Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network

Applying SAS to Students With Complex Support

Needs

December 8, 2010

PaTTAN’s Mission

The mission of the Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance

Network (PaTTAN) is to support the efforts and initiatives of the

Bureau of Special Education, and to build the capacity of local

educational agencies to serve students who receive special

education services.

2

Pennsylvania’s Commitment to Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)

Our goal for each child is to ensure IEPteams begin with the general education

setting with the use of Supplementary Aidsand Services before considering a more

restrictive environment.

3

Essential Questions

• Who are our students with complex support needs?

• What are the promising educational practices for educating students with complex support needs?

4

Essential Questions

• How can we ensure that students with complex support needs are accessing grade level content standards?

• How can we interpret instruction for students with complex support needs at different communication levels?

5

Who are the students?

• Think, Pair, Share • When you hear “learners with

complex support needs”, who do you think of? – Learning characteristics– Labels– Kind of supports needed

6

Thinking About Our Students

7

8

Adapted from Kleinert & Kearnes, 2001

The Vision

“Imagine educational practices in which learners with complex support needs have the same learner outcomes as students without disabilities”

9

Presume Competence

Viewing students through the lens of a disability label may increase the likelihood of misjudging capabilities and barring some students from opportunities to learn what other students their age are learning

(Jorgensen, McSheehan & Sonnenmeier, 2007)

10

Presume Competence

Viewing students through the lens of abilities will increase the likelihood of nurturing individual talents and providing all students the opportunities to learn what other students their age are learning in the general education classroom.

(adapted from Jorgensen, McSheehan & Sonnenmeier, 2007)

The Least Dangerous Assumption

• “…educational decisions ought to be based on assumptions, which if incorrect will have the least dangerous effect…we should assume that poor performance is due to instructional inadequacy rather than to student deficits…”

Anne Donnellan Ph.D

University of San Diego11

12

Inclusive Education

Membership

Participation

Learning

I count

I belong

General Education Instruction

Social &Other

AcademicEverything

Else

Adapted from Michael McSheehan, Institute on Disability, University of New Hampshire, 2009

Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network

State’s Perspective

13

Federal Requirements

• Federal laws and regulations required that all students, including those with the most severe disabilities, participate in the statewide accountability process:– Section 504 of The Rehabilitation Act, – Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of

1990– Title I of the Elementary and Secondary

Education Act– Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

(IDEA) Amendments of 1997– No Child Left Behind (NCLB)

The Accountability System

• The Pennsylvania Alternate System of Assessment (PASA) was introduced as the statewide alternate assessment during the 2000-2001 school year.

• The test was initially designed to assess reading and math in grades 5, 8, and 11.

• Grade 3 was added to the set of grades tested.

• In 2005-06 grades 4, 6, and 7 were tested for the purposes of AYP for the first time

• In 2007 the PASA Science in grades 4, 8, and 11 was introduced.

Assessing Students with Complex Support Needs

• According to federal guidelines, alternate assessments judged against alternate academic achievement standards should be aligned to grade level expectations.

• The PASA alternate anchors/eligible content are aligned to the grade level PSSA anchors/eligible content.

• The PASA alternate anchors/eligible content are reinterpreted and limited in depth and breadth.

National Research and Studies

• This new field of large scale assessment for students with complex support needs was “ripe” for research.– Institutions of Higher Education– National Alternate Assessment Center– National Center for Educational Outcomes– The Inclusive Large Scale Standards and

Assessment group– National Center for the Improvement of

Educational Assessment

PA Research and Studies

SALLSA Enhanced Assessment Grant (2008)

• Partners include Measured Progress, UNC-Charlotte, University of Oregon, Western Carolina University, Georgia, Washington, and Wyoming

• Purpose– Examine alignment of the alternate

assessment to general grade level standards and anchors

SALLSA Enhanced Assessment Grant (2008)• Activities

– Alignment study in reading and math– Curricular Indicator Survey

• Findings and Suggestions– The majority of students in the sample

reportedly had symbolic communication systems but teachers frequently reported teaching content at the “attention” level.

– At the same time, teachers reported designing instructional activities in which they expected active participation (either with supports or independent) from their students.

– Continued professional development may help teachers target deeper learning (i.e., higher levels of DOK) while retaining the expectation for independent performance.

SALLSA Enhanced Assessment Grant (2008)

• Findings and Suggestions– Survey responses suggest that there may be

room for growth in building access to the general curriculum.

– Teachers did not rely extensively on their general education counterparts for assistance in developing curriculum access or teaching academic skills.

