No Child Left Behind: Considerations for the

Assessment of Students with Disabilities

Martha Thurlow and Sandra ThompsonNational Center on Educational Outcomes

University of Minnesota

No Child Left Behind. . . a reauthorization of

ESEA continuing in the context of the standards-based reform movement . . .with an emphasis on system accountability

Purpose of No Child Left Behind

“…to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and state academic assessments”

NCLB does NOT require

student accountability (e.g., graduation

exams to get a diploma) •NCLB does require

SYSTEM level accountability to ensure that all students learn to high levels.

• State standards for what a child should know in math and reading now, and in science by 2005-06

• Test every student's progress toward the standards. Beginning in 2005-06, test in grades 3 through 8 and once in high school in math and reading. Beginning in 2007-08, science achievement must also be tested.

Requirements

Under NCLBAssessments shall provide for…• Participation of all students

• Reasonable adaptations and accommodations for students with disabilities (IDEA & 504), and alternate assessment

• Inclusion of limited English proficient students with accommodations, including, if practicable, native-language versions of the assessment

• Assessment in English of reading/language arts for any student in US for 3 consecutive school years

But, isn’t IDEA our law? Why do we have to worry about NCLB?

IDEA 1997

. . . a reauthorization created within the context of the standards-based reform movement . . . with another reauthorization coming in 2003

Key Provisions in IDEA 97

•Statement of present levels, needs, and how they affect involvement and progress in general curriculum

•Annual goals and objectives to allow involvement and progress in the general curriculum

• General educator collaboration• Assessment – full integration

into standards-based reform

Key Provisions in IDEA 97

The key provisions in IDEA 97 really address equity concerns – access to common standards,

challenging curriculum, and effective instruction

NCLB Requirements

IDEA Requirements

Together, they require us to address content standards,

achievement standards, assessment and access to the

general curriculum

How do IDEA and NCLB “fit together?”

Assumptions that underlie both NCLB and IDEA point to the benefits of standards-based systems for all students All children can learn

We need to be responsible for the learning of all children

Standards-Based Reform Context

--- Everything else is negotiable ---

schedules, place, time, structure, curriculum, instructional methods,

methods of assessment. . .

This is SO important …“It is not possible to predict which children will be in the top half of the achievement distribution at any given level of general intelligence.”

Kevin McGrew (2003)

40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120130140 150 160

IQ=75 + 5

What should our expectationsbe for “Child in School” in reading?

Child A in School

90 100110120130140

BRS40 50 60 70 80

Basic Rdg Skills SS (for GIA SS = 70-80)

Educators’ views of expected reading

achievement performance

based on IQ of 75

90 100110120130140

BRS40 50 60 70 80

Basic Rdg Skills SS (for GIA SS = 70-80)

Where will most

of the Child A’s

of the world

achieve in

reading?

Regression-based

expected score

How can this

be ?

“For most students with below average IQ scores, it is NOT possible to predict individual levels of expected achievement with the degree of accuracy that would be required to deny a student the right to high standards/expectations.”

Kevin McGrew (2003)http://www.iapsych.com/iapdirector.htm

Data Are Emerging

5,647

13,528

12,607

4,419

9,514

7,545

4,1753,414

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

1997 1998 1999 2000

Nu

mb

er o

f S

tud

ents

Number Tested Number Passing with Score of 55-100

New York Regents Exam, 2001: Number of students with disabilities passing is higher than the number taking in the past

Trend data across grades in large southern state – special education population changes over time mask closing of gap between special education and general education students

Recent article in the Boston Globe (December 22, 2002)

Katie Bartlett has spent all of her 17 years exceeding the expectations the world placed on her when she was born with Down syndrome. . . .Still no one was quite sure what would happen when Bartlett took the MCAS exam, now a requirement for a high school diploma in Massachusetts.

This is what happened: She passed

Critical Assessment Issues

Decision Making

Accommodations

Universally Designed Assessments

Alternate Assessments

3 Ways to Participate in Assessments

Same way as other students

With accommodations

In an Alternate AssessmentBut, this does not mean that it is simple

Decisions and the IEP team

But this does not mean that it is simple

• WHO needs to be part of the discussion?• WHAT external opportunities and constraints

must be considered?• IMPLICATIONS of decisions must be identified

and discussed, recorded, and reconsidered each year.

