Presentation on theme: "Developing an Aligned Alternate Assessment System Iowas Alternate Assessment for 2006-07 October 6, 2006."— Presentation transcript:
Developing an Aligned Alternate Assessment System Iowas Alternate Assessment for 2006-07 October 6, 2006
Developing an Aligned Alternate Assessment System Steve Maurer Martin Ikeda, Ph. D. Iowa Department of Education
Todays Presentation Handouts Taping Presentation will be emailed to AEA and UEN Iowa Alternate Assessment (IAA) Contacts
Why are you here today? Understand the enhancements to the Iowa Alternate Assessment for 2006-2007 Federal NCLB Peer Review Standard Setting Evaluation from the field
ICN Protocol for today If you are having problems at your site, use the phone in your room to contact ICN Due to the number of participants, we will not be stopping to answer questions live As you have questions, email or fax them: Email questions to email@example.com Fax to Mary Sullivan @ (515) 242-6019
Outcomes Understand federal requirements for alternate assessments Steps in the IAA for 2006-2007 Examples of how to document and keep evidence What to do on Monday
Acknowledgements Material in this presentation was developed and adapted from work done by: Steve Maurer, IDE, Project Contact Tom Deeter, IDE Mary Sullivan, IDE Marty Ikeda, IDE Mike Burdge and Jean Clayton, ILSSA Jerry Tindal, University of Oregon United States Department of Education National Center for Educational Outcomes Stephen Elliott, Vanderbilt University
A Regulatory Perspective General Assessment (ITBS/ITED) with or without accommodations Iowa Core Content Standards and Benchmarks (ICCSBs) Alternate Assessment I alternate achievement standards for 1% of the population (most significant cognitive disabilities) Alternate Assessment II modified academic achievement standards for 2% of the population
Remember: The materials you are seeing are in DRAFT format. Process and materials piloted the week October 16th Materials in final format will be sent out in November
Requirements for Alternate Assessment (August 2005) http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/altguidance.pdf
A-1. Why should students with disabilities, including those with the most significant cognitive disabilities, be included in State assessment and accountability systems? Its the law Students with disabilities, including those with the most significant cognitive disabilities, benefit instructionally from such participation To ensure that appropriate resources are dedicated to helping these students succeed, appropriate measurement of their achievement needs to be part of the accountability system
B-5. May a State use student progress on IEP goals or an assessment of functional life skills to meet the Title I regulation requirements? No.
First, IEP goals are individualized for each student, and a students progress toward each goal is measured for purposes of reporting progress to parents and for making individualized decisions about the special education and related services a student receives…
Second, as required by Title I, schools are accountable for student achievement only in the content areas of reading/language arts and mathematics. IEP goals may address a broad range of individualized instructional needs, as well as behavioral and developmental needs, and might not be based on the States academic content standards.
… students with the most significant cognitive disabilities should have access to the general curriculum Guidance also adds…
Common Approaches to Alternate Assessment Portfolio Assessment Performance Assessment Comprehensive Rating Scales of Achievement
Portfolio Assessment is an organized collection or documentation of student-generated or student-focused work typically depicting the range of individual student skills.
Performance Assessment is a task or series of tasks requiring a student to provide a response or create a product to show mastery of a specific skill or content standard.
Comprehensive Rating Scales of Achievement are rating scales anchored by descriptive rubrics for quantifying teacher judgments of students knowledge and skills based on repeated direct and indirect observations situated in a number of school settings.
Commonalities Across Alternate Assessment Approaches Collection of Evidence Samples Alignment or linkage to state grade level content standards. Evaluation of evidence samples for reliability and validity Scores that can be summarized by a proficiency level descriptor
Alternate Assessment Approaches Portfolios are difficult to establish traditional metrics of validity and reliability Tasks are more amenable to traditional metrics of reliability and validity. Pose issues around test security and multiple forms Rating Scales are most amenable to traditional metrics of reliability. Safeguards for validity need to be built in.
