IEP - Adequate Progress

My last blog post was political. Unfortunately, the election didn't go as I had hoped. I have lots to say about campaign promises and what it could mean for students if those promises are kept, but today I'd rather write about something less heavy.

Two posts ago we explored which mandate takes priority, FAPE (Free Appropriate Public Education) or LRE (Least Restrictive Environment). Ultimately, we concluded that FAPE wins over LRE by a smidge. Feel free to read that post here. School districts must support students to make progress appropriate in light of their unique circumstances. So today, I want to talk about appropriate, or adequate, progress.

For general education students and the majority of students who receive special education services, the expectation is that those students meet state standards. You can see what your state standards are by Googling "state academic standards." I live in Pennsylvania, so here is a link to PA State Standards if you'd like to take a peek. [ Important sidenote- standards are not curricula. School districts must develop curricula at the local level that are designed to help students achieve state standards. In other words, standards are the goals for learning developed by the state; school districts develop the curricula as the means and methods to achieve those goals. ] As long as students are meeting those standards, then they are making adequate progress in school and will advance to the next grade.

Okay, but what about students with more significant support needs who are receiving special education services? What if state standards are an unrealistic and unfair benchmark to hold them to? Do they just stay in the third-grade indefinitely until they've mastered those third-grade state standards? Absolutely not. The idea sounds totally absurd, right?! Your state will have alternate state assessments tied to age-appropriate grade level standards for students with significant support needs. "These alternate assessments reflect the grade-level standards but are less complex and do not cover the content in as much depth or breadth (i.e., alternate academic achievement standards), while maintaining high expectations for these students." (Quote taken from the very informative and reliable Iris Center webpage.) So an eighth-grade student will take an alternate assessment on eighth-grade standards, even if they are proficient in math, reading, or science at a much lower level than eighth-grade. So if traditional state standards and movement from grade to grade are not a suitable means of measuring progress in students with significant support needs, how then do we know if they're making progress? The answer- these students will demonstrate adequate progress through their IEP goals.

Before we get into IEP goals and progress monitoring, let me note something regarding state standards and special education. For students with more significant support needs, remember that FAPE in the LRE is still the mandate. As such, those students have a right to the general education curriculum delivered in the general education classroom. If that content is beyond their current level of ability it does NOT mean they get yanked out of the general education classroom and put in a segregated setting. What it DOES mean is that the team must explore supplementary aids and services to make that content more accessible to the student, including modifications of the curriculum itself. Okay? Okay!

So now let's explore IEP goal progress. First, remember that IEP goals are developed by the IEP team, including the parent. Goals should reflect the student's individual needs which should be clearly identified in the Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance (PLAAFP) section of their IEP. Goals should be relevant and important to both the long-term and short-term vision for the student. Goals should also be written in a way in which they can be understood by all (including the parent), be implemented by the school with fidelity (even if the educator or related service provider changes), and be measured (because if you can't gather meaningful data from the goal, then it is wasting everyone's time).

Let's look at a couple bad goals.

• Johnny will improve reading skills by the end of the school year.

• Sarah will increase ability to follow instructions without prompts.

• Luke will improve organizational skills by staying organized with 80% accuracy.

What do you think of these goals? Do you feel like you have more questions than answers about how the team will measure progress? Let's rewrite them as solid SMART (Specific Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-Bound) goals so you can see the difference for yourself.

• By the end of the school year, when given a third-grade reading passage and use of a reading window, Johnny will read the passage aloud and demonstrate 80% accuracy as measured on reading probes given once every other week. Current baseline is 50%.

• By the end of the school year, when given a simple one-step verbal directive with visual cues throughout the school day and across all settings, Sarah will follow the direction with 0-1 additional prompts with 80% accuracy on four out of five trials given daily. Data will be collected daily and averaged each week. Goal will be considered mastered once 80% has been achieved in four out of five consecutive weeks. Current baseline is 50% with 1 prompt and 20% with no prompts.

• By the end of the school year, when provided a written agenda and daily check in/check out with teacher, Luke will organize personal materials in his binder (for one point) and bring assignments/homework to and from school daily (for one point) with 90% accuracy as measured by daily binder checks. Total points available will be 10 per five-day week. Data will be collected daily and reported as weekly percentage. Current baseline is 30%.

See the difference? In the rewritten goals, we know the students' baselines, what the target is for mastery, the means by which we'll measure progress, and the timeframe in which we hope to have the goal accomplished. To be able to measure progress, it is ESSENTIAL that the goals be well written.

The next piece is to correctly implement progress monitoring. If the team agrees that progress should be measured once every other week, or daily and averaged weekly, or whatever, then it is ESSENTIAL that it happens AND that the data is shared and understood. For example, if Johnny is only given probes once a month instead of every other week, it will take twice as long to realize if our interventions are working as intended (or not) which would delay any possible revisions to the plan. Or if we are given probes every other week and Johnny is at 100% accuracy for five probes in a row, but we aren't talking to each other, then we are missing an opportunity to either advance his reading goal or discontinue it and perhaps focus on a different area of need. IEP goal progress should be shared at least as frequently as report cards, but if more frequent sharing of progress is necessary, then the team should agree on what that looks like. What I'm saying is, solid goals, implementation of progress monitoring with fidelity, AND great communication are ESSENTIAL in knowing if your learner is making adequate progress.

If your learner is on track to meet their goal, fantastic! Keep doing what you're doing! And when they meet their goal, call a team meeting to decide what's next; no need to wait until the annual IEP review meeting. Conversely, if it is clear that the learner is not on track to meet their goals, then again, do not wait until the annual IEP review meeting to discuss it. Call a meeting ASAP! If the goal is well written and relevant and the IEP has been implemented with fidelity but your learner is not on track to achieve their goal, the team needs to meet to discuss if the interventions that are being provided are appropriate. Maybe it's the right intervention but delivered at the wrong time (e.g. student is too tired in the afternoon when the intervention is delivered), or maybe it's the right intervention but not delivered with enough frequency (maybe it needs to be delivered daily instead of three times a week), or maybe it's the right intervention but not the right intensity (maybe it needs to be 1:1 instead of in a small group), or perhaps it is the wrong intervention entirely and something different should be trialed. But keep this in mind, if you have a good understanding of the learner's current PLAAFP and wrote solid SMART goals, then it is unlikely that the goal is the problem. It is much more likely that the problem is either implementation of the intervention(s) or the intervention(s) itself.

Teachers, if you inherited bad goals, I hope you feel empowered to call a meeting to set it right. Furthermore, when things aren't working out as planned (lack of progress), I hope you are supported when you call a meeting to discuss a change in intervention(s). Parents, you can and should take an active role in monitoring your learner's IEP goal progress. I have a free blank template you can utilize with examples on my Resources page to get you started. Additionally, you can keep an eye out for my workshops where I work 1:1 with parents to help you gauge your learner's IEP goal progress. I hope this post helps support you all and all your learners in taking steps to ensure adequate progress.

With Love, Light & Gratitude,

Janell

P.S. Not so sure you want to take on this process alone? I can help! Book a FREE consultation on my website!