A missing element in individualized education plans Quality

1
A missing element in individualized education
plans Quality!

• Kristie Pretti-Frontczak
• Kent State University
• Early Childhood Intervention Program
• kprettif_at_kent.edu
• http//fpsrv.dl.kent.edu/ecis/Web/Research/Nationa
  l20Survey/nsurvey1.asp

2
Logic

• Quality IEP goals and objectives lead to.
• Stronger links between key program processes,
• which leads to.
• Individualized intervention,
• which leads to.
• Improved child outcomes

3
Recommended Practice/Changes

• Shorter IEPs
• Oriented to individualized and family-centered
  outcomes
• Less staff oriented
• Better linked to the general curriculum
• Huefner, D. S. (2000). The risks and
  opportunities of the IEP requirements Under IDEA
  97. The Journal of Special Education, 33(4).
  195-204.
• Clark, S. G. (2000). The IEP process as a tool
  for collaboration. Teaching Exceptional Children,
  33(2), 56-66

4
Past Findings

• Individualized Education Plans (IEPs)
• Contain missing mandated components (Carri, 1985
  Peterson Odom, 1995 Schenck Levy, 1979)
• Target non-functional skills (Downing, 1988
  Weisenfeld, 1986)
• Contain little information regarding how goals
  will be generalized or what performance criteria
  will be used (Lynch Beare 1990)
• Emphasize pre-academic skills versus real-life
  skills (Goodman Bond, 1993)
• Include goals and objectives that do not address
  a childs area of identified delay or need (Smith
  Simpson, 1989)

5
Goals v. Objectives

• Pretti-Frontczak and Bricker (2000) found that
  aggregated mean percent scores for objectives
  were consistently higher than for goals
• Notari and Drinkwater (1991) also found that
  interventionists were able to write higher
  quality objectives than goals
• Billingsley (1984) and Tymitz (1980) indicated
  objectives were more difficult to write.

6
Terminology

• Long Range Goals (LRGs)

• 12 month skill
• General Broad (has components or subskills)
• Represents generalization of behavior
• Represents independence or spontaneity

7
Terminology Continued

• Short Term Objectives (STOs)

• Intermediate steps discrete skills components

• Benchmarks

• 3-6 month skill
• Major milestone likely a different
• behavior building blocks

8
Participants

• Sample came from a national survey of 550
  preschool teachers (including itinerant teachers)
• 215 teachers provided pairs of IEP goals and
  objectives
• Teachers represent 20 states from 5 regions of
  the US
• Majority from the Southern and Midwestern regions
• South (n86)
  Midwest (n78)
• Northwest/West (n25) Southeast
  (n20)
• Northeast (n6)

9
Participant Characteristics (N215)

• Highest degree obtained
• High school diploma 1 (0.5)
• Associates degree 2 (0.9)
• Bachelors degree 111 (51.6)
• Masters degree 99 (46)
• Doctoral degree 2 (0.9)
• State licensures/certifications/endorsements to
  work with preschool children with disabilities
• No 26 (12.3)
• Yes 186 (87.7)
• Number of years teaching preschool age children
• Range from zero years to 30 years (M8.8, SD6.9)
• Number of years teaching preschoolers w/special
  needs
• Range from zero years to 30 years (M7.9, SD6.6)

10
Findings Written Goals

• Only 26.5 or 57 of the 215 goals were considered
  codable using the GORI
• The targeted skill can be seen and/or heard
• Multiple people can agree that the same skill has
  occurred
• A specific definition of the skill is provided
• Examples include
• Child will initiate and maintain a verbal
  interaction with peer and sustain the interaction
  for 5 minutes
• Sam will carry out two-step direction without
  contextual cues.

11
Goals Continued

• That means, 73.5 or 158 of the 215 goals written
  by preschool teachers in this study were not
  codable using the GORI
• Examples include
• Will improve "readiness" skills
• J. will develop age-appropriate math skills.
• In other words what are readiness skills or
  what are age-appropriate math skills?

12
Findings Written Objectives

• In contrast to written goals, 80 or 172 of the
  215 objectives were considered codable using the
  GORI
• The targeted skill can be seen and/or heard
• Multiple people can agree that the same skill has
  occurred
• A specific definition of the skill is provided
• Examples include
• Andy will hold his writing utensil in a
  three-fingered grasp
• Child will hang up own belongings ( coat, book
  bag) upon arrival at school

13
Objectives Continued

• Thus, 20 or 43 of the 215 objectives written by
  preschool teachers in this study were not codable
  using the GORI
• Examples include
• Will perform a familiar daily job in the
  classroom
• To show an increase in attention span
• In other words what are familiar daily jobs or
  what does an increased attention span look like?

