Evaluating the

1
Evaluating the RTI Readiness of School
AssessmentsJim Wrightwww.interventioncentral.or
g
2
(No Transcript)
3
Interpreting the Results of This Survey

• YES to Items 1-3. Background. The measure gives
  valid general information about the students
  academic skills and performance. While not
  sufficient, the data can be interpreted as part
  of a larger collection of student data.
• YES to Items 4-5. Baseline. The measure gives
  reliable results when given by different people
  and at different times of the day or week.
  Therefore, the measure can be used to collect a
  current snapshot of the students academic
  skills prior to starting an intervention.
• YES to Items 6-7. Goal-Setting. The measure
  includes standards (e.g., benchmarks or
  performance criteria) for typical student
  performance (e.g., at a given grade level) and
  guidelines for estimating rates of student
  progress. Schools can use the measure to assess
  the gap in performance between a student and
  grade level peersand also to estimate expected
  rates of student progress during an intervention.
• YES to Items 8-11. Progress Monitoring. The
  measure has the appropriate qualities to be used
  to track student progress in response to an
  intervention.

4
Background Validity

• Content Validity. Does the measure provide
  meaningful information about the academic skill
  of interest?
• Convergent Validity. Does the measure yield
  results that are generally consistent with other
  well-regarded tests designed to measure the same
  academic skill?
• Predictive Validity. Does the measure predict
  student success on an important future test,
  task, or other outcome?

5
Baseline Reliability

• Test-Retest/Alternate-Form Reliability. Does the
  measure have more than one version or form? If
  two alternate, functionally equivalent versions
  of the measure are administered to the student,
  does the student perform about the same on both?
• Interrater Reliability. When two different
  evaluators observe the same students performance
  and independently use the measure to rate that
  performance, do they come up with similar
  ratings?

6
Benchmarks Goal-Setting

• Performance Benchmarks. Does the measure include
  benchmarks or other performance criteria that
  indicate typical or expected student performance
  in the academic skill?
• Goal-Setting. Does the measure include guidelines
  for setting specific goals for improvement?

7
Progress-Monitoring and Instructional Impact

• Repeated Assessments. Does the measure have
  sufficient alternative forms to assess the
  student weekly for at least 20 weeks?
• Equivalent Alternate Forms. Are the measures
  repeated assessments (alternative forms)
  equivalent in content and level of difficulty?
• Sensitive to Short-Term Student Gains. Is the
  measure sensitive to short-term improvements in
  student academic performance?
• Positive Impact on Learning. Does research show
  that the measure gives teachers information that
  helps them to make instructional decisions that
  positively impact student learning?

8
Team Activity Evaluate the RTI Readiness of
Your Schools Academic Measures

• Directions Select one important literacy
  measure used by your school. On the form Evaluate
  the RTI Readiness of Your Schools Academic
  Measures (next page), evaluate the RTI
  readiness of this measure. Be prepared to share
  your results with the group.

9
A Review of RTI Literacy Assessment/ Monitoring
ToolsJim Wrightwww.interventioncentral.org
10
RTI Literacy Assessment Progress-Monitoring

• The RTI Literacy model collects reading
  assessment information on students on a schedule
  based on their risk profile and intervention
  placement.
• Reading measures used are valid, reliable,
  brief, and matched to curriculum expectations for
  each grade. Depending on the grade, the battery
  of reading measures used can include assessments
  in phonological awareness, oral reading fluency,
  and basic reading comprehension.

Source Burns, M. K., Gibbons, K. A. (2008).
Implementing response-to-intervention in
elementary and secondary schools Procedures to
assure scientific-based practices. New York
Routledge.
11
RTI Literacy Assessment Progress-Monitoring
(Cont.)

• To measure student response to
  instruction/intervention effectively, the RTI
  Literacy model measures students reading
  performance and progress on schedules matched to
  each students risk profile and intervention Tier
  membership.
• Benchmarking/Universal Screening. All children in
  a grade level are assessed at least 3 times per
  year on a common collection of literacy
  assessments.
• Strategic Monitoring. Students placed in Tier 2
  (supplemental) reading groups are assessed 1-2
  times per month to gauge their progress with this
  intervention.
• Intensive Monitoring. Students who participate in
  an intensive, individualized Tier 3 reading
  intervention are assessed at least once per week.
  

