Accessibility, Assessments, and the Law: What State and District Leaders Need to Know Martha Thurlow and Sheryl Lazarus National Center on Educational Outcomes

Topics Paradigm Shift in Accessibility and Accommodations UDL in Design and Delivery of Assessments Accommodations and Nationally-Recognized High School Assessments Challenges and Solutions in Technology-based Approaches to Accessibility and Accommodations

Types of Assessments Based on Every Student Succeeds Act: General (Regular) Assessments Alternate Assessments for Students with the Most Significant Cognitive Disabilities (Alternate Assessments based on Alternate Achievement Standards) English Language Proficiency Assessments

Assessment Formats Paper and pencil tests have a long history of development, over time increasingly including only multiple choice and short constructed response. Technology-based assessments are now being used with increasing frequency, expanding greatly after the 2010 Race-to-the-Top Assessment Program provided funding to consortia of states.

New Paradigm Universal features – accessibility supports available to all students as part of the technology platform (may need to be turned off for some) Designated features – accessibility supports available to students for whom the need has been indicated by an adult or team of adults Accommodations – accessibility supports that are available only to students with disabilities and/or English learners

Smarter Balanced Framework The three levels in Smarter Balanced are Universal Tools, Designated Supports, and Accommodations. Accommodations are available only to students with disabilities (IEP and 504).

PARCC Framework The three levels in PARCC are Features for All Students, Accessibility Features (Identified in Advance), and Accommodations. Accommodations are available to students with disabilities (IEP and 504), ELs and ELs with disabilities.

ELPA21 Framework The three levels in ELPA21 are Universal Features, Designated Features, and Accommodations. Accommodations are available only to ELs with disabilities (IEP and 504).

Accessibility Frameworks Type of Assess-ment Assessment For All Participating Students For Some Students with Educator Input For Few Students with Documented Needs General Assess-ment PARCC Features for All Students Accessibility Features Identified in Advance Accommodations Smarter Balanced Universal Tools Designated Supports ELP Assess-ment ELPA21 Universal Features Designated Features WIDA ASSETS Accessibility Tools Alternate Assess-ment DLM Supports Provided within DLM via PNP Supports Requiring Additional Tools/Materials NCSC Optimal Testing Conditions Accessibility Features

Individualized Features Personal Needs Profile: Digital version of accessibility features and accommodations needed by an individual student, formatted to an international standard that allows it to be sent electronically with other student information (PARCC Definition). ISAAP: Individualized Student Assessment Accessibility Profile (Smarter Balanced)

Technology-based Assessments Innovative item types promoted (a sample) Drag and drop Audio and/or video stimuli Multiple responses Possibility of adaptivity Possibility of timely reporting Embedded accommodations**

ESSA – Universal Design for Learning (UDL) ESSA uses definition in Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 Provide flexibility in the ways information is presented, in the ways students respond or demonstrate knowledge and skills, and the ways students are engaged. Reduces barriers in instruction, provides appropriate accommodations, supports, and challenges, and maintains high achievement expectations for all students, including students with disabilities. Mentioned numerous places in ESSA, for example, State Plans (Sec. 1005) need to show: “Implemented a set of high-quality student academic assessments in mathematics, reading or language arts, and science.” These assessment should be “developed, to the extent practicable, using the principles of universal design for learning.”

ESSA - Nationally Recognized High School Assessments May use “nationally recognized high school assessment” instead of state assessment (ACT, SAT, Smarter Balanced, PARCC, Accuplacer, etc.). Administered in multiple states Recognized by institutions of higher education for entrance or placement Aligned to challenging State standards Produces valid and reliable data Applies to all high school students except those who participate in alternate assessment Has appropriate accommodations States need to establish application process for LEAs. Once approved for one district, any may use.

High School Assessment Accommodations Policies Wide variation in frameworks across four assessments (ACT, SAT, PARCC, Smarter Balance) PARCC and Smarter Balanced have 3-tier frameworks ACT and SAT focus on whether the score is college reportable Available at: https://nceo.umn.edu/docs/OnlinePubs/Report403/NCEOReport403.pdf

ACT and SAT For ACT, and in most SAT states, accommodations request submitted to test company, which approves or does not approve the accommodation. If not approved state may still allow its use as a “state- allowed” accommodation for accountability and other purposes. At least one SAT state (Connecticut) approves both college-reportable and state-allowed accommodations.

National Education Technology Plan (2016) “Future of Assessment” compares traditional and next generation assessments, with the goal of “more flexibility, responsiveness, and contextualization” – accessibility that is universally designed in one of the features of next generation assessments: When both assistive technologies and assessments effectively interoperate, students are better able to demonstrate what they know and how to apply this knowledge. (NETP, 2016, p. 57)

Challenges in Technology-based Assessments Inconsistent testing platforms for different assessments May have been more of a challenge for adults than for students, but still a challenge! Scrolling issues An issue for all students mentioned by all consortia May have a greater impact on students with disabilities and English learners than other students

Challenges – cont. Accessibility features and accommodations did not work as intended Not able to turn off universal features (an important designated feature) Limitation on number of re-reads did not activate

Challenges – cont. Guidance on how to configure computers and other devices to handle videos not available Tutorials for students needed to be more “kid friendly”

Challenges – cont. Use of accessibility features and accommodations was not tracked Ability to track the USE of accommodations (and other accessibility features) was a huge promise of technology-based assessments No consortium assessment was able to do this –only could track the accessibility features and accommodations that were SELECTED for a given student

Challenges – cont. Many concerns related to the use of assistive technology (AT) Lack of security with “3rd party” AT Incompatibility with “3rd party” AT Result is often that students are not allowed to use AT they regularly use during instruction

Importance for Students with Disabilities May affect students with disabilities differently from other students* Example: Student with a disability might be frustrated and not continue to try when other students are not as frustrated and do continue to try *Effect may be direct or indirect

Some Solutions Develop test security policies and procedures to address AT issues (e.g., erase assessment content; turn off features not allowed on assessment) Allow the student to use AT that is regularly used during instruction (unless it would compromise test validity.

Successfully Using AT Students need to be familiar with AT they will use on the assessment. Ensure that students using AT have access to a practice test session that enables them (and their teachers) to see that the AT works as intended in the test environment. AT compatibility issues should be checked before test day. Tools and procedures should be developed to make it easy for LEAs to report any compatibility issues. Procedures also are needed that address how reported issues will be addressed.

More Solutions Require vendors to demonstrate their capabilities before signing a contract! Ensure that practice tests have the same embedded (and non-embedded) accessibility features and accommodations as the actual assessment. Check out the technology, not just the assessment items. Involve students in cognitive labs and usability studies. Include students with disabilities in infrastructure trials prior to testing.

Lessons Learned About Instruction and Assessment–Implications for TA providers Available at: https://nceo.umn.edu/docs/OnlinePubs/LessonsLearnedAboutInstruction.pdf https://nceo.umn.edu/docs/OnlinePubs/LessonsLearnedAboutAssessment.pdf

Working Across Agencies LEAs need help making accessibility decisions for all students, including students with disabilities, ELs and students who do not have an identified disability and are not EL. Special education’s vast experience in this area can be a resource when thinking about other populations Silos sometimes need to be broken down between special education, assessment, curriculum and instruction, Title III, etc.

Working with LEAs Decision making about which accessibility supports and accommodations are needed by an individual student remains a challenge Provide professional development and encourage practice by both students and adults.