03/18/04sb alt acheivement stds1 alternate achievement standards for oregon’s extended assessments...

03/18/04 SB Alt Acheivement Stds 1

Alternate Achievement Standards for Oregon’s Extended Assessments

Action ItemOregon State Board of Education

March 18, 2004


Significant Dates

December 8 & 9, 2004—Panel MeetsDec ‘03 thru Feb ’04—ODE applies

standards to 2002-03 Extended Assessment Data to examine impact of alternate standards

March 18, 2004—State Board of Education Considers Alternate Standards


Recommendations to the State Board on Alternate Achievement Standards

Adopt alternate achievement standards recommended by the panel Implement the standards for two years—2003-2004 & 2004-2005 Re-evaluate alternate standards in 2005 (consider any new regulations, data trends, or research about the Extended Assessments)


Additional Recommendations

Continue current guidelines for “Including All Students” and making IEP team decisions Report Individual Student accomplishments to student, teacher, and family Direct the Accountability Team to incorporate Extended Assessment scores (and alternate standards) in accountability reporting


Background


Oregon’s Extended Assessment Timeline

Development Development 19981998

Pilot Test 1999Pilot Test 1999

Field Test 2000Field Test 2000

Statewide Statewide Implementation Implementation 20012001


Three principles adopted in 1998

Stick with the Board adopted standards, don’t add

new standards,

Emphasize a single comprehensive assessment

system that includes all students, and

Avoid establishing an alternate assessment that

is a catch-all or dumping ground for low

performing students.


ODE goals from 1999 forum:

Review list of strategies identified in 1998 and update.Expand definition of each strategy and account for progress to date.Develop a 3-5 year implementation time line.


In this process, careful attention was

given to standardizing the Extended

Assessment tasks and considering

the level of support needed for each

student to show what he or she could

do.


IDEA ‘97 Assessment RequirementsState performance goals and indicators for SWDSWD included in state and district assessments with accommodations if neededIf not included, statement of why not plus alternate assessmentStates must aggregate and report aggregate and report resultsresults of alternate assessments


Four Extended Assessments for Students with Significant Disabilities

Curriculum Based Curriculum Based Measures:Measures:Extended Reading Extended Mathematics Extended Writing

Environmentally Environmentally Based Measures:Based Measures:

Extended Career andLife Role Assessment System (X-CLRAS)—IV


One-on-one Extended Performance Assessments

Standard tasks and scoring proceduresRatings that evaluate independent performance while focusing on knowing and doingMeasures designed to be sensitive to growthAligned to standards and to student’s current level of performancePredictive of performance on benchmarksScores can be aggregated and reported as group summaries


The Framework for Inclusive AssessmentLadder of Levels

Writing/Math PS R/L, Math, Science R & M only CRLS Grades

C CAM 12

B 11

CIM CIM A 10* C Some Students 9

Benchmark 3 Benchmark 3 B w/Significant 8* A Cognitive 7

C Disabilities 6

Benchmark 2 Benchmark 2 B May Take 5* A X-CLRAS 4

C Throughout their 3* Benchmark 1 Benchmark 1 B School 2

A Career 1

Ex Wr Ex R & M K

Ex Wr Ex R & M X-CLRAS PK

Ex Wr Ex R & M PS

# Achievement Level Tests * Grades tested Extended Assessments


Extended Academic Assessments


I Extended ReadingI Extended Reading

Naming Letters, PicturesBlending Sounds Reading Words, Names, SentencesReading Text OrallyReading and Listening Comprehension


II Extended II Extended MathematicsMathematics

Naming/copying numbersCounting & writing numeralsShapes/telling timeNaming, counting moneyManipulatives & computation


III Extended WritingIII Extended Writing

Copying LettersCopying WordsDictated WordsDictated SentencesWriting SentencesStory Writing


IV Extended CLRASIV Extended CLRAS based on Oregon’s Academic Content and based on Oregon’s Academic Content and Performance Standards and the CAM Performance Standards and the CAM Career Related Learning StandardsCareer Related Learning Standards

Personal Management

Career Development

Communication

Problem Solving

Team Work

Employment Foundations

Motor Skills (not CAM)


Typical daily routinesEssential related skills for living in English language arts, mathematics, and science

Extended Career and Life Role Assessment System (CLRAS)


Extended Career and Life Role Assessment System (CLRAS)

Baseline Annual Assessment Checklist (BAAC)Selected Routines for LivingRelated Skills


Assessment of Daily Routines

Combines teacher rating and performance assessmentAssesses related skills while students are engaged in routinesSpecific related skills determined by the IEP team.


Eating Lunch--Activities

Locates cafeteria Locates food service lineSelects foodFinds seating locationPrepares to eatConsumes foodPuts away utensils, tray, etc.Leaves cafeteria


Example of Related Skills

Expressive Communication1. Chooses preferred object2. Accepts/pushes away 3. Gestures for permission

Problem Solving1. Gestures to indicate problem2. Cooperates while others solve problem

Employment Foundations: Math1. Matches objects 1:12. Counts to 10

Employment Foundations: Reading

1. Points to capital letters2. Points to name/survival signs


Rated on Level of Independence

4--Independent (may include minimal peer assistance)3--With gestures, visual and/or verbal prompts only2--With partial physical assistance prompt*1--With full physical assistance prompt*0--Step was not completed with full physical assistance

* May include gestures, visual &/or verbal prompts.


