The purpose of this study was to explore how student achievement relates to ambitiousness of goal setting and to goal mastery. The subjects were 58 special education students for whom teachers assessed baseline performance and set reading goals employing a standard format. On the basis of the relation between baseline and the anticipated goal performance, students were assigned to goal ambitiousness groups. For 18 weeks, teachers implemented students' goals, end-of-treatment goal mastery was determined, and pretest and posttest achievement scores were entered into multivariate and univariate analyses of covariance, with pretest reading scores as the covariate. Analyses revealed that ambitiousness of goals was associated positively with achievement; goal mastery was not. Implications for goal setting and IEP evaluation procedures are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BanduraA. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122–147.
2.
BeckR. (1981). Curriculum management through a data base. (Unpublished manuscript available at 3300 Third Street N.E., Great Falls, MT 59404).
3.
BloomB. S.HastingsJ. T., & MadausG. F. (1971). Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning.New York: McGraw-Hill.
4.
CliffordM. M. (1984). Thoughts on a theory of constructive failure. Educational Psychologist, 19, 108–120.
5.
CooleyW. W., & LohnesR. R. (1962). Multivariate procedures for behavioral science.New York: John Wiley & Sons.
6.
CooperH. (1979). Pygmalion grows up: A model for teacher expectation communication and performance influences. Review of Educational Research, 49, 389–410.
7.
DenoS. L., & MirkinP. K. (1977). Data-based program modification: A manual.Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
8.
DusekJ., (1975). Do teachers bias children's learning?Review of Educational Research, 45, 661–684.
9.
DusekJ., & O'ConnellE. (1973). Teacher expectancy effects on the achievement test performance of elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 371–377.
10.
Famham-DiggoryS. (1972). Cognitive processes in education: A psychological preparation for teaching and curriculum development.New York: Harper & Row.
11.
FuchsL. S. (1981). The concurrent validity of progress measures of basal reading material. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
12.
FuchsL. S. (1982). Reading. In MirkinP. K.FuchsL. S., & DenoS. L. (Eds.), Considerations for designing a continuous evaluation system: An integrative review (Monograph No. 20). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
13.
FuchsL. S., & DenoS. L. (1982). Developing goals and objectives for educational programs.Washington, D.C.: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
14.
FuchsL. S.DenoS. L., & MarstonD. (1983). Improving the reliability of curriculum-based measures of academic achievement for psychoeducational decision making. Diagnostique, 8, 135–149.
15.
FuchsL. S.DenoS. L., & MirkinP. K. (1982). Effects of frequent curriculum-based measurement and evaluation on student achievement and knowledge of performance: An experimental study (Research Report No. 96). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 226 045).
16.
FuchsL. S.DenoS. L., & MirkinP. K. (1984). The effects of frequent curriculum-based measurement and evaluation on pedagogy, student achievement, and student awareness of learning. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 449–460.
17.
FuchsL. S., & FuchsD. (in preparation). The relation between formative evaluation goals and achievement outcome: A meta-analysis.
18.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD., & DenoS. L. (1982). Reliability and validity of curriculum-based informal reading inventories. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 6–26.
19.
GagneR. M. (1964). The implications of instructional objectives for learning. In LindvallC. M. (Ed.), Defining educational objectives.Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
20.
Ginn and Company. (1976). Reading 720.Lexington, MA: Ginn (Xerox Corp.).
21.
GlasserW. (1968). Schools without failure.New York: Harper & Row.
22.
GronlundN. E. (1968). Measurement and evaluation in teaching.New York: MacMillan.
23.
HartleyJ., & DaviesI. K. (1976). Preinstructional strategies: The role of pretests, behavioral objectives, overviews and advance organizers. Review of Educational Research, 46, 239–265.
24.
HuckS.W., & LongS.D. (1973). The effect of behavioral objectives on student achievement. Journal of Experimental Education, 42, 40–41.
25.
JenkinsJ. R.DenoS. L., & MirkinP. K. (1979). Measuring pupil progress toward the least restrictive environment (Monograph No. 10). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 185 767).
LawsonT. E. (1973). Influence of instructional objectives on learning technical subject matter. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 10 (4), 5–14.
28.
LibertyK. A. (1975). Decide for progress: Dynamic aims and data decisions (Working Paper No. 56). Seattle: University of Washington Experimental Education Unit.
29.
MagerR. F. (1975). Preparing instructional objectives.Belmont, CA: Fearon Publishers.
30.
McNeilJ. D. (1967). Concomitants of using behavioral objectives in the assessment of teacher effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Education, 35, 69–74.
31.
MirkinP. K., & DenoS. L. (1979). Formative evaluation in the classroom: An approach to improving instruction (Research Report No. 10). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 185 174).
32.
MirkinP. K.DenoS. L.FuchsL. S.WessonC.TindalG.MarstonD., & KuehnleK. (1981). Procedures to develop and monitor progress on IEP goals.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
33.
New York State Education Department. (1982). Subchapter P: Part 200—-Handicapped Children. Regulations of the Commissioner of Education for the State of New York.
34.
PeckhamP. D., & RoeM. D. (1977). The effects of frequent testing. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 10 (3), 40–50.
35.
RossworkS. G. (1977). Goal setting: The effects on an academic task with varying magnitudes of incentive. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 710–715.
36.
TymitzB. L. (1981). Teacher performance on IEP instructional planning tasks. Exceptional Children, 48, 258–260.
37.
WessonC.DenoS. L.MirkinP. K.SevcikB.SkibaR.KingR., & MaruyamaG. (1982). Teaching structure and student achievement effects of curriculum-based measurement: A causal (structural) analysis (Research Report No. 105). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 227 127).
38.
YsseldykeJ. E., & ThurlowM. L., (Eds.). (1980). The special education assessment and decision-making process: Seven case studies. (Research Report No. 44). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 203 589).