The IEP team has authority to make decisions. . .

AccommodationsAccommodations are changes in instructional and assessment materials or procedures that allow the student’s knowledge and skills to be developed and assessed.Accommodations provide

students with disabilities access to instruction and assessments, so that ALL can have access, participate, and make progress . . .

Good Accommodations Decisions

Start with good instructional decisions

Systematic questions about accommodations for individual students

Collection of data to aid decision making

What helps student learn or perform better?

What has student or parents told you?

What gets in the way of the student showing skills?

What has the student been taught to use?

Types of Accommodations

ResponseMark test bookletWord processorUse references

PresentationRepeat directionsLarge print editionBraille edition

SettingStudy carrelSmall groupIndividualized

TimingExtended timeFrequent breaksUnlimited time

SchedulingSpecific time of daySubtests in different order

OtherTest preparationOut-of-levelMotivational cuesAcross multiple days

Report on a Case Study: Out-of-Level Testing in

a School District

Jane Minnema

Research Questions

Student instruction?

Student and teacher perceptions?

Student selection?

Data Collection Strategies

IEP reviews (n=14)

Teacher provided student data (n=65)

Face-to-face interviews

Conducted on-site in the schools

Conclusions

• Instructed below grade of enrollment

• Not reported in accountability programs

• Test scores not usable for instructional decisions

• Policy implementation inconsistencies

• Lacked understanding of future effects

Definitional IssuesSome accommodations are considered to change what is assessed, and others are viewed as “ok” –

But the terms used to describe what is and isn’t “ok” vary across the states and districts.

Know what terms mean in your state and district!

Stay on top of the literature at:

http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/ AccomStudies.htm

[NCEO’s online accommodations bibliography with search features]

Is the the choice of accommodations appropriate?

Aligned with instructional accommodations, but not an excuse not to teach

Student needs it to demonstrate knowledge and skills – or to participate in assessment

Implications of using this accommodation have been identified and carefully considered

Not determined by test publisher, but by student need, what is being measured (construct), and the purpose of the test

Legal Cases Are Changing Views About Accommodations

Oregon – a new view of accommodations (innocent until proven guilty)

California – cannot require a special waiver to use needed accommodations

Oregon Case “Accommodations shall be considered allowable, valid, and scorable if they are used during instruction1 or classroom assessment and are listed on a student’s IEP or Section 504 plan, unless ODE can show that the accommodation invalidates the score interpretation.2 Rather than consider all accommodations first invalid until proven valid, ODE shall consider all accommodations valid unless ODE can show that the accommodation would invalidate the score interpretation.”

Oregon ASK Settlement Agreement

California Case U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer said the state may administer its first mandatory statewide high school exit exam this week as planned. But he ruled that special education students can be afforded any testing accommodation that they have been determined to need, including the use of calculators, spell- checkers, or extra time, during the testing set for March 5-7…. The judge has yet to rule on how the state should grade the tests of students with disabilities, as well as other contentious issues.

Education Week, March 6, 2002

Issues:

• Tendency to allow too many accommodations, possibly reducing expectations for student learning.

• Poor decision making about accommodations, reflecting lack of knowledge about instructional accommodations.

• Use of accommodations as an excuse to exclude students scores on reports or accountability.

Promising Practices:

• States keeping track of how many students use accommodations and which ones.

• Out-of-the-box thinking about the use of accommodated test scores.

• Clear decision-making criteria (e.g., alignment to instructional accommodations) and training on how to make decisions.

• Teaching students about the tests they take and about the accommodations that they need.

• Develop a process for making decisions about accommodation use

• Choose accommodations based on individual student needs and preferences

• Teach students to use selected accommodations routinely in the classroom, at home, and in the community – evaluate effectiveness

Recommendations for IEP Teams

• Know state/district accommodations policies

• Give students opportunities to use selected accommodations on practice tests

• Make sure test administrators know about accommodations a student will use

• Record accommodations use accurately on test booklet (or other form)

Recommendations for IEP Teams

Individualized accommodation decisions should be linked to what is being assessed, access tools a student uses for learning, and the student’s characteristics

FOR EXAMPLE:

Purposeful reading – reading to select and apply relevant information for a given task

Does this allow different ways of interacting with print? And, what are the implications for accommodations?

