Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Oregon’s Statewide Assessment Options
for Students with Disabilities
Alternate Assessments and Accommodations
Dianna CarrizalesODE COSA Fall Conference
October 13th
Mr. Elephant
Related Issues More paperwork Mixed messages Hazy decision-making guidelines
IEP documentation (more t’s to cross
more i’s to dot) The forced implementation of seemingly
opposing laws The students
Statewide Assessment of Students with Disabilities: The NCLB/IDEA Connection NCLB
Count all students Disaggregate data Hold schools, districts, and states accountable (participation,
inclusion, education to grade level content standards) Demonstrate progress and improvement toward nationwide
expectations
IDEA 2004 Include all students Be aware of civil rights while addressing individual educational
needs Provide access to meaningful education Demonstrate progress and improvement on individualized
educational goals
What is the primary purpose of statewide assessment in Oregon? Disaggregated grade level accountability
for results at a federal level Adequate Yearly Progress
Funding Programs Addressing all students
How do we support IDEA 2004? Free and appropriate education Least restrictive environments Procedural safeguards Individualized Education plans Progress monitoring and dynamic
instruction Provision of appropriate accommodations Assistive technology Research based instructional methods
Peer Review Who was reviewed? Criteria
Content standards Achievement standards Full assessment system Technical quality
Document that life skills scores do not count for AYP
Alignment Document alignment of
alternate to academic content standards
Inclusion Reporting
Rating Status Full approval Full approval with
recommendations Approval expected Approval pending Non-approved
Oregon’s Assessment System
Assessment Options Then and Now
2001-2005 2006-2007
10 (CIM)
8
7
6
5
4
3
10 (CIM)
8
7
6
5
4
3
Extended CLRAS
Exte
nd
ed
A
ssessm
en
t
Scaff
old
ed
A
dm
inis
trati
on
Accom
mod
ate
d A
ssessm
en
t
Genera
l Ass
ess
ment
Juri
ed
Assessm
en
t
Accom
mod
ate
d A
ssessm
en
t
Mod
ified
Assessm
en
t
Extended K-2
Targ
ete
d A
ssessm
en
t
What’s really different? 2001-2005 2006-2007
10 (CIM)
8
7
6
5
4
3
10 (CIM)
8
7
6
5
4
3
Extended CLRAS
Exte
nd
ed
A
ssessm
en
t
Scaff
old
ed
A
dm
inis
trati
on
Accom
mod
ate
d A
ssessm
en
t
Gen
era
l A
ssessm
en
t
Targ
ete
d A
ssessm
en
t
Juri
ed
Assessm
en
t
Mod
ified
Assessm
en
t
Extended K-2A
ccom
mod
ate
d A
ssessm
en
t
What counts toward participation and performance General Accommodated Extended* Scaffolded*
Decision Making: Heuristics for transition
Previous: Targeted 2006-2007: Accommodated: depending on the difference
between actual grade and target grade level
Previous: Modified 2006-2007: Accommodated or Extended: depending on the
difference between actual grade and target grade
Previous: Extended K-2 2006-2007: Extended grade level assessment
Previous: CLRAS 2006-2007: Most likely Scaffolded administration of Extended
Previous: Juried 2006-2007: Either accommodated or general*
How can we make decisions
Before we’ve seen the test?Draft guidelines
Consider General Assessment with or without accommodations if: Student:
Performs at or around grade level Has academic difficulties that primarily surround reading but may be
average or close to average in other subject areas Has academic difficulties in areas other than reading that are “mild to
moderate” and can typically be addressed by using simplified language Is reading within two to three grades of his or her enrolled level
Instruction: Is primarily general curriculum instruction (but may also use a
specialized curriculum in some areas)
Some Judgment variables: What assessment did he take last year? How is his attention? What types of behaviors should be considered?
Consider Extended Assessment if: Student:
Performs well below grade level Is significantly below grade level in reading Has academic difficulties that are generalized (to all subject areas) and are
significant Benefits from specialized individual supports
Instruction: Is primarily a specialized curriculum or From general curriculum must be significantly reduced in breadth, depth, and
complexity
Some Judgment variables: What assessment did he take last year? How is his attention? What types of behaviors should be considered? Previous relevant experiences
Consider Scaffolded Administration of Extended Assessment if: Student:
Performance is significantly impacted by a disability Does not read Has academic, mobility, and receptive and expressive language
difficulties that are generalized and significant Relies on individual and significant supports to access reduced content
materials
Instruction: Is from a specialized curriculum and has functional components and/or Includes academic goals that are significantly reduced in depth,
breadth, and complexity from grade level content
Some Judgment variables: Is the student able to interact with instructional material in a way that
provides meaningful feedback?
Accommodations
Accommodations of Setting Response Presentation Timing/Scheduling
Examples Extended time Frequent breaks Change in test directions Change in font or size of text Assistive technology Test setting Manipulatives
When used? In the classroom vs. Testing only?
Accommodations Review Process Process for determining accommodations Panel review process Research base as a format What is the issue considered?
