1. Building a Better Alternate Assessment
Assessment Conference
Minneapolis, MN
August 5, 2015
Garrett Petrie, Donna Tabat-Charlesworth
“Leading for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one.”

2. Teaching John Steinbeck’s The Pearl