Source Burns, M. K., Gibbons, K. A. (2008).
Implementing response-to-intervention in
elementary and secondary schools Procedures to
assure scientific-based practices. New York
Routledge.
12

• Apply the 80-15-5 Rule to Determine if the
  Focus of the Intervention Should Be the Core
  Curriculum, Subgroups of Underperforming
  Learners, or Individual Struggling Students (T.
  Christ, 2008)
• If less than 80 of students are successfully
  meeting academic or behavioral goals, the
  intervention focus is on the core curriculum and
  general student population.
• If no more than 15 of students are not
  successful in meeting academic or behavioral
  goals, the intervention focus is on small-group
  treatments or interventions.
• If no more than 5 of students are not successful
  in meeting academic or behavioral goals, the
  intervention focus is on the individual student.

Source Christ, T. (2008). Best practices in
problem analysis. In A. Thomas J. Grimes
(Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V
(pp. 159-176).
13
Curriculum-Based Measurement Advantages as a Set
of Tools to Monitor RTI/Academic Cases

• Aligns with curriculum-goals and materials
• Is reliable and valid (has technical adequacy)
• Is criterion-referenced sets specific
  performance levels for specific tasks
• Uses standard procedures to prepare materials,
  administer, and score
• Samples student performance to give objective,
  observable low-inference information about
  student performance
• Has decision rules to help educators to interpret
  student data and make appropriate instructional
  decisions
• Is efficient to implement in schools (e.g.,
  training can be done quickly the measures are
  brief and feasible for classrooms, etc.)
• Provides data that can be converted into visual
  displays for ease of communication

Source Hosp, M.K., Hosp, J. L., Howell, K. W.
(2007). The ABCs of CBM. New York Guilford.
14
SOURCE CAST Website http//www.cast.org/publica
tions/ncac/ncac_curriculumbe.html
15
Measuring General vs. Specific Academic Outcomes

• General Outcome Measures Track the students
  increasing proficiency on general curriculum
  goals such as reading fluency. Example CBM-Oral
  Reading Fluency (Hintz et al., 2006).
• Specific Sub-Skill Mastery Measures Track
  short-term student academic progress with clear
  criteria for mastery (Burns Gibbons, 2008).
  Example Letter Identification.

Sources Burns, M. K., Gibbons, K. A. (2008).
Implementing response-to-intervention in
elementary and secondary schools Procedures to
assure scientific-based practices. New York
Routledge. Hintz, J. M., Christ, T. J., Methe,
S. A. (2006). Curriculum-based assessment.
Psychology in the Schools, 43, 45-56.
16
(No Transcript)
17
CBM Literacy Measures Sources

• DIBELS (https//dibels.uoregon.edu/)
• AimsWeb (http//www.aimsweb.com)
• Easy CBM (http//www.easycbm.com)
• iSteep (http//www.isteep.com)
• EdCheckup (http//www.edcheckup.com)
• Intervention Central (http//www.interventioncentr
  al.org)

18

• Reading 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Alphabetics
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension

19
Initial Sound Fluency (ISF)

• standardized, individually administered measure
  of phonological awareness that assesses a childs
  ability to recognize and produce the initial
  sound in an orally presented word. The examiner
  presents four pictures to the child, names each
  picture, and then asks the child to identify
  (i.e., point to or say) the picture that begins
  with the sound produced orally by the examiner.
• Time About 3 minutes

SOURCE Good et al. (2002) DIBELS administration
and scoring guide. https//dibels.uoregon.edu/meas
ures/files/admin_and_scoring_6th_ed.pdf
20

• Reading 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Alphabetics
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension

21
Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF)

• assesses a students ability to segment three-
  and four-phoneme words into their individual
  phonemes fluently. The PSF task is administered
  by the examiner orally presenting words of three
  to four phonemes. It requires the student to
  produce verbally the individual phonemes for each
  word.
• Time 1 minute

SOURCE Good et al. (2002) DIBELS administration
and scoring guide. https//dibels.uoregon.edu/meas
ures/files/admin_and_scoring_6th_ed.pdf
22