– Increasing student access to the general education curriculum and better aligning instruction in order to increase academic achievement may require more professional development and strengthened relationships with general educators in the same schools.

A State Consortium To Examine the Consequential Validity Of

Alternate Assessments Based On Alternate Achievement

Standards (AA-AAS) : A Longitudinal Study (2008)

or1% GSEG

1% GSEG

• Partners included the North Central Regional Resource Center at the University of Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin

• Purpose – To determine intended and unintended

consequences in the utilization and interpretation of the alternate assessment

1% GSEG

• Activities– Survey teachers who administer the PASA– Survey administrators directly involved

with the PASA (e.g., principals where the PASA is administered)

– Conduct observations in classrooms of teachers who completed the survey

1% GSEG

• Findings– Teachers and administrators had a

strong understanding of the purpose of the PASA and how to administer it.

– Teachers saw the benefit of the alternate standards and anchors as helping to align special education with state standards and improve development of IEP goals.

1% GSEG

• Findings– Respondents were confident in the

professional development received regarding the administration of the assessment.

– In contrast, professional development opportunities were limited in regards to interpretation of scores and communication of results

Standards Aligned System

• The Bureau of Teaching and Learning requested that the Bureau of Special Education incorporate students with complex support needs into the Standards Aligned System (SAS).

SAS Activities

• The University of Kentucky through ILSSA and National Alternate Assessment System worked in cooperation with the Bureau of Special Education and PaTTAN

• June 15-18, 2010• Approximately 20 educators

including special educators and general educators

SAS Activities

• Using the Pathways to Learning in combination with SAS Curriculum Framework, educators modified lesson plans within SAS and/or developed new lesson plans

• These modified lesson plans incorporated focus upon– Near links and far links to grade level

content– Communication levels (pre-symbolic,

emerging symbolic, symbolic)

SAS Outcomes

• 21 lesson plans were developed in June 

• Lesson plans required additional vetting

• For immediate placement onto SAS, the following are ready:– 7 modified reading lesson plans – 4 modified math lesson plans– 2 modified science lesson plans

National Center and State Collaborative

• The federal government announced General Supervision Enhanced Grants

• Referred to as the NCSC GSEG• Purpose is to develop Common Core

Assessment for the 1% population (new alternate assessment aligned to the Common Core)

NCSC GSEG

• While there were approximately 6 proposals, Pennsylvania committed to this project only.

• Partners include National Center for Educational Outcomes, National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment, National Alternate Assessment Center, University of North Carolina Charlotte, 18 state partners, and 6 entities.

• There is a shared commitment for research to practice, development of a comprehensive model curriculum, instruction, assessment and professional development.

The Future: Continuing the Vision

“Imagine educational practices in which learners with significant disabilities have the same learner outcomes as students without disabilities”

• Kleinert and Kearnes, 2001

Curricular Context for Students with Complex Support Needs

34

Research

35

Number of validated research and literature review studies occurring in the past 35 years studying educational practices for students with complex

support needs:

128 reading55 math

10 science

M. McSheehan: 2010 PEAL Conference, Pittsburgh PA36

Access to general education curriculum and the role of context

• Access to general education contexts• Instruction on general education

content• High expectations• Participation in and progress on

general education content• Participation in general education

accountability measuresRyndak, Moore, Orlando and Delano, 2010

37

It’s All About the Fit… Special and General

Education

• IEP– Not a curriculum– Describes how the student will:

• access education; • make progress in the general curriculum; and • address other unique needs.

• State Standards– Drive the development of the curriculum– Are assessed by NCLB/ESEA– Reflect what all students should learn

38

Some questions to ask when looking at student performance

• Is it academic?content referenced: reading, math, science

• Is the content referenced to a student’s assigned grade level based on chronological age?

• Does the focus of achievement maintain fidelity with the content of the original grade level standard (content centrality) ? what the student is doing

Browder et al. Links for Academic Learning

39

Some questions to ask when looking at student performance

• Does the focus of the performance level maintain fidelity of the original grade level standard?the level of student performance

• Is the expected student achievement to show learning of grade referenced academic content?

• Is it meaningful?

Browder et al. Links for Academic Learning

40

Using the Common Core Standards to Address InstructionTeachers should …..

• Apply strategies for linking to grade level content instruction

• Identify clear instructional goals and objectives

• Ensure that the instructional goals and objectives are assessed

That results in …..

• student work that reflects appropriate constructs in reading, mathematics and science

41

Is it what we think it is?

