Testing Students with Disabilities District Test Coordinators Meeting October 14, 2011 1

Testing Students with Disabilities

District Test Coordinators Meeting

October 14, 2011

1

Monitoring Use of Accommodations

Required under IDEA ESEA (NCLB)

Two-pronged approach Office of Assessment Office of Exceptional Children

2

Test Security Violations 2011

Oral Administration Not Provided Incorrect Test Booklet Provided Oral Administration Provided Wrong Response Method Calculator Not Provided Calculator Provided Student Refused Accommodation*

3

Use of IEP Accommodations

The Performance of Students with Disabilities on PASS 2011

4

5

Participation of Students with Disabilities in Statewide Testing

43,104 students with disabilities (SWD) were tested in grades 3-8 in 2011 (includes PASS and SC-Alt students)

SWD students made up 13.2% of all students tested in grades 3-8

6.5% of SWD students were tested with SC-Alt The number of students tested with SC-Alt

was 0.86% of all students tested with PASS and SC-Alt (SWD and Non-SWD)

6

Standard Accommodations

All Content Areas- Grades 3-8 with Exceptions Noted

Timing Scheduling Oral or Signed Administration (except

ELA grades 3-4) Use of Calculator with Math (except

grades 3-4) Response Options Supplementary Materials or Devices

7

Non-Standard Accommodations

Oral or Signed Administrations of ELA in grades 3-4

Writing Extended Response – Non-standard Procedures Use of spell check, grammar check,

word prediction software Use of Calculator with Math in

grades 3-4

8

Use of Accommodations with PASS 2011

Content Area

Percent of SWD Students Using Accommodations Grades 3-8 or 5-8 as Noted (*)

Any Accommodation

Oral/Signed Administration

CalculatorNon-Standard Accommodation

ELA 65.2 41.4* 2.4

Writing 66.9 48.0 0.1

Math 68.0 53.4 26.2* 0.15

Science 65.6 53.3

Social Studies

65.5 53.1

* Grades 5-8 only

9

Signed Administrations Signed administrations for ELA are

standard accommodations for grades 5-8 and non-standard accommodations for grades 3-4 (consistent with oral administration of ELA)

Only 0.3% of SWD in grades 5-8 received signed administrations (75 students)

Data for oral administrations of ELA in this presentation includes signed administrations

10

Use of Oral Administration of ELA in Grades 5-8

Oral administrations were used predominantly in grades 5-8 where they are standard accommodations

The overall rate of oral administrations for grades 5-8 was 41.4% (37.2% in 2010)

11

Percent of SWD Receiving Oral Administration of ELA by Grade

2009-2011

Gr 3 Gr 4 Gr 5 Gr 6 Gr 7 Gr 80

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

22.224.9

30.3

36.8 37.734.8

3.6 4

32.7

37.1 40.638.7

2.3 2.5

36.2

42.9 43.7 43.7 2009

2010

2011

Per

cent

of

Stud

ents

12

Rates of Oral Administration by Disability Groups for Grades 5-8

By disability group percentage, mild and moderate mental disability and TBI students had the highest oral administration rates (56 – 74%)

Used by 44% of learning disability students, and being the largest disability group, made up approximately 70% of all students receiving oral administrations

ELA Performance of SWD Tested With and Without Oral Administration (OA) in Grades 5-8

Not Met Met Exemplary0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

9078.4

19.1

2.5

64.5

26.2

9.3

70.3

23.2

6.5

With OAWithout OAAll SWD

13

14

Use of Calculators with PASS

Calculator administrations were predominantly in grades 5-8 where they are standard accommodations

The overall rate of calculator administrations for grades 5-8 was 26.2% (22.5% in 2010)

15

Percent of SWD Using Calculator Administrations by Grade

2009-2011

Gr 3 Gr 4 Gr 5 Gr 6 Gr 7 Gr 80

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2.5 4.78.1

19.8

28.630.5

0.3 0.4

10.6

20.3

28.332.2

0.1 0.2

11.4

26.3

31.8 37.42009

2010

2011

Per

cent

of

Stud

ents

16

Rates of Calculator Use by Disability Groups for Grades 5-8

By disability group percentage, mild mental disability, orthopedically impaired, and TBI students had the highest calculator use rates (29 – 37%)

Used by 27% of learning disability students, and being the largest disability group, made up approximately 69% of all students receiving calculator administrations

Math Performance of SWD Tested With and Without Calculators in Grades 5-8

Not Met Met Exemplary0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90 85.2

14

0.9

66.2

27.2

6.6

71.2

23.7

5.1

WithWithoutAll SWD

17

District Reports on Use of PASS Accommodations

Report the rates of use of IEP and 504 Plan accommodations for Writing, ELA, and Mathematics for the 2009 – 2011 PASS administrations

The reports were mailed to superintendents, special education administrators, and DTCs

18

19

  2009   2010

  2011

Total Number of Student Records (All Students)

10927   11153

  11105

Total IEP/504 Students in Writing 1134   1176   386*

Total IEP/504 Students in ELA 1142   1184   1235 Total IEP/504 Students in Mathematics

