How do we keep kids from being stuck in our gap?

National Center on Educational Outcomes June, 2004

How do we keep kids from being stuck in our gap?

A frame, a series of discussion questions, and some possible

answers

Panelist: Rachel Quenemoen, NCEO


Purpose of No Child Left Behind

“…to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and state academic assessments”


Purpose of Assessment Requirements of IDEA

• Improve results for student with disabilities through improved teaching and learning

• Raise expectations for students with disabilities

• Increase access to the general curriculum

• Provide parents information about their child’s achievement in relationship to the performance of other children in their school


Issues in both NCLB and IDEA • Students with disabilities previously

exempted from assessment and accountability system

• Students with disabilities previously received instruction in separate curriculum

• Change from low to high expectations for students with disabilities

• State leadership in fostering school and district accountability


Assessment Options• General assessment• General assessment with accommodations (or

modifications)• Alternate assessment on grade level achievement

standards – students have mastered the grade-level content, but can’t show it on general assessment

• Alternate assessment on alternate achievement standards – assuming best instruction and access, there is compelling evidence the students learn grade-level content differently


Observation

Cognition

Interpretation

The assessment triangle (Pellegrino et al., 2001)


HOW these students learn and show what they know

Assumption:

Students affected by “gap” issues generally learn and show what they know MORE like students in the general assessment than like students in the alternate assessment for students with MOST significant challenges


WHO are the students who are affected by a gap of some kind?

Common question: How many “can” achieve at grade level, with the best

instruction and access?

Kevin McGrew studies: http://www.iapsych.com/index.htm


Alternative question: How many schools currently ensure every child

has the services, supports, and specialized instruction necessary to

succeed in the grade-level curriculum?


How has the IEP process been traditionally construed?

• Identify the services, supports, and specialized instruction necessary so that the student can be successful in the grade level curriculum

OR

• Negotiate what the school can offer and the parents will accept to avoid conflict – define how to lower expectations for this student


WHAT should these students know and be able to do?

What does “access to, participation and progress in the general curriculum” mean?

What has it meant in your schools and districts?


Assumption: Many of these students have been failed by our system – the policy goal is first and foremost to correct that situation.

Assumption: Some (unknown number) will not achieve to proficiency at grade level by high school, even with the best possible instruction and instruction, but we don’t know which ones.


HOW WELL students must perform to be “proficient”

Assumption: We need to transition students in the first category out of the gap – and really push practice to make that occur as quickly as possible!

Assumption: All students, including those in the second category, have the right to be taught as if they can succeed, even if they do not ultimately achieve proficiency in all areas.


What are the “other” questions?• Concern about AYP? Safe harbor provisions, played

out, provide flexibility that means in 2014 you may have @75% of a subgroup at proficiency, and NEVER miss AYP

• Concern about cost of teaching to grade level? Then let’s have that discussion

• Concern about lawsuits? Case law already makes you vulnerable (reread Rowley in the context of standards-based reform) – what can give you and families common understanding?


What can we do in our assessment and accountability policies and

practices to move MOST students into general assessment, and to

ensure all students achieve at the highest level possible?


One part of the answer:

Progress Monitoring in an Inclusive Standards-based

Assessment and Accountability System


PM AS BROADLY CONCEIVED

• (1) Curriculum-Based Measurement; • (2) Classroom assessments (system or teacher-

developed); • (3) Adaptive assessments constrained to grade

level; and • (4) Grade-level large-scale assessments used

during the year to monitor growth of individual students and groups of students


CAUTION!!!!!!

• Aligned to GRADE LEVEL content - CONSTRAINED to grade level

• The “myth” of below grade level instruction

• Blind trust in statistical magic – black box faith

• Remediation vs. acceleration


Challenges• Strategies for scoring, analyzing, and tracking

data.

Quick turn-around of scores necessary to provide feedback for instruction.

• INTENSIVE training on deriving meaning from the data to develop effective improvement plans.

Many (most?) teachers, school psychologists, IEP team members do NOT know how to do this!

• Needed: New models for classroom integrated assessments on grade level content for this purpose (Pellegrino et al., 2001).


Resources Available• National Center on Student Progress Monitoring:

Improving Proven Practices in the Elementary Grades

• phone: 202.944.5300 | fax: 202.944.5454 • TTY: 877.334.3499 • e-mail: [email protected] • http://www.studentprogress.org• Research Institute on Progress Monitoring• Phone: 612.626.7220 fax: 612.625.6619 • e-mail: [email protected] • NCEO http://nceo.info [email protected]

http://nceo.info/

http://nceo.info/

Documents

How do we keep kids from being stuck in our gap?