Strategies for Evaluating Collaborative Mainstream Instruction: “Let the Data Be Our Guide”

Does Latency in Recording Data Make a Difference? Confirming the Accuracy of Teachers’ Data

“…Our results can be used to support the assumption that data recorded immediately after a student’s behavior occurs will be more accurate than data collected later in the school day or the following school day. Furthermore, it supports researchers suggesting direct measurement as an effective means of evaluating instructional effectiveness and increasing student performance (Cooke et al, 1991; Gable et al, 1997; Horner et al, 2001; Munger et al, 1988). Replications of the present investigation are needed to confirm these results.…”

“…Unfortunately, many teachers find direct observation and data collection to be too time-consuming and a task that interferes with their teaching responsibilities (Jones, 2009; Munger, Snell, & Loyd, 1988). Measuring student behaviors only once provides limited information, whereas measuring performance repeatedly and over time allows teachers to more accurately determine the effectiveness of instruction and student learning (Gable, Arllen, Evans, & Whinnery, 1997; Horner et al, 2001). Thus, data reliability can be directly influenced by measurement frequency, suggesting that it may be necessary to record student behaviors more often (Fuchs, 1986; White & Haring, 1980).…”

On the Same Page

“…Although the goal of co-teaching is to improve student outcomes, Austin (2001) found that many co-teachers make decisions about instructional effectiveness based on subjective opinions rather than concrete data. Strengthening the capacity of co-teachers to make quality decisions about student development requires use of more objective means (Gable, Arllen, Evans, & Whinnery, 1997). Frequent joint review of repeated and multiple quantitative measures of pupil performance (i.e., test scores, report card grades, curriculum-based measurement data) can help co-teachers make sound judgments about their instruction.…”

Changing Roles of Special Education Administrators: Impact on Multicultural Learners.

“…They must continue to be the bridge between special education and general education in regard to accountability issues (Crockett, 2002). Additionally, they must endeavor to use data to make decisions about the implementation of research-based practices (Gable & Arllen, 1997) for students who are struggling as well as multicultural students with disabilities. Providing appropriate instruction based on standards will enhance the use of data-based decision-making to facilitate all students in meeting the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) marker designated by NCLB.…”