Guidelines


Which Which Students with Disabilities will take regular assessments??

WritingWriting--produce 5+ sentences on a topic

Mathematics Mathematics (KS)(KS)-- answer questions re: time, patterns, shapes, measures, money, simple fractions

Reading (KS)Reading (KS) --read 225 word passages & answer 3-5 questions


Who takes Ext. Assessments?

Students w/ Significant Disabilities

With instruction in functional daily living skills and/orand/orPerforming well below Benchmark 1 in reading, writing,

or mathematics


Critical Constructs of NCLB ’02 affirming ESEA ‘94

Assess all students annually grades 3 through 8 & once in high school—no less than 95%

All students achieve standards over 12 year periodReport disaggregated outcomes Implement an Accountability System to high standards with rewards and sanctionsMeasure Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)


New NCLB Regulations: Announced in the Federal Register Tuesday, December 9, 2003

Alternate Standards may be established for students with significant cognitive disabilities Up to 1% of all students can be reported as “meeting” standards through the alternate standards


Standard Setting Panel


Standards Setting Panel Work

1. Specify the task demands

2. Reflect on student performance

3. Take notes on the process—explain reasons

4. Establish performance levels using a common language (Emerging, Proficient, Strong)

5. Provide recommended judgments with clarification


Recommend Alternate Standards

English Language ArtsReading/LiteratureWriting

MathematicsKnowledge and SkillsMath Problem Solving


Standard Setting Panel Expressed the Belief that--

Students Taking Extended Assessments Should Have the Opportunity to “Meet” or “Exceed”


High Standards & Expectations for All Students including All Students with Disabilities (SWD)

Avoid low expectationsAcknowledge achievementsHonor accomplishmentsRecognize dignity


What’s the impact?


2000, 2001, 2002 Students with Disabilities Using Options to the General Oregon Statewide Assessment

Challenge Down Modified Administration Extended Assessments

Were Not counted


In 2003 SWD Using the Options Were Counted

Challenge Down Modified Administration Extended Assessments

With Performance level = “With Performance level = “Does Not Does Not MeetMeet””


Alternate Standards for SW Significant Disabilities (1%)

With Alternate Standards, these students would have the opportunity to “meet” or “exceed” standards


How Many Students Take Extended Assessments?

Oregon Statewide Assessment

Extended Assessment Participation--2 year comparisonGrades 3 % 5 % 8 % 10 % Total %

Reading '02 1039 2.5% 492 1.1% 228 0.5% 102 0.2% 1861 1.1%Reading '03 1618 3.9% 752 1.7% 285 0.6% 187 0.5% 2842 1.7%

Mathematics '02 738 1.8% 416 0.9% 208 0.5% 103 0.3% 1465 0.9%Mathematics '03 1143 2.8% 639 1.5% 263 0.6% 193 0.5% 2238 1.3%Combines students taking either Extended CLRAS, Extended Reading, or Extended Mathematics


How will Extended Mathematics Assessment Scores be Reported?

E xte nd e d M ath e m a ticsP e rform a nce Le ve l in M ath e m a tics

K n ow le d ge an d S kills I tem s


P ro b le m S olv ing

E xten d ed Ca re er a n d L ife R o le A s se s sm e nt S ys temX - C L R A S - - P e rfo rm a n ce L e vel in M a th em a tics

M a th P ro b le m S o lv ing


K n ow le d ge an d S kills I tem s


P ro b le m S olv ing


M a th e m a ticsO ve ra ll P e rfo rm a n ce L e vel


Mathematics Knowledge and SkillsGrade 3

Figure 2. Knowledge and Skills:Extended Mathematics Assessment Third Grade (n=652)

14.1

42.9 42.9

28.8

50.3

20.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Do Not Meet Meet Exceed Do Not Meet Meet Exceed

Proficiency Category

Perc

ent o

f St

uden

ts in

Cat

egor

y

Task Item Proficiency=50% Task Item Proficiency=66%

Note: Knowledge and Skills tasks include 30 possible (weighted) points. Proficiency categories are calculated as: <10=Does not Meet; 10-19=Meets; 20-30=Exceeds. Task Item Proficiency levels (50% and 66%) refer to the percent of correct items in each task required to score "proficient" in that task. Clearly, the 66% item proficiency is a more stringent standard: twice as many students fail to meet the standard using this cut-off point. A total of 18 differentially-weighted tasks were included on the Extended Mathematics Assessment.



Figure 5. Knowledge and Skills:Extended Mathematics Assessment Fifth Grade (n=374)

12

40.9

23

29.1

47.947.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70



Perc

ent o

f St

uden

ts in

Cat

egor

y


Note: Knowledge and Skills tasks include 30 possible (weighted) points. Proficiency categories are calculated as: <10=Does not Meet; 10-19=Meets; 20-30=Exceeds. Task Item Proficiency levels (50% and 66%) refer to the percent of correct items in each task required to score "proficient" in that task. Clearly, the 66% item proficiency is a more stringent standard: twice as many students fail to meet the standard using this cut-off point. A total of 18 differentially-weighted tasks were included on the Extended Mathematics Assessment.