Good Evidence Creates a Picture of Performance! Think of each dot of color in the picture as a piece of classroom evidence or a response to a test item. To get a clear and complete picture of a students performance takes a good sample of evidence. Some alternate assessments do a better job of sampling information from both the foreground and the background of students skills.
Alternate Assessment 2006-07 Body of Evidence will include: Learner Characteristics Inventory Rating Scale in Reading, Mathematics and Science Supporting Evidence –Teacher selected –Standard Task
Learner Characteristics Inventory Purpose: to understand the characteristics of students in the Iowa Alternate Assessment 12-item scale (handout) Developed by the National Alternate Assessment Center Timeframe
Rating Scales Development Iowa Core Content Standards and Benchmarks Other States frameworks Standards frameworks from National Organizations (McRel, NCTM) Input from content specialists
Steps in the IAA 2006-2007 Step 1: Complete the Learner Characteristics Inventory Step 2: Read the items on the rating scale. Step 3: Document evidence of proficiency for each CCSB. Keep 2 samples of evidence for each CCSB on the appropriate Portfolio Evidence form Step 4: Administer Performance Task Step 5: Record results of performance task on Performance Event form Step 6: Use performance task and classroom evidence to rate student on all items Step 7: Summarize Proficiency Scores & Proficiency Level Decisions Step 8: Report Results Step 9: Reliability Check and Audit
Step 1. Complete the Learner Characteristics Inventory You will need: State ID number that is entered into Project EASIER. Someone in your school buildings office should be able to help you locate the students ID number. Check with building principal on how to access appropriately Three options for returning inventory
Step 1. Complete the Learner Characteristics Inventory Three options Online Complete the fillable form. Hard copy
Step 2. Read the Items on the Rating Scale Start thinking about which items you will have naturally occurring opportunity to teach and could enter into the Portfolio Evidence Forms Rating scales will be sent out electronically in late October or early November
Step 3. Document Evidence of Proficiency for ICCSBs Record students performance between November and February Rating scale for Reading, Mathematics, and Science Portfolio Evidence Form Evidence is gathered over the course of the year and just not during February and March
Step 3. Document Evidence of Proficiency for ICCSBs Portfolio Evidence FormReading (Grades 3-8 and 11) One Standard Many entries Total 2-4 Total (To be determined) pieces of evidence
Step 3. Document Evidence of Proficiency for ICCSBs Portfolio Evidence FormMathematics (Grades 3-8 and 11) Four Standards Many entries 2 pieces per Standard 8 TOTAL
Step 3. Document Evidence of Proficiency for ICCSBs Portfolio Evidence FormScience (Grades 5, 8, and 11) Four Standards Many entries 2 pieces per Standard 8 TOTAL
Step 3. Document Evidence of Proficiency for ICCSBs Steps to Document Evidence Date Write the item number that the evidence corresponds to on the Portfolio Evidence Form Summarize students accuracy of performance
Evidence + or – 2 years or grades Recent Representative Relevant Reliable
Recent Collected during the current school year
Representative Typical performance of knowledge and skills with classroom materials, instruction, and accommodations
Step 6. Rate the Students Performance Using the entries in the Portfolio Evidence Forms and the Performance Task forms, complete the rating scale For Reading, Mathematics (Grades 3-8 and 11) and Science (Grade 5, 8, and 11)
Step 8. Report Results Share with Parents Make appropriate decisions for IEP, instruction, and assessment for 2007-08
Step 9. Reliability Check and Audit 50% of Portfolios April 2007 Trained Raters Report Results Make changes for 2007-08
We will be back with answers to some questions at:XXXX Questions Fax to Mary Sullivan (515-242-6019) Email to firstname.lastname@example.org
What to do Monday Student State ID numbers Make sure building and/or district administrators are aware of the IAA process Review the Participation Guidelines Examine Iowas Core Content Standards and Benchmarks (ICCSBs) Examine your districts standards and benchmarks for natural links to the ICCSBs
What to do Monday Talk to parents about the process E-mail additional questions to email@example.com