14
Findings and Implications

• Goals and objectives from this sample do not meet
  a basic definition of codable
• Legal mandates specify that long range goals and
  short term objectives/benchmarks MUST be
  measurable
• When targeted non-measurable skills, how do
  teachers and other team members
• Embed skills that are not measurable?
• Know when a child is making progress?
• Collect data?
• Select appropriate interventions?
• Report on a childs performance over time?

15
Looking Beyond the Basics

• Many would argue that in addition to being
  measurable, IEP goals and objectives should be
  meaningful.
• Are the goals and objectives written by teachers
  in this study of high quality?
• Do teachers write better goals or better
  objectives?
• What factors are related to higher quality
  written goals and objectives?

16
Selecting Meaningful Skills

• At least four main criteria should be used for
  selecting meaningful skills
• Functional
• Usable
• Observable and measurable
• Addressable
• Developmentally appropriate

17
Quality Indicators Goals

• Overall (N215)
• GORI scores ranged from 0 to 9
• M 1.48, SD 2.6
• In terms of just codable goals (n57, 26.5)
• GORI scores ranged from 3 to 9
• M 5.58, SD 1.65

18
(No Transcript)
19
Quality Indicators Objectives

• Overall (N215)
• GORI scores ranged from 0 to 8
• M 4.03, SD 2.43
• In terms of just codable objectives (n172, 80)
• GORI scores ranged from 2 to 8
• M 5.04, SD 1.51

20
(No Transcript)
21
Antecedents

• The condition or context under which the behavior
  will occur and can be observed OR the occurrence
  or event that happens before the behavior
• Antecedents used on goals and objectives/benchmark
  s should represent generalization or independence
• Examples of antecedents used on IEPs
• During a variety of daily activities During
  group activities
• At school and at home When given a variety of
  foods
• Independently Following a directive
• OR state actual behavior (e.g., initiate, seek,
  answer questions)
• Examples of antecedents used on intervention
  plans
• When given a model/prompt During play time
• When presented with pictures With a walker
• At circle With physical assistance
• When presented a toy Given another
  persons assistance
• When a game is played When given a choice

22
Antecedent Continued

• Two optional components of the Antecedent or
  Condition
• Accommodation (including special materials)
• Evaluation Setting where you want to see the
  skill performed (has it generalized)

Taken from Lignugaris-Kraft, B.,
Marchand-Martella, N., Martella, R. (2001).
Writing better goals and short-term objectives or
benchmarks. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(1),
52-58.
23
Behaviors (Knowledge and Skills)

• Observable and measurable skills demonstrated by
  the child. Targeted skills describe something
  which can be seen or heard by an observer.
• Behaviors have a beginning and an end
• Examples
• Looks Names Gives Cuts
• Puts on Takes off Zips Jumps
• Pours Copies Selects Places
• Uses Walks Remains Answers
• Initiates Seeks Maintains Reach
• Non Examples
• Increases Understands Believes Comprehends
• Realizes Demonstrates Knows Tries
• Grey Area Examples
• Manipulates (describe how they manipulate)
• Participates (describe how they participate)
• Uses (describe how they use)

24
Criteria

• Statements that describe a standard level of
  performance required to learn and apply the skill
• Ask the following questions
• What will convince me the child has acquired the
  skill?
• What is reasonable in terms of data collection?
• Across all activities, settings, people?
• For how many days are they consistent?
• What is the classroom schedule like (i.e., of
  opportunities)?
• Examples
• At least once a day At least twice during
  group activities
• On each occasion Each day for two weeks
• Performance criteria helps make skills measurable
  the degree of difficulty or duration (e.g., for
  15 feet, across hard and soft surfaces, with
  familiar adults, without a context, intelligibly)

25
Criteria Continued

• Three Major Components
• Criterion Level (e.g., percentage correct or rate
  of correct responding)
• Number of time demonstrated at specified level
  (addresses the issue of consistency what is
  considered mastery)
• Evaluation schedule (the frequency the team plans
  to collect data)

Taken from Lignugaris-Kraft, B.,
Marchand-Martella, N., Martella, R. (2001).
Writing better goals and short-term objectives or
benchmarks. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(1),
52-58.