Educational assessment and accountability for all students: Facilitating the meaningful participation of students with disabilities in district and statewide assessment programs (original) (raw)
Related papers
Providing Assessment Accommodations for Students with Disabilities in State and District Assessments
Nceo Policy Directions, 1997
This report examines issues concerning the provision of accommodations for students with disabilities participating in state and district assessments. The report considers what an accommodation is, what kinds of accommodations are available, who should make the decision regarding accommodations, when accommodations should be used, and how accommodations affect test results. Analysis of state written guidelines has resulted in identification of the following principles to guide decisions: (1) base decisions on the student's needs; (2) use a form identifying variables in accommodation decisions; (3) have people who know the student make decisions about accommodations; (4) align instruction, classroom testing, and district or state assessment; and (5) consider the type of test. States are urged to have a written assessment policy which reflects inclusive practices for student participation in assessment and clear assessment accommodation policies. Two tables list types of assessment accommodations and sample questions to consider in the decision process. (DB)
National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota, 2008
Abstract: Building on research and practice, the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) has revisited and updated its 2001 document that identified principles and characteristics that underlie inclusive assessment and accountability systems. This report on a principled approach to accountability assessments for students with disabilities reflects lessons learned during the past seven years, presenting six core principles:(1) All students are included in ways that hold schools accountable for their learning;(2) Assessments ...
Increasing the Participation of Students with Disabilities in State and District Assessments
Nceo Policy Directions, 1997
This report examines issues concerning the participation of students with disabilities in state and district assessments and offers principles and recommendations for increasing their participation. This report suggests that 85 percent of students with disabilities could participate either in the regular assessments or by using accommodations and that only 15 percent might need an alternate assessment. An analysis of state-written guidelines has identified principles such as beginning with the premise that all students will participate in the accountability system and basing participation decisions on the student's instructional goals. The issue of participation in graduation exams is also addressed, with the suggestion that the same principles used in decisions about state assessment and accountability systems be implemented. The report recommends: (1) clarification of the purpose of the assessment and accountability systems;
Appalachia Educational Laboratory at Edvantia, 2005
nline assessment promises a faster and more useful return of data about student performance in states' accountability assessments. The prospect of gaining quick access to such information is alluring, and many states are creating new assessments for an online environment in order to obtain it. This period of retooling presents a significant additional opportunity-that of improving the assessment of students with disabilities. By employing universal design principles-i.e., using methods that take differing abilities into consideration from the start of a project-states can maximize the effectiveness of their new assessments for measuring the knowledge and skills of students with disabilities, while also improving the speed and usefulness of their systems generally. Adapting universal design practices can guide assessment developers as they work to capture the considerable potential of online environments to give educators a better picture of student learning. Universal design of assessment is specifically intended to benefit those students who have physical disabilities or learning disabilities that impede their interpretation of assessment items or their responses to them. Secondary benefits for all students, however, are likely to be the final result. This brief outlines the potential of acting during this historical moment to significantly improve accountability assessments through universal design of their online versions. Success with universal design will require collaboration among individuals with expertise in several distinct areas of specialized knowledge-including universal design, special education, online technology systems and applications, assistive technology, assessment, and content standards-all working within an environment of evolving legislation. This document provides an overview of the various facets of this congruence of specialties, discusses the potential of their interplay, and encourages a joint effort as states create online assessments. Why Seek Change? Using state accountability assessments to measure the academic progress of students with disabilities is a relatively recent development. Until 1997, students with disabilities were routinely excluded from large-scale assessments, and reporting of scores for disabled students who did participate varied widely. 1
Learning Disability Quarterly, 2004