Looking at how complexity builds to fully meet the standard

1. Initial activity2. Building knowledge and skills3. Meeting the standard

42

Linking to the Common Core Standards: English Language Arts K-12

Grades 9-10 Students:Strand: Reading Standards

for Literature

5.Analyze how an author structures a text, orders events within it (e.g., parallel plots), and manipulates time (e.g., pacing) to create mystery, tension, or surprise.

Craft and structure

Is it what we think it is?

• Is it academic/reading?Yes

• Is the task typical of a student the same age working on the same content? Far link. Romeo and Juliet is adapted from a text illustrating complexity and quality from grades 9-10, but Josh is simply ordering events without an overt reference to text structure

• Is the level of performance typical of a student the same age working on the same content?Far link. Josh is ordering events (application) but no analysis is involved

Josh will order notable events in Romeo and Juliet using pictures with simple captions

Building knowledge and skill

Draft

Josh will use a graphic organizer to lay out details from a notable event.

Is it what we think it is?

• Is it academic/reading?Yes

• Is the task typical of a student the same age working on the same content? Far link. Josh is working on Shakespeare but details of the event are not overtly related to text structure

• Is the level of performance typical of a student the same age working on the same content?Far link. Josh is identifying (recall) and organizing details (simple application) but it does not include analysis required by the standard

Josh will complete a graphic organizer to lay out details of a notable event (includes distractors).

Text Structure: Problem and Solution

Draft

Reading Standards for Literature/Craft and Structure

5. Analyze how an author structures a text, orders events within it, and manipulates time (e.g., pacing) to create mystery, tension, or surprise.

Josh will answer questions related to problem and solution (distractors included

Text Structure: Problem and Solution

Draft

Is it what we think it is?

• Is it academic/reading?Yes

• Is the task typical of a student the same age working on the same content? Far link. Using Romeo and Juliet Josh is investigating problem and solution, an element of text structure, but there is no evidence of how it is related to text structure

• Is the level of performance typical of a student the same age working on the same content?Far link. Josh is answering questions which include recall but at least one includes a description and requires comprehension to answer, but not analysis

Josh will answer questions related to problem and solution (distractors included)

Analyzing how the author uses structure of the text to show tension, etc.

Draft

Analyzing how the author uses structure of the text to show tension, etc.

Draft

Is it what we think it is?

• Is it academic/reading?Yes

• Is the task typical of a student the same age working on the same content? Near link. Josh shows how the author is using pace to cause a reaction in his audience and provides examples directly related to the standard

• Is the level of performance typical of a student the same age working on the same content?Near link. Josh analyzes how the fast pace and order of events causes emotion in his audience through the use of examples of events and resulting tension and a timeline

Josh will answer questions related to problem and solution (distractors included)

SAS AS A RESOURCE

53

STANDARDS-ALIGNED INSTRUCTION AND FUNCTIONAL SKILLS

54

Getting Started

55

Process:

1. Identify the standard

2. Review outcomes

3. Identify instructional activities• Re-think what “functional” is

• Provide supports that promote independence

Step 1

• Identify and link to the appropriate content standard(s).– State Standard Linked to Common Core– PSSA Anchors– Review what the standard is about

• The Big Idea – Wiggins and McTighe• The Enduring Understanding – Wiggins and

McTighe• Deconstruct the Standards – Stiggins• Unpacking the Standards

56

Guiding Questions

• What is the standard?• What is the grade level expectation?

– PSSA anchor

• What is the standard all about?– Big Idea– Essential Questions

57

Webb’s DOK Levels (2002)

• DOK Level 1 Recall of Information

• DOK Level 2 Basic Reasoning

• DOK Level 3 Complex Reasoning

• DOK Level 4 Extended Reasoning

58

Step 2

• Determine the Outcomes.– Refer to the grade level PSSA Anchors

and Eligible Content– Use grade level curriculum as a guide

• Guiding Questions– What are the desired outcomes for all

students?

– How will students demonstrate their knowledge and skills?

59

Step 3

• Identify the instructional activities that move the student toward achievement of the standard.• Instructional activities for all students

Typical classroom activities – lecture, note-taking, etc.

• Active participation for a student with significant cognitive disabilities• All parts of instruction based on student strengths

and moving the student toward learning of prioritized outcomes linked to the grade level content standard

• Previously identified and/or additional supports specific to instructional activities

– Identify barriers – Determine supports

60

Guiding Questions

• Is the student actively participating in each part of the instructional activity?

