2021
DOI: 10.1177/10534512211032616
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Systematic Progress Monitoring of Individualized Education Program Goals in Mathematics

Abstract: The review of Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District case revealed that an individualized education program (IEP) requires inclusion of specific measurable goals to ensure educational benefit. The purpose of this article was to provide a systematic approach to progress monitoring IEP goals in mathematics, which monitors whether a student is benefiting from the mathematics instruction being provided. Using curriculum-based measures (CBM) is discussed as a feasible tool for monitoring the progress of studen… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Teachers should use a general outcome measure rather than a mastery measure, which usually assesses only a subset of specific skills (i.e., short-term measures). With mathematics, progress-monitoring measures typically contain problem types representing content across the year's curriculum (Rojo et al, 2022). Because these measures are intended to be given frequently, they must be short but sensitive to student change.…”
Section: Step 1: Choose An Appropriate Progress-monitoring Toolmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Teachers should use a general outcome measure rather than a mastery measure, which usually assesses only a subset of specific skills (i.e., short-term measures). With mathematics, progress-monitoring measures typically contain problem types representing content across the year's curriculum (Rojo et al, 2022). Because these measures are intended to be given frequently, they must be short but sensitive to student change.…”
Section: Step 1: Choose An Appropriate Progress-monitoring Toolmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yet, a careful and objective reading of the Endrew F. decision changed the Rowley standard only to a general and no more precise formulation, expressing disagreement only with the Tenth Circuit's low-level interpretation of Rowley, not Rowley itself. Similarly, and more specific to progress measurement, Rojo et al (2021) characterized Endrew F. as providing "a new [and "high"] standard for documenting and ensuring student growth" (p. 328). Yet, the Endrew F. court did not enunciate any specific standard for documentation beyond the Rowley formulation and reiterated the Rowley disclaimer of ensuring any particular level of growth.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%