Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
For me to understand Spencer’s wants vs needs I need to rethink the description as a journey . . .
a process where what may have started as a want turns into a need – and very likely not intentionally.Consider that Spencer is young – only 6.
Consider he wants to fit in with peers – be liked by his peers.
Consider the need of some children with autism – everything needs to be “just right” – and then Consider that he sees the difference between his B’s/C’s and A’s (really? An A through F system in First grade????) and is set up to start a road to anxiety.
Consider where the anxiety leads . . . ?
Consider when a want to play Minecraft mophs into a need as it curbs anxiety.
Consider the want to have friends is found, maybe, not at 1st grade – but in his online peers.
Consider the addition of panic attacks (comorbid?) He needs to find calm and self regulation.
Consider the addition of asthma attacks (another very scary layer). He needs to breathe.So, I find now a child with many layers of wants and needs. More information and collaboration is needed with Spencer’s mom to begin to sort this out. I would want a good profile of Spencer’s social/emotional/behavioral needs (we find the DECA C a great tool for getting to know what strengths to maximize and what skills need to be taught). I would want to find peer and parent supports. And I would seek out the school psychologist as an integral part of Spencer’s Team, as well as the school nurse. I would want Spencer and his mom to know that their school wants to help. And just as a process brought us to this point – it will be a process to come back out of it.
Given familiar material presented during group activities, Joan will verbally participate (in chorus with her peers) in repeating songs, poems, and fingerplays that use alliteration and/or rhyme during 80% of opportunities over 5 days by annual review time.
This is a goal that I wrote for a child this spring so I am curious to see if it meets the criteria of the R-GORI rating scale.
1). Yes. Joan can be observed and heard using her voice to participate with her peers during the activity.
2). Yes. I think the criterion is implied here (independtly but in conjunction with her peers) and is measured by the frequencey with which she participates.
3). Yes. This is a skill that is a verbal (and may include motor) action that is a behavior needed in order for her to participate in activities related to literacy, language development, self/other awareness and self regulation.
4). Yes. The behavior is a component of group participation that is crucial for a child in a school setting.
5). Yes. The target skill is a building block of literacy (alliteration and rhyme) and of self/other awareness and self regulation (participating in a group activity.
6). Yes. As Joan moves into activities with related books, and words – she can demonstrate her recognition of rhyme and alliteration, and is likely to participate more fully in both small group and incidental learning opportunities.
7). Yes. Verbal games using rhyme and alliteration are frequently used in her school setting – particularly during transitions. She also has a baby sister at home and parents will encourage her to use songs, rhymes, and stories when interacting and caring for her sibling.
8). Yes. Teacher, paraprofessional, SLP, and parents all participate in encouraging participation in songs and rhymes with students throughout various times of the day and in various settings.Daniel,
Your goal is functional and measurable. I also see it is a precursor to future skills (using eye gaze for interactive computer learning). Your delineation of how this skill will be measured across multiple settings/with multiple individuals and the importance of the family opportunities for involvement are thought provoking and challenging for me to consider as I write my goal. Thank you!
Hi Daniel –
I really loved your statement – ” I feel we can and should write goals to demonstrate a purpose for the learning. The goal need not be just be related to counting by 1’s, 5’s and 10’s but to do so for the functional purpose of developing money handling skills. Or, the goal wouldn’t have to be on answering “wh” questions when reading a passage but could be expanded to following a five step recipe in order to successful create a food product.” I totally agree with you. I think the habit that I am trying to break is to move away from goals/objectives that seem to be more measurable – and I am looking forward to the segment on how to “measure” progress when the goal is written in a very functional and meaningful way.
As we discuss functionality, I have to say that I am so thankful that I work in preschool settings that encourage developmentally appropriate learning through play! I always cringe a bit when I have to (because if is required in my district) revise IEPs for kindergarten and change my goals to “fit” into “reading, writing, math, social skills, or behavior” headings based on common core curriculum. I have even had K sped teachers tell me that they do NOT “DO” functional communication goals because that is for the SLP – Yikes!
Now to get off my soapbox and answer the question. I think all goals should be functional – and that academic goals are functional goals. All goals should teach skills that lead to increased participation and independence. I loved the statement Kristie made regarding the need to consider the “why” behind the discrete skill and “how’ it will help a child to participate, access, and make progress. If we are embedding learning opportunities in preschool that lead to the skills that are foundational to reading, writing, and math – I do not think it should be any different for a child heading into kindergarten. Kristie mentioned “broad, embedded, and meaningful goals”. So what might this look like in the area of “math”? I am challenging myself (true confessions time) because I have made the error of focusing more on the curriculum expectations than on the child – because it is easier and I did not give it my best. So a non functional academic goal might read: “ _____ will count items with 1:1 correspondence up to 20 with 80% accuracy over 5 days”. A functional version of this might read: “Across a variety of activities, ______ will use countable materials in a variety of ways, counting out up to 20 items while touching each item (e.g., while building with blocks, playing duck -duck, putting away materials) over 5 days”. This means that counting has become a meaningful activity for this child that helps him to a greater degree to access and participate in his general education classroom while making progress on his goal.Response to Daniel:
Hello Daniel – I will try to respond to someone different each time so it is your turn :).I appreciated your responses. It should be difficult to get past Filter 1 – and without the information it is challenging. In our IEP goals we do not refer to the disability determination – so I had to think outside the box on this one. For Filter 2, I agree about the inference to being limited in the ability to actively participate in the daily activities. Your response to Filter 3 was interesting and I believe accurate as I envision a play based small group learning to pair the labels to the numbers. And your comment about the annual nature of IEPs for Filter 4 is accurate – and it is very challenging to speculate where a child will be in a year. My experience is that I tend to “undershoot” and they get farther than I expected!