• Reading 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension

23
Letter Naming Fluency (LNF)

• Students are presented with a page of upper- and
  lower-case letters arranged in a random order and
  are asked to name as many letters as they can.
• Time 1 minute

SOURCE Good et al. (2002) DIBELS administration
and scoring guide. https//dibels.uoregon.edu/meas
ures/files/admin_and_scoring_6th_ed.pdf
24

• Reading 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension

25

• Reading 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension

26
Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF)

• Tests the alphabetic principle including
  letter-sound correspondence and of the ability to
  blend letters into words in which letters
  represent their most common sounds. The student
  is presented a sheet of paper with randomly
  ordered VC and CVC nonsense words (e.g., sig,
  rav, ov) and asked to produce verbally the
  individual letter sound of each letter or
  verbally produce, or read, the whole nonsense
  word.
• Time 1 minute

SOURCE Good et al. (2002) DIBELS administration
and scoring guide. https//dibels.uoregon.edu/meas
ures/files/admin_and_scoring_6th_ed.pdf
27

• Reading 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics/Specific Subskill Mastery
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension

28

• Reading 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics
• Fluency with Text/General Outcome Measure
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension

29
Oral Reading Fluency (ORF)

• Student performance is measured by having
  students read a passage aloud for one minute.
  Words omitted, substituted, and hesitations of
  more than three seconds are scored as errors.
  Words self-corrected within three seconds are
  scored as accurate. The number of correct words
  per minute from the passage is the oral reading
  fluency rate.
• Time 1 minute

SOURCE Good et al. (2002) DIBELS administration
and scoring guide. https//dibels.uoregon.edu/meas
ures/files/admin_and_scoring_6th_ed.pdf
30

• Reading 5 Big Ideas
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetics
• Fluency with Text
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension/General Outcome Measure

31
Comparison of RTI Assessment/Monitoring Systems

• DIBELS Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early
  Literacy Skills
• Initial Sound Fluency Preschool gt Middle K
• Letter Naming Fluency Beginning K gt Beginning Gr
  1
• Phoneme Segmentation Fluency Middle K gt End Gr 1
• Nonsense Word Fluency Middle K gt Beginning Gr 2
• Oral Reading Fluency Middle Gr 1 gt Gr 6

32
Comparison of RTI Assessment/Monitoring Systems

• Easy CBM
• Letter Naming Fluency K gt Gr 1
• Letter Sound Fluency K gt Gr 1
• Phoneme Segmentation Fluency K gt Gr 1
• Word Reading Fluency K gt Gr 3
• Oral Reading Fluency Gr 1 gt Gr 8

33
Comparison of RTI Assessment/Monitoring Systems

• AimsWeb
• Letter Naming Fluency Beginning K gt Beginning Gr
  1
• Letter Sound Fluency Middle K gt Beginning Gr 1
• Phoneme Segmentation Fluency Middle K gt Middle
  Gr 1
• Nonsense Word Fluency Middle K gt End Gr 1
• Oral Reading Fluency Gr 1 gt Gr 8
• Maze (Reading Comprehension Fluency) Gr 1 gt Gr 8

34
Comparison of 2 RTI Assessment/Monitoring Systems

• DIBELS
• Initial Sound Fluency Preschool gt Middle K
• Letter Naming Fluency Beginning K gt Beginning
  Gr 1
• Phoneme Segmentation Fluency Middle K gt End Gr
  1
• Nonsense Word Fluency Middle K gt Beginning Gr 2
• Oral Reading Fluency Middle Gr 1 gt Gr 6

• AimsWeb
• Letter Naming Fluency Beginning K gt Beginning
  Gr 1
• Letter Sound Fluency Middle K gt Beginning Gr 1
• Phoneme Segmentation Fluency Middle K gt Middle
  Gr 1
• Nonsense Word Fluency Middle K gt End Gr 1
• Oral Reading Fluency Gr 1 gt Gr 8
• Maze (Reading Comprehension Fluency) Gr 1 gt Gr
  8

35
Elbow Group Activity RTI-Ready Literacy
Measures

• In your elbow groups
• Review the set of CBM literacy assessment tools
  in the handout.
• Select a starter set of literacy measures by
  grade level that you would like your school to
  adopt. (If your school already has a standard set
  of CBM literacy/tools, discuss ways to optimize
  its use.)

