the characteristics of non-proficient special education and non-special education students on...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments
Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow, & Sheryl Lazarus
National Center on Educational OutcomesUniversity of Minnesota
This paper was developed, in part, with support from the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs grants (#H373X070021). Opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of Education or Offices within it.
![Page 2: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
NCEO Web site(http://www.cehd.umn.edu/nceo/)
![Page 3: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Outline
BackgroundAlternate Assessment based on Modified Academic
Achievement Standards (AA-MAS) QuestionsMethod
Data sourceAnalytical Techniques
ResultsConclusions
![Page 4: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
AA-MAS
4
States may count up to 2% of students participating in an AA-MAS for annual yearly progress (AYP).
Students with IEPAA-MAS is phasing out
on August 23, 2013, the U.S. Department of Education published a proposed rollback of regulation that allowed the AA-MAS (NCEO, 2014).
The assessment may be going away, but struggling learners with disabilities still exist.
![Page 5: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Candidates for AA-MAS
Students with low performing belief that low performance on the assessment
indicates a need for students to have a different type of assessment in order to demonstrate their knowledge and skills in a content area.
Students below proficiency levelFederal regulations state that eligible AA-MAS
participants should be “not proficient” on grade-level content within the year of their IEP
![Page 6: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Previous study on low performing students
6
Wu, Lazarus, & Thurlow, 2010males, students of color and students from low-income
backgrounds, regardless of whether they have a disability=>LP
If low performing students with these demographic characteristics also have a disability, they are much more likely to remain in the bottom 10th percentile across multiple years of the assessment
AA-MAS participants were significantly more likely to be from minority racial or ethnic backgrounds (Shaftel & Rutt, 2012)
![Page 7: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Is proficiency more reasonable?
Individual states set score cut-points for proficiency in different places, depending on the rigor of the state assessment and related standards.
It may be that the group of non-proficient students with disabilities, as stated in federal regulations, is more representative of the characteristics of the total population in a state.
![Page 8: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Questions
How does the percent of NP students who receive SPED services compare to the percent of NP Non-SPED students?
How do the demographic characteristics of PNP SPED students compare to the demographic characteristics of PNP Non-SPED students?
![Page 9: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Method
Data source
![Page 10: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Method-Definition
Non-Proficient Studentsat or below the cut-off score for proficiency
Persistent Non-Proficient Students (PNP)students who were in the non-proficient group all three
years of our analyses.Demographic variables
GenderWhite vs. non-whiteLow income (free/reduced lunch)
![Page 11: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Results—RQ1
How does the percent of NP students who receive SPED services compare to the percent of NP Non-SPED students?
![Page 12: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Number of students—Reading
10% SPED 90% Non-SPED
![Page 13: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Number of students—Math
10% SPED 90% Non-SPED
![Page 14: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Proportion—NP Reading
Non-SPED>SPEDStudents in SPED are more likely to be NP
![Page 15: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Proportion—NP Math
Non-SPED>SPEDStudents in SPED are more likely to be NP
![Page 16: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Proportion—PNP Reading
No pattern across all 4 states
# of NPs
![Page 17: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Proportion—PNP Math
# of NPs
Students in SPED are more likely to be PNP (70 vs. 20; 15 vs.14)More than 60% of NP became PNP in state 2
![Page 18: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Proportion—PNP
Reading: no pattern foundNP students in SPED were more likely to remain NP in
each of the three years compared to their SPED peers for State 4.
MathNP students in SPED were more likely to remain NP in
each of the three years compared to their Non-SPED peers.
![Page 19: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Results—RQ2
How do the demographic characteristics of PNP SPED students compare to the demographic characteristics of PNP Non-SPED students?
![Page 20: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Figure 1. Percentage of State 1’s male and female students in the persistently non-proficient, and total, populations on the state reading assessment by special education status
Gender—Reading (State 1)1a. G5R 1b. G8R
![Page 21: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Figure 2. Percentage of State 1’s male and female students in the persistently non-proficient, and total, populations on the state math assessment by special education status
Gender—Math (State 1)
2a. G5M 2b. G8M
![Page 22: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Figure 1-1. Percentage of State 4’s male and female students in the persistently non-proficient, and total, populations on the state reading assessment by special education status
Gender—Reading (State 4)
1a. G5R 1b. G8R
![Page 23: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Figure 2-1. Percentage of State 4’s male and female students in the persistently non-proficient, and total, populations on the state math assessment by special education status
Gender—Math (State 4)
2a. G5M 2b. G8M
![Page 24: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Gender—Across states
Similarity PNP are more likely to be malesMore than 50% of SPED population are males
DifferencesThe difference between SPED and non-SPED is quite
different between statesDifference between males and females are not the
same (the gap is bigger on state 1, not on state4)
![Page 25: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Gender—Within a state
Within a state, the pattern is consistent across gradesMost of PNP students who received SPED are more
likely to be malesWithin a state, the pattern is not consistent across content areasThe gap is smaller on PNP male between SPED and
non-SPED on Reading, but the gap is bigger on mathMost of PNP students who did not receive SPED are
more likely to be females (True for state 4 math, not for reading).
