Progress Monitoring

Progress monitoring is the practice of assessing students' academic performance as they work to meet objective milestones. Progress monitoring requires instructors to identify goals, determine students' current levels of performance, and establish how quickly students must advance to meet these goals within a set period of time, usually by the end of the school year. Each student's academic performance is evaluated on a regular basis, whether it is weekly, biweekly, or monthly. Student progress toward the achievement of a predetermined academic goal is assessed and compared to the expected rate of learning.

Keywords Assessment; Curriculum-Based Measurement; High-Stakes Testing; Individualized Education Program (IEP); Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); Learning Styles; No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB); Progress Monitoring; Standardized Testing

Testing & Evaluation > Progress Monitoring

Overview

Progress monitoring is the practice of assessing students' academic performance as they work to meet objective milestones. Progress monitoring requires instructors to identify goals, determine students' current levels of performance, and establish how quickly students must advance to meet these goals within a set period of time, usually by the end of the school year. Each student's academic performance is evaluated on a regular basis, whether it is weekly, biweekly, or monthly. Student progress toward the achievement of a predetermined academic goal is assessed and compared to the expected rate of learning. If actual progress is lagging behind expected progress, instruction should be adjusted to give students the best opportunity to meet their goals.

Student progress monitoring is a fairly simple process. First, instructors identify the curriculum material they expect students to master over the school year. Instructors then use the identified material to develop or select appropriate, curriculum-based measurement assessments, which are also called 'probes.' Then instructors assess students frequently-once a week is recommended. Finally, student scores are charted on a graph, and instructors base educational decisions on the data culled from each probe.

Progress monitoring can be used for many instructional decisions. They include:

• Monitoring student growth within an instructional program,

• Creating instructional groups,

• Identifying skill deficits,

• Screening at-risk students,

• Aiding in eligibility decisions for students, and

• Evaluating placement in special education or reintegrating students into regular education programs.

The information provided by progress monitoring can help students learn faster and make instruction more effective as teachers make decisions about the types of instruction that may work best with each student's learning style. With weekly assessments, instructors can learn quickly whether methods are effective or not. Student progress monitoring can be used with one student at a time or as a group. Progress monitoring also works well with students who have an individualized education program (IEP) plan; instructors can work with curriculum goals and state standards to develop each student's individual goals. These objectives can be easily measured and tracked with curriculum-based measurements that break down the goals into smaller, measurable steps that are assessed weekly.

For example, one student's goal might be to be able to read a certain number of words per minute by the end of the school year. Once the probes have been administered and a baseline set, instruction begins. Every week during the course of instruction, the student's reading abilities are measured to determine the progress made toward his or her goal. Since all the tests have the same level of difficulty, the weekly assessments should accurately reflect the student's rate of progress, meaning that the instructor can compare the actual rate of learning against the expected rate. If the student is meeting or exceeding expectations, then the instructor should continue with their instructional methods. If student performance does not meet expectations, however, then the instructor needs to change instruction. Some trial and error is inevitable, because several variables can influence student progress. Instructional methods, the amount of time allotted to improving a skill, and class groupings can all influence progress. Therefore, instructors need to use their best judgment and keep adjusting instructional methods until they find the right mixture that enables student to reach expected rates of progress.

Curriculum-Based Measurement

Curriculum-based measurement, the most widely known method of progress monitoring, was developed in the late 1970s to screen at-risk students and those with learning disabilities. An increased focus on accountability and adequate yearly progress was brought about with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and the IDEA Act of 1997 and 1999. Curriculum-based measurement has come to the forefront again to meet the requirements of this legislation.

For student progress monitoring to work, instructors need quick, reliable assessments that are available in multiple formats and easy to administer and score. Curriculum-based measurement is a good option for progress monitoring. It generally takes less than five minutes to administer and has many different forms, so students are never made to repeat identical assessments.

