Provide some background on use of Individual Growth and Development Indicators for Continuous Progress Monitoring

Show an example of one IGDI: Early Communication Indicator

Show how the data can be used for making intervention decisions

University of Kansas: Charles Greenwood, Dale Walker, Jay Buzhardt, Kathleen Baggett, Judith Carta—IGDIs for children birth to 3 years

University of Minnesota: Scott McConnell—IGDIs for 3-5 year olds

University of Oregon & Dynamic Measurement Group: Ruth Kaminski & Roland Good-DIBELS—Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills

The best investment we can make today educating our children is early intervention! E.g., Heckman, others Public and private preschool programs are scaling

up and becoming part of the USA’s K-12 system Federal and state policies are requiring that

programs and services produce child outcomes Early Head Start and Head Start Office of Special Education Programs

Programs are required to use evidence-based practice Practices for which research indicates that

children are more likely to benefit compared to other practices

Because PMM is an evidence-based practice

Use of PMM leads to Greater teacher understanding of what

each children can do and needs to learn Earlier identification of children not

making progress Increased teacher planning and changes

in children’s intervention/instruction designed to meet their needs

http://www.ncpm.org

•More Dynamic

•More Data-Driven

•More Responsive

In this approach, children receive services sooner and more frequently when needed

Increased expectations for accountability

Need to identify children who need early intervention

Programs and individual staff members need to know when they are making a difference in moving children toward outcomes

To check on individual children’s growth

To inform parents about child growthTo ramp up individual children’s

program if necessaryTo get a check on how well our

programs are doingTo focus our professional

development efforts in our programs

How can we learn more quickly that a child is falling behind in development?

How can we use that information to guide what we do in our programs?

How do we know if what we are doing is improving a child’s trajectory?

Conventional forms of early childhood assessment not linked to individual rates of growth toward outcomes

Child data not used in making ongoing program decisions Not repeatable enough Not accessible enough for program staff Not sensitive to intervention or program effects or

growth over time Difficult for parents and practitioners to understand

Measures that provide helpful information about children's growth toward socially valued outcomes and that guide intervention decision making

Measures that focus on key skills indicators rather than wide-band comprehensive skills

IndividualGrowth and

DevelopmentIndicator

Quick measureGives instant informationTells a lot about an important

general outcome: healthCan repeat it frequently

The most well known IGDIs are Pediatric Growth Charts

Widely used by pediatricians and parents

Quick and easy to doRelatively inexpensive

RepeatableCan indicate potential problem and

effectiveness of an intervention

Reflect progress toward a socially valid general outcome

Strategic (a leading indicator) not comprehensive measurement

Chart an individual’s progress Brief and quick to administer Repeatable (rate of growth, slope) Trend line compares expected vs.

actual rates of learning

Child uses gestures, sounds, words, or sentences to express wants and needs.

Child engages in a range of basic self‑help skills, including but not limited to skills in dressing, eating, toileting/hygiene and safety/identification.

 Child interacts with peers and adults, maintaining social interactions and participating socially in home, school, and community settings.

 Child manipulates toys, materials, and objects in a fluent and coordinated manner to play and participate in home, school, and community settings.

Child meets behavioral expectations (such as following directions, rules, and routines) in home, school, and community settings.

-Priest et al, 2001

The General Outcome “The child uses gestures, sounds, words,

or sentences to convey wants and needs or to express meaning to others."

In a national survey of parents and practitioners, expressive communication was a highly rated outcome of early childhood▪ Priest et al., 2001

Key Skill Elements Gestures Vocalization Single Words/Signs Multiple Words/Signs

Combine to form Total Communication Indicator

Vocalizations Multi-Word Utterances

Single Words

Total Communication

Gestures

What does the IGDI Measure?

Administration Procedures Toy-play setting with familiar

adult as play partner 6-minute testing sessions Play partner’s role is to facilitate

play and follow child’s lead Set-up/clean-up/put away

Alternate Toy Forms Observational Recording

Procedures

Toy Form A: House

Toy Form B: Barn

NOS CODING SHEET

Gestures Vocalizations Single Word Utterances

Multi-Word Utterances

Total

5:00

G V W M

4:00

G V W M

3:00

G V W M

2:00

G V W M

1:00

G V W M

:00

G V W M

Child ID #:________________ Wave:___________________ Test Date:_________________ Assessor:_______________ Coder:____________________ Circle one: Barn / House Location:__________________ Reliability Y N Primary Coder Name: ________________

36 Mos ExpectationChild’s

Observed Trajectory

Normative Trajectory

GOMs not only show that children are acquiring skills, but they capture information about the rate of growth

Rate of growth can be compared to normative rates as well as to child’s own rate before or during an intervention or different phases or variations of intervention

This makes GOMs a sensitive way of looking at effectiveness of interventions

Shows whether child’s current rate of growth is adequate for reaching the outcome.

Can easily communicate progress with family members, other professionals

Can indicate whether change in intervention is needed

Even when trajectory is far from typical, a positive trendline deflection in response to an intervention can convey when changes are “closing the gap”

For Infants and Toddlers (http://www.igdi.ku.edu) Early Communication (Language) Early Problem Solving (Cognition) Early Movement (Motor) Early Social (Social/Emotional)

For Preschoolers (Early Literacy) (http://ggg.umn.edu/) Picture naming (Spoken Vocabulary) Alliteration Rhyming

Individual Child Level Progress findings Intervention decision making

Individual Program Level Child Results Implementation Quality and Staff Management

Project Level (e.g., State-wide) Child Results Implementation Quality and Staff Management

Scores Data TableTotal Communication Growth Chart

Child’s Data Summary

Child’s Data Table

Individual Child ReportIndividual Child Report

Child’s Scores

Benchmark Trajectory

Slightly Below Benchmark

Below Benchmark

Child’s Trajectory

Intervention or condition

Line

Average Growth Trajectory Individual Children of ConcernDistribution of Proficiency

Children performing below benchmark. (Only available to

program directors/coordinators.)