The National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (NJCLD) recognizes the role that state and district-wide assessments of learning outcomes have towards achieving high academic standards for students and documenting educational accountability for the public. For students with learning disabilities such assessments often present both needed opportunities and serious challenges. It is imperative that students with learning disabilities are provided the opportunity to access, participate, and demonstrate knowledge and skills in state and district-wide assessments. Throughout the United States over the last several years, states have been involved in educational reform. A major focus has been to make public schools accountable for the education of all students, including students with learning disabilities. This includes setting high academic standards, raising graduation requirements, and creating highstakes state assessments that may affect grade promotion, graduation, scholarship eligibility, and the accreditation of individual schools. With this paper the NJCLD highlights issues and offers guidance on sound implementation of state and district-wide assessments to ensure equal access by students with learning disabilities. Federal regulations require access and accountability for students with learning disabilities. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 [PL 93-112], as amended, requires that individuals with disabilities, including students with learning disabilities, be given equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from the policies and procedures customarily granted to all individuals. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 [IDEA], [PL 105-17], regulations require that all students with disabilities participate in a state's accountability system. Additionally, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 [NCLB], [PL 107-110], requires that at least 95% of students with disabilities participate in assessments that measure adequate yearly progress of schools, school districts, and states. Thus, State Boards of Education and Departments of Education must understand that the participation of students with learning disabilities in state and district-wide assessments is not participation just for the sake of participation. Instead, participation in these assessments must lead to informed teaching, improved learning, and the acquisition of needed literacy skills, learning strategies, and social skills that allow students with learning disabilities to access the general education curriculum. Furthermore, these assessments must be related to outcomes that go beyond the schoolhouse door (e.g., employment, technical education, post-secondary education).
1996
The Maryland-Kentucky-NCEO Assessment Project encompasses a comprehensive array of research studies on assessment accommodations and alternate assessment approaches that facilitate inclusion of all students in statewide assessment programs. The planned research program include: comparative studies involving a qualitative examination of the assessment systems in Kentucky and Maryland; studies that involve secondary analyses of existing data bases to address critical technical and implementation issues in the assessment of students with disabilities; and experimental field studies that involve the collection of new data to address several technical issues crucial to the development and modification of state assessment policies.
Identifying Appropriate Test Accommodations for Students With Learning Disabilities
Focus on Exceptional Children
Accountability is a prominent issue in public education. A great deal of time, money, and student and teacher effort is spent on testing students' academic achievement and progress to evaluate the educational outcomes of schools, school systems, and states. Students enrolled in public schools sometimes take eight or more sets of standardized tests throughout their school career. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) requires that all students enrolled in public schools take a reading and math assessment each year in grades 3 through 8, and to be tested at least once during grades 10 through 12. By the 2007-08 school year, the NCLB also will require testing in science at least once during grades 3 through 5, 6 through 9, and 10 through 12. As of June 10, 2003, all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico had federally approved statewide accountability plans in accordance with the NCLB (Webb & Aspey, 2003). Despite broad implementation of assessment plans, testing varies widely within states, in terms of the amount and type of accountability. Often, outcomes measured by high-stakes assessments are tied to funding, which makes the results important to local and state school administrators. The NCLB holds states and schools accountable for their effectiveness and continuous improvement. Schools that fail to meet performance objectives can lose federal funds, and Title 1 funds can be diverted to allow students in failing schools to transfer to higher-performing schools. NCLB also has provisions for rewarding bonuses to successful schools. Because of the nature of their academic difficulties, students with disabilities often present particular challenges for administrators and educators when standardized high-stakes assessments are concerned. In the past, states have not always included students with disabilities in their assessment systems and analyses. Low participation rates of students with disabilities continued despite mandates for their being included in accountability programs required by 1997 amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2001). In essence, the scores of these students and their outcomes did not count (Fuchs & Fuchs, 1999; Fuchs, Fuchs, Eaton, Hamlett, & Karns, 2000). In an effort to gain full information regarding the educational outcomes for all students, the NCLB requires that students with disabilities be included in tests to the fullest extent possible. This further commitment to gaining information about outcomes for students with disabilities recognizes the importance of this population of students and requires Dr. Lynn Fuchs and Dr. Doug Fuchs are with the special education faculty of