Slide 1 of 34 A Historical Background of Scholastic Assessments and the use of Assistive Technology in the United States September 9, 2014 3-4p.m. Eastern.

of 34 A Historical Background of Scholastic Assessments and the use of Assistive Technology in the United States September 9, 2014 3-4p.m. Eastern Time

of 34 This webinar is one in a series of two webinars on AT and Education. The next webinar in this series is scheduled for October 8, 2014, titled “Assistive Technology, Accessibility, and High-Stakes Assessments” Register at https://www4.gotomeeting.com/register/345295727 Both webinars will be recorded and archived on the RESNA Catalyst Project Website at http://www.resnaprojects.org/statewide/webed.html If you do not see Real Time captioning on your screen, please visit http://www.streamtext.net/player?event=RESNA. You will need to tile or cascade your web pages to view both the PowerPoint along side the captioning. Please use your chat box or question box to ask questions.https://www4.gotomeeting.com/register/345295727 http://www.resnaprojects.org/statewide/webed.html http://www.streamtext.net/player?event=RESNA

of 34 Presenters Janice Carson, Director, Idaho AT Project Ron Hager, Senior Attorney, National Disability Rights Network 3

of 34 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Passed in 1975, effective in 1978 All students with disabilities guaranteed – Free appropriate public education (FAPE) – In the least restrictive environment (LRE) – Pursuant to a written individualized education program (IEP) – Parents have the right to due process to question school district decisions – Assistive technology provisions added in 1990 4

of 34 No Child Left Behind Act Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) created in 1965 ESEA purpose—provide federal support to educate disadvantaged children who live in poor urban and rural areas NCLB, amended ESEA and renamed, in 2001 States must assess all students, including students with disabilities, in reading and math annually in grades 3 – 8 (less frequently for science) States must make adequate yearly progress toward reading, math and science mastery by 2014 5

of 34 NCLB Assessments All students with disabilities must take NCLB assessments IDEA amended to reflect NCLB requirements Students with disabilities may take all statewide and district-wide assessments, including “high stakes” tests, in one of five ways The determination of which assessment to use and any needed accommodations is to be made by the IEP Team 6

of 34 NCLB Assessment Options Students with disabilities may: – Take regular assessment in same manner as other students – Take regular assessment with approved accommodations or modifications – Take alternate assessment based on same educational standards as regular assessment – Take alternate assessment based on different educational standards – Take assessment based on modified achievement standards 7

of 34 Alternate Assessment Guidelines Intended for students with significant cognitive disabilities Only "proficient scores" of 1% of students who meet the criteria for this assessment may be counted toward a school's AYP determination (i.e., whether or not the school "needs improvement") However, no restriction on number of students who may take this assessment 8

of 34 Modified Assessment Guidelines Effective in 2007: – Provide access to grade ‑ level curriculum; – Be aligned with State's academic content standards for grade in which student is enrolled; – Only academic achievement standards for students are to be modified, not content standards; – May not preclude a student from earning a regular high ‑ school diploma 9

of 34 Modified Assessment Guidelines No limit on the number of students who can take this alternate assessment (as long as the IEP team determines its necessary) 2% cap on number of proficient and advanced scores that may be counted towards AYP Total number of students counted on alternate and modified assessments cannot be more then 3% Modified assessments removed from NCLB waivers 10

of 34 IDEA Assessment Requirements IEP Team determines which assessment student takes, based on five options above If IEP Team determines student needs alternate assessment, it must indicate what alternate assessment is appropriate and why IEP determines any individual appropriate accommodations the student needs 11

of 34 IDEA Assessment Amendment Effective in 2007 State- and district-wide assessments must, to extent possible, be developed and administered using “universal design” principles When selecting alternate assessment not aligned to state’s academic content standards, IEP Team must be aware of any possible effects, including whether student will qualify for diploma State guidelines must identify accommodations that do not “invalidate the score” IEP Team must select only those accommodations which do not invalidate the score 12

of 34 Questions? Please use your chat box or ask questions. 13

of 34 A Standard Evolution CCSS, SBAC & PARCC Support Standards-Based Reform 14

of 34 A Standard Evolution 15

of 34 CCSS, SBAC & PARCC What are the CCSS? State education chiefs and governors in 48 states came together to develop the Common Core, a set of clear college- and career-ready standards for kindergarten through 12th grade in English language arts/literacy and mathematics. The Common Core FAQs. (ND). Retrieved May 28, 2014 from http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/frequently-asked-questions/ 16

of 34 Adoption of CCSS Green – adoption Blue –partial adoption 17

of 34 Status of CCSS in States Blue - rejectedRed - activity to rejectGray - no action Courtesy of Diane Golden 18

of 34 CCSS, SBAC & PARCC Common Core State Standards (CCSS) SBAC & PARCC High Stakes testing – Teacher evaluations (salary, promotion, contracts) – District accreditation – Grade promotions – Graduation/Diploma Critical Need for full accessibility Courtesy of Diane Golden 19