Children due for an assessment

Targeting Targeting IndividualsIndividuals

StandardsMethods Used

The psychometric standards (AERA, 1999): Reliability Validity (Criterion and predictive)

Progress monitoring standards (NCPM, 2007): Alternate forms Sensitivity to student improvement (slope) Annual yearly progress (AYP) benchmarks (level

at end point) Rates of improvement are specified (typical

growth rates) Improvement in teacher planning and/or

student learning

Literature Review and Synthesis Draft General Outcome Definition Identify Key Skills Identification, Selection, and Definitions

Methods National Survey

Socially Validate the General Outcome Definition Pilot Testing

Identify and Select Toy Forms Pilot Testing

Establish Administration Feasibility through User Testing Cross Sectional Design Phase 1 Validation Study

Establish Sensitivity to Differences in Age; Reliability) Longitudinal Design Phase 2 Validation Study

Demonstrate Sensitivity to Short-term Growth over Time; Reliability

Scale-up Application Website Tools and Resources

Greenwood, C. R., Carta, J. J., Walker, D., Hughes, K., & Weathers, M. (2006). Preliminary investigations of the application of the Early Communication Indicator (ECI) for infants and toddlers. Journal of Early Intervention, 28(3), 178-196.0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39

Age at Test

Rat

e p

er M

inu

te

Gestures

Vocalizations

Single Words

Muliple Words

GOM approach does offer reliable and valid tools for progress monitoring in early childhood.

They can be used for many purposes in intervention decision-making.

Their ease of use and illustration of growth make them excellent tools for communication about children’s progress.

Their sensitivity to growth allow for more frequent refinements and more effective interventions for individual children.

Advantages Universal screening (all children) Focus on short-term growth and development Linked to response to intervention and prevention

strategies Supports staff planning and decisions regarding

changing intervention Designed for use by early interventionists and

parents Web-based support provides instant individual or

group reports Limitations

Requires a systematic effort to implement with fidelity

Requires administrative support to use at scale

For infants and toddlers Communication, Movement, Problem

Solving, Social, and Parent/Child Interaction http://www.igdi.ku.edu

For preschoolers Early Literacy: Vocabulary, Alliteration, and

Rhyming http://ggg.umn.edu

For kindergarten to grade 3 Early Literacy: Reading http://dibels.org

Public Pages: Information, access, training, and

materialsPrivate Pages (Requires UserID and

Password): Data services (collection, entry,

management, and reporting)▪ $1 per child or▪ Participation in research/demonstration

activities

New progress monitoring work in development at the Center for Response to Intervention in Early Childhood (CRTIEC) Oral Vocabulary Phonemic Awareness Book Knowledge Comprehension

Online at http://www.crtiec.org

Greenwood, C. R., Carta, J. J., & Walker, D. (2005). Individual growth and development indicators (IGDIs): Tools for assessing intervention results for infants and toddlers. In B. Heward & et al. (Eds.), Focus on Behavior Analysis in Education: Achievements, Challenges, and Opportunities (Chapter 6) (pp. 103-124). Columbus, OH: Pearson/Prentice-Hall.

Greenwood, C. R., Carta, J. J., Baggett, K., Buzhardt, J., Walker, D., & Terry, B. (2008). Best practices in integrating progress monitoring and response-to-intervention concepts into early childhood systems. In A. Thomas, J. Grimes & J. Gruba (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 535-548). Washington DC: National Association of School Psychology.

McConnell, S. R., McEvoy, M. A., & Priest, J. S. (2002). Growing measures for monitoring progress in early childhood education: A research and development process for Individual Growth and Development Indicators. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 27(4), 3-14.

Walker, D., Carta, J. J., Greenwood, C., & Buzhardt, J. (2008). The use of Individual Growth and Development Indicators for progress monitoring and intervention decision making in early education. Exceptionality, 16(1), 33-47.

Carta, J. J., Greenwood, C. R., Walker, D., Kaminski, R., Good, R., McConnell, S. R., & McEvoy, M. (2005). Individual growth and development indicators (IGDIs): Assessment that guides intervention for young children. Young Exceptional Children, 4, 15-27.

Greenwood, C. R., Carta, J. J., & Walker, D. (2004). Individual growth and development indicators (IGDIs): Tools for assessing intervention results for infants and toddlers. In B. Heward et al., (Eds.), Focus on Behavior Analysis in Education: Achievements, Challenges, and Opportunities (Chapter 6, pp. 103-124). Pearson/Prentice-Hall: Columbus, OH.

Greenwood, C. R., Carta, Walker, D., Carta, J. J., & Hughes, K. (2006). Preliminary investigators of the application of the Early Communication Indicator (ECI) for infants and toddlers. Journal of Early Intervention, 28, 178-196.

Greenwood, C. R., Carta, J. J., Baggett, K., Buzhardt, J., Walker, D., & Terry, B. (2008). Best practices integrating progress monitoring and response to intervention concepts into early childhood systems for infants and toddlers. In A. Thomas, J. Grimes & J. Gruba (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V. Washington DC: National Association of School Psychology, Washington, DC.

If you don’t know where you’re going, any road will get you there.----Lewis Carroll

But trajectories can illustrate whether child is on a path toward achieving important outcomes or is closing the gap.