Figure 8. Knowledge and Skills:Extended Mathematics Assessment Eighth Grade (n=145)

20

42.137.9

55.9

37.2

6.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70



Perc

ent o

f St

uden

ts in

Cat

egor

y


Note: Problem Solving tasks include 15 possible (weighted) points. Proficiency categories are calculated as: <5=Does not Meet; 5-9=Meets; 10-15=Exceeds. Task Item Proficiency levels (50% and 66%) refer to the percent of correct items in each task required to score "proficient" in that task. A total of 18 differentially-weighted tasks were included on the Extended Mathematics Assessment.



Figure 11. Knowledge and Skills:Extended Mathematics Assessment Tenth Grade (n=121)

21.5

29.8

48.849.6

43.8

6.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70



Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

in

Cat

ego

ry




Mathematics Problem SolvingGrade 5

Figure 6. Problem Solving:Extended Mathematics Assessment Fifth Grade (n=374)

31

42.2

33.230.7

26.7

36.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70



Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

in

Cat

ego

ry





Figure 9. Problem Solving:Extended Mathematics Assessment Eighth Grade (n=145)

49.7

32.4

41.4

24.825.5 26.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70



Perc

ent o

f St

uden

ts in

Cat

egor

y





Figure 12. Problem Solving:Extended Mathematics Assessment Tenth Grade (n=121)

24

29.8

46.3

18.2

35.5

46.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70



Perc

ent o

f St

uden

ts in

Cat

egor

y




How will Extended Assessment English Language Arts Scores be Reported?

P e rfo rm a n ce Le vel in R e ad ing P e rform a nce Le ve l in W riting

E xten d ed Ca re er a nd L ife R o le A s se s sm e nt S ys temX- C L R A S - -P e rform a nce Le ve l in R ea d ing

E xten de d R e ad ingP e rfo rm a n ce Le vel in R e ad ing

E xten d ed W ritingP e rform a nce Le ve l in W riting

E n g lis h L an gu ag e A rtsw ith E xte n de d A cad e m ic As s es s m e n ts

E n g lis h L an gu ag e A rtsO ve rall P e rfo rm a n ce L e vel


Reading and LiteratureGrade 3

Figure 13. Total Proficiency Points:Extended Reading Assessment Third Grade (n=969)

59.5 56

16.8

27.1

20.919.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70



Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

in

Cat

ego

ry


Note: Total Proficiency categories are based on 22 possible (weighted) points. Proficiency categories are calculated as: <7=Does not Meet; 7-13=Meets; 14-22=Exceeds. Task Item Proficiency levels (50% and 66%) refer to the percent of correct items in tasks 1-7 required to score "proficient" in that task. Tasks 8-10 were internally weighted, as each task included an "easy," "medium," and "difficult" option.



Figure 14. Total Proficiency Points:Extended Reading Assessment Fifth Grade (n=456)

56.8 54.6

20.4

2525

18.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70



Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

in

Cat

ego

ry





Figure 15. Total Proficiency Points:Extended Reading Assessment Eighth Grade (n=162)

53.7

45.7

20.4

34

22.823.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70



Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

in

Cat

ego

ry





Figure 16. Total Proficiency Points:Extended Reading Assessment Tenth Grade (n=118)

50.8 48.3

22

29.7

22.9

26.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70



Perc

ent o

f St

uden

ts in

Cat

egor

y




Not Applied to Extended WritingOnly 145 High School Students took 2003 Extended Writing

Grade 10 only

Grades 3, 5, and 8Suspended in

2003


Recommendations

Review


Recommendations on Alternate Achievement Standards

Adopt alternate achievement standards recommended by the panel. Implement the standards for two years—2003-2004 & 2004-2005 Re-evaluate alternate standards in 2005 (consider any new regulations, data trends, or added information about the Extended Assessments and adjust accordingly)


Additional Recommendations

Continue current guidelines for “Including All Students” and making IEP team decisions Report Individual Student accomplishments to student, teacher, and family Direct the Accountability Team to incorporate Extended Assessment scores (and alternate standards) in accountability reporting


Continue current guidelines for “Including All Students” and making IEP team decisions

Individually determined

Present level of performance

Instructional Goals

Accommodations

Content Standards


Report Individual Student Accomplishments to Student, Teacher, and Family

Students receive scores on the assessments they take.

Scores give the student, teacher, and family information about the student’s achievement.


Accountability & AYP

Rely on the Accountability Team to determine how scores will be handled in calculating and reporting AYP & the Oregon Report Card

03/18/04sb alt acheivement stds1 alternate achievement standards for oregon’s extended assessments...

Documents

alt acheivement stdsin

alt acheivement stdsidea

extended assessment

extended assessment

alt acheivement stdsode

extended assessment

new standards

alternate assessmentstates