of 34 CCSS, SBAC & PARCC State Assessment Participation (hopefully current) PARCC -- AR, AZ, CO, DC, IL, LA, MD, MA, MS, NJ, NM, NY, OH, RI, TN (ND, VI) SBAC – CA, CT, DE, HI, ID, ME, MI, MO, MT, NV, NH, NC, OR, SD, VT, WA, WV, WI (ND, VI, WY) Never Joined Either – VA, TX, NE, MN (AS, GU, MP, PR) Withdrew – AK, AL, FL, GA, IN, KY, KS, OK, PA, SC, UT IA – legislature must approve Courtesy of Diane Golden 20

of 34 CCSS, SBAC & PARCC Federal Activities Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) Multiple meetings ED, PARCC and SBAC 1) Limited understanding of software accessibility 2) Misunderstanding of UDL and AT Assumed built-in would address all access needs 3) Conflict with pure content experts/specialists Skills could not be technology supported 4) Neither consortia had internal accessibility expertise or external advisory expertise Courtesy of Diane Golden 21

of 34 Support Standards-Based Reform Idaho Local Education Agency (LEA) Missouri State Education Agency (SEA) 22

of 34 Support Standards-Based Reform Local Education Agency 23

of 34 Support Standards-Based Reform We know time spent in the general education setting is increasing for students with disabilities, however, in order to participate in standards- based reform, they must have access to the general education curriculum (Rose, Meyer, & Hitchcock, 2006).

of 34 Support Standards-Based Reform CCSS ShiftFunctional Equivalent Steeper staircase of Text Complexity-The reading levels expectation in 12 th grade is higher thus the levels increase at a faster rate Need access to content AIM Text-to-speech Text Compaction Stronger Emphasis on Nonfiction and Informational Text-Harder to understand because the terminology is more difficult Need access to content Same as above Reading pens Increased Emphasis on Text-Based Answers and Academic Vocabulary Need to be able to use text-based content and vocabulary to answer assessment questions Digital content Writing software to build a dictionary from the content to answer questions on assessments Support to learn vocabulary 25

of 34 Support Standards-Based Reform State Education Agency 26

of 34 Support Standards-Based Reform Missouri Activity Example Task Force - Organizations and State ED Agency Special Education Administrators School Psychologists Specialized Instruction and Related Services Staff Assistive Technology Specialists Higher Education Instruction/Assessment Faculty Developed Guiding Principles for Assessment Accessibility Courtesy of Diane Golden 27

of 34 Support Standards-Based Reform Guiding Principles 1)Digital assessment applications must conform to an accepted set of accessibility standards. 2)Students must be allowed to use their own AT. – If students forced to use unfamiliar AT, becomes a test of how quickly and efficiently they can learn new AT. – Without use of AT tools in assessment that are used in everyday learning, the measure of true academic proficiency is questionable. Courtesy of Diane Golden 28

of 34 Support Standards-Based Reform Guiding Principles 3)Guidelines restricting the use of access features must be patently justified and cannot result in disability- based discrimination or cause invalid proficiency scores for students with disabilities. 4)Mandating another “individual student plan” to authorize and activate access features for assessments is unnecessary. 5)Technology supported academic achievement must be valued equally with non-technology supported. Courtesy of Diane Golden 29

of 34 Support Standards-Based Reform Missouri and CCSS Assessments Missouri is a member of SBAC SBAC Accommodation/Access Guidelines adopted – SBAC Governing Board adopted resolution allowing states to vary from the SBAC Guidelines to conform to their own laws, regulations, and policies in relation to accessibility for students with disabilities – This “variance” resolution will be used by Missouri. Missouri awarded state contract to CTB to develop platform and administer CCSS assessments. Courtesy of Diane Golden 30

of 34 Support Standards-Based Reform Assistive Technology Survey Missouri AT Program  What operating system are your students using?  Mostly Windows  What tablets are your students using?  Mostly iPads  What browsers are your students using?  No clear majority  What kinds of specific AT are your students using?  Significant use of built in OS access features  Set of input and output AT identified Courtesy of Diane Golden 31

of 34 What are you doing in your state or territory? 32

of 34 Thank You! Questions? Please use your chat box or ask questions.

of 34 Webinar Two: Wednesday, October 8, 2014 AT, Accessibility, and High-Stakes Assessments Dave Edyburn, Ph.D., from the University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee, as he provides a detailed analysis of Assistive Technology, accessibility, and high stakes assessments. Topics to be covered in this webinar include the following: – State partnerships with the Four National Assessment Consortia – Technology infrastructure requirements for schools – Embedded technology supports – Allowable Assistive Technologies – Register at: https://www4.gotomeeting.com/register/345295727 https://www4.gotomeeting.com/register/345295727 34

Slide 1 of 34 A Historical Background of Scholastic Assessments and the use of Assistive Technology in the United States September 9, 2014 3-4p.m. Eastern.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Slide 1 of 34 A Historical Background of Scholastic Assessments and the use of Assistive Technology in the United States September 9, 2014 3-4p.m. Eastern."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Slide 1 of 34 A Historical Background of Scholastic Assessments and the use of Assistive Technology in the United States September 9, 2014 3-4p.m. Eastern.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Slide 1 of 34 A Historical Background of Scholastic Assessments and the use of Assistive Technology in the United States September 9, 2014 3-4p.m. Eastern."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback