MI-Access Science: The State of the Extended Benchmarks

MI-Access Science: The State of the Extended Benchmarks Vincent J. Dean, PhD Assessment Consultant for Students with Disabilities Session 52 OEAA Conference 2007

Today’s Topics • MI-Access Science Assessments • Assessment Plan Writing Team (APWT) • EB and Item Development/Samples • Instructional Relevance • Present and Future EB Endeavors

MI-Access Science Assessments • NCLB – 2007/2008 • Science in grades 5, 8, and 11 • Functional Independence, Supported Independence, Participation • Extended Benchmarks from Michigan Curriculum Framework v.2000

Assessment Plan Writing Team (APWT) • Members • Charge: Develop Assessment Plan • Five meetings/work sessions over the time period of July 2005 through March 2006

APWT Primary Goal • Extend the Benchmarks in science for three groups of special education students who function as if they have mild to severe cognitive impairments: Functional Independence (FI) Supported Independence (SI) Participation (P)

APWT Secondary Goals • Achieve consensus on abilities and skills of each population • Should vs. Can • Attain a better understanding of the P/SI student populations - Wing Lake Developmental Center

APWT Secondary Goals • Evaluate alternate assessments and item-type formats • Generate preliminary assessment blueprints and item specifications • Generate prototype items

APWT Process Extending Benchmarks from Michigan Curriculum Framework Science Content Standards, 2000 version (MCF v.2000) • 3 Questions –

Extending Benchmarks Question 1 “What is the fundamental meaning or content of this cluster of standards and benchmarks?”

Extending Benchmarks Question 2 “What are the underlying key concepts and understandings?”

Extending Benchmarks Question 3 “What knowledge and skills will be assessed?”

Extended Benchmarks (EBs) Examples of EBs across grade spans Examples of EBs across populations

Extended BenchmarksPhysical Science

Extended Science Benchmarks Life Science

Extending Benchmarks Additional components of the EBs: • Key concepts • Real-world contexts • Taken from the general education Benchmarks when possible; added for each population as appropriate

Key Concepts/Real-World Contexts • Participation EB (Physical Science): “Identify attributes/properties of common objects.” Key Concepts: “Texture-rough, smooth. Smell-pleasant, unpleasant. Size-larger, smaller. Color-common color words. Shape-circle, square, triangle. Weight-heavy light.”

Key Concepts/Real-World Contexts • Participation EB (Physical Science): “Identify attributes/properties of common objects.” Real-world contexts: “Leisure activities, clothing choice, personal hygiene, carrying objects, environmental signs, animals.”

APWT Process Item types and formats • Multiple Choice FI: 3 choices-text and/or graphics SI: 3 choices-graphics P: 2 choices-graphics • Observation/Activity Participation only

APWT Process All items • aligned to extended benchmarks • related to key concepts • related to real-world contexts • coded to adult life contexts

Sample FI Item Which object is attracted by a magnet? A plastic ruler B steel needle C rubber ball

Sample SI Item - MC Which animal is a reptile? A turtle frog B mouse C

Picture Cards The assessment administrator will be provided with an 8½ X 11 picture of a frog, a mouse, and a turtle.

Scoring Rubric - SI

Scoring Rubric – Assessment Administrators • Must have two observers • Primary Assessment Administrator • Shadow Assessment Administrator

Sample Participation Item Which animal lives in water? frog A mouse B

Picture Cards The assessment administrator will be provided with an 8½ X 11 pictures of a frog and a mouse.

Sample Participation Item Activity: The student will correctly identify body parts during a familiar dressing routine and when given directions (e.g., “Show me where mittens are worn”, or “Tell me on which part of the body do the mittens go”). Scoring Focus: Identifying body parts

Scoring Rubric - Participation

Instructional Relevance • Standards-Based IEPs • PLAFP for AA-AAS (all 3 present levels of MI-Access) • IDEA 2004 Regulations – PLAFP • §300.320 (2)(ii) For children with disabilities who take alternate assessments aligned to alternate achievement standards, a description of benchmarks or short-term objectives;

Instructional Relevance Benchmarks (grades 3-8) • MEAP High School Benchmarks • Michigan components of the MME • Possible secondary credit exams • Michigan Merit Curriculum framework • HSCEs available for each course • www.michigan.gov/osi

Instructional Relevance • MI-Access • EBs (grades 3-8 and 11) • Functional Independence, Supported Independence, Participation • English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science • Student access to general curriculum • Alignment • IEP Goals –Standards-based • Assessment - Classroom and Statewide

“Mining” the EBs • Begin by discussing the fundamental meaning and content of the EB statement. • Underline important key concepts. • Think about the meaning of each concept—underlying knowledge/skills, concrete examples—and why it’s important.

“Mining” the EBs Questions • Do our students receive instruction on this concept? • Where, when, and how? • Performance Context • If we don’t teach this now, how could we in the future?

“Mining” the EBs Questions • What types of IEP goals could we write to measure these concepts? • Are our instructional materials covering these concepts adequately? • What materials exist to help us figure this stuff out?

Using the EBs to Prepare for MI-Access Questions • How many EBs from each strand/standard will be assessed? • What will the items assessing these concepts look like? • How will the items based on these concepts be scored and reported?

“Mining” and Preparation Tools • EB Documents • Online Learning Program • Blueprints from Assessment Plans • Released Item Booklets • Reports • www.michigan.gov/mi-access

MI-Access Science: The State of the Extended Benchmarks