Inclusive Assessment & Accountability Systems for Students with Disabilities in Standards-Based Reform

1. Inclusive assessment and accountability systems: Issues and opportunities for students with disabilities in standards-based reform Rachel F. Quenemoen National Center on Educational Outcomes University of Minnesota quene003@tc.umn.edu

2. PRESENTATION OPTIONS Overview of standards-based reform principles, and how students with disabilities “fit in” Assessment Participation Accommodations Alternate Assessments Reporting Accountability and Consequences Challenges and Strategies nceo, 2001

3. OVERVIEW OF STANDARDS-BASED REFORM PRINCIPLES

4. Standards-based reform OCR High Stakes, 2000 (July 6 draft) p. ii, Letter from the Assistant Secretary “In fact, the promotion of challenging learning standards for all students-coupled with assessment systems that monitor progress and hold schools accountable-has been the centerpiece of the education policy agenda of the federal government as well as many states.”

5. A Common Theme . . . Assessment and Accountability for All Students • Improving America’s Schools Act – Title I • IDEA 97 • Others: Office of Civil Rights, STW, Perkins

6. These Laws Require: • Participation of ALL students in state and district assessments • Reported information about the performance of special populations, relative to other students • Measurement against common standards for ALL students

7. Accountability System Components Goals (Content Standards) Indicators of Success (Performance Standards) Measures of Performance (Assessment System) Reporting Consequences

8. . . . The purpose of assessment and accountability is to improve the quality of instruction in schools and school systems, rather than simply to measure and report school effectiveness.” Committee on Title I Testing and Assessment Report, 1999

9. Bottom Line! High Standards All Students --- Everything else is negotiable --- schedules, place, time, structure, instructional methods, methods of assessment. . . AcCOUNTability

10. ASSESSMENT PARTICIPATION

11. Measures of Performance Eligibility Assessments Classroom Tests Large-ScaleAssessments Districtwide Statewide National

12. Measures of Performance The Ideal Relevant to instruction Impetus for change and improvement Multiple measures used for decisions Designed to accommodate all students High stakes for system before high stakes forstudent

13. Consequences Student Accountability – students are held responsible and consequences are assigned to them. Examples: students must pass a test to graduate, move from one grade to next, etc. System Accountability – educators, schools, or districts are held responsible and consequences are assigned to them. Examples: schools rated according to test scores, teachers receive rewards for student performance, etc.

14. Assessment ParticipationAll Comes Down to: How do we know All Students are making progress toward High Standards ?

15. 4 Ways to Participate in State/District Assessments • Standard Participation • Participation with Approved Accommodations • Participation with Non-approved Accommodations or Modifications • Participation in Alternate Assessments

16. ACCOMMODATIONS

17. Accommodations Accommodations are changes in testing materials or procedures that enable the student to participate in an assessment in a way that allows knowledge and skills to be assessed rather than disabilities or limited English proficiency Kinds of Accommodations Presentation Setting Timing Response Scheduling Other

18. Appropriate Accommodation Practices Should . . .Increase the Participation of Students in Assessments • During Assessment • During Instruction • Ideal – Accommodating tests might reduce need for accommodations

19. Why the Controversy About Accommodations? Norm-referenced perspective Fairness to others Logistically difficult Accommodation policies and concerns about validity are based on opinion, not data.

20. Selecting Accommodations* Who?IEP team (and ALL of the student’s teachers may have input, even if they are not at the IEP team meeting) What?Both instructional and assessment accommodations, with some alignment between the two When?During IEP team meeting, and any other time a decision is needed for an assessment How?IEP team considers student characteristics in light of test requirements, then consider implications of accommodations policies * For students with disabilities

21. ALTERNATE ASSESSMENTS

22. Alternate Assessment A substitute way of gathering information about the performance and progress of students who do not participate in typical state assessments

23. Alternate Assessments • Are used in place of general state and district wide assessments • Serve as an index of student progress toward meeting standards held for all students

