a presentation of methods and selected results 1

A presentation of methods and selected results

1

Policy, Validity Framework, Study Design

2

3

“Has the State ascertained that the decisions based on the results of its assessments are consistent with the purposes for which the assessments were designed?”

“Has the State ascertained whether the assessment produces intended and unintended consequences?”

4

1. Teacher and administrator motivation and effort will be evident.

2. Professional development support will be provided.

3. Instruction and curriculum will be adapted.

4. Student motivation and effort will be evident.

5. Performance will improve and be related to the changes above.

5

6. Access to augmentative and alternative communication will be improved.

7. Parental involvement in student’s academic career will be increased.

6

7

8

9

10

11

CONTEXTUAL VARIABLES EVIDENTIAL VARIABLES

Gender Race SES Grade/Age School Size LEP

Teacher* familiarity Teacher attitudes and

beliefs Professional

development Instruction in content

areas Access to AAC Parent involvement

12

*Includes administrators

GENERAL EDUCATION SPECIAL EDUCATION

A history of assessment

Adequate psychometric methods to construct and evaluate assessments

Academic instruction is the foundation of education

In the absence of disability, opportunity to learn and do well on the assessment

Assessment is relatively new

Limited psychometric methods to construct and evaluate assessments

Academic instruction is special education reform

Limited opportunity to learn

13

Background, Structure, Future

14

Marilyn RobertsMichigan Department of Education

Lynda Balmer-LuppPennsylvania Department of Education

Sandra Berndt & Eva KubinskiWisconsin Department of Public Instruction

Michigan’s Alternate Assessment Program

16

17

A 3 tiered approach to AA-AAS

2002 – Development and Administration of Participation (P) and Supported Independence (SI) levels of Mi-Access

2005 – Development and Administration of Functional Independence (FI) levels of the Mi-Access

2007-2008 – Administered First FI Science Assessment

2007 – 2008 – Mi-Access revised to align with MI content standards

Type of Assessment:

Subjects Assessed:

Grades Administered :

Administration:

Response formats:

Scoring:

Performance Based

Reading, Math, Science

(R, M) 3 – 8, 11; (S) 5, 8, 11

Individual

Multiple choice & constructed response

Video Tape, Primary & Shadow Scorers

18

Common Core Alignment

Learning Progressions or Other Structure?

State Consortia?

Pennsylvania Alternate System of Assessment

20

21

A 3 tiered approach to AA-AAS

2000 – PASA Reading & Math Administered to grades 5, 8, & 11

2002 - 2005 – Grades 3, 4, 6, & 7 Added

2005– PASA scores counted toward AYP

2007 – PASA Science Administered to grades 4, 8, & 11

Type of Assessment:

Subjects Assessed:

Grades Administered :

Administration:

Response formats:

Scoring:

Performance Based

Reading, Math, Science

(R, M) 3 – 8, 11; (S) 4, 8, 11

Individual

Multiple choice & constructed response

Video Tape, Scoring Conference

22

PA has adopted the Common Core Standards

PA has incorporated Learning Progressions into the Standards Aligned System

PA is participating in a Consortia for the 1%-Alternate Assessment

Wisconsin Alternate Assessment for Students with Disabilities

24

1998 - Alternate Performance Indicators (APIs)

Original WAA-SwD based on APIs

2006 WAA-SwD does not pass peer review

April 2007 – Development of Extended Grade Band Standards

January 2008 – Revised WAA-SwD Administered, an on-demand, performance-based AA-AAS

25

Type of Assessment:

Subjects Assessed:

Grades Administered :

Administration:

Response formats:

Performance Based

Reading, Math, Science

3 – 8, 10 (R, M); 4, 8, 10 (S)

Individual

Multiple choice & constructed response

26

Common Core Alignment

Learning Progressions or Other Structure?

State Consortia?

Descriptive Data and Frequency Counts

28

Teachers are familiar with the assessment

29

30

31

What are attitudes and beliefs toward the assessment?

32

33

*Results are similar for math & science

34

35

From a list generated from the pilot study

36

37

Professional development opportunities are being provided

38

39

Curriculum is aligned with the State’s Alternate Academic Standards

40

41

* Results are similar for math & science

READING SCIENCE

42

READING SCIENCE

43

Students are motivated to learn the material and do well on the assessment

44

45

Student scores are improving as a result of these factors

46

47

DIRECTOR OF C & I SUPERINTENDENT

48

PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL ED

49

Marilyn RobertsMichigan Department of Education

Lynda Balmer-LuppPennsylvania Department of Education

Sandra Berndt & Eva KubinskiWisconsin Department of Public Instruction