Developing an Aligned Alternate Assessment System

1. Developing an Aligned Alternate Assessment System Iowa’s Alternate Assessment for 2006-07 October 6, 2006

2. Developing an Aligned Alternate Assessment System Steve Maurer Martin Ikeda, Ph. D. Iowa Department of Education

3. Today’s Presentation • Handouts • Taping • Presentation will be emailed to AEA and UEN Iowa Alternate Assessment (IAA) Contacts

4. 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

5. 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 mary.sullivan@iowa.gov • Fax to Mary Sullivan @ (515) 242-6019

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. Requirements for Alternate Assessment (August 2005) • http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/altguidance.pdf

11. A-1. Why should students with disabilities, including those with the most significant cognitive disabilities, be included in State assessment and accountability systems? • “It’s 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

12. 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.

13. First, IEP goals are individualized for each student, and a student’s 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…

14. 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 State’s academic content standards.

15. Guidance also adds… … students with the most significant cognitive disabilities should have access to the general curriculum

16. Common Approaches to Alternate Assessment • Portfolio Assessment • Performance Assessment • Comprehensive Rating Scales of Achievement

17. Portfolio Assessment • is an organized collection or documentation of student-generated or student-focused work typically depicting the range of individual student skills.

18. 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.

19. 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.

20. 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

21. Alternate Assessment Approaches Rating Scales are most amenable to traditional metrics of reliability. Safeguards for validity need to be built in. Tasks are more amenable to traditional metrics of reliability and validity. Pose issues around test security and multiple forms Portfolios are difficult to establish traditional metrics of validity and reliability

22. Good Evidence Creates aPicture 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 student’s 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.

23. 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

24. 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

25. Rating Scales • Development • Iowa Core Content Standards and Benchmarks • Other States’ frameworks • Standards frameworks from National Organizations (McRel, NCTM) • Input from content specialists

26. 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

27. Step 1. Complete the Learner Characteristics Inventory • You will need: • State ID number that is entered into Project EASIER. • Someone in your school building’s office should be able to help you locate the student’s ID number. • Check with building principal on how to access appropriately • Three options for returning inventory

28. Step 1. Complete the Learner Characteristics Inventory • Three options • Online • Complete the “fillable form.” • Hard copy

29. 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

30. Step 3. Document Evidence of Proficiency for ICCSBs • Record student’s 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

31. Step 3. Document Evidence of Proficiency for ICCSBs • Portfolio Evidence Form—Reading (Grades 3-8 and 11) • One Standard • Many entries • Total 2-4 Total (To be determined) pieces of evidence

32. Step 3. Document Evidence of Proficiency for ICCSBs • Portfolio Evidence Form—Mathematics (Grades 3-8 and 11) • Four Standards • Many entries • 2 pieces per Standard • 8 TOTAL

33. Step 3. Document Evidence of Proficiency for ICCSBs • Portfolio Evidence Form—Science (Grades 5, 8, and 11) • Four Standards • Many entries • 2 pieces per Standard • 8 TOTAL

34. 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 student’s accuracy of performance

35. Evidence • + or – 2 years or grades • Recent • Representative • Relevant • Reliable

36. Recent • Collected during the current school year

37. Representative • Typical performance of knowledge and skills with classroom materials, instruction, and accommodations

38. Relevant • Is linked to a rating scale item

39. Reliable • If another person would examine performance/evidence they would come to the same conclusion

40. Step 4. Administer Performance Tasks • Developed by Iowa Department of Education • targeting late February to send out • tasks cover grade spans • tasks cover many benchmarks • Performance Task Form

41. Step 5. Record Results of Performance • The Performance Event form is used to summarize performance on the standard task • Rate the student’s performance

42. 12345678 5 ABC District Ikeda x x

43. Step 6. Rate the Student’s 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)

44. Step 7. Summarize Proficiency • Proficiency Scores • Proficiency Levels

45. Step 8. Report Results • Share with Parents • Make appropriate decisions for IEP, instruction, and assessment for 2007-08

46. Step 9. Reliability Check and Audit • 50% of Portfolios • April 2007 • Trained Raters • Report Results • Make changes for 2007-08

47. Questions Fax to Mary Sullivan (515-242-6019) Email to mary.sullivan@iowa.gov We will be back with answers to some questions at:XXXX

48. 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 Iowa’s Core Content Standards and Benchmarks (ICCSBs) • Examine your districts standards and benchmarks for natural links to the ICCSBs

49. What to do Monday • Talk to parents about the process • E-mail additional questions to steve.maurer@iowa.gov

50. Thank You