View
216
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Effect of Public Policy on Alternate
Assessments
Sue Rigney
Alternate Assessment ConferenceUniversity of Maryland
College Park, MD October 2007
Historical
1990-2000: Many SWD routinely excluded from state & national assessments
Exemption of a special education student requires:
a) “the student has been found eligible for special educations services through an IEP; and
b) receives Special Educations services prior to the first day of testing; and
c) receives 49% or less of his/her reading/English instruction per week through general education instruction.”
Source: MEAP Assessment Administration Manual, 1991
Alternate Assessment
Key Federal Statutes
• IASA 1994 Standards and assessments by 2000-01 All SWD to be included in assessments
• IDEA 1997 Access to general curriculum Alternate assessment in place July 2000
• NCLB 2001 SWD included in assessments & accountability
for all public schools
• IDEA 2007 Follows NCLB
Alternate Assessment
NCLB + Regulations
• 1% AA-AAS December 2003• Permits alternate achievement standard
for students with most significant cognitive disability
• 2% AA-MAS April 2007• Permits modified academic achievement
standard for students whose disability prevents them from meeting grade level standard in period covered by current IEP
Alternate Assessment
Examining Policy Effects
• Intent• Implementation• Impact on State practice
Alternate Assessment
Intent
• Is always good• Realized through implementation
Diverse actions, actors Slow, must be sustained
• Consequences may be unexpected Perception vs reality Perception is reality
Alternate Assessment
Intent - IDEA 04 & IASA
Paradigm ShiftsParadigm ShiftsIDEA 04• Access to general curriculum for SWD
IASA 97 for Title I Schools• All students included in State assessments • Scores of SW must be publicly reported for
school and district accountability• State must explain how scores from alternate
assessment are integrated into accountability system
Alternate Assessment
Intent - NCLB
“To ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high quality education…” All schools publicly accountable for
performance of SWD
Alternate achievement standard permitted only for students with most significant cognitive disability
1% cap as safeguard for students
Alternate Assessment
Implementation
• Statute clarified by guidance
• Occurs in the field - monitoring must examine evidence of compliance
• Compliance alone may not ensure that policy goals are reached
• Successful implementation requires State as well as federal action
Alternate Assessment
Federal Policy Implementation
• Statute, regulations & guidance drafted and disseminated
• Compliance monitoring carried out by multiple offices e.g.,OSEP, OESE, SASA
• Peer review of Title I State Plan required
• Technical assistance
• $$
Alternate Assessment
State Policy Implementation
• Inclusion policies and procedures
• Optional development & implementation of AA-AAS or AA-MAS consistent with statute
• Support for test administration and use
• Infrastructure for local implementation
Assessment training
Professional development to support effective instruction
Alternate Assessment
Implementation - IASA
• Compliance monitoring• Assessment system peer review
Focus on test administered in 2000-01 Continued under NCLB for States not
approved
Alternate Assessment
IASA Peer Review – AA Must
“When assessment procedures are altered, it is critical to ensure that scores, decisions, and judgments based on those assessments are fair, reliable, and valid. The criteria for technical quality outlined in…. “Professional Standards of Technical Quality,” apply to modified, accommodated, and alternate assessments.
IASA Peer Review Guidance, p. 15
Implementation - NCLB
• Accountability workbooks• Title I monitoring• OSEP monitoring• Peer review of State assessment
systems
Alternate Assessment
“…the NCLB standards and assessment peer review process increased the requirements for documenting the technical quality of all assessments, but the biggest shift was for AA-AAS. The type of technical documentation necessary to fulfill the peer review requirements has never been expected from AA-AAS developers previously.”