Curriculum-based measurement is a “set of procedures to assess student progress toward long-term goals in reading, spelling, written expression, and mathematics. It is an objective, ongoing system to measure student outcomes in order to evaluate the effectiveness of instructional interventions and student progress toward annual curriculum goals” (Deno, 1985, as cited in Hosp & Hosp, 2003, ¶ 5). Since curriculum-based measurement is intended for long-term use, instructors are able to adjust their teaching practices accordingly to address their students' needs. Studies have shown that the students of instructors who use curriculum-based measurement tachieve higher grades than those with instructors who do not. Additionally, the results produced by curriculum-based measurement can be graphed, meaning that instructors can easily track each student's progress. These graphs provide parents with strong illustrations of their child's progress toward stated goals.

Reading, spelling, and mathematics - the core areas students need to master for future academic success - tend to be the focus of most curriculum-based measurements. The following describes how curriculum-based measurement for subject works:

Reading

Two types of measurement can be used in a curriculum-based measurement of reading. One type requires students to read a passage with approximately every seventh word deleted for 2.5 minutes. The student must select one of three words to replace the missing word in order to restore meaning. The instructor determines the number of correct replacements. The second type requires students to read a passage aloud for one minute with the instructor determining the number of words correctly read. The student should have one copy of the passages to read from, and the instructor should have another to note the number of words read correctly. The straight reading task tends to be used more often than the replacement task.

Regardless of which type of measurement is chosen, the instructor should administer three different reading passages of equivalent grade level, none of which should be passages that the student has read before. The material should be geared to what the instructor believes to be the student's instructional level, and can be administered during one testing session or over consecutive days.

If the score does not match the criteria, the student is given three additional passages either below or above the grade level until the student's instructional level has met the criteria. Once the appropriate instructional level is identified, thirty equivalent passages need to be used to monitor student progress throughout the year. These passages should be at the student's goal level, not their current level. The goal level is determined by the level the student is expected to reach after one school year of instruction, but is typically defined as one year above current instructional level.

Spelling

Curriculum-based measurement for spelling is conducted by asking students to spell words from dictation for two minutes. Instructors then count the number of correctly written letter sequences. The spelling lists should be different but of equivalent grade level and should include at least twelve to thirteen words for grades one through three and seventeen to eighteen words for grades four through eight. The spelling words should represent the skills students are expected to master by the end of the school year. Only one copy of the measurement is needed. Instructors note the number of correct letter sequences for each word; a correct letter sequence is the right letter in the correct order. The link between two consecutive letters is counted as a correct letter sequence if both are correct. Also, the spaces prior to the first letter and after the last letter are also counted as a correct letter sequence if the first and last letters are correct. Therefore, the word 'teacher' consists of eight correct letter sequences. No credit is given if only one of the letters in a two-letter sequence is correct.

For the first assessment, three equivalent spelling tasks are administered to students. These spelling tasks can be administered in one session or over consecutive days. The median score is used to provide the first data point of each student's graph, and then thirty different, but equivalent, spelling probes will be used throughout the year to monitor student progress.

Mathematics

Curriculum-based measurement for mathematics asks students to answer computational problems for two minutes. Instructors then count the number of correct digits. Math tasks should be different but of equivalent grade level and include at least twenty-five problems per task. The problems should represent the skills students are expected to master by the end of the school year. Math problems will need to be developed for each probe based on these skills. The same number of problems representing each skill taught should be the same for every probe so that each probe is equivalent and representative of the entire year's curriculum. Two copies of each math sheet are needed with the instructor's copy containing the correct answer and indicating the correct number of digits for each problem. A correct digit is the right numeral in the correct place.

For the first assessment, three equivalent tasks are given to students. This can be done in one testing session or across consecutive days. The median score is the first data point on each student's graph, and then thirty different, but equivalent, mathematics probes will be used throughout the year to monitor student progress.

Reading assessments need to be administered to students on an individual basis. However, spelling and mathematics assessments can be given individually or in a group setting. The above examples show how easily it is to administer curriculum-based measurements and collect the appropriate data for progress monitoring. This data should be used to guide instruction. Since curriculum-based measurements take so little time to administer, instructors have more time for actual instruction. Curriculum-based measurements also allow comparisons to be made across students, classes, and schools because all students take the same assessments.

