developing measurable annual goals - amazon...

DEVELOPING MEASURABLE ANNUAL GOALS

You supply the passion & dedication.

We’ll support your daily practice.

Who’s here?~

Something you want to learn more about

or

Something positive in your recent work with students

Resources■ www.GoalBookApp.com (login required) ■ www.ParentCenterHub.org

IDEA: http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cregs%2C300%2CD%2C MARSE: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/MARSE_Supplemented_with_IDEA_Regs_379598_7.pdf MDE Measurable Annual Goals: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/Measurable_Annual_Goals_Guidance_502383_7.pdf LISD IEPs and Toolkits / Annual Goals: http://www.lisd.us/ieps-and-toolkits/#IEP Creating Meaningful and Measurable Early Childhood IEP Goals (University of Kansas): http://www2.ku.edu/~kskits/ta/Packets/CreatingIEPs/ Legally Defensible IEP Goals PowerPoint: http://www.isbe.net/spec-ed/np_handouts/2012/session6.pdf

IDEA – 300.320 (excerpt)(a) General. As used in this part, the term individualized education program or IEP….must include—

■ (2)– (i) A statement of measurable annual goals, including academic and functional

goals designed to--■ (A) Meet the child's needs that result from the child's disability to enable

the child to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum; and

■ (B) Meet each of the child's other educational needs that result from the child's disability;

■ (3) A description of—– (i) How the child's progress toward meeting the annual goals described in

paragraph (2) of this section will be measured; and– (ii) When periodic reports on the progress the child is making toward meeting

the annual goals (such as through the use of quarterly or other periodic reports, concurrent with the issuance of report cards) will be provided;

http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cregs%2C300%2CD%2C300%252E320%2C

IDEA 300.324 (excerpt)■ (b) Review and revision of IEPs.

– (1) General. Each public agency must ensure that, subject to paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this section, the IEP Team--■ (i) Reviews the child's IEP periodically, but not less than annually, to

determine whether the annual goals for the child are being achieved; and■ (ii) Revises the IEP, as appropriate, to address--

– (A) Any lack of expected progress toward the annual goals described in Sec. 300.320(a)(2), and in the general education curriculum, if appropriate;

http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cregs%2C300%2CD%2C300%252E324%2C

MARSE R 340.1721e (excerpt)

■ Individualized education program. Rule 21e. – (1) An individualized education program shall be developed in accordance with

34 CFR part 300 and shall include all of the following in writing: ■ (a) A statement of measurable annual goals, including measurable short-

term objectives.

Note: The Michigan Office of Special Education has identified that Benchmarks may be written in the place of short term-objectives (STOs)

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/MARSE_Supplemented_with_IDEA_Regs_379598_7.pdf THINK, PAIR, SHARE: What does that mean to you? NOTE: Both IDEA and MARSE use goals – not goal(s) – Indicating a need for at least 2 annual goals in the IEP

The Spirit versus the Letter of the law: If you focus only on the letter of the law, then your point of view will be narrow. This means focusing only on the minimum requirements under IDEA and MARSE in order to comply with federal and state regulations. The result is that your approach will most likely have a narrow impact on students.

In contrast, an approach that applies the spirit of the law considers the concept of annual goals more broadly. With this perspective, Attaining quality educational outcomes for students becomes the focus of your planning, and your actions are more likely to lead to greater success for students with disabilities. Effective goal develop requires that you focus on both complying with the letter of the law and also understanding the spirit and intent of IDEA to allow access to general education. While paperwork is a necessity, the goal is to successfully plan for quality educational outcomes. The real measure of your work will be how successful your students are in school and in real life! THINK, PAIR, SHARE: What matters about measurable annual goals?

Gather Baseline Data

Identify Functional

and Academic Concerns

Describe Strengths,

Needs, and Student

Impact in the PLAAFP

Develop Goals

Identify Supports

and/or Related Services

Evaluate Progress

Developing Annual Measurable Goals

The Present Levels Statement or PLAAFP is based on the HERE and NOW PLAAFP stands for “Present Levels of Achievement and Functional Performance” From ParentCenterHub.org: What is a PLAAFP? The “present levels” statement is intended to comprehensively describe a child’s abilities, performance, strengths, and needs. It is based on, and arises out of, all the information and data previously collected and known about the child, most especially the full and individual evaluation of the child that must be conducted in accordance with IDEA’s evaluation/eligibility provisions of §§300.301 through 300.311. Where does the information for a child’s present levels come from? If the child is new to special education, the information used to craft the “present levels” statement will come from the tests and observations done during the child’s evaluation for eligibility. If the child’s IEP is being revised, the information may come from evaluations done during the year (by the school or from an Independent Educational Evaluation or IEE). Teachers and others who work with the child may offer information gained during the child’s day-to-day school routine. Parents also share information that help shape the child’s “present levels” statement. • Teacher, Parent, and Student Input • Documented observations – written, systematic, and ongoing • Classroom performance – work samples, classroom assessments, curricular probes, writing samples • Service Providers – logs, observations • Evaluations – initial, reevaluation, FBAs, etc. • Community Providers & Evaluations • Assessments – diagnostic, standardized, rating scales, criterion-reference, curriculum-based, benchmark, screening, progress

monitoring, formative, state, district, etc. • Checklists – behavior, homework, materials • Behavior and Discipline Logs (SWIS, eSchool) • Attendance records Who Collects the Data? • Designated Case Manager • Special Education Teacher • General Education Teacher • Any other Special Education provider (SSW, OT, PT, SLP, TC, etc.) Ongoing Data Collection