Marion & Pellegrino
NCLB Peer Review: AA-AAS Must
Yield results separately in reading and math Clear guidelines for student participation provided to all LEAs Designed and implemented in a manner that supports use of results
for AYP• Aligned with state content standards
• Assessment design - appropriate for school accountability measure (e.g., results comparable across schools and districts)
State provides evidence of technical quality,• Validity, reliability accessibility, objectivity, and consistency with nationally recognized professional and technical standards
• Description of the standard-setting process, the judges and their qualifications, and state adoption of alternate achievement standards
Reports results to teachers and parents in a manner consistent with the alternate achievement standards
Alternate Assessment
Impact-IASA
On January 19, 2001
Alternate Assessment
Decision # States
Full Approval 11 DE, IN, KS, LA, MD, MA, PA, RI, VT, VA, WY
Conditional Approval (Complete by Spring 2001)
6 KY, MO, NC, OR, TX, WA
Timeline waiver 14 CO, CT, GA, HI, ME, MS, NE, NV, NH, NY, ND, OH, SC, SD
Compliance Agreement 3 CA, WV, WI
Still under review 18 AL, AK, AZ, AR DC, FL, ID, IL, IA, MI, MN, MT, NJ, NM, OK, PR, TN, UT,
Impact-IASA
Issues Facing States on January 19, 2001 Requirement #
Inclusion of limited English proficient students
22
Inclusion of students with disabilities
14
Disaggregated Reporting 30
Finish Standards-based System 11
Impact NCLB
States Revising/Developing Alternate Assessment in 2005
Alternate Assessment
Area # States
Approach 8
Content 10
Standard-setting
13
Scoring Criteria 17Source: 2005 State Special Education Outcomes, NCEO
Current Status
As of 8/6/0731 States = Approved + Approval Expected
12-16 States working on AA-AASMajor concerns:
alignment with grade level content documenting technical quality
Completing the AA-AAS
2005-06 DEADLINE EXTENDED2005-06 DEADLINE EXTENDEDApproval Pending (does not meet all of the requirements)
If only significant issues with an alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards or an assessment for limited English proficient students… Condition on its fiscal year 2007 Title I, Part A grant
award Mandatory Oversight, pursuant to 34 C.F.R. §80.12. Agreement with the Department
demonstrating a commitment and investment of resources to resolve all outstanding issues for the 2007–08 administration of its assessments.
a mutually acceptable timeline for how and when the remaining work toward having a fully approved standards and assessment system will be accomplished.
Review of AA-MAS
Standards and Assessment Peer Review Guidance: Information and examples for meeting requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
•Revised to include AA-MAS requirements
•Distribution to States TBA
•Peer reviewer training Jan 2008
Impact on Assessment Practice
Virtually all State assessment participation policies changed since IASA
Participation of SWD in State assessments is substantially increased
22/50 states have changed participation policies/guidelines for AA-AAS since the Dec 9, 2003 regulation
Peer Review has prompted linkage to academic content for all states
Alternate Assessment
Impact on Assessment Practice
State examples of rigorous practice emerging, e.g. Alabama standard setting report
New methodology emerging: e.g. Links for Learning, NAAC Learner Characteristics Inventory
Articles in professional journals focus on AA-AAS
Questions about validity of AA-AAS challenges some assumptions about general test
Impact on Instruction
• Anecdotal and case studies• Most pre-date requirement for academic
content
• Inclusion in accountability makes a difference:“I think our expectations are higher.”
Impact on Student Outcomes
• Evidence of student outcomes limited
Reports do not separate general test results and alternate results
OSEP collects detailed data in biennial report but it’s hard to find
Alternate Assessment
MSA Snapshot (State)
With trend data
ALT-MSA Snapshot (State)
With trend data
http://www.mdreportcard.org/Assessments.aspx?WDATA=State&K=99AAAA#ALTsnapshot
Impact on Student Outcomes
• Evidence of student outcomes limited Reports do not separate general test results
and alternate results
OSEP collects detailed data in biennial report
• Evidence of student outcomes difficult to interpret Many state alternates redesigned in last 3
years, so trend data is not interpretable
Test results confounded with OTL
Alternate Assessment
Lessons Learned?
• Collaboration needed to develop alternate assessments: assessment, special ed, content experts
• Resources needed to build local support systems
• Consequences must be documented
• Interpretation of outcomes difficult because student results confounded with opportunity to learn
Alternate Assessment