36
CBM Developing a Process to Collect Local
Norms Jim Wrightwww.interventioncentral.org
37
RTI Literacy Assessment Progress-Monitoring

• To measure student response to
  instruction/intervention effectively, the RTI
  model measures students academic performance and
  progress on schedules matched to each students
  risk profile and intervention Tier membership.
• Benchmarking/Universal Screening. All children in
  a grade level are assessed at least 3 times per
  year on a common collection of academic
  assessments.
• Strategic Monitoring. Students placed in Tier 2
  (supplemental) reading groups are assessed 1-2
  times per month to gauge their progress with this
  intervention.
• Intensive Monitoring. Students who participate in
  an intensive, individualized Tier 3 intervention
  are assessed at least once per week.

Source Burns, M. K., Gibbons, K. A. (2008).
Implementing response-to-intervention in
elementary and secondary schools Procedures to
assure scientific-based practices. New York
Routledge.
38
Local Norms Screening All Students (Stewart
Silberglit, 2008)

• Local norm data in basic academic skills are
  collected at least 3 times per year (fall,
  winter, spring).
• Schools should consider using curriculum-linked
  measures such as Curriculum-Based Measurement
  that will show generalized student growth in
  response to learning.
• If possible, schools should consider avoiding
  curriculum-locked measures that are tied to a
  single commercial instructional program.

Source Stewart, L. H. Silberglit, B. (2008).
Best practices in developing academic local
norms. In A. Thomas J. Grimes (Eds.), Best
practices in school psychology V (pp. 225-242).
Bethesda, MD National Association of School
Psychologists.
39
Local Norms Using a Wide Variety of Data
(Stewart Silberglit, 2008)

• Local norms can be compiled using
• Fluency measures such as Curriculum-Based
  Measurement.
• Existing data, such as office disciplinary
  referrals.
• Computer-delivered assessments, e.g., Measures of
  Academic Progress (MAP) from www.nwea.org

Source Stewart, L. H. Silberglit, B. (2008).
Best practices in developing academic local
norms. In A. Thomas J. Grimes (Eds.), Best
practices in school psychology V (pp. 225-242).
Bethesda, MD National Association of School
Psychologists.
40
Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)www.nwea.org
41
Applications of Local Norm Data (Stewart
Silberglit, 2008)

• Local norm data can be used to
• Evaluate and improve the current core
  instructional program.
• Allocate resources to classrooms, grades, and
  buildings where student academic needs are
  greatest.
• Guide the creation of targeted Tier 2
  (supplemental intervention) groups
• Set academic goals for improvement for students
  on Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions.
• Move students across levels of intervention,
  based on performance relative to that of peers
  (local norms).

Source Stewart, L. H. Silberglit, B. (2008).
Best practices in developing academic local
norms. In A. Thomas J. Grimes (Eds.), Best
practices in school psychology V (pp. 225-242).
Bethesda, MD National Association of School
Psychologists.
42
Local Norms Supplement With Additional Academic
Testing as Needed (Stewart Silberglit, 2008)

• At the individual student level, local norm
  data are just the first step toward determining
  why a student may be experiencing academic
  difficulty. Because local norms are collected on
  brief indicators of core academic skills, other
  sources of information and additional testing
  using the local norm measures or other tests are
  needed to validate the problem and determine why
  the student is having difficulty. Percentage
  correct and rate information provide clues
  regarding automaticity and accuracy of skills.
  Error types, error patterns, and qualitative data
  provide clues about how a student approached the
  task. Patterns of strengths and weaknesses on
  subtests of an assessment can provide information
  about the concepts in which a student or group of
  students may need greater instructional support,
  provided these subtests are equated and reliable
  for these purposes. p. 237

Source Stewart, L. H. Silberglit, B. (2008).
Best practices in developing academic local
norms. In A. Thomas J. Grimes (Eds.), Best
practices in school psychology V (pp. 225-242).
Bethesda, MD National Association of School
Psychologists.
43
Steps in Creating Process for Local Norming Using
CBM Measures

