, then square your correlationr = .70 then about 49% overlap (i.e., variance)
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
STU
DEN
T PE
RFO
RMAN
CE O
N H
IGH
-STA
KES
TEST
Words Read Correctly Per Minute - 2nd Grade
FALSE POSITIVESFurther Diagnostic Assessment
False NegativesAdditional Data Currently Available
Negatives for At-Risk
POSITIVES for At-Risk
Relationship Between ORF In Fall of 2nd Grade and High-Stakes Testing in 3rd Grade
A Word About Correlations
• A correlation tells us about the strength of a relationship
• A correlation does not tell…– …the direction of the relationship
• If A causes B, or if B cause A <or>– …if the relationship is causal or if there is another variable
• if C causes A and B
• Strong correlations do not always equate to accurate prediction of specific populations
Presentation Activity 3
• How are you currently making data-based decisions using the universal screening measures you have?
• Do you need to make some adjustments to your decision-making process?
• If you answered yes to the question above, What might those adjustments be?
Data-Based Decision Making with USM-B
Some Preliminary Points
• Social behavior screening is just as important as academic screening
• We will focus on procedures (common sense is needed: If a child displays severe behavior, then bypass the system we will discuss today)
• We will focus on PBIS and SSBD– The programs are examples of basic principles– You do not need to purchase these exact
programs
Office Discipline Referrals
• Good as a stand-alone screening tool for externalizing behavior problems
• Also good for analyzing schoolwide data– Discussed later
Teacher Nomination
• Teachers are generally good judges• Nominate three students as externalizers• Nominate three students as internalizers• Trust your instincts and make decision
– There will be more sophisticated process to confirm your choices
Confirming Teacher Nominations with Other Data
• Teacher, Parent, and Student Rating Scales– BASC– CBCL (Achenbach)
Example: Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD)
• Critical Events Inventory:– 33 severe behaviors (e.g., physical assault, stealing) in
checklist format– Room for other behaviors not listed
• Adaptive Scale: Assesses socially appropriate functional skills (e.g., following teacher directions)
• Maladaptive Scale: Assesses risk for developing antisocial behavior (e.g., testing teacher limits)
Data-Based Decision Making Using Universal Screening Measures for Behavior
• Computer software available• Web-based programs also available• See handout (Microsoft Excel Template)
Average Referrals Per Day Per Month
ODR Data by Behavior
ODR Data by Location
ODR Data by Time of Day
ODR Data by Student
Review of Important Points: Academic Peformance
• USMs used for screening and progress monitoring
• It is important to adhere to the characteristics when choosing a USM
• USM-A’s typically are similar to curriculum-based measurement procedures
• There are many ways to choose appropriate cut scores, but it is critical that available resources be considered
Review of Important Points: Behavior
• Social behavior is an important area for screening• Number of office discipline referrals is a strong
measure for schoolwide data analysis and external behavior
• Both internalizing and externalizing behaviors should be screened using teacher nominations
• Follow-up with rating scales• Use computer technology to facilitate the data-
based decision-making process
Data Based Decision Making with Diagnostic Tools for Academic
Performance and Social Behavior
Presentation Activity 1
• What have you heard about diagnostic tools?
• What are your biggest concerns?
3 Purposes of Diagnostic Tools
Follow up with any student identified on the USM as potentially needing additional support
Identify a specific skill or subset of skills for which students need additional instructional support
Assist in linking students with skill deficits to empirically supported intervention
Rationale for Using Universal Screening Measures
Rule out any previous concerns flagged by a universal screening measure
Find an appropriate diagnosis
Identify an effective treatment
Characteristics of Diagnostic Tools
Might be administered in a one-to-one format
Require more time to administer than a USM
Generally contain a larger sample of items than a USM
Generally have a wider variety of items than a USM
Presentation Activity 2
• What diagnostic tools (DT) do you have in place currently for:– Reading?– Writing?– Math?– Behavior?
• How do these fit with the characteristics of DTs outlined on the previous slide?
Examples of Diagnostic Tools for Academic Skills (DT-A) at Tier III and
Special Education
Curriculum Based Evaluation
Curriculum-Based Evaluation1. Answer this: What does the student need in
addition to what is already being provided (i.e., intensification of service)?