Construct has been compromised Item is no longer connected to the standards
Extended Assessments Content
Mathematics, Reading, Writing, Science Elementary level assessment Middle/High level assessment Grade level content standards reduced in depth,
breadth, and complexity (show standard) Manipulatives Graphics Approximately 5 items per task Scoring
Independence Accuracy
Structure Format (last year’s
sample assessments) Similar administration Restructured scoring Similar data entry
EXTENDED SCIENCE (GENERAL)SCORING PROTOCOL
March 13 – April 28, 2006
An Extended Administration Example Content standard: Describe and
interpret relationships using information from tables and graphs including coordinate graphs (first quadrant)
Scoring Accuracy:
Incorrect response not related to item = 0
Incorrect response selected from “flowers” column=1 (can ask for clarification “where would you look?”
Correct response = 2 Independence:
Student needed a verbal prompt, student needed a gestural prompt, student needed no prompt, student needed full assistance to complete the task.
While pointing, teacher reads prompt: “This table shows the weeks that Laura planted flowers. And the number of flowers planted each week. How many flowers did she plant in the 3rd week?”
Week Flowers
1 3
2 6
3 9
4 12
Scaffolded Extended Administration Option More modeling and modeling language More examples More stratified scoring Simplified/plain language Avoid exceptions Careful sequencing Extended wait time following the presentation of an item Incorporation of signals and cuing Alternative routes to accuracy “raise your hand/nod/blink if
you see a match” Provide multiple choice options for items when possible Allowances for pacing Incorporation of performance-neutral praise statements for
teacher to use regularly throughout assessment (e.g. You are working so hard!)
Scaffolded Example While pointing at each feature in
the example, read the prompt: “This table shows how many baskets Mike made each day. Look. Day 1, 2 baskets. Day 2, 3 baskets, day 3 (etc. to day 4) How many baskets did he make in Day 4?” (or, “Point to how many baskets he made in day 4”) Wait 10 seconds for response.
If correct, move on to item 1. If incorrect say, let’s look slide
finger down “day” column from the word “day” to the number 4 and say here is day 4. Move finger across to the baskets and column and say, Mike made 5 baskets that day.
Day Baskets
1 2
2 3
3 4
4 5
Scaffolded Item Original: “This table
shows the weeks that Laura planted flowers. And the number of flowers planted each week. How many flowers did she plant in the 3rd week?”
Scaffolded: Pointing at columns: “This table shows the weeks that Laura planted flowers and the number of flowers planted each week. Look, week 1, 3 flowers, week 2, 6 flowers, week 3, 9 flowers (etc. to 4 weeks) How many flowers did she plant in the week 3?” Or, “point to how many flowers she planted in week 3.”
Week Flowers
1 3
2 6
3 9
4 12
Scoring Accuracy:
Incorrect response not related to item = 0 Incorrect response, but selected from “flowers” column=1 Correct response = 2
Independence: Student needed a verbal prompt e.g. “Show me week 3.
Now look in this column”. Student needed a gestural prompt e.g. weeks 1 and 2
covered. Student needed no prompt (fully independent response) Student needed full assistance to complete the task (fully
supported, e.g. hand over hand or teacher provides answer)
Scenario: Lily Lily is in a life-skills classroom and is
receiving instruction from a life-skills curriculum. Lily’s IEP goals include recognizing letters, her name, and using a picture schedule to communicate basic needs.
Scenario: Troy Troy is in 4th grade, and has been on an IEP for
reading for a full academic year. During reading, Troy is grouped with students who, like him, are currently reading from 2nd grade material and are receiving support in the form of a phonological intervention program. During math, Troy receives assistance from a classroom aid who reads the problems with him, and waits (providing no additional assistance) as he works the problems on his own.
Scenario: Steele Steele is a 9th grade student who receives math
instruction in a class entitled, “functional math.” Steele is learning how to tell time, count money, make change, use metrics with a ruler, and identify simple fractions. Steele can decode and identify literal information from a headlining newspaper article, and reads at the 11th percentile, or the below average range, as compared to other children his age. Using a mapping strategy, and given additional time to complete the task, Steele can write a 5-sentence paragraph.
Scenario: Zera Zera is a 7th grade student. She is
performing at the 80th percentile on the curriculum based measurement tests her teachers give her in the content areas. Zera has difficulties moving the mouse and sitting in one position for long periods of time.
Scenario: Jim Jim is on an IEP and is in a self-contained
behavioral setting where he receives additional support for to assist with manifestations of ED. Last year, in 4th grade, he took the Extended Assessments Reading and targeted down in other assessments. Over the course of the year he has done very well on his schoolwide reading measures and is now reading at a 3rd/4th grade level.
Data Entry State data entry site Separate from administration Passwords necessary Trained assessors take responsibility for
accuracy of data entry
Training January No trainer of trainer District level monitoring Cadre I
ESD and district level assessors State trainers in 4 zones Grants awarded for travel and substitutes
Cadre II Live statewide web-streaming Cadre I serve as facilitators in district and county
trainings Grants awarded for travel and substitutes
For Information Links to information:http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?
id=178
Contact: Dianna Carrizales(503) [email protected]
