RTI Measurement Overview: Measurement Concepts for RTI Decision Making

1. RTI Measurement Overview: Measurement Concepts for RTI Decision Making A module for pre-service and in-service professional development MN RTI Center Author: Lisa H. Stewart, PhD Minnesota State University Moorhead www.scred.k12.mn.us click on RTI Center

2. MN RTI Center Training Modules This module was developed with funding from the MN legislature It is part of a series of modules available from the MN RTI Center for use in preservice and inservice training: 2

3. Overview • Purpose(s) of assessment • Characteristics of effective measurement for RTI • Critical features of measurement and RTI in the areas of screening, progress monitoring, and diagnostic instructional planning • CBM/GOMs as a frequently used RTI measurement tool • Multiple sources of information and convergence

4. Why Learn About Measurement? “In God we trust… All others must have data.” Dr. Stan Deno 4

5. Assessment: One of the Key Components in RTI Curriculum and Instruction Assessment School Wide Organization & Problem Solving Systems (Teams, Process, etc) Adapted from Logan City School District, 2002

6. Measurement and Assessment • Schools have to make many choices about measurement tools and the process of gathering information used to make decisions (assessment) • We need different measurement tools for different purposes

7. Some Purposes of Assessment • Screening • Diagnostic - instructional planning • Monitoring student progress (formative) • Evaluation (summative)

8. Screening Standardized measures given to all students to: Help identify students at-risk in a PROACTIVE way Give feedback to the system about how students progress throughout the year at a gross (e.g., 3x per year) level If students are on track in the fall are they still on track in the winter? What is happening with students who started the year below target, are they catching up? Give feedback to the system about changes from year to year Is our new reading curriculum having the impact we were expecting? DRAFT May 27, 2009 8

9. Diagnosis/Instructional Planning • Measures given to understand a student’s skill level (strengths and weaknesses) help guide: • Instructional grouping • Where to place the student in the curriculum & curricular materials • What skills are missing or weak and may need to be retaught or practiced and the level of support and explicitness needed • Development or selection of curriculum and targeted interventions

10. Monitoring Student Progress (Formative) • Informally this happens all the time and helps teachers adjust their teaching on the spot • More formalized progress monitoring involves standardized measures, tied to important educational outcomes, and given frequently (e.g. weekly) to: • Prompt you to change what you are doing with a student if it is not working (formative assessment) so you are effective and efficient with your time and instruction • Make decisions about instructional goals, materials, levels, and groups • Aid in communication with parents • Document progress for special education students as required for periodic and annual reviews

11. Evaluation (Summative) • Measures used to provide a snapshot or summary of student skill at one particular point in time, often at the end of the instructional year or unit • E.g. state high stakes tests • "When the cook tastes the soup, that’s formative; when the guests taste the soup, that’s summative."

12. One Test Can Serve More Than One Purpose • To the extent a test does more than one thing well, it is a more efficient use of student time and school resources • Example 1: Reading CBM measures of Oral Reading Fluency can be used for screening and progress monitoring • Example 2: the NWEA (MAP) test may be used for screening and instructional planning

13. Activity • On Measurement Overview Purposes of Assessment Worksheet • Make a list of all the tests you have learned about or have seen used in the school setting (or are currently in use in your school) • Try to decide what purpose(s) each test served

14. Assessment Tools and Purpose(s)

15. Buyer Beware • Although it is good if a test can serve more than one purpose, just because a test manual or advertisement SAYS it is useful for multiple purposes, doesn’t mean the test actually IS useful for multiple purposes • Example: Many tests designed for diagnostic purposes or for summative evaluation state they are also useful for progress monitoring, but are too time consuming, too costly, too unreliable, or too insensitive to changes in student skills to be of practical use for progress monitoring

16. Establishing a Measurement System A core feature of RTI is identifying a measurement system Screen large numbers of students Identify students in need of additional intervention Monitor students of concern more frequently 1 to 4x per month Typically weekly Diagnostic testing used for instructional planning to help target interventions as needed 16

17. Characteristics of An Effective Measurement System for RTI valid reliable simple quick inexpensive easily understood can be given often sensitive to growth over short periods of time Credit: K Gibbons, M Shinn 17

18. Technical Characteristics of Measurement Tools • Reliability- the consistency of the measure • If tested again right away or by a different person or with an alternate equivalent form of the test, the score should be similar • Allows us to have confidence in the score and use the score to generalize what we see today to other times and situations • If a student knows how to decode simple words on a sheet of paper at 8am this morning, we would expect him to be able to decode similar simple words at noon… and the next day…

19. Why is Reliability so Important? • Assume you have a test that decides whether or not you need to take (and pay for) a remedial math class in college that does not count toward graduation. • The test average score is 50 points. • The test has a “cut off” score of 35, so students who score below 35 have to take the remedial class.