-Facilitates instructional planning -Helps determine if instructional strategies are working -Facilitates communication between IEP team members -Gives direction for setting future IEP goals -Assists in making placement and ESY decisions

IEP teams should work toward data that is: Multi-method – based on multiple ways to collect data such as teacher made assessments (gen and special ed), district assessments, standardized assessments, etc. Multi-observation – collected from several observations, assessments, or probes over time Multi-rater – assessed by more than one person if applicable/appropriate Multi-setting – assessed in special education and general education settings (RR, classroom, therapy settings, playground, etc.) The more methods, observations, raters, and settings, the more complete the picture of the student. Example: Strength: David can read some CVC words. Demonstrated Need: David scored a 178 on the NWEA test at the 1st percentile. His growth last year was -6. His reading comprehension is below grade level. David has a hard time paying attention in class. What additional data could we collect to get a more complete picture of David?


Identify Functional


Describe Strengths,

Needs, and Student


Develop Goals

Identify Supports


Evaluate Progress


Where to start with your PLAAFP: Hint: Know the curriculum standards for the student’s enrolled grade level. Knowing where students should be gives meaning to where they are. From ParentCenterHub.org: The “present levels” statement is crafted by considering the areas of development in which a child with a disability may need support. These are roughly divided into the two areas of development: academic and functional. Neither of these terms—academic achievement, functional performance—is defined in IDEA. However, both are discussed by the Department of Education as follows. Academic achievement. According to the Department: “Academic achievement” generally refers to a child’s performance in academic areas (e.g., reading or language arts, math, science, and history). We believe the definition could vary depending on a child’s circumstance or situation, and therefore, we do not believe a definition of “academic achievement” should be included in these regulations. (71 Fed. Reg. at 46662) Thus, when we’re talking about “academic achievement,” we’re talking about the academic subjects a child studies in school and the skills the student is expected to master in each: reading and language arts, writing, math and the various skills expected there, science, history, and so on. Children’s circumstances will vary, as the Department notes, which means that the examination of the child’s academic achievement and performance is an individualized consideration. Where does that child stand academically, and—a critical question—how does the child’s disability affect his or her involvement and progress in the general education curriculum? The “present levels” statement must contain a description that answers these questions. Functional performance. With respect to the meaning of “functional performance,” the Department of Education points to how the term is generally understood as referring to “skills or activities that are not considered academic or related to a child’s academic achievement.” This term “is often used in the context of routine activities of everyday living.” The reason that examples of functional skills were not included in IDEA was because “the range of functional skills is as varied as the individual needs of children with disabilities” (71 Fed. Reg. at 46661). But we can understand that “routine activities of everyday living” refer to skills and activities of daily living skills such as: -dressing, eating, going to the bathroom; -social skills such as making friends and communicating with others; -behavior skills, such as knowing how to behave across a range of settings; and -mobility skills, such as walking, getting around, going up and down stairs.

All of these types of skills are important to consider when writing the child’s “present levels” statement, asking questions such as: -Where does the child stand in terms of functional performance? -How does the child’s disability affect functional performance and, from there, his or her involvement and progress in the general education curriculum? As with academic achievement, consideration of a child’s functional performance is highly individualized. You also won’t find a description in IDEA of how functional skills are measured, “because this is a decision that is best left to public agencies, based on the needs of their children.” (Id.) However, the Department goes on to note that: [T]he evaluation procedures used to measure a child’s functional skills must meet the same standards as all other evaluation procedures [described in IDEA at §300.304(c)(1)]. (71 Fed. Reg. at 46661) When all is said and done, then, the IEP Team must talk about the impact of the child’s disability on his or her ability to learn and do the kinds of things that typical, nondisabled children learn and do. This is the information that is then included in the IEP as the “present levels” statement.


Identify Functional


Describe Strengths,

Needs, and Student


Develop Goals

Identify Supports


Evaluate Progress


The “present levels” statement is intended to comprehensively describe a child’s abilities, performance, strengths, and needs. It is based on, and arises out of, all the information and data previously collected and known about the child, most especially the full and individual evaluation of the child that must be conducted in accordance with IDEA’s evaluation/eligibility provisions of §§300.301 through 300.311. A well-written present level will describe (the 1st 3 are REQUIRED): • The child’s strengths and weaknesses

• There must be a strength for each area of need based on data • A description of the need, which includes the starting point for instruction

• Baseline data and data sources • Data should be presented in specific, objective terms • Data should be presented with meaningful context

• The adverse impact of the disability • How the child’s disability affects his or her ability to be involved and progress in the general curriculum.

• What helps the child learn • What limits or interferes with the child’s learning • Frequency and location data Don’t use guesswork – don’t write your thoughts about why a student may be struggling with a particular area, unless you are able to offer specific evidence: “Alyssa may have trouble focusing because she like talking to their friends too much” Examples Examples can be very illustrative, so we have included several below. None is a complete “present levels” statement, of course. These snippets are provided to suggest the range of information and detail you might find in a “present levels” statement. -Elise is essentially non-verbal and uses many ways to communicate including: gestures, facial expression, eye gaze, vocalizations, word approximations, head nods for yes, head shakes for no, and use of a Dynavox 3100 augmentative communication device which she accesses with a head switch. -Lawrence needs a quiet, separate place to do individual work. -Terri learns quickly when working in a small group. -Zung understands and remembers what he hears about a subject. Learning by reading or looking at pictures is difficult for him and doesn’t work as well. -Kim imitates other children and learns from them. -Results of standardized testing using the Woodcock-Johnson Revised (WJ-R) show Mario’s basic reading skills are at a beginning-4th grade level (standard score = 89). His basic writing skills are at a 3.7 grade level (standard score = 81). -David’s performance in basic reading and writing is significantly below his ability. David makes errors when he reads and has trouble decoding long words, but his comprehension skills are strong. He uses context cues and picture cues to help him understand what he is reading.