2. Conduct an analysis of student responding– Record review: Work samples– Observation: Independent work time– Interview: Ask the student why he or she struggles
3. Develop a hypothesis based on the above4. Formulate a “test” of this hypothesis
Data-Based Decision Making with DT-A
Example of CBE: Tammy
• Fourth-grade student• Did not make adequate progress with the Tier II
standard protocol intervention in winter• School psychologist administered an individual probe
(i.e., diagnostic tool) and observed Tammy’s completion of this probe
• An analysis of responding yielded a diagnosis of the problem
• This diagnosis of the problem informs intervention selection
1. What seems to bethe problem?
2. What should theintervention target?
3. Describe something ateacher could do to target this problem.
4. Do you have to buyan expensive program just for Tammy?
Revisiting the 3 Purposes of Diagnostic Tools: Tammy
Follow up with any student identified on the USM as potentially needing additional support
Identify a specific skill or subset of skills for which students need additional instructional support
Assist in linking students with skill deficits to empirically supported intervention
Revisiting the Characteristics of Diagnostic Tools: Tammy
Might be administered in a one-to-one format
Require more time to administer than a USM
Generally contain a larger sample of items than a USM
Generally have a wider variety of items than a USM
Presentation Activity 3
• How are you currently making data-based decisions using the diagnostic tools you have?
• Do you need to make some adjustments to your decision-making process?
• If you answered yes to the question above, what might those adjustments be?
Data-Based Decision Making with Diagnostic Tools for Social
Behavior (DT-B)
Office Discipline Referrals
• Good as a stand-alone screening tool for externalizing behavior problems
• Also good for analyzing schoolwide data– Discussed later
• See example teacher nomination form – Chapter 2 of book and on CD
Teacher Nomination
• Teachers are generally good judges• Nominate three students as externalizers• Nominate three students as internalizers• Trust your instincts and make decision
– There will be more sophisticated process to confirm your choices
• See example teacher nomination form – Chapter 2 of book and on CD
Confirming Teacher Nominations with Other Data
• Teacher, Parent, and Student Rating Scales– BASC– CBCL (Achenbach)
Example: Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD)
• Critical Events Inventory:– 33 severe behaviors (e.g., physical assault, stealing) in
checklist format– Room for other behaviors not listed
• Adaptive Scale: Assesses socially appropriate functional skills (e.g., following teacher directions)
• Maladaptive Scale: Assesses risk for developing antisocial behavior (e.g., testing teacher limits)
Functional Assessment and/or Experimental Functional Analysis
• Set of procedures that requires extensive training
• Functional Assessment: Results in a testable hypothesis about reason for behaviors (e.g., social attention, escape, tangible reinforcement, sensory reinforcement)
• Functional Analysis: Results in empirical support for the tested hypothesis
Functional Assessment:Remember to RIOT
• Record review– ODRs, antecedent-behavior-consequence (A-B-C) logs,
teacher narratives
• Interview– Teacher, child, parent, key personnel
• Observation– A-B-C logs, frequency counts– Classroom observations
• Test (not done): This is what the experimental functional analysis is all about
Data-Based Decision Making Using DT-B:Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence Logs
Behavior Recording LOG Directions: Please be as specific as possible. Child’s Name: Karyn E._______________________ Date: _4/30_________ Grade: 2nd Teacher: Mrs. Becker Setting: School: Library, classroom, recess Observer: Ryan M.____________________ Date Time Setting
Where did the behavior take place?
Task What should student be doing?
Behavior What did student do?
Consequences How did you and/or students react?
Effect What happened after these reactions?
10/14 10/16 10/17 10/18 10/19
9:15 10:05 9:45 9:00 10:45
Library Small group art project Recess Classroom Classroom
Picking out a book Working with peers Free play Transitioning between reading and specials (today was computer skills) Working with peers on piñata
Pushed a peer Threw glue bottle at peer Hit peer in face with small pebble Did not transition quietly Pushed peer’s work materials on the floor
I sent him to the office Given a time-out in the hall Stood him against wall. Peer cried Reminded him he must transition quietly Sent him to the office and called mother
Came back and was polite Came back in calm Went to class with bad attitude He continued singing “don’t you wish you girlfriend was hot like me” and asking a peer about American idol – He even asked if I watched it. His mother picked him up and took him home
Comments: As you can see he is often rude, does not respond well to traditional discipline, and is aggressive towards peers.
1. What patterns do you see here? 2. What is the likely function of behavior?
Data-Based Decision Making Using DT-B:Frequency Counts
1. What day does the behavior most often occur? What day is it least likely to occur?
2. What time of day does the behavior most often occur? Least often?
3. When should someone come to visit if they wanted to witness the behavior?
Note: It is just as important to lookat when the behavior occursas it is to look at when it doesn’t.
