Visions for the Future: Inclusive Assessments

1. Visions for the Future:Inclusive Assessments Jacqueline F. Kearns, Ed.D. University of Kentucky

2. A world class inclusive assessment system would: • recognize that students with disabilities including those with significant cognitive disabilities benefit from participation in the general curriculum based on the same goals and standards as their typical peers. • Currently, 75% of students with SCD in AA-AAS read sight words and use a calculator for basic mathematical operations. • require authentic demonstration of skills and knowledge of all students • authentic, contextualized demonstrations are essential for students with disabilities particularly for students with significant cognitive disabilities. • include structured processes that ensure all have the opportunity to show what they know.

3. incorporate training on curriculum and instruction so that assessment on the academic content is not the only time students have access to the content. allow for formative evidence of instruction on the assessed content , the context of the instruction, as well as summative demonstration of skills and knowledge. provide summative information for accountability purposes and formative evidence would provide LEA and SEA with needs assessment data to guide ongoing training and support, and inform teacher training/licensure processes.

4. INTERPRETATION OBSERVATION COGNITION The Assessment Triangle & Validity Evaluation Marion & Pellegrino (2006) • Assessment System • Test Development • Administration • Scoring • Reporting • Alignment • Item Analysis & DIF/Bias • Measurement error • Scaling and Equating • Standard Setting • VALIDITY EVALUATION • Empirical evidence • Theory & logic (argument) • Consequential features • Student Population • Academic content • Theory of Learning

5. Why Knowing the Kids is Important….

6. References • Agran, M., Fodor-Davis, Moore, & Martella, (1992). Effects of peer-delivered self-instructional training on a lunch-making task for students with severe disabilities. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 27, 230-240. • Billingsley, F., Gallucci, C., Peck, C., Schwartz, I., & Staub, D. (1996).  "But those kids can't even do math:  An alternative conceptualization of outcomes in special education.  Special Education Leadership Review, 3 (1), 43-55. • Brown, L., Nisbet, J., Ford, A., Sweet, M., Shiraga, B., York, J., Loomis, R. (1983). The critical need for non-school instruction in educational programs for severely handicapped students. Journal of the Association of the Severely Handicapped. 8, 71-77. • CAST (2002). • Fox, (1989). Stimulus Generalization of skills and persons with profound mental handicaps. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 24,219-299. • Haring, N. (1988). Generalization for students with severe handicaps: Strategies and solutions. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. • Hughes, C. & Agran, M. (1993). Teaching persons with severe disabilities to use self-instruction in community settings: An analysis of the applications. Journal of the Association for Persons with severe Handicaps, 18, 261-274. • Hughes, C., Hugo, K., & Blatt, J. (1996). Self-instructional intervention for teaching generalized problem-solving with a functional task sequence. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 100 565-579. • Kearns, J., Towles-Reeves, L., Kleinert, H., Kleinert, J., Klienchact-Thomas, M. (in press). • Towles-Reeves, L., Kearns, J., Kleinert, H., Kleinert, J. (2009). Describing Characteristics of Students in AA-AAS. Journal of Special Education • Westling, D., & Fox, L. (2004). Teaching Students with Severe Disabilities. Columbus: Pearson (Merrell). • Whitman, T. L. (1990). Self-regulation and mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 94, 347-362.