-Ann stops working when the work becomes too time consuming or the difficulty of the assignment increases -Chris’s slow reading speed causes frustration and hinders work completion -Lindsey’s difficulty with reading comprehension affects her ability to answer written test questions across subject areas -Mindy’s behavior causes her to lose opportunities for friendship and participation in activities with other students “Present Levels” for Preschoolers Oh, and one more thing about the “present levels” statement. If we’re talking about a preschool child, the statement will be a bit different. In this circumstance, “present levels” won’t be talking about how the preschooler’s disability affects his or her participation in the general education curriculum. For preschoolers, the statement needs to talk about how the disability affects the child’s participation in appropriate activities—meaning preschool activities. Those are often different than what school-age children are involved in and include things like learning basic skills such as using scissors, coloring, grouping things, learning your letters, playing children’s games, and so on. So the “present levels” statement for a preschooler will describe how the child’s disability affects his or her participation and success in the preschool environment. Here are two examples: -Dayton prefers to play in isolation and becomes upset (e.g., cries and hits others) when another child comes too close. As a result his peer interactions at playtime are limited. -Damien’s attention problems result in failure to follow the teacher’s directions, talking out of turn and responding inappropriately during group activities.

Writing a PLAAFP in IlluminateStudent Strengths

• Identify a strength for each area of need

•The strength is the starting point for instruction

Parental Input/Concerns

•Parent input is parent information about the student

•Designate how the parent’s concern will be addressed in the IEP

Evaluation Types

•Designate where you obtained the data for your PLAAFP

Demonstrated Needs

•Present current baseline data in specific, objective terms

•Give meaningful context the data

•Also consider what helps the child learn and what limits or interferes with the child’s learning

• Include Academic and Functionalneeds

Impact

• Identify how the disability affects the child’s ability to engage and progress in the general curriculum

•Select the appropriate impact for each “Demonstrated Need” area

•Additional impact narrative can be placed in the Demonstrated Needs statement itself


Identify Functional


Describe Strengths,

Needs, and Student


Develop Goals

Identify Supports


Evaluate Progress


Moving from the PLAAFP to Goals Student needs must be addressed via at least one of the following: -Measurable annual goals -Supplementary aids, services, and supports -Transition activities (students ages 16+) A fully developed, well-written “present levels” is the foundation upon which the rest of the IEP can be developed to specify appropriate goals, services, supports, accommodations, and placement for the child. From ParentCenterHub.org: The Close Tie Between the “Present Levels” Statement and the Annual Goals A child’s annual goals must be crafted with careful attention to enabling the child to be involved in, and make progress in, the general education curriculum. Again, we see in IDEA’s language the close tie between the “present levels” statement and the annual goals that are then developed. The “present levels” statement must include a description of how the child’s disability affects his or her involvement and progress in the general education curriculum. This information will be useful to the IEP team in developing annual goals that are mindful of the child’s participation in general education (Rebhorn & Küpper, 2007). From the Legally Defensible powerpoint: Present Levels of Performance should provide information that specifically relates to the goals and objectives and should allow for direct comparison of progress.

Deciding on Goals Using Prompting Questions While each state and/or local school district typically develops its own version of the IEP form, the one absolute universal from district to district and state to state is that the IEP must contain the required information described in §§300.320 and 300.324. It can be a challenge, to say the least, to create on paper a living, breathing, appropriate educational plan and to translate that plan into effective implementation. Some IEP forms lend themselves well to the IEP development process by incorporating descriptive, dynamic, and concrete language. One such example comes from the Implementation Guide developed by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (2008), portions of which are quoted below as examples of how the development of an effective IEP can be facilitated by prompts that ask probing questions, pose appropriate considerations, and provide a format that promotes the capture of comprehensive information on, and for, a child. On the Massachusetts Implementation Guide, the very first prompt given for the development of annual goals says: There must be a direct correlation between the annual goal(s) and the present level of educational performance. (p. 4) The next series of prompts asks: -What can the student currently do? -What challenging, yet attainable, goal can we expect the student to meet by the end of this IEP period? -How will we know that the student has reached this goal? (p. 4) -What evidence will we need to show the student has met the desired level of performance? -Will attaining this goal help close the “learning gap” for this student? And finally, the Implementation Guide adds: -In order for the student to make progress in the general education curriculum and life of the school, academic and functional goals should continue to be skill based, measurable and reflect individual student needs based upon the disability. (p. 4) Using these types of prompts, or posing similar ones, will help IEP teams develop annual goals for children in a logical, sequential, simple, yet comprehensive manner that connects all the related pieces and leads to an effective, appropriate IEP. It’s also useful to keep in mind that the crafting of annual goals for a child involves considering each area of that child’s needs related to the general curriculum, nonacademic and/or extracurricular activities, and any other educational needs that result from the child’s disability. Writing goals can be one of the most challenging parts of developing the IEP. One reason for this is because the goals may cover so many different areas.