Data-Based Decision Making Using DT-B:Direct Behavioral Observations
Behavioral Observation Form Target Student Name:_Larry F.__________________ Birth date: 4/1/1998____ School: Metcalf__________________________________ Teacher: Havey_____ Observer: _Blake M.__________________________ Date: ___5/30/________
Behavior(s) Definitions Behavior 1: Aggression (A) Physical or verbal actions toward another person that has
potential for harm Behavior 2: Talk-outs (TO) Verbalizations without permission Behavior 3: On-task (OT) Oriented to academic task or appropriate engagement with
materials Behavior 4: Behavior 5:
Target Child Behavior 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 A X X 2 TO X X X X X X 3 OT X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 4 5
Behavior 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 1 A X X 2 TO X X X X X X 3 OT X X X X X 4 5
Composite Child Behavior 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 A X 2 TO X X X 3 OT X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 4 5
Behavior 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 1 A 2 TO X X 3 OT X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 4 5
TCB1 _4/40_ TCB2 __12/40 TCB3 22/40_ TCB4 ______ TCB5 ______ CCB1 _1/40_ CCB2 _5/40_ CCB3 _35/40 CCB4 ______ CCB5 ______ (#Occurrences/#Observations) X 100
1. What can you get from this?
2. Are all of these behaviors severe enough to warrant individualized intervention?
Experimental Functional Analysis• Experimentally testing a hypothesis about why a
behavior occurs:– Social attention– Escape– Tangible reinforcement– Sensory reinforcement
• Requires expertise, cooperation, and time• Strongest empirically supported method available
today for identifying cause(s) of behavior
Example of Experimental Functional Analysis: Talking Out in Class
Potential Function Test ConditionTangible reinforcement Contingent access to
reinforcement
Attention Contingent reprimand
Escape Contingent break upon talkingout after demand
Sensory stimulation Leave isolated in room
Control condition Free time with attention andno demands
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
SESSIONS
RA
TE
OF
TA
LK
ING
OU
T B
EH
AV
IOR
Attention
Tangible R+ Escape
Toy Play
What is the primary function of behavior?
Review of Important Points• Three Purposes for Diagnostic Tools
– As a follow-up to USM– To identify a specific skill that needs additional support– To assist in linking students to intervention
• Four Characteristics of Diagnostic Tools– Might be administered in a one-to-one format– Require more time to administer than a USM– Generally contain a larger sample of items than a USM– Generally have a wider variety of items than a USM
Review of Important Points
• DT-A procedures may differ at Tiers II and III
• DT-B procedures may differ at Tiers II and III
• DT data are not the only data to consider when developing an intervention
Progress Monitoring
Evaluating Intervention Effects
Purpose and Rationale
• Determine student responsiveness to intervention at any tier
• Ensure that students are receiving an appropriate level and type of instructional support
• Identify problems early if performance “slips” are observed
Characteristics of Progress Monitoring Tools
• Similar to USM:– Brief to administer– Allow for multiple administrations and repeated
measurement of student performance– Simple to score and interpret
• Can often be administered to groups of students
Progress Monitoring Tools for Academics (PMT-A)
• Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM)– Reading: DIBELS, AIMSweb, easyCBM– Math: AIMSweb, easyCBM
• Progress should be presented on a graph to all stakeholders (parent/guardian, student, teacher, principal)
Progress Monitoring Tools for Behavior (PMT-B)
• Completion of forms– Review data collection forms on topics related
diagnostic testing
• Collection of observation data• Progress should be presented on a graph to all
stakeholders (parent/guardian, student, teacher, principal)
• These graphed data should be similar to baseline/diagnostic data
Frequency of Progress Monitoring: A Tiered Approach
• Tier I– Three times per year at grade level
• Tier II– Once per week on grade-level probe– Once per week on intervention effects
• Tier III– Once per week at grade level– Nearly daily monitoring of intervention effects
• Special Education– Once per week at grade level– Nearly daily monitoring of intervention effects
Data-Based Decision Making with Progress Monitoring Tools
Evaluating Intervention Effectiveness
Rate of Improvement Relative to Peers
• Performing a gap analysis between target student(s) and same-grade peers
• Goal of the intervention is to decrease gap• Minimal desired outcome is to maintain gap
(i.e., keep student from falling farther behind)• At least two measurements are needed
Gap Analysis
The gap was maintaining (as shown on previous slide)
• We would prefer to see the gap decrease (as shown on next slide)
• We need a more potent intervention– More time– Different intervention
Rate of Improvement Relative to Criterion
• Focus on decreasing gap between student’s current performance a specific criterion– Example: Cut score that might predict student
meeting AYP
• This may be higher than the average peer performance in low-functioning schools
• This may be lower than the average peer performance in high-functioning schools
Evaluating Intervention Outcomes
Comparing Slopes
How long must an intervention be implemented before calling it quits?
