Improving the Accessibility of Locally Developed Assessments CCSSO National Conference on Student Assessment 2016 Phyllis Lynch, PhD Director, Instruction, Assessment and Curriculum Rhode Island Department of Education

Basic Education Program Regulations Comprehensive Assessment Systems must include measures of student performance for the purposes of formative, interim, and summative evaluations of all students Adhere, to the extent possible, to the principles of the National Council on Measurement in Education Be free from bias and include universal design features that are embedded in the assessments. Be appropriate for the student population and address the assessment needs of all students, including students with disabilities, culturally and linguistically diverse students, and students in early childhood programs.

Role of assessment in Teaching and Learning Assessment is one of three parts of an educational system which alone cannot improve student learning. Curriculum, instruction, and assessment must be carefully aligned and work together to maximize student learning. Instructionally supportive assessments are aligned to learning targets which represent a collection of standards, both academic and 21st Century skills that are associated with a unit plan Assessments that are authentic, allow for a range of student abilities, and provide information that leads to instructional planning.

Review of State and LEA Assessment Policies and Practices Review process used a two pronged research approach to examine both policies and practice at the state and local levels. Current practices were documented and examined in partnership with four districts. Analysis of their assessment system guided technical assistance based on identified gaps, redundancies or strengths that emerged during the process. NCEO and a NCIEA staff members conducted the semi-structured group interviews with RI DOE and district and school staff

Assessment Review Findings Data from different assessments were used for different purposes by teachers, building administrators, and central office staff. For some assessments, the amount of administration time was disproportionate to the information received in return. Some current assessments were not aligned with instruction. Some districts were involved in several distinct assessment initiatives, and districts wished that there was a way to integrate activities across the initiatives to reduce the testing burden.

Assessment Review Findings Districts did not have testing policies that ensured some students populations of were not over tested. Educators found it challenging to develop or implement commercial assessments that were fair to all student populations and still measure the intended construct. Finally, educators acknowledged that they and their colleagues needed to develop new knowledge and skills to successfully implement such a system.

Accessibility and Fairness in Local Assessment Districts did not have testing policies that ensured some students populations of were not over tested. Educators found it challenging to develop or implement commercial assessments that were fair to all student populations and still measure the intended construct. Today I would like to talk further about two of our findings. Specifically, Districts did not have testing policies that ensured some students populations of were not over tested. We found that often students with disabilities and English Learners were formally and informally assessed more often that other students. While this is a bit expected students were often participating in assessments with little useful information gained to support instruction. Educators found it challenging to develop or implement commercial assessments that were fair to all student populations and still measure the intended construct. Specifically, teachers were not confident in what accommodations they could provide and when based on the purpose of the assessment. How to build or implement assessments for all students that were accessible with out changing the construct being measured and still get meaningful information. Educators had different scoring rules for different students.

Accessibility and Fairness in Local Assessment Fairness entails a lack of bias, the accessibility of the assessment, and the equity with which the assessment is administered. National Research Council. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Implementing Accessible and Fair in Local Assessment Systems Develop guidance to districts to develop differentiated assessment plans for students that recognize differing assessment needs and purposes. Provide guidance and technical assistance on building accessible assessments and implementing the principals of universal design in assessment development Share protocols on scoring calibration Too often assessment is seen as something where “one size fits all.” There is a need for differentiated plans to reflect the diversity of students’ learning and therefore assessment needs. Not all students should take all assessments. For example, every student does not need to participate in universal screening past a certain grade level (probably grade 3). Schools need to be smart about administering tests, not just have fixed rules. For example, some schools currently administer screening assessments three times a year for RTI purposes to all students. Students who score above a set threshold in the fall screening may not need to be included for winter or spring screening. Another example: Once students move past grade 3 or 4, they can be screened into the RTI screening process using state-level test results from the preceding spring.

Implementing Accessible and Fair in Local Assessment Systems Provide technical assistance to educators on determining appropriate accommodations based on purpose and construct. When is it appropriate to read a student a reading test? When is it not? Can items be changed for some students and if so how? Assessment Toolkit Online Module and Guidance Documents Guidance on Developing & Selecting Quality Assessments Using Baseline Data: Guidance & Worksheet Assessment Review Tool & Companion Document Protocols for Analyzing and Scoring Student Work Too often assessment is seen as something where “one size fits all.” There is a need for differentiated plans to reflect the diversity of students’ learning and therefore assessment needs. Not all students should take all assessments. For example, every student does not need to participate in universal screening past a certain grade level (probably grade 3). Schools need to be smart about administering tests, not just have fixed rules. For example, some schools currently administer screening assessments three times a year for RTI purposes to all students. Students who score above a set threshold in the fall screening may not need to be included for winter or spring screening. Another example: Once students move past grade 3 or 4, they can be screened into the RTI screening process using state-level test results from the preceding spring.