Academic vs. FunctionalThe 2 types of

goals have different

purposes.

There are 2 types of goals. Their use is based on student need.

Measurable Annual Goals are developed based on the PLAAFP.

Each student receiving special

education services has a

PLAAFP.

Present Levels of Academic Achievement

and Functional Performance (PLAAFP)

Measurable Annual Goals

Academic GoalsFocus on student

learning and progress in the general curriculum

Functional GoalsFocus on student

accessing the general curriculum

Addressing the Child’s Academic and Functional Needs IDEA uses the terms “academic and functional” to describe the kind of goals that need to be written. Their use here, with respect to annual goals, indicates that the writing of measurable annual goals flows from the content of the “present levels” statement, where the IEP team described the child’s present levels of academic and functional performance. Depending upon the child’s needs, some goals may target areas of the general education curriculum. Answering a prompting question such as “what does the child need to learn or do academically?” indicates what goals might be appropriate for that child. Examples could include learning to identify a range of sight words, write more proficiently, or learn basic number facts or solve more complicated word problems. Other goals may target learning that comes from a special education or individualized curriculum, such as reading Braille. Another area for goals might be what the child needs to learn or be able to do functionally. These type of goals don’t come under a typical “academic” curriculum. But if a child has functional needs that impact participation in the educational environment, such as learning to eat independently, use public transportation, or communicate with an augmentative communication device, then goals to meet these needs would be important to include in the IEP. The same is true of goals to address social or emotional needs, such as impulse control, anger management, or appropriate behavioral alternatives. Note: Students with moderate to severe, and sometimes mild, cognitive impairments will likely have several goals and objectives targeting functional skill needs. Note: Secondary transition students would benefit from goals addressing how their disability affects their postsecondary vision. But that’s not all. As IDEA also indicates, the child may have other educational needs that result from his or her disability. Those needs must be addressed through measurable annual goals in the IEP as well.

Annual

The Importance of “Annual” Another aspect of writing annual goals is contained in the word “annual.” What might the child be expected to achieve in a year? A well-written goal must describe the skill or level of performance that the child is expected to reach by a given time, at least in a year. From the Legally Defensible Powerpoint: A goal should be written for what the team expects the student to achieve within a year, so that the same goal is not repeated year to year. • Annual goals are statements that describe what a child with a disability can reasonably be expected to accomplish within a 12-month period, in the child’s special education program. Letter to Butler, 213 IDELR 118 (OSERS 1988); Notice of Interpretation, Appendix A to 34 CFR Part 300, Question 4 (1999 regulations).

Measurable

And there’s something else that’s very important. Can you measure whether or not the child has achieved the goal? The 2004 Amendments to IDEA requires that the annual goals be measurable. The IEP team must be able to tell if the goal has been reached, because the child’s performance can be counted, seen, heard, or somehow measured. Not surprisingly, writing IEP goals that are measurable challenges many an IEP team. You may find Wrightslaw’s resource on Smart IEPs very helpful. “SMART” stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time-bound. To read more about writing IEP goals that are SMART, visit:http://www.wrightslaw.com/nltr/10/nl.0511.htm Briefly here, let’s take apart two examples of measurable annual goals and see what their elements are. Example 1: Including a Performance Indicator David will achieve a reading score at the 5th grade level or above, as measured by the Qualitative Reading Inventory (QRI). (Rebhorn, 2009) [NOTE: this example does NOT include the required timeframe] Here we see that the goal is for David to be reading at a 5th grade level or above by the end of the school year. The measurable part of the statement comes at the end: “as measured by…” The named reading inventory will serve as the tool for measuring David’s progress. This is a common way in which goals are made measurable—by specifying a grade- or age-level performance indicator, especially one that’s been established through district or state standards, or within a curriculum, within scope-and-sequence materials that the school/district/state uses. Example 2: Indicating a Rate By the end of the year, Elise will be able to use her augmentative communication device to produce a thought, comment, or idea in 3 out of 5 trials with no more than 50% teacher prompts or cues. [NOTE: this example does NOT include the method of documentation] Here again, the measurable part of the annual goal is found in the closing phrase. “In 3 out of 5 trials…” There are conditions included to further specify what “acceptable performance” will mean: “…with no more than 50% teacher prompts or cues.” Indicating a rate (80% of the time, with 75% success, with 90% accuracy) is another common way that IEPs teams make annual goals measurable. From ParentCenterHub.org: More Examples of Measurable Annual Goal Statements Many of our readers and website visitors have asked us for more examples—-more, more! So. We will–quoting from the Nebraska Department of Education’s (2010) online guide for IEP Teams. (Great guide, BTW.) The four critical components of a well-written goal are: -Timeframe is usually specified in the number of weeks or a certain date for completion. A year is the maximum allowed length for the timeframe.

