February 13, 2012

Our Collaborative Data Documentation Sheet

Orlanda and I were comparing notes one day earlier this year about the seemingly bazillions of data documentation sheets that we had tried over the years and how none of them ever quite fit the bill. I showed her the one that I was currently using at the time and a few days later she tweaked the format using another data sheet she had tweaked from a colleague, and together we came up with a GREAT sheet. It has been really handy that we are both using the same format so when we are co-teaching, whichever one of us isn't direct teaching can pick up each other's data sheets and document data easily.

Most of my (Kelley's) sheets are 2 sided to allow for frequency data to be collected on one side (behavioral or academic)...

...and anecdotal data on the other side.

 Obviously, I just make a note of the goal to remind me what I'm tracking. When I calculate the data I correlate it to the criterion.

If kids have a lot of goals, they have a whole sheet to themselves. Students who are only working on a few goals or if I only see them in a group instead of working one on one or in the inclusion setting,  are put on a "group" sheet. That way I can pull one sheet out for a group and track data on many students at the same time.

I color code the sheets as well, so I can quickly retrieve the one I want and make notes.
Using the same data documentation sheets allows us to easily share data across sessions for those students that we share as teacher and speech/language pathologist. This has helped our data reports be even more thorough. It has also helped us to evaluate behaviors and skills across settings.

The Group data sheets that we are using can be found here:

We have toyed with a variety of ways to calculate and measure our data, and currently we have stuck with "Percentage of trials correct".  We have considered changing to a "rubric" system, but in the meantime, we have found this method to be the most useful and we just make sure we take GREAT notes when any "unknown" factors affect our therapy outcomes!  You will see in the data Key that we use a (+) for a correct response, a (-) for an incorrect response, and (O) means we circle the type of response when it was cued.  So essentially, we have four types of responses that we document:  correct, incorrect, cued correct, and cued incorrect.  The "notes" are an important place to document the "type" of cue needed, particularly if it was an extremely explicit cue (such as "hand over hand").

In speech therapy, I (Orlanda) use the above data sheet for group language sessions and even in fluency therapy.  I have also tweaked the same type of data sheet specifically for articulation therapy with the only change being to the data key and an added "level".  Find this data sheet here:

On this form, the "level" refers to one of the following:  isolation, syllable, word, phrase, sentence, connected speech, etc.  Also, I have switched from the (+) method to using tally marks (/) because they are much faster for me to count and calculate AND I can fit more into a box (considering my goal is always 50+ trials per session).  Then I use the "independence" slot to document the estimated amount/type of cues needed for each student.  I have another data sheet that is similar but is meant for an individual therapy session.  Grab it here:

We would love to take a look at your data systems. What system do you use? Email us and we'd love to share your ideas with others.         ~Kelley and Orlanda


  1. AnonymousJuly 23, 2013

    Do you try to set similar goals for your ASD kids? I am looking for an efficient way to collect data for my collaborative (self contained) groups, but I am finding that because they tend to have different goals- no form works perfectly.

    1. Yes and no. All goals are individualized for each student, of course, but it is very common for many of our ASD students to have similar needs and therefore similar goals. For example, many of our students will have goals for whole body listening or reading nonverbals or initiating conversation, but may have different levels of cueing/prompting or mastery criteria. For example, my first graders all have a goal for whole body listening because this is a big area of need. One includes criteria for "moderate prompting on 75% of measured trials" while another student's specifies "minimal prompting on 75% of measured trials". All I have to do is keep my data on number of prompts for both students and then when it is time to analyze data, I just reconcile the number of prompts against the rubric I use to differentiate minimal/moderate/maximum levels and then figure out the percentage. I hope that's not clear as mud! If you need more help, please comment again or shoot us an email at speech.specialed@gmail.com. Thanks for reading and commenting, Kelley

  2. Hi! I love your data sheets! Is there a way I can download them?


We love to hear your comments!