1142   1187

  1236

  2009

2010

2011

  Change in

Percent from2009

  Count %

Count %

Count %

IEPs 1082 9.9   1113 10.0   1122 10.1   0.2

504 Plans 94 0.9   106 1.0   121 1.1   0.2

ELA Standard Accommodations:                  

Setting 719 63.0   782 66.0   829 67.1   4.2

Timing 42 3.7   58 4.9   38 3.1   -0.6

Scheduling 35 3.1   1 0.1   9 0.7   -2.3

Oral/Signed Administration (Grades 5-8)

188 25.2   201 25.6   264 32.3   7.1

Presentation – Other 23 2.0   60 5.1   35 2.8   0.8

Response Options 59 5.2   83 7.0   110 8.9   3.7

Non-standard Accommodation:

Oral/Signed Administration (Grade 3 or 4)

41 10.4   15 3.8   8 1.9   -8.5

Palmetto Assessment of State Standards (PASS) Use of Testing Accommodations for 2009–2011

Sample District

SC-Alt

Administration Window

March 5 – April 27

Testing materials will arrive in the districts by February 23

2011-12 Training Dates

DTC-Alt Pretest Webinars

November 15 November 17

(Two sessions each day)

New Test AdministratorTraining

January 9 - GreenvilleJanuary 10 - FlorenceJanuary 11 - CharlestonJanuary 12 - ColumbiaJanuary 13 - Columbia

Second Rater Procedure

Replaces videotaping for capturing administration and scoring fidelity

Sample of teachers/students participate

Math is the only content included

22

NEW

Second Rater Qualifications

Meet qualification criteria for test administrator

Must be trained

23

2011 Testing Issues

Failure to transfer student responses from the worksheet to the answer document

Failure to follow administration procedures

24

National Center State Collaborative (NCSC)

Alternate Assessment Consortia

Multi-state Comprehensive Assessment System

Complements the Two General Assessment Consortia

25

Comprehensive Assessment System

instructional materials aligned to the common core state standards

resources and supports for teachers formative assessment tools information on appropriate interim

uses of data for progress monitoring summative assessments

26

The Organizational Partners

National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)Host and fiscal agent

National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment

(NCIEA) Lead on development of assessments

University of Kentucky (UKY)Lead on professional development

University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNCC)Lead on curriculum development

edCount, LLC Evaluation

27

19 State Partners:

Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, North Dakota, Pacific Assessment Consortium (PAC-6) , Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Wyoming

28

Opportunities

A brief survey on instruction and post-school outcomes for students with significant cognitive disabilities

A focus group meeting to be held in Columbia in October

Community of Practice

29

Community of Practice

training on communication systems and access to the general curriculum including the common core state standards

implement model curricula as well as help refine and clarify materials and resources then share with other educators in the state

selected based on recommendations of district special education administrators

approximately 30 teachers, related services personnel, and other educators

one-day meeting this fall webinars throughout the school year

30

Alternate Assessment on Modified Achievement Standards (AA-MAS)

(2% Assessments)

Update

31

Power School

Instructional Setting 504 Special Education (SE)

True Grade Actual grade that the student should be

in if not enrolled in a self contained program

Regular Grade Closest appropriate grade available

32

Including Students with Disabilities in NAEP

33

Including Students with Disabilities in NAEP

• National Assessment of Educational Progress Only ongoing nationwide assessment Representative sample across states State- and national-level results

• State grades 4 and 8• National-grades 4, 8, and 12

Valid cross-state comparisons

34

Overview Designed primarily to provide data to

state- and national-level policy makers With passage of ESEA/NCLB, state’s

participation became required The National Center for Education

Statistics (NCES) in the U.S. Department of Education is responsible for NAEP implementation

NAEP policy is set by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB)

35

NAEP Inclusion Policy

• New policy becomes effective with NAEP 2011 reports.

• Focus on states’ inclusion of students with disabilities (SD) and English language learners (ELLs).

• As a percentage of total population, total excluded (SD/ELL) should not be more than 5%.

• As a percentage of the identified group, excluded should not exceed 15%.

36

Recent Exclusion Rates: NAEP 2009

Excluded

Subject Grade % of Total% of SD Group

Mathematics 4 2.0 12.2

Mathematics 8 4.4 31.9

Reading 4 5.3 31.1

Reading 8 6.4 42.4

37

38

Inclusion Rates: State vs. National

0102030405060708090

100

Math Reading Math Reading

4 8

Per

cent

Incl

uded

South Carolina

National Public

(2009 NAEP Data)

Considerations

NAEP participation is now addressed in the online IEP tool.

–Other key points–

NAEP provides most accommodations typically offered on state tests.

NAEP does not produce scores for individual students and participation is anonymous. Results are summarized only at the state and national level.

The NAEP assessments do not impose any consequences for students, schools, or districts and are solely intended to provide an overall measure of educational achievement for the nation and individual states.

39

Considerations

Participating students are not required to complete the whole test and may skip any test question. Even when a student does not complete the entire test, useful data are still obtained from the provided item responses.

Students who meet participation guidelines for the SC-Alternate Assessment are not expected to participate in NAEP.

40

Contact Information

41

Suzanne Swaffieldsswaffie@ed.sc.gov

Douglas Alexanderdgalexan@ed.sc.gov

Anne Mruzamruz@ed.sc.gov

Chris Webstercwebster@ed.sc.gov