The “door” we need to go through: What is meant by ‘reading’ What about ‘literacy?’

The answer(s) to these questions will determine the accommodations that can be used when certain content standards are taught and assessed!

Ways to interact with print: with examples of accommodations

• Visual • Tactile (feeling print)• Auditory (listening to

printed messages)• Multi-modal (using

any combination of the above modalities)

• Printed text; ASL• Article in Braille and

Nemeth Codes• Listen to taped articles

(Radio or TV?)• Computer-based

“assistive” reading/ viewing programs– (e.g., digital talking news)

Universally Designed Instruction and Assessments are designed to be accessible and valid for the widest range of students

Moving to universally designed instruction and assessment

Think about universal design in architecture and tool design

Curb cuts and ramps

Elevators that talk to you

Door handles rather than knobs

Special pen shapes that are easier to hold

Elements of Universally Designed Assessments

Inclusive assessment population

Precisely defined constructs

Accessible, non-biased items

Amenable to accommodations

Elements of UD Assessments (continued)

Simple, clear, and intuitive instructions and procedures

Maximum readability and comprehensibility

Maximum legibility

“Think aloud”

• Recently interviewed 90 students using think aloud protocol

• 4th and 8th grade• Used multiple choice and

constructed response items from state math test

Student Characteristics

Grade 4 Grade 8

Learning Disability 10 10

Deaf/Hard of Hearing 10 10

Mild Cognitive Impairment 5 5

English Language Learner 10 10

No disability 10 10

Overall Observations

• Students who were confident of content did not have problems with design

• Students who had no idea how to solve the problem did not have problems with design

• Students “in the middle” – not sure of content, some reading difficulty, design made a difference

Examples of Student Perceptions

• Many students didn’t see one of the cities on a map

• The name of one of the cities was “Independence” - uncommon meaning

• Box between top and bottom of item – some students did not read entire item

• Sign for parallel gave away the answer• Some students read fraction 3 5/8 as “35

divided by 8”• Students unfamiliar with settings – “Glee

club does number,” “fitness club”

Considerations for Item Review• Overall appearance is clean and

organized• Clear format for text• Clear format for pictures and graphics

(when essential to item)• Concise and readable text• Format allows for changes without

changing meaning or difficulty• Meets criteria for measuring what it

is intended to measure

Alternate Assessments

First introduced in IDEA 97 -

for students unable to participate in general state assessments

Alternate Assessments

• Required for school accountability decisions under NCLB

• Reflect shifting goals for students with significant cognitive disabilities

Proposed Regulations(Notice of Proposed Rule Making – NPRM)

NPRM: Alternate assessment is for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities who are 3 standard deviations below the mean on intellectual and adaptive behavior measures

NPRM: Up to 1% of students above can be held to alternate achievement standards

Assessment Decision-Making Process in Standards-based Reform

Context

If no, ad just the student’sinstruction so tha t he/she

is work ing toward standards.

If no, consider a lternateassessm ent participation

for the student.

If yes, the student shouldparticipate in the genera l

assessm ent with a careful planfor the use of accommodations.

Can the student show what he/sheknows on a general assessment,

using accommodations?

W hen yes, go onto the nex t question .

Is the s tudent working toward high standards?

Development of Alternate Assessments

1. Stakeholder and policymaker identification of desired student outcomes for the population, reflecting the best understanding of research and practice, thoughtfully aligned to same content expected for all students.

2. Development, testing, and refinement of assessment methods.

3. Scoring of evidence according to professionally accepted standards, against criteria that reflect understanding of desired student outcomes.

4. Standard-setting process to allow use of results in reporting and accountability systems.

5. Continuous improvement of the assessment process.

Lara’s IEP Goals Before Alternate Assessment

• Lara will be fed

• Lara will be cleaned up

• Lara will be moved

Critical Functions focus on function of standard in

enhancing a student’s life• Standard: “Student communicates

ideas through speaking to various audiences”

• Critical Function: “Communicate ideas”

• Alternate Form: “Use augmentative and alternative communication system”

»Kleinert & Kearns, 2001

Alternate assessments have produced dramatic changes in the education of students with disabilities

They raise expectation issues all over again!

More information?

Visit: http://education.umn.edu/nceo

or Search for NCEO

Web site includes: Topic introduction

Frequently Asked Questions

Online and Other Resources