24. Alternate Assessments are Performance Based • Data are collected through: • Observation • Recollection (checklist/interview) • Record Review • Testing (Performance events)

25. Alternate Assessment Approaches Selected by States • Portfolio/body of evidence 28 states • Checklist/Rating scale 4 states • IEP analysis 5 states • Other 6 states • Uncertain or not reported 7 states

26. REPORTING

27. Why Publicly Report Student Outcomes? • Each community (all of its members) has an investment in our public schools. Our public school system needs to inform the community on how its doing. • The standard reform movement emphasizes accountability to well-defined outcomes. A basic accountability strategy is to publicly report performance on these outcomes. • Informed communities are involved communities

28. ACCOUNTABILITY and CONSEQUENCES

29. SYSTEM ACCOUNTABILITY • Are ALL students learning to high standards? • Need to pull apart results - are there GROUPS of students failing? What are possible reasons? No access to general education curriculum? No accommodations to learn or to show what they’ve learned? No appropriate interventions to ensure learning? Low expectations?

30. The Challenge • Alignment between content/performance standards and assessments for all students is the issue. • Construct validity is a primary problem. • Comparability of results is a central concern. • FAIRNESS – OCR High Stakes document

31. IS THE PROBLEM THE KIDS OR THE TESTS? • The problem: One size fits all approach • The solution: More inclusive development of tests; and defining an approach which allows for flexibility in how academic information is collected, while at the same time producing results which are comparable, aggregatable, and generalizable.

32. Defining the challenges, defining a research agenda to investigate them, and working together on policy and practice that work! Developing recom-mendations to en-sure higher validity in assessments for LEP students and for students with dis-abilities Addressing the challenge with two streams of activity:

33. STUDENT Accountability • AFTER system is held accountable, THEN we hold the student accountable • Appropriate assessment measures • Multiple measures, includes large scale test scores, but also other performance measures as appropriate • Decisions made by team, documented

34. THE CORE TOPICS • Participation in regular assessment • Accommodations • Alternate Assessment • Reporting issues • USE of results • OTHERS?

35. CHALLENGES AND STRATEGIES

36. CRITICAL ISSUES /BARRIERS • High-stakes assessments • Resistance to accommodations • Denial of responsibility • Gray area issues

37. STRATEGIES – high stakes • Address high stakes for systems and students – adjust accountability system to recognize improvement in performance of lower performing students • Allow a slower phase-in for inclusion of scores of students with disabilities to allow for previous limited opportunities

38. STRATEGIES, high stakes (2) • Diploma options – have the same options, not just for SWD (end of course, certificate of mastery, certificate of completion, comprehensive; • Recognize all students do NOT demonstrate high-level knowledge and skills the same way, different ROUTES to diploma; • Credentialing as an option • Input from stakeholder groups • Media outreach to explain diploma options

39. STRATEGIES – resistance to accommodations OSEP Questions and Answers, plus OESE clarifications What is fair? Are we OVER accommodating? Are we enabling or are we accommodating?

40. STRATEGIES – denial of responsibility NEEDED: professional development on how to make good decisions on HOW students with disabilities participate in and benefit from assessments, from accommodations, and from appropriate instruction toward standards. We have to obtain and make use of good data in order to improve schooling for all students.

41. STRATEGIES – Gray area issues Study the assumptions of your: overall assessment program; state standards; participation and accommodations policies; assessment formats; the stakes of accountability system. Ask of these assumptions - Do ALL kids count?

42. STRATEGIES – Access to the general curriculum ALL children can learn, all children have the right to learn, all children can be successful. They must have the opportunity.

43. Bottom Line! High Standards All Students --- Everything else is negotiable --- schedules, place, time, structure, instructional methods, methods of assessment. . . AcCOUNTability

44. BUT WHY BOTHER? • ONE system, ALL learners • acCOUNTability • Increase expectations • Increase success

45. www.coled.umn.edu/NCEO quene003@tc.umn.edu