![Page 26: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Figure 3. Percentage of State 1’s white and non-white students in the persistently non-proficient, and total, populations on the state reading assessment by special education status
Ethnicity—Reading (State 1)
3a. G5R 3b. G8R
![Page 27: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Figure 4. Percentage of State 1’s white and non-white students in the persistently non-proficient, and total, populations on the state Math assessment by special education status
Ethnicity—Math (State 1)
4a. G5M 4b. G8M
![Page 28: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Figure 3-1. Percentage of State 4’s white and non-white students in the persistently non-proficient, and total, populations on the state reading assessment by special education status
Ethnicity—Reading (State 4)
3a. G5R 3b. G8R
![Page 29: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Figure 4-1. Percentage of State 4’s white and non-white students in the persistently non-proficient, and total, populations on the state Math assessment by special education status
Ethnicity—Math (State 4)
4a. G5M 4b. G8M
![Page 30: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Ethnicity—Across states
Similarity The proportion of the PNP is NOT similar to the whole population
Differences The proportion on SPED PNP population is about 50-50 for state
1 across grades and content areas, but not for state 4. Most PNP students with SPED are more likely to be White (for
state 4; state 1 is 50-50) The difference between SPED and non-SPED is quite different
across states (gap is smaller on state 1) Most of PNP students who receive SPED are more likely to be
non-white (True for state 4, not for state 1).
![Page 31: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Ethnicity—Within a state
The pattern is consistent across grades and content areas for state 1, but not for state 4.
The pattern is not consistent across content areasThe gap between SPED and non-SPED is bigger on
Reading than on math across grades for state 4.The gap between SPED and non-SPED is bigger on
Grade 8 than on grade 5 for both content areas.
![Page 32: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Figure 5. Percentage of State 3’s low income and non-low income fifth and eighth grades students in the persistently non-proficient and total population on the state reading assessment by special education status
Income Level—Reading (State 3)
5a. G5R 5b. G8R
![Page 33: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Figure 6. Percentage of State 3’s low income and non-low income fifth and eighth grades students in the persistently non-proficient and total population on the state math assessment by special education status
Income Level—Math (State 3)
6a. G5M 6b. G8M
![Page 34: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Figure 5-1. Percentage of State 4’s low income and non-low income fifth and eighth grades students in the persistently non-proficient and total population on the state reading assessment by special education status
Income Level—Reading (State 4)
5a. G5R 5b. G8R
![Page 35: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Figure 6. Percentage of State 4’s low income and non-low income fifth and eighth grades students in the persistently non-proficient and total population on the state math assessment by special education status
Income Level—Math (State 4)
6a. G5M 6b. G8M
![Page 36: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Low Income—Across states
Similarities The proportion of the PNP is different from the whole population Most PNP students are more likely to be from low income
regardless the disability statusDifferences
The difference between SPED and non-SPED is quite different across states (the gap in grade 5 is bigger than grade 8 for state 1; However, the gap is bigger in grade 8 than grade 5 for state 4.)
![Page 37: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Low Income—Within a state
Within a state, the pattern is consistent across grades and content areas for state 1, but not for state 4.
Within a state, the pattern is not consistent across content areasThe gap between SPED and non-SPED is bigger on
Reading than on Math across grades for state 4.The gap between SPED and non-SPED is bigger on
Grade 8 than on grade 5 for both content areas.
![Page 38: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Conclusion
Not exactly same as the findings in Wu et al.’s low performing study (Wu et al, 2012). The possible reason might be due to the cut score for
the proficiency level is quite different among states. Even though some of the characteristics were similar across states (e.g., low-income level), the differences between the SPED and Non-SPED population were not the same across states.
Not the same pattern across the two content areas of reading and math.
![Page 39: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Conclusions
There were some similarities in the characteristics of PNP students, such as male, non-white and low-income.
The percentages of PNP students for one state’s content assessments were stable for SPED and non-SPED populations in one of the characteristics, but the same was not the case for other states.For example, in state 1, on the math assessment there were
different patterns for gender and for race/ethnicity. There were relatively stable percentages of male versus
female students in the PNP SPED and Non-SPED groups compared to the total population tested.
![Page 40: The Characteristics of Non-Proficient Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments Yi-Chen Wu, Kristi Liu, Martha Thurlow,](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081514/56649d9d5503460f94a868eb/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Final Comments
AA-MAS is going away, but these students are not going away
The results provide important information about a group of kids who will be in the next generation
assessments it is important to continue to analyze data to see how
this population is doing over time.