Further Insights

Research

Research has shown that progress monitoring can help students learn more, improve instructor decision making, and increase students' awareness of their own performances. Progress monitoring has also been shown “to be a reliable and valid predictor of subsequent performance on a variety of outcome measures,” making it useful for varied instructional decisions (Deno, 2003; Fuchs, Deno & Mirkin, 1984; Good & Jefferson, 1998, as cited in Safer, 2005, ¶ 6). Even though progress monitoring was developed to assess special education students, it has been shown to have predictive value in early literacy programs and in identifying general education students who are at risk for academic failure.

Benefits of Progress Monitoring

If correctly implemented, there are many benefits to progress monitoring. Instructors are able to make informed decisions about their instructional methods, and learning may be accelerated as instruction is adjusted to student needs. Documentation of student progress is built into progress monitoring, which can be used to meet No Child Left Behind Act and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requirements. Since instructors measure progress frequently, they can revise their instructional plan as soon as students need it rather than waiting until a standardized test, high-stakes test, or state assessment shows that student instructional needs are not being met.

Progress monitoring regularly measures all skills to be learned and differs from mastery measurement approaches, such as a chapter test. Mastery measurements can tell instructors whether students have learned the particular skills covered in the assessment but not if students are progressing at a pace that will allow them to meet their learning goals. By regularly assessing all skills that need to be learned by the end of the school year, instructors can chart changes in the number of correct words read per minute. This can also be done for the number of correct digits and compare each student's progress to the rate of improvement that is needed to meet the year-end goals. If students are deemed to be making insufficient progress, then instructors can adjust their methods to try to meet students' needs. Instructors can also chart student progress by graphing a line between students' initial level of performance on a particular skill and a stated goal. Instructors then plot the level of performance as each assessment is administered, noting the progress along the way. If the pattern indicates that students are not making adequate progress to meet their goals, instructors can adjust their teaching. This can mean providing additional instruction to some students, working one-on-one or in small groups with some students, going over the concepts again using different instructional approaches, or providing extra practice time for students.

Challenges of Progress Monitoring

The challenges of student progress monitoring tend to center around support and the proper administration of the assessments. Instructors may need help in transforming complex progress monitoring into easier, user-friendly approaches; and training may be necessary to ensure that assessments are properly administered and the results properly read. Training may also be necessary to help instructors learn the best way to disseminate the information attained so students and parents can easily understand the process and how it helps students.

Students with Disabilities

Both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 require that a student's individualized education program (IEP) plan includes recording the current level of academic performance, the annual goals to be measured, an assessment of the student's progress, and a plan for parental involvement and awareness. In short, these acts require monitoring of student progress. Progress monitoring is a good tool to meet these requirements because properly administered progress monitoring appropriately addresses these issues, and the charting process makes it very simple for instructors and school administrators to share a child's progress with his or her parents. Progress monitoring can help students with learning disabilities because it enables instructors to adjust their teaching methods during the school year so students have a better chance of meeting their academic goals. The charting capabilities and reports that come from progress monitoring can also help a student's IEP team develop and modify the plan according to the student's progress and educational needs.

Conclusion

With the enactment of the No Child Left Behind Act, the national educational culture shifted to a standardized, high-stakes testing culture. One of the problems with these standardized tests is that the results are not available for months, possibly not even by the end of the school year. This means these particular assessments cannot provide any information to instructors and parents quickly enough to be of any help in addressing students' current educational needs. Progress monitoring allows instructors to use quick, easily administered measurements that provide information on student progress. Instructors can determine if students need more individualized attention, more intensive instruction, or different instructional approaches. Since many districts now use high school exit exams which require students to demonstrate a solid foundation in core skills, progress monitoring can be especially useful in the early grades, when these skills are being developed. A solid foundation in reading, writing, and mathematics can set the stage for later student success; progress monitoring can help determine if these skills are being learned.

In 2015 The No Child Left Behind regimen was succeeded by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). This legislation was enacted at the end of the Obama administration. Assessments of the effectiveness of No Child Left Behind were, at best, mixed. A primary criticism was its over-reliance on standardized testing. ESSA was intended to alleviate many of these and other shortfalls. ESSA was itself modified during the Trump Administration. Although new frameworks were established for the education of American school children, left unchanged was the need for data-gathering and benchmarking. These continue to be the hallmarks of progress monitoring.