Thanks!
MelindaJust an fyi – after reading the goal, I extrapolated a bit in thinking about who this child may be based on the goal being achievable in one year . . . I may have over reached but it did make for an interesting way to analyze the goal.
Filter 1:
The information in this goal implies that the child may be experiencing a developmental delay – and is not making crucial cognitive connections that could be indicated by the types of outcomes that are the focus of the goal. In such case this may stem from the child’s disability. One of the examples (find a friend) may be reasonable functional need for the child that is missing and will need to be addressed in an IEP. I also see the needs in the areas of pairing and beginning to understand symbols as worthy – though some of the examples may be a bit broad and academic vs based in symbolic play with peers.Filter 2:
Assuming this goal is what the team hopes to accomplish over the next year – and without the baseline to guide – and with the assumption that I have made through filter 1 . . . I would say that this does represent an adverse impact on the child. Participation with peers will be limited if the child cannot begin to make the types of connections that are represented through – choosing a buddy, participating in a “job” at snack time, or take care of everyday tasks during the arrival routine at school. Acitivities of pairing number and letter tags will begin to help the the team determine readiness for learning more complex academic tasks.Filter 3:
Could this child acquire these skills if given exposure, access, and practice? This is a really tough one that hits home for me as i am fortunate to work in a setting that provides very high quality care and education. Part of my assessment process is based on the time we have given already to see if the child has responded to just that. And when they are not responding then we consider the need for specially designed instruction. But if the the team is trying to make this determination based on information gathered through other’s observations and insight – they will have to use that to form an opinion. If there is a history of this child just not making connections that support pariticipation with peers and others, then I do think that it may require specially designed instruction.Filter 4:
Is this goal developmentally approriate and does it predict what this child might have accomplished in one year? I do think that if it is done in a sequential manner (it does seem like elements of stages are represented here – while not necesarily aligned), the skills do make sense in moving from simple connections with peers to symbolic connections with numbers and letters.Comment: I have never seen a goal written this way – rather it seems to be a goal and multiple objectives all grouped together. This thinking may be related to how we delineate goals and objectives of the forms that we use in our district.
Hello Olena,
I am fortunate to know you personally so I especially appreciate your responses. You are able to restate and question in a very positive way that would be respectful of parents or other team members who are participating in this process. You were able to pull out the observation or data and go from there to validate and then proceed to seek the additional information that would be helpful in drawing a more complete picture. Knowing your role, I can see where you have had to develop these strengths in order to blend the “art and science” of working in ECSE. We paint pictures of children based on data – always trying to determine what matters and how to measure it in a way that is meaningful. I will reply to other participants but this was just such a nice chance to affirm that we both want to learn and further develop our skills in our work with these little ones and their families! See you online this summer!1)Dayton prefers to play in isolation and becomes upset (e.g., cries and hits others) when another child comes too close. As a result, his peer interactions at playtime are limited.
Green/Red. This is good information on his preference about setting events for play, it does not give any information about what he enjoys playing with or whether he is able to tolerate peers when supported by an adult as a mediator/participant in the play process. If his experience with peers have been challenging this may be impacting his tolerance. Also – the statement “limited” leads me to think that there may be times when he is able to be near others. I would like to have that information first.
2)As measured on the EOWPVT-R, Carmen’s (48 months) expressive vocabulary is at 19 months and as measured by the ROWPVT-R her receptive vocabulary is at 26 months.
Red. This may be helpful information to determine eligibility but it does not give any type of present level description of Carmen’s functional communication skills during play, social interactions, or any “settings”.
3) Elise is essentially non-verbal and uses many ways to communicate including: gestures, facial expression, eye gaze, vocalizations, word approximations, head nods for yes, head shakes for no, and use of a Dynavox 3100 augmentative communication device which she accesses with a head switch.
Green/Red. I would like to see this start with what she can do rather that the “non-verbal” label. Some good information – yet the function of her communication strategies is not present (e.g., who is she communicating with, and in what settings/circumstances is she most able to communicate.
4)Damien’s attention problems result in failure to follow the teacher’s directions, talking out of turn and responding inappropriately during group activities.
Red. A negative statement and a big leap of assumption. There are so many other factors that could be considered here. The what/where/when/who questions have been bypassed. I hear this kind of statement from preschool teachers and it is always a challenge but a good process as we wade through the “W” waters.
5)Zung understands and remembers what he hears about a subject. Learning by reading or looking at pictures is difficult for him and doesn’t work as well.
Green/Red. It is a meaningful observation. It is a starting point in identifying his learning style but the statement “doesn’t work as well” makes me wonder if he is understanding and remembering some of the time.
6)Mark doesn’t know his colors. He can count to 3 but doesn’t always remember the number 2. He can stack 3 blocks.
Red. The information here has very little meaning. I would ask – what is he doing with colored objects (sorting, matching, pointing). What is he counting – is he counting by rote? counting blocks? how often is he skipping 2? And what was he doing when he was playing with the blocks? I had a little guy recently who did not see the point of building a tower because he wanted to make trains :).
With all of this said – I see that I have been rather critical – but I am also pointing the finger at myself and have been guilty of at least most of these at one time or another! I realize that I am looking at these through my lens of working in classrooms and talking with families and teachers. I am fortunate to have a great deal of information when I am writing a present level.
The challenge here is the limited information out of context. I want to ask all my W questions!