• Whatever the manual says• 10-15 data points• Quarter system?• Do not stop an intervention until a pre-
specified date based on one of the above has been reached!– Doing so will result in a violation of treatment
integrity of the scientifically based/empirically supported intervention being implemented
Slope Rules(“Changing Interventions”)
• Change means new or severely intensified Intervention
• Do not make any changes without having differences in slopes between rate of improvement (ROI) of target student(s) compared to average peer or criterion
• Three possible slope decision rules …
Slope Comparison Decision Rule #1
• If the slope of the trend line is flatter than the slope of the aim/goal line (as shown on next slide), then a change should be made– Intensify the intervention or– Start a new intervention based on assessment
data
Slope Comparison Decision Rule #2
• If the slope of the trend line is steeper than the slope of the aim/goal line (as shown on next slide), then a change in intensity can be made– Decrease the frequency of the current intervention
per week, or– Decrease the duration of the current intervention
per week, or– Fade out the intervention, but do not stop it all
together!
Slope Comparison Decision Rule #3
• If the slope of the trend line is similar to the slope of the aim/goal line (as shown on next slide), then a change should be made– Intensify the intervention, or– Start a new intervention based on assessment data
• The intervention did not close the gap (the intervention was therefore ineffective)
• The student was unresponsive to the intervention
Monitoring Progress Along the Way
Three-Point Decision Rules: Adjustments
Three-Point Decision Rules (Adjusting)
• Adjust does not mean change– Adjust: Accommodation (slight change in current
Intervention)– Change: Modification (new intervention)
• Do not make any adjustments without having three consecutive data points above or below the goal/aim line.
• Three possible three-point decision rules …
Three Data-Point Decision Rule #1
• If you have three data points below the aim/goal line (as shown on next slide), then you can do something different– Accommodations only– Accommodation must be left in place for three
consecutive data points (above or below the line) before removing or adding additional accommodations
Three Data-Point Decision Rule #2• If you have three data points above the
aim/goal line (as shown on next slide), then you can do something different– Accommodations only– Accommodation must be left in place for three
consecutive data points (above or below the line) before removing or adding other accommodations
– Keep in mind the goal is to facilitate growth. If you are above the line you might consider doing nothing because you are on track to meet criteria
Three Data-Point Decision Rule #3
• If you do not have three data points above the aim/goal line (as shown on next slide), then do nothing different– Continue the intervention according to protocol– Changing something here will violate intervention
integrity
0 = No1= Good2= Excellent
Be Safe Be Respectful Be Your Personal Best Teacher initials
Keep hands, feet, and objects to self
Use kind words and actions
Follow directions Working in class
Class 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2
Recess 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2
Class 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2
Lunch 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2
Class 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2
Recess 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2
Class 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2
Total Points = Points Possible = 50
Today ______________% Goal ______________%
HAWK Report (Helping A Winning Kid)Date _________________ Teacher_______________________
Student_______________ Parent’s signature______________________________
Comments:
AU: we’ll need to include the permission statement here, in small print.
Monitoring Behavior with a Check-In/Check-Out System
Analyzing Data from a Check-In/Check-Out System
Evaluating the RTI Model• Both formative and summative evaluation should be conducted
– Annually for formative evaluation– Every three to five years for summative evaluation
• Process variables– Self-assessment– External assessment– Administrative feedback– Parent satisfaction
• Outcome Variables– High-stakes test scores, attendance, ODR– Percentage of students receiving services at each tier– Disaggregated data are important to AYP
Review of Important Points
• Progress monitoring is essential component of RTI– It is how you evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention
and determine RTI• Rate of improvement (ROI)
– Relative to peers or to specific criterion are options • Data-based decision making
– Three data points required before deciding whether to adjust an intervention (i.e., make a small accommodation)
– At least 10 to 15 data points often suggested as a minimum for decisions about making larger modifications
Review of Important Points• Daily Behavior Report Cards
– Typically used at Tier II– It is ideal to have the daily report card contain items that reflect
established schoolwide expectations.• Program Evaluation
– Evaluated by team and by external observer– Evaluate process variables and outcome variables– Feedback should be provided to teams
• Parent/Guardian Involvement and Satisfaction– Often can be gathered in a questionnaire at the end of problem-
solving team meetings and/or parent-teacher conferences
Questions