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and the subsequent shift to remote and then hybrid learning raised concerns about student progress. As such, many instructors had to implement new techniques to meet students’ needs during this time. Following a lessening of COVID restrictions and the eventual return to in-person learning, many experts began to examine the profound and lasting impact that the pandemic had on student progress.

Terms & Concepts

Assessment: Educational assessment is the process of determining the amount of information students have retained from instruction.

Curriculum-Based Measurement: Curriculum-Based Measurement is the process of using short, frequent assessments to track student progress in core academic skills like reading, spelling, and mathematics.

High-Stakes Testing: High-stakes testing is the use of test scores to make decisions that have important consequences for individuals, schools, school districts, and/or states and can include high school graduation, promotion to the next grade, resource allocation, and instructor retention.

Individualized Education Program (IEP): An individualized education program details the specific academic goals, measurement methods, behavioral management initiatives, and learning performance of a student that needs the services that special education provides.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): The Individuals with Disabilities Act, formerly the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, requires that all states receiving federal funds for education provide students with disabilities with a proper public education that is able to develop and enhance each student’s individualized skill-set and aptitude in preparation for their future careers and independent living.

Learning Styles: Learning styles are the different ways students learn. While most are visual learners, some students prefer their education to be delivered through auditory or tactile processes or a combination of all three.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB): The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 is the latest reauthorization and a major overhaul of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, the major federal law regarding K-12 education.

Standardized Testing: Standardized testing the process of administering and scoring a test in a uniform manner in order to achieve consistent interpretations of testing data.

Bibliography

Buzhardt, J., Walker, D., Greenwood, C. R., & Heitzrnan-Powell, L. (2012). Using technology to support progress monitoring and data-based intervention decision making in early childhood: Is there an app for that?. Focus on Exceptional Children, 44, 1-18.Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Christ, T. J., Zopluoglu, C., Long, J. D., & Monaghen, B. D. (2012). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading: Quality of progress monitoring outcomes. Exceptional Children, 78, Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Etscheidt, S. (2006). Progress monitoring: Legal issues and recommendations for IEP teams. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38 , 56-60. Retrieved September 4, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

www.gse.harvard.edu/ideas/news/23/05/new-data-show-how-pandemic-affected-learning-across-whole-communities

Hosp, M. & Hosp, J. (2003). Curriculum-based measurement for reading, spelling, and math: How to do it and why. Preventing School Failure, 48 , 10-17. Retrieved September 4, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Kirp, David L. (December 10, 2021). Why the New Education Law Is Good for Children Left Behind.The New York Times. Retrieved June 1, 2023, from https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/10/opinion/why-the-new-education-law-is-good-for-children-left-behind.html

McLane, K. (n.d.) Monitoring student progress. National Center for Learning Disabilities. Retrieved September 4, 2007, from

National Center on Student Progress Monitoring (n.d.). Common questions for progress monitoring. Retrieved September 4, 2007, from

Oslund, E. L., et al. (2012). Predicting kindergarteners’ response to early reading intervention: An examination of progress-monitoring measures. Reading Psychology, 33(1/2), 78-103. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Safer, N. (2005). How student progress monitoring improves instruction. Educational Leadership, 62 , 81-83. Retrieved September 4, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

(2021). Stages and Tools for the Local Education Agency (LEA).Leaning Forward. Retrieved June 1, 2023, from https://essa.learningforward.org/local-education-agency/stage-4/

Suggested Reading

Headington, R. (2004). Monitoring, Assessment, Recording, Reporting and Accountability: Meeting the Standards. London, UK: David Fulton Publishers.

Hosp, M., Hosp, J. & Howell, K. (2006). The ABCs of CBM: A Practical Guide to Curriculum-Based Measurement. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Tymms, P. (1999). Baseline Assessment and Monitoring in Primary Schools. London, UK: David Fulton Publishers.