• Are the activities moving the student toward outcomes linked to the grade level content standard?– Can the student access instruction? Is targeted

information provided in student’s mode of communication?

– Can the student interact with instruction and materials? Does the student have the means to demonstrate knowledge, skills, and concepts acquired?

– What will engage the student in the activity? How will the student remain motivated long enough to learn?

61

1. Food Web Activity. Each student will take an activity card and hang it round his/her neck. Read the card to identify organism and follow directions. “Eat” by placing one hand on the appropriate student’s shoulder. Organism may only “eat” another organism when that organism has eaten twice, i.e. both hands of the student must be touching a different shoulder. Eat twice - don’t let go of your food.

2. Answer questions posed by the teacher written on the board, e.g. Who had the most difficult/longest time finding food? Why was that? What is the difference between this (food web) and a food chain? Record answers.

3. Work in a small group to brainstorm what might happen if we wiped out all the grasshoppers? Research to check what has happened to a variety of organisms

What are the instructional activities planned for all students?

How can the student actively participate in the instructional activities?

What supports (already identified or

additional.?

1. Participate in whole class activity

2. Follow directions for the food web activity

3. Read the index cards4. Work with others on building

the food web

1. Participate in whole class activity

2. Follow directions3. Read the questions4. Write down the answers

1. Participate in small group2. Follow directions for research3. Work with others4. Brainstorm what might happen

if one organism was destroyed5. Conduct research on food webs

Consistency in Instructional Activity

62

1. Food Web Activity. Each student will take an activity card and hang it round his/her neck. Read the card to identify their organism and follow directions. “Eat” by placing one hand on the appropriate student’s shoulder. Organism may only “eat” another organism when that organism has eaten twice, i.e. both hands of the student must be touching a different shoulder. Eat twice and don’t let go of your food.

2. Answer questions written on the board, e.g. Who had the most difficult/longest time finding food? Why was that? What is the difference between this (food web) and a food chain? Record answers.

3. Work in a small group to brainstorm what might happen if we wiped out all the grasshoppers? Research to check what has happened to a variety of organisms.

·

What are the instructional activities planned for all students?

How can the student actively participate in the instructional activities?

What supports (already identified or additional) would help the student access the

instruction?

63

Menu of Functional Skills

• Read– Accessing information

• Receptive Communication

• Vocabulary/Concept development

• Comprehension• Find information

– Read:• Receptive

communication– Asking questions/asking

for help• Expressive

communication

• Record information– Writing

• Expressive communication

• Follow directions– Listening

• Receptive Communication

• Comprehension• Contribute/Share ideas

– Turn taking– Expressive

communication• Work with others

– Social interactions

64

that can be practiced within a variety of academic activities

Menu of SupportsListen How do we know the student is listening? The

student can be given a selection of objects or graphics representing key points in the lecture and can select each object or graphic at the correct point in the lecture. Lecture could be provided digitally.

Take Notes How can the student participate in note-taking? graphics or objects to collect notes , picture symbols, notes pre-printed and the student could “mark” as they follow, preprogrammed communication devices, adapted keyboards , digital text and a text reader or take photos

Respond and Participate

How will the student respond to questions? using graphics to select the correct answer, pre-programmed communication device could be used, such as Classroom Suite, with menu interfaces for each content area

Co-operate and work in groups

How will the student work in a group? Student could work with a peer to fulfill a group role.

65

Accessing Content Grade Level Standards

• Maintain the same depth and breadth of knowledge

• Align content to grade level content standards vs alternate standards

• Symbolic, Emerging Symbolic, Pre-Symbolic considerations

University of Kentucky; Stepwise Process, 2009Browder, Spooner, Wakeman, Trela, & Baker, 2006

66

67

Future Directions and Next Steps

• Input• What questions do you have? • What challenges and opportunities

do you see? • What supports may be needed?

68

Contact Information www.pattan.net

Jeannine H. BrinkleyStatewide Lead: Inclusive Practicesjbrinkley@pattan.net

Sharon L. LeonardPaTTAN Harrisburgslleonard@pattan.net

Debbie BrownPaTTAN KOPdbrown@pattan.net

Dori AndersonPaTTAN Pittsburghdanderson@pattan.net

Commonwealth of PennsylvaniaEdward G. Rendell, Governor

Pennsylvania Department of EducationThomas E. Gluck, Acting Secretary

Amy Morton , Deputy SecretaryOffice of Elementary and Secondary

Education

John J. Tommasini, DirectorBureau of Special Education

Patricia Hozella, Assistant DirectorBureau of Special Education 69