• Identify personnel to assist in collecting data.
  A range of staff and school stakeholders can
  assist in the school norming, including
• Administrators
• Support staff (e.g., school psychologist, school
  social worker, specials teachers,
  paraprofessionals)
• Parents and adult volunteers
• Field placement students from graduate programs

Source Harn, B. (2000). Approaches and
considerations of collecting schoolwide early
literacy and reading performance data. University
of Oregon Retrieved from https//dibels.uoregon.e
du/logistics/data_collection.pdf
44
Steps in Creating Process for Local Norming Using
CBM Measures

• Determine method for screening data collection.
  The school can have teachers collect data in the
  classroom or designate a team to conduct the
  screening
• In-Class Teaching staff in the classroom collect
  the data over a calendar week.
• Schoolwide/Single Day A trained team of 6-10
  sets up a testing area, cycles students through,
  and collects all data in one school day.
• Schoolwide/Multiple Days Trained team of 4-8
  either goes to classrooms or creates a central
  testing location, completing the assessment over
  multiple days.
• Within-Grade Data collectors at a grade level
  norm the entire grade, with students kept busy
  with another activity (e.g., video) when not
  being screened.

Source Harn, B. (2000). Approaches and
considerations of collecting schoolwide early
literacy and reading performance data. University
of Oregon Retrieved from https//dibels.uoregon.e
du/logistics/data_collection.pdf
45
Steps in Creating Process for Local Norming Using
CBM Measures

• Select dates for screening data collection. Data
  collection should occur at minimum three times
  per year in fall, winter, and spring. Consider
• Avoiding screening dates within two weeks of a
  major student break (e.g., summer or winter
  break).
• Coordinate the screenings to avoid state testing
  periods and other major scheduling conflicts.

Source Harn, B. (2000). Approaches and
considerations of collecting schoolwide early
literacy and reading performance data. University
of Oregon Retrieved from https//dibels.uoregon.e
du/logistics/data_collection.pdf
46
Steps in Creating Process for Local Norming Using
CBM Measures

• Create Preparation Checklist. Important
  preparation steps are carried out, including
• Selecting location of screening
• Recruiting screening personnel
• Ensure that training occurs for all data
  collectors
• Line up data-entry personnel (e.g., for rapid
  computer data entry).

Source Harn, B. (2000). Approaches and
considerations of collecting schoolwide early
literacy and reading performance data. University
of Oregon Retrieved from https//dibels.uoregon.e
du/logistics/data_collection.pdf
47
Team Activity Draft a Plan to Conduct an
Academic Screening in Your School or District

• Directions
• Discuss a process for collecting screening data
  three times per year in your school.
• What are resources in your school that can assist
  with these screenings?
• What challenges do you anticipateand how can you
  overcome them?

48
Monitoring Student Progress at the Secondary
Level Jim Wrightwww.interventioncentral.org
49
Universal Screening at Secondary Schools Using
Existing Data Proactively to Flag Signs of
Disengagement

• Across interventions, a key component to
  promoting school completion is the systematic
  monitoring of all students for signs of
  disengagement, such as attendance and behavior
  problems, failing courses, off track in terms of
  credits earned toward graduation, problematic or
  few close relationships with peers and/or
  teachers, and then following up with those who
  are at risk.

Source Jimerson, S. R., Reschly, A. L., Hess,
R. S. (2008). Best practices in developing
academic local norms. In A. Thomas J. Grimes
(Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V
(pp. 1085-1097). Bethesda, MD National
Association of School Psychologists. p.1090
50
Mining Archival Data What Are the Early Warning
Flags of Student Drop-Out?