In 36 instructional weeks… By November 19, 2008…. By the end of 2008-09 school year… -Conditions/Method of Measurement specify the circumstances that prompt the child’s performance of an observable behavior. Conditions are dependent on the behavior being measured and involve the application of skills or knowledge. When presented with 2nd grade level text… Given a mixed 4th grade level math calculation probe…. Given a story prompt and 30 minutes to write… During therapy-based documented observations… -Behavior clearly identifies the performance that is being monitored, usually reflects an action or can be directly observed, and is measurable. Sarah will read… Mary will score… Chris will say…… -Criterion [or Mastery] identifies how much, how often, or to what standards the behavior must occur in order to demonstrate that the goal has been reached. The goal criterion specifies the amount of growth the child or youth is expected to make by the end of the annual goal period. Production: At least 5 math problems… Percentage: With at least 80% accuracy… Duration: At least 5 minutes at a time… Grade Level: At the 4.5 grade level… Fluency: 96 words per minute… Tally: With 5 or fewer behavior checks… Instances: No more than 3 times a day… Change from Baseline (provide baseline in goal or PLAAFP): Improve by at least 10%... Trial-Based: In 8 of 10 trials… Session-Based: On 9 consecutive attempts... Score-based: Earning 4 or better when graded according to the 6-trait writing rubric. (pp. 25-27)

MeasurableMeasurable isn’t everything…

Hints for Writing Measurable Goals and Objectives Observable and measurable skills demonstrated by the child are targeted skills that describe something which can be seen or heard by an observer. Behaviors have a beginning and an end.

Meaningful

From the University of Kansas Creating IEPs Packet: Identifying Meaningful Goals There is a direct relationship between the needs identified on the PLAAFP and the measurable annual goals. In order to identify really meaningful goals, the PLAAFP should first identify those needs, which if addressed, will make the most positive difference for the child and his/her family. Pretti-Frontczak and her colleagues also recommend choosing skills that are: • Functional, usable, observable and measurable • Not likely to develop without intervention • Developmentally appropriate/match child’s developmental level • Address multiple areas and are generalizable • A priority to all team members, including parents • Enhance participation in appropriate activities • Realistic and achievable as a means to prioritizing meaningful and measurable IEP goals. Writing Meaningful Goals A goal is meaningful when it describes a behavior/skill that will have a real impact on the success of a child in current, as well as future environments. Therefore, the IEP team should select goals that are not likely to develop without intervention. Goals are meaningful when they enhance and address multiple areas in a child's life, when they match a child's developmental level, and are based on the progress a child can reasonably be expected to achieve within 12 months. A good way to determine if a goal is meaningful is to apply the "so what" test. Ask yourself, "What will the ability to achieve this goal do for the child?" The following is an example of the "so what" test: Goal In 12 months, during personal sharing time at school, Kelly will appropriately respond to the topic and initiations of others (i.e., stay on topic, ask pertinent questions, make related statements) 80% of given opportunities, as measured on 5 consecutive, structured observations. So What? Kelly will be able to gain appropriate information, maintain positive relationships with peers and adults, and function appropriately in group activities. In this example, there are many benefits to Kelly in accomplishing the goal. The answers to the "so what" test indicate this is a useful skill for Kelly, and therefore the goal is meaningful. Had the team been unable to provide a good answer to the "so what" test, then the goal would not be functional and another goal should be selected.

A second test used by teams to identify the appropriateness of a goal is the "stranger test". Goals should be written so that anyone who is working with the child, including the parents, can use the information to develop appropriate intervention plans and assess the child's progress. Of course you will be teaching your student many things that are not specifically written out as goals. Through the course of the school day, your student will be engaging in planned activities built from your classroom curriculum. Many of the skills that were identified in the evaluation, but not identified as needing specialized instruction, will be addressed through the course of the general education curriculum. Your student will participate and be supported in those activities just like all the other children. Since you are not doing anything different for your student in this part of the program, there is no need for the intensive level of monitoring that is required for an IEP goal.

Standards-Based

-Goals must be based on the grade-level standards for the grade in which the student is enrolled -IEP teams are still able to individualize annual goals for the student From the US Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services Dear Colleague Letter 11/16/15: To help make certain that children with disabilities are held to high expectations and have meaningful access to a State’s academic content standards, we write to clarify that an individualized education program (IEP) for an eligible child with a disability under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) must be aligned with the State’s academic content standards for the grade in which the child is enrolled. […] we expect annual IEP goals to be aligned with State academic content standards for the grade in which a child is enrolled. This alignment, however, must guide but not replace the individualized decision-making required in the IEP process. In fact, the IDEA’s focus on the individual needs of each child with a disability is an essential consideration when IEP Teams are writing annual goals that are aligned with State academic content standards for the grade in which a child is enrolled so that the child can advance appropriately toward attaining those goals during the annual period covered by the IEP. In developing an IEP, the IEP Team must consider how a child’s specific disability impacts his or her ability to advance appropriately toward attaining his or her annual goals that are aligned with applicable State content standards during the period covered by the IEP. For example, the child’s IEP Team may consider the special education instruction that has been provided to the child, the child’s previous rate of academic growth, and whether the child is on track to achieve grade-level proficiency within the year. The Department recognizes that there is a very small number of children with the most significant cognitive disabilities whose performance must be measured against alternate academic achievement standards, as permitted in 34 CFR §200.1(d) and §300.160(c). As explained in prior guidance, alternate academic achievement standards must be aligned with the State’s grade-level content standards. The standards must be clearly related to grade-level content, although they may be restricted in scope or complexity or take the form of introductory or pre-requisite skills. This letter is not intended to limit a State’s ability to continue to measure the achievement of the small number of children with the most significant cognitive disabilities against alternate academic achievement standards, but rather to ensure that annual IEP goals for these children reflect high expectations and are based on the State’s content standards for the grade in which a child is enrolled. In a case where a child’s present levels of academic performance are significantly below the grade in which the child is enrolled, in order to align the IEP with grade-level content standards, the IEP Team should estimate the growth toward the State academic content standards for the grade in which the child is enrolled that the child is expected to achieve in the year covered by the IEP. In a situation where a child is performing significantly below the level of the grade in which the child is enrolled, an IEP Team should determine annual goals that are ambitious but achievable. In other words, the annual goals need not necessarily result in the child’s reaching grade-level within the year covered by the IEP, but the goals should be sufficiently ambitious to help close the gap. The IEP must also include the specialized instruction to address the unique needs of the child that result from the child’s disability necessary to ensure access of the child to the general curriculum, so that the child can meet the State academic content standards that apply to all children in the State.

