Importance of collection and progress on IEP goals

Both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA) and the 2004 Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) clearly require the collection and reporting of student progress toward accomplishing Individualized Education Plan (IEP) goals and objectives both in process and end result. “The child's progress toward the annual goals is measured, as stated in the IEP. His or her parents are regularly informed of their child's progress and whether that progress is enough for the child to achieve the goals by the end of the year. These progress reports must be given to parents at least as often as parents are informed of their nondisabled children's progress.  The child's IEP is reviewed by the IEP team at least once a year, or more often if the parents or school ask for a review. One purpose of this review is to see whether the child is achieving his or her annual goals. “For example, the child may not be making progress toward his or her IEP goals, and his or her teacher or parents may become concerned. On the other hand, the child may have met most or all of the goals in the IEP, and new ones need to be written. In either case, the IEP team would meet to revise the IEP (Issaquh, WA District School system).”  Parents can make suggestions for changes, can agree or disagree with the IEP goals, and agree or disagree with the placement. At least every three years the child must be reevaluated. This evaluation is often called ‘triennial.’ Its purpose is to find out if the child continues to be a "child with a disability," as defined by IDEA, and what the child's educational needs are. However, the child must be re-evaluated more often if conditions warrant or if the child's parent or teacher asks for a new evaluation (U.S. Department of Education).”

The Issaquh School District summed up the importance of collection of progress by stating, “Evaluation and documentation of student progress is intended to serve three purposes: A. to measure a student's performance against established IEP goals and objectives. B. To help identify causal factors that account for significant differences between actual and predicted performance. C. To provide a database for adjusting the student's IEP if it does not appear the student will meet the annual goal. Each service provider must collect explicit data on student progress on a regular basis for measuring progress towards goals and objectives. The frequency with which the data is recorded will depend upon the goal and objectives. Some situations require daily data. For some, measurement at weekly or monthly intervals is appropriate. The data must be recorded at least monthly on each objective. Data sheets used to support the written progress report should be maintained in the teacher (related service provider) files (for a period of seven years in some states).” Cook, Klein, and Tessier said, “Articulation of how families will be involved and the type and frequency of communication regarding the child progress are required on the IEP.  Progress must be reported at least four times a year (p. 129)."

 All parents want progress reports and if they are not happy with the progress, they do turn to the legal system. I read an article written by Assistant Professor Susan K. Etscheidt, Department of Special Education, University of Northern Iowa titled, “Progress Monitoring: Legal Issues and Recommendations for IEP Teams” and she said that many IEP teams do not monitor progress and parents have brought law suits against the school system. “A statement of how the child’s progress toward the annual goals will be measured is included in the IEP (20 U.S. C. 1414 (d) (1) (1)."   She gave a review of several court cases and said that “Several administrative and judicial decisions have focused on the absence of adequate progress monitoring. In general courts have been unwilling to accept school district assertions concerning the appropriateness of a student’s program absent proof in the form of data. A review of recent decisions concerning progress monitoring reveals five primary areas of concern regarding progress monitoring: 1. The IEP team fails to develop or implement progress monitoring plans; 2. Responsibilities for progress monitoring are improperly delegated; 3. The IEP team does not plan or implement progress monitoring for behavior intervention plans (BIPs); 4. The team uses inappropriate measures to determine student progress towards graduation; or 5. Progress monitoring is not frequent enough to meet the requirements of IDEA or to provide meaningful data to IEP teams (Etscheidt, pp. 56-57).”  She suggested that multiple measures (both direct and indirect) be used. In closing, she writes, “Progress monitoring is a vital component of an IEP and essential to evaluating the appropriateness of a child’s program. By improving progress monitoring, IEP teams will ensure that the educational programs developed for students with disabilities will be meaningful and beneficial (Etscheidt p. 60).” 

References:

Cook, Ruth E., Klein, M.D. & Tessier A. (2004). Adapting Early Childhood Curricula for Children in Inclusive Settings. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. p 129.

Etscheidt, Susan K. “Progress Monitoring: Legal Issues and Recommendations for IEP Teams”  Teaching Exceptional Children, Jan/Feb 2006, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 56-60.

http://www2.ed.gov/parents/needs/speced/iepguide/index.html#implement accessed Feb. 13, 2011

http://www.issaquah.wednet.edu/district/departments/SpecServices/Process/IEP.aspx  accessed Feb. 16, 2011