• A sample of 13,000 students in Philadelphia were
  tracked for 8 years. These early warning
  indicators were found to predict student drop-out
  in the sixth-grade year
• Failure in English
• Failure in math
• Missing at least 20 of school days
• Receiving an unsatisfactory behavior rating
  from at least one teacher

Source Balfanz, R., Herzog, L., MacIver, D. J.
(2007). Preventing student disengagement and
keeping students on the graduation path in urban
middle grades schools Early identification and
effective interventions. Educational
Psychologist,42, 223235. .
51
What is the Predictive Power of These Early
Warning Flags?
Number of Early Warning Flags in Student Record Probability That Student Would Graduate
None 56
1 36
2 21
3 13
4 7
Source Balfanz, R., Herzog, L., MacIver, D. J.
(2007). Preventing student disengagement and
keeping students on the graduation path in urban
middle grades schools Early identification and
effective interventions. Educational
Psychologist,42, 223235. .
52
Breaking Down Complex Academic Goals into Simpler
Sub-Tasks Discrete Categorization
53
Identifying and Measuring Complex Academic
Problems at the Middle and High School Level

• Students at the secondary level can present with
  a range of concerns that interfere with academic
  success.
• One frequent challenge for these students is the
  need to reduce complex global academic goals into
  discrete sub-skills that can be individually
  measured and tracked over time.

54
Discrete Categorization A Strategy for Assessing
Complex, Multi-Step Student Academic Tasks

• Definition of Discrete Categorization Listing
  a number of behaviors and checking off whether
  they were performed. (Kazdin, 1989, p. 59).
• Approach allows educators to define a larger
  behavioral goal for a student and to break that
  goal down into sub-tasks. (Each sub-task should
  be defined in such a way that it can be scored as
  successfully accomplished or not
  accomplished.)
• The constituent behaviors that make up the larger
  behavioral goal need not be directly related to
  each other. For example, completed homework may
  include as sub-tasks wrote down homework
  assignment correctly and created a work plan
  before starting homework

Source Kazdin, A. E. (1989). Behavior
modification in applied settings (4th ed.).
Pacific Gove, CA Brooks/Cole..
55
Discrete Categorization Example Math Study Skills

• General Academic Goal Improve Tinas Math Study
  Skills
• Tina was struggling in her mathematics course
  because of poor study skills. The RTI Team and
  math teacher analyzed Tinas math study skills
  and decided that, to study effectively, she
  needed to
• Check her math notes daily for completeness.
• Review her math notes daily.
• Start her math homework in a structured school
  setting.
• Use a highlighter and margin notes to mark
  questions or areas of confusion in her notes or
  on the daily assignment.
• Spend sufficient seat time at home each day
  completing homework.
• Regularly ask math questions of her teacher.

56
Discrete Categorization Example Math Study Skills

• General Academic Goal Improve Tinas Math Study
  Skills
• The RTI Teamwith teacher and student
  inputcreated the following intervention plan.
  The student Tina will
• Approach the teacher at the end of class for a
  copy of class note.
• Check her daily math notes for completeness
  against a set of teacher notes in 5th period
  study hall.
• Review her math notes in 5th period study hall.
• Start her math homework in 5th period study hall.
• Use a highlighter and margin notes to mark
  questions or areas of confusion in her notes or
  on the daily assignment.
• Enter into her homework log the amount of time
  spent that evening doing homework and noted any
  questions or areas of confusion.
• Stop by the math teachers classroom during help
  periods (T Th only) to ask highlighted
  questions (or to verify that Tina understood that
  weeks instructional content) and to review the
  homework log.

57
Discrete Categorization Example Math Study Skills

• Academic Goal Improve Tinas Math Study Skills
• General measures of the success of this
  intervention include (1) rate of homework
  completion and (2) quiz test grades.
• To measure treatment fidelity (Tinas
  follow-through with sub-tasks of the checklist),
  the following strategies are used
• Approached the teacher for copy of class notes.
  Teacher observation.
• Checked her daily math notes for completeness
  reviewed math notes, started math homework in 5th
  period study hall. Student work products random
  spot check by study hall supervisor.
• Used a highlighter and margin notes to mark
  questions or areas of confusion in her notes or
  on the daily assignment. Review of notes by
  teacher during T/Th drop-in period.
• Entered into her homework log the amount of
  time spent that evening doing homework and noted
  any questions or areas of confusion. Log reviewed
  by teacher during T/Th drop-in period.
• Stopped by the math teachers classroom during
  help periods (T Th only) to ask highlighted
  questions (or to verify that Tina understood that
  weeks instructional content). Teacher
  observation student sign-in.