MDE ModelTo support(his/her)

postsecondary goal of _____

(Student) will

(skill or behavior that can be counted or observed)

As measured by (measurementor assessment

strategy)

(level of attainment to show mastery

such as accuracy or rate)

By (timeframe or date)

■ A goal must have the RED, GREEN, PURPLE, and ORANGE components to be measurable

■ The BLUE component is helpful to demonstrate the connection to the postsecondary goal but is not required by law. It is used in Transition IEPs only (students ages 14-16 and older).

MDE Guidance

In Illuminate: Edit the Modified Goal Description

MDE Guidance in Illuminate

MDE Model

To support(his/her)


(Student) will



strategy)




In Illuminate: Edit the

Modified Goal Description

Modified Goal Description:1st Text Box

Performance Criteria: 2nd text box

Length of time: 3rd text box

■ The RED, GREEN, PURPLE, and ORANGE components MUST be in the Modified Goal Description even if they are also in the Short Term Objectives!

While you edit…

(not visible but here)

MDE in Illuminate

MDE Model

To support(his/her)


(Student) will



strategy)




Example

To support her postsecondary goal of working as a teacher, Suzanne will identify the problem and solution of an informational text and make 3 inferences about

the theme or message of each chapter

as measured by informal reading assessment 4 out of 5 times

by February 2017.

Example

To support his postsecondary goals of living with his parents and participating in supported volunteering,

Josh will increase his communication skills by indicating his activity preference to others via a 4-compartment

switch

as measured by documented teacher observations in 60% of trials

by February 2017.

■ Note: The Modified Goal Description will print as a complete sentence on the PDF

After you edit… When you print…

Note: the above graphic includes 2 additional, suggested – but not required – IEP goal components: (1) setting/context and (2) supports needed *Keep in mind, you are obligated to follow what is written in the IEP until the IEP is updated or amended. From ParentCenterHub.org: 8 components of a well written IEP goal • Focused – on the student’s area of need • Meaningful – promotes growth for the student in the coming year. Not exclusive to classroom or a particular situation but

focuses on t he student’s lifelong success • Precise – is your language clear and articulate. Someone else can easily understand the goal • Measurable – can you measure percentages and rate of completion of this goal? • Standards-based – is the goal rooted in academic goals that fit the general education curriculum • Attainable – can this goal reasonably met within 1 calendar year? • Ambitious – want them to be attainable but rigorous enough to help students access the gen ed curriculum • Observable – can you watch this action being performed so as to measure it?

Short Term Objectives

From ParentCenterHub: IDEA’s Exact Words Here’s the verbatim requirement for this component of the IEP. (ii) For children with disabilities who take alternate assessments aligned to alternate achievement standards, a description of benchmarks or short-term objectives… §300.320(a)(2)(ii) And for Other Children? At a State’s Discretion Interestingly, states may still choose to use benchmarks with other children, but this is a matter left up to local discretion. Note: Michigan Requires at Least 2 Short Term Objectives Per Annual Goal The Purpose of Benchmarks and Short-Term Objectives One of the changes made by the 2004 Amendments to IDEA concerns the requirement for benchmarks or short-term objectives in IEPs. Previously, benchmarks or short-term objectives were required to be developed in correlation with a child’s annual IEP goals. While this requirement changed in the 2004 reauthorization, their general purpose has not. Benchmarks indicate the interim steps a child will take to reach an annual goal. They also serve as a measurement gauge to monitor a child’s progress and determine if the child is making sufficient progress towards attaining an annual goal. Using a roadmap analogy, benchmarks and short-term objectives are used to divide the trip to the final destination into concrete, smaller steps. Short-term objectives are developed based on a logical breakdown of the major components of the annual goals, and they can serve as milestones for measuring progress toward meeting the goals. The objectives should be written in an order that reflects a progression through the various skills needed to meet the annual goals and permit monitoring of progress throughout the year. Appendix A to 34 CFR Part 300. An Example Here’s an example of an annual goal with short-term objectives for a student named David. The IEP team developed David’s reading goal and objectives by looking at the information in his present level statement. Then they determined the skills that David needs to learn in order for him to be able to read at a 5th grade level. Annual Goal: David will achieve a reading score at the 5th grade level or above, as measured by the Qualitative Reading Inventory (QRI). [Note: this example does NOT include the timeframe] Short-term Objectives By October, when given a list of 20 unfamiliar words that contain short-vowel sounds, David will decode them with 90% accuracy on each of 5 trials. By October, when given 20 unfamiliar words that contain long-vowel sounds, David will decode them with 90% accuracy on each of 5 trials.

By December, David will correctly pronounce 20 words with 90% accuracy on each of 5 trials to demonstrate understanding of the rule that where one vowel follows another, the first vowel is pronounced with a long sound and the second vowel is silent (ordeal, coast). By December, David will correctly separate 20 words by syllables with 90% accuracy on each of 5 trials to demonstrate understanding of the rule that each syllable in a word must contain a vowel (les-son).