20. Why is Reliability so Important? (Cont’d) • If the test is reliable, and you get a score of 30, if you take another version of the test or take the test again a week later (without major studying or changing what you know!) you would likely get a score very close to 30…. • If the test is not reliable, and you get a score of 30…You might be able to take the test again or take another version of the test and get a score of 40…or a score of 20! • If the test is unreliable we can’t have much faith in the score and it becomes difficult to use the test to make decisions!

21. Validity • But what if the test IS reliable and you get a score of 30 but your math skills are much better than the score implies? What if you get a score of 30 but you don’t really need a remedial math class? • Then the test has an issue with VALIDITY- • A test is valid only if the interpretation of the test scores are supported • A common definition of validity is that “the test measures what it says it measures” • Another definition is that a test is valid if it helps you make better decisions or leads to better outcomes than if you had never given the test

22. Types of Validity • There are many ways to try to demonstrate validity: • Content validity • Criterion related validity: concurrent and predictive • Treatment Validity • Construct Validity

23. Types of Validity (Cont’d) • Content validity • The test content is reasonable • Criterion related validity: two types • Concurrent- the scores from this test are similar to scores from other tests that measure the same/similar thing • Predictive- the test scores from this test do a pretty good job of letting us know what score a student will get on another test in the future

24. Types of Validity (Cont’d) • Treatment Validity • If you use this test to decide about some treatment or intervention or instructional approach…. • Do you make better decisions? • Do you have better goals? Planning? Student engagement? • Most importantly: Are the outcomes for your students better?

25. Types of Validity (Cont’d) • Construct Validity • Does the test measure the theoretical trait or characteristic? • E.g. If the theory says children need to have a base of solid decoding skills before they will be fast and fluent readers of new text, do the scores on the reading test of decoding and fluency support that? • All other ways to try to document validity are in some way also addressing construct validity (content, criterion, treatment, etc.)

26. The NOT Validity Kind of Validity • Face validity is NOT really validity • Positive: It “looks” good • Just because a test looks good or you (or your colleague) like to give it does not mean it gives you good information or is the best test to use • Negative: I just don’t like it • Just because a test isn’t set up exactly how you like it does not mean it does NOT give you good information • Look for EVIDENCE of reliability and validity, don’t rely on your reaction, or the reactions and testimonials of colleagues, alone.

27. Reliability and Validity • Just because a test is reliable does not mean it is valid • It may reliably give you an inaccurate score! • If a test is not reliable, it cannot be valid • No test or test score is perfectly reliable • We use test scores to help make a variety of decisions-- some “low stakes” and some “high stakes” decisions…. • So how reliable is “reliable enough”? • It depends ….

28. Measuring Reliability and Validity • Typically reliability and validity evidence involves comparing the test to itself or to other tests or outcomes • The statistic used to sum up that comparison is often a correlation ( r ) • Correlations vary from r = 0.0 to 1.0 • The closer a correlation is to 1.0 the “stronger” the relationship or the better you can predict one score or outcome if you know the other one

29. How Reliable is Reliable Enough? • For important INDIVIDUAL decisions? r = .90 • For SCREENING decisions? r = .80 Salvia & Yselldyke, 2006 • “Reliability is like money, as long as you have it, it’s not a problem, but if you don’t, it’s a BIG problem!” ~ Fred Kurlinger

30. How Valid is Valid Enough? Source: Webb, MW, 1983 journal of reading, 26(5) 414-424

31. Looking at Validity With a Purpose in Mind • Predictive Validity is really important if you are using the test as a screening tool to predict which students are at risk or not at risk of reading difficulty • Treatment validity is really important if you are using the test in an effort to lead to some sort of improved outcome

32. Validity isn’t Just About the Test • Validity has to do with the test use and interpretation, so even a “valid” test can be used for the wrong reasons or misinterpreted or misused • Example 1: A test score for an ELL student should reflect the student’s skills, not her ability to understand the directions and what is being asked • Example 2 on next slide

33. Validity isn’t Just About the Test (Cont’d) • Example 2: Letter Naming Fluency (LNF) • LNF involves giving a student a page of randomized upper and lower case letters and having the student name as many letters as they can in one minute. • As a test of early literacy, LNF has good reliability and concurrent and predictive validity, especially predictive validity • However, it can be easily MISUSED— • If interpreted correctly, LNF can identify students at risk for early reading difficulty and get those students into well-rounded early literacy instruction well suited to them, • BUT, if it is interpreted to mean that a student low in LNF needs to just have a lot of instructional time spent only learning letter names (often taking time away from high quality well-rounded early literacy instruction) it can actually have a negative impact.

34. Test Utility • Is it easy to use, time efficient, and cheap?  • Even if a test is reliable and valid, if it is too difficult to use, too time consuming, or too expensive it just won’t get used • If a reliable and valid progress monitoring tool took 30 minutes per child and you wanted to monitor 10 students in your class every week, would you use it? • However, if a test is easy and short and cheap… but isn’t reliable or valid… it’s still a waste of time, no matter how short!

