Transcript: Lynn Fuchs, PhD
Lynn Fuchs outlines how to determine whether a student is making adequate progress in terms of performance level and rate of growth and how that determination applies to changing a student’s tier of instruction (time: 3:17).
The best thinking about how to make decisions about whether students stay in intervention, move to a less-intensive level of intervention, or move to a more-intensive level of intervention are based first of all on performance level at the end of intervention. And for that we need a normative framework to index how the student compares to the peers either in the classroom or across his grade level in that school. And for that we have to rely on the kind of periodic, intermittent assessment that the school collects for everybody in the school. If a student is at least at the twenty-fifth percentile of his classroom peers, it would make sense to release him from intervention, continue to monitor his performance, and see whether he continues to grow without the more-intensive intervention he’s been getting.
For a student who is not at least at the twenty-fifth percentile of his local comparison group, the likelihood that he can succeed back in the classroom goes down. And so we would consider two options for that student: either continuing in Tier 2 or moving to more-intensive intervention. And one guideline for deciding whether to keep him in Tier 2 or move him to more intensive is his rate of progress during the intervention he’s presently receiving. For that, we would want to use weekly or every other week data from the Tier 2 intervention to calculate a rate of improvement. That’s his rate of progress. How much is he increasing on a weekly basis in his present Tier 2 intervention. There are norms for most commercially available progress monitoring systems that will tell you what an adequate rate of growth for that progress monitoring measure is. And if the student is demonstrating a good rate of progress, even though he’s not at the twenty-fifth percentile yet of his classroom peers, then a good decision is to keep the student in his present intervention. But if this student meets the dual discrepancy–that is, he’s low on performance at the end of intervention–and his rate of growth in his present level of intervention is inadequate then the right decision is to move this student to a more-intensive level of intervention.