Short-Term Objectives and BenchmarksBoth STOs and

Benchmarks are reported to parents

via the Progress Report

Both STOs and Benchmarks

assess student progress toward the measurable

annual goal

The 2 types of intermediate steps characterize goal

progress in different ways

Intermediate steps toward the

measurable annual goal must contain

measurable components

Intermediate steps include the Skill or Behavior, Mastery Criteria, Evaluation

Procedure, and Evaluation Schedule

Short Term ObjectivesCompromised of at

least 2 separate but relevant measurable

skills

May be addressed sequentially or simultaneously

Benchmarked Goals

Comprised of one relevant measurable skill with at least 2 progress targets

(benchmarks) on an aim line

Addressed sequentially

Short-Term Objectives

Benchmarks


Identify Functional


Describe Strengths,

Needs, and Student


Develop Goals

Identify Supports and/or Related Services

Evaluate Progress


The IEP must also contain a statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services to be provided to the child, or on behalf of the child. That’s three separate, distinct, and critical elements–special education, related services, and supplementary aids and services. From the Legally Defensible powerpoint: Each IEP goal should correspond with services or identified instruction. Conversely, there should not be direct service minutes without a corresponding goal. From Parentcenterhub.org: SPECIAL EDUCATION Special education is instruction that is specially designed to meet the unique needs of a child with a disability. This means education that is individually developed to address a specific child’s needs that result from his or her disability. Since each child is unique, it is difficult to give an overall example of special education. It is individualized for each child. Some students may be working at the pre-kindergarten grade level, others at the first, second, or third grade level. There may be students whose special education focuses primarily on speech and language development, cognitive development, or needs related to a physical or learning disability. Special education for any student can consist of: -an individualized curriculum that is different from that of same-age, nondisabled peers (for example, teaching a blind student to read and write using Braille); -the same (general) curriculum as that for nondisabled peers, with adaptations or modifications made for the student (for example, teaching 3rd grade math but including the use of counting tools and assistive technology for the student); and -a combination of these elements. It is also important to remember that the education, services, and supports outlined in a child’s IEP do not necessarily cover that child’s entire education.The IEP only addresses those educational needs resulting from the child’s disability. If a child needs special education support throughout the school day, for all activities, the IEP will cover all these needs. If the child doesn’t need special education support in one or more areas (for example, physical education, music, or science), then the IEP will not include these subjects. The child accesses them through the general curriculum/ class, with no additional special education services. RELATED SERVICES Related services help children with disabilities benefit from their special education by providing extra help and support in needed areas, such as speaking or moving. Related services can include, but are not limited to, any of the following: -speech-language pathology and audiology services -interpreting services

-psychological services -physical and occupational therapy -recreation, including therapeutic recreation -early identification and assessment of disabilities in children -counseling services, including rehabilitation counseling -orientation and mobility services -medical services for diagnostic or evaluation purposes -school health services and school nurse services -social work services in schools -parent counseling and training SUPPLEMENTARY AIDS AND SERVICES The IEP must contain a statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services to be provided to the child, or on behalf of the child. The Short Story on Supplementary Aids and Services Supplementary aids and services are often critical elements in supporting the education of children with disabilities in regular classes and their participation in a range of another school activities. IDEA’s definition of this term (at §300.42) reads: Supplementary aids and services means aids, services, and other supports that are provided in regular education classes, other education-related settings, and in extracurricular and nonacademic settings, to enable children with disabilities to be educated with nondisabled children to the maximum extent appropriate … Speaking practically, supplementary aids and services can be accommodations and modifications to the curriculum under study or the manner in which that content is presented or a child’s progress is measured. But that’s not all they are or can be. Supplementary aids and services can also include: -direct services and supports to the child, and -support and training for staff who work with that child. That’s why determining what supplementary aids and services are appropriate for a particular child must be done on an individual basis.


Identify Functional


Describe Strengths,

Needs, and Student


Develop Goals

Identify Supports


Evaluate Progress


From ParentCenterHub.org: Prompting Questions to Help Guide the Discussion IEP teams may find it easier to address this component of the IEP by framing the discussion around specific questions. For example, the IEP team might ask itself these three questions: -How will the child’s progress be measured? -When will the child’s progress be measured? -How well will the child need to perform in order to achieve his or her stated IEP goals (and, for some children, benchmarks or objectives)? The information on how well a child must perform and how his or her progress will be measured is often called evaluation criteria. Well-written evaluation criteria are stated in objective, measurable terms. (You’ll note the tie-in with the requirement that the annual goals written for a child must be measurable.) For example, a child might be required to perform a task “with 90% accuracy” or get 18 out of 20 words correct in each of 5 trials. These are concrete numbers or scores, establishing what the IEP team considers an acceptable level of performance or progress for the child. In other instances, progress may not be measured in number scores, such as statements like this: By June 15, Vicky will complete the obstacle course unassisted, as documented by the adapted physical education teacher. In this example, the teacher will observe and take notes while Vicky completes the obstacle course. Teacher observation/notes are one way of checking progress. Other ways of checking progress may include: -reviewing class work and homework assignments; -giving quizzes, tests, or teacher-made assessments; and -giving informal and/or formal assessments (the QRI or Woodcock-Johnson, for example). Reporting to Parents on the Child’s Progress IDEA’s exact words above also refer to the periodic reporting of each child’s progress, which gives parents, other members of the IEP team, and the public agency the opportunity to review the IEP and make adjustments if they are warranted. When a child does not make the progress expected, then it’s essential to determine why and take corrective action. The accepted standard in Michigan is to report progress at least as often as general education students’ progress is reported (i.e. at reporting periods).