35. Test Utility (Cont’d) • Is it sensitive enough for the decisions you want to make? • Can it detect the differences between groups of kids or within an individual that you need to help you make a decision? • If a progress monitoring tool can only show gains of 1 point per month, is it sensitive enough to help give you timely feedback on the student’s response to your instruction?

36. Activity • On “Characteristics of Assessment Tools for RTI” Worksheet • Make a list of tests you have learned about or have seen used in the school setting (or are currently in use in your school) • Can use all or some of the tools from the Purposes of Assessment Worksheet for your list • Is the test reliable and valid FOR THE PURPOSE IT IS BEING USED? • Is it quick and simple? • Is it inexpensive? • Can it be given often (has alternate forms, etc)? • Is it sensitive?

37. Characteristics of Assessment Tools for RTI

38. Some Help in Looking for Evidence • Measurement tools are reviewed at the following sites: • www.rti4success.org • www.studentprogress.org • These sites only review tests submitted, if it is not on the list it doesn’t mean it is bad, just that it wasn’t reviewed • Be sure you know the purpose of assessment (screening, progress monitoring, etc) to best interpret the information

39. Critical Features of Measurement and RTI Screening Progress Monitoring Diagnostic Instructional Planning 39

40. Measurement and RTI: Screening • Reliability coefficients of at least r =.80. Higher is better, especially for screening specificity. • Well documented predictive validity • Evidence the criterion (cut score) being used is reasonable and creates not too many false positives (students identified as at risk who aren’t) or false negatives (students who are at risk who aren’t identified as such) • Brief, easy to use, affordable, and results/reports are accessible almost immediately

41. Measurement and RTI: Progress Monitoring • Reliability coefficients of r=.90+ • Because you are looking at multiple data points over time, it is possible to use a test with a lower reliability (e.g. .80-.90), but wait until you have several data points and use the combined data to increase confidence in your decisions • Well documented treatment validity!

42. Msrmnt & RTI: Progress Monitoring (Cont’d) • Test and scores are very sensitive to increases or decreases in student skills over time • Evidence of what slope of progress (how much growth in a day, week or a month) is typical under what conditions can greatly increase your ability to make decisions • VERY brief, easy to use, affordable, alternate forms, and results/reports are accessible immediately

43. Measurement and RTI: Diagnostic Assessment for Instructional Planning • Reliability coefficients of r =.80+ ASSUMING you are open to changing the instruction (formative assessment) if your planning didn’t work out as you thought it might • Aligned with research on the development and teaching of reading • Well documented treatment validity, utility for instructional planning! • Time and cost efficient but specific enough to be useful for designing effective interventions • Linked to standards and curriculum scope and sequence

44. Msrmnt & RTI: Diagnostic Assessment for Instructional Planning (Cont’d) • Many instructional planning tools have limited information on reliability and validity—Look for tools that do have data. • If creating your own tests, use best practices in test construction. • Overall be sure you are doing standardized frequent progress monitoring and looking at student engaged time as other sources of information to ensure instruction is well planned.

45. RTI, General Outcome Measures and Curriculum Based Measurement Many schools use Curriculum Based Measurement (CBM) general outcome measures for screening and progress monitoring You don’t “have to” use CBM, but many schools do Most common CBM tool in Grades 1- 8 is Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) Measure of reading rate (# of words correct per minute on a grade level passage) and a strong indicator of overall reading skill, including comprehension Early Literacy Measures are also available such as Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF), Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Letter Name Fluency (LNF) and Letter Sound Fluency (LSF) 45

46. Why GOMs/CBM? Typically meet the criteria needed for RTI screening and progress monitoring Reliable, valid, specific, sensitive, practical Also, some utility for instructional planning (e.g., grouping) They are INDICATORS of whether there might be a problem, not diagnostic! Like taking your temperature or sticking a toothpick into a cake Oral reading fluency is a great INDICATOR of reading decoding, fluency and reading comprehension Fluency based because automaticity helps discriminate between students at different points of learning a skil 46

47. GOM…CBM… DIBELS… AIMSweb… DRAFT May 27, 2009 47

48. CBM Oral Reading Fluency Give 3 grade-level passages using standardized administration and scoring; use median (middle) score 3-second rule (tell the student the word & point to next word) Discontinue rule (after 0 correct in first row, if <10 correct on 1st passage do not give other passages) 48

49. Fluency and Comprehension The purpose of reading is comprehension A good measures of overall reading proficiency is reading fluency because of its strong correlation to measures of comprehension.

50. The Importance of Multiple Sources of Information • No ONE test is going to serve all purposes or give you all the information you need. • Use MULTIPLE sources of data to make the best decisions • Screening, progress monitoring, diagnostic, and evaluative data from multiple sources and/or across time • Teacher observation and more formal observations • Other pieces of relevant information such as behavior, attendance, health, the curriculum and instructional environment, etc. • Look for CONVERGENCE of data- places where several sources of data point to the same decision or conclusion