Troubleshooting

What if the parent doesn’t agree with the goals? What if the parent insists on adding a particular goal? What if the student is not progressing toward the goals? What if the student meets the goals quickly? What if IEP goals can’t be readily identified for the student?

Legal Review

From the Legally Defensible PowerPoint: In re: Student with a Disability, 50 IDELR 236 (SEA NY 2008): • Present level that student has “delays in fine motor coordination” is insufficient because it fails to provide his current level of ability and how his impairment affects his ability to complete school-based fine motor activities. • Likewise, stating that student’s “weak” expressive language skills affect his ability to interact appropriately in class does not describe how he functionally communicates, his level of difficulty, or the level of assistance he needs. • Stating that math skills are at a Pre-K level does not provide specific information about what math skills student possesses. The parent should know what skill acquisition/improvement is expected from the student at the end of the IEP year. • Because the goals in the child’s IEP were expressed in subjective and inexact terms such as “to increase participation,” and “to increase compliance,” the team could not make an objective analysis of whether the child was making progress toward his goals and objectives. Anchorage Sch. Dist., 51 IDELR 230 (SEA AK 2008). • A child’s annual goals were not measurable because they contained phrases such as “will spontaneously,” “with little prompting,” “with some attention/supervision,” “easy/familiar task,” “difficult/novel task,” and other undefined terms. Pueblo Sch. Dist. 60, 110 LRP 7284 (SEA CO 10/16/09). The staff member should know how to implement it from the face of the goal. • Under that test, an IEP goal is appropriate if a person unfamiliar with the IEP would be able to implement the goal, implement the assessment of the student’s progress on the goal, and determine whether the student’s progress was satisfactory. Mason City Cmty. Sch. Dist., 46 IDELR 148 (SEA IA 2006). The FAPE standard is satisfied when the IEP was reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit, determined prospectively. T.G. v. Midland Sch. Dist. 7 (C.D. Ill. 2012): • Reading comprehension goal was not properly written because it did not require student to actually read, but merely to listen to a story and answer questions about it. • Writing goal in which teacher evaluated student progress on a numerical scale was acceptable. Writing is measured qualitatively and teacher may subjectively evaluate progress. • Parents’ “active and influential” involvement in developing IEP is an important factor in determining its appropriateness. Make sure the STOs are attainable! From the Legally Defensible powerpoint: M. H. v. N.Y. City Dep’t. of Ed., 2012 WL 2477649 (2nd Cir. 2012): • Short-term goals were unattainable. Student would not be able to distinguish fact and fiction and predict outcomes when currently reading one word at a time. • Goals insufficiently individualized; taken from grade level goals. • Vast majority of objectives lacked evaluation procedures. “Teacher observation” insufficient.

Klein Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Hovem, 745 F.Supp. 2d 700 (S.D. Tex. 2010): • Student with IQ of 142 had LD in written language and reading and failed writing portion of state test repeatedly. When student could not complete a college application, parents unilaterally placed him in specialized school. • Goals were not individualized, but were the same goals for all non-special education student who wanted to attend college: take general ed coursework; pass courses at 70%; pass state tests. • Same goals year after year contributed to insufficient transition plan. • IEP team did not consider functional skills for written language LD such as preparing lists, writing messages. Ravenswood City Sch. Dist. v. J.S., 2012 WL 2510844 (N.D. Cal. 2012): • Goal to identify upper and lower case alphabet letters, measured by percentage correctly identified, failed to provide measurable standard where there was no indication of how many letters student could identify at beginning of school year. • Goal to respond to questions when read a story did not help student learn to read, contained no baseline percentage, goal percentage or criteria for the questions and answers. • Objectives to (a) add and subtract numbers to 10 with 40% accuracy first trimester, (b) up to 15 with 60% accuracy second trimester and (c) up to 20 with 80% accuracy third trimester did not link success or failure in previous trimesters. Strongsville City Sch. Dist., 59 IDELR 176 (SEA OH 2012): • Goal was not measurable: ”The student will understand that the use of time is one way to communicate to others and that people often have a negative perception of those who are not able to judge time and its use by turning in 90% of all assignments quarterly.” Pueblo Sch. Dist. 60, 110 LRP 7284 (SEA CO 10/16/09). The failure to monitor a student’s progress toward IEP goals can amount to a denial of FAPE. County Sch. Bd. Of Henrico County v. R.T., 45 IDELR 274 (E.D. Va. 2006). A student’s failure to make measurable progress towards goals, and the team’s repeating IEP goals the student has still not mastered, can be evidence that the district’s IEP is flawed. K.S. v. Freemont Unified Sch. Dist., 53 IDELR 287 (N.D. Ca. 2009): • Slow progress does not necessarily mean a student did not receive FAPE, especially when the student is severely disabled. • IEP appropriate where majority of goals were clearly revised or at least expanded after student achieved the previous year’s expectations. • Appropriate progress does not equate to achievement of each and every IEP goal. • Reasonableness of IEP is not assessed in hindsight, but according to information available to team at the time the IEP was drafted.

Practice

Where to find help: • Regional Supervisor • Monitor • Other team members • Compliance website

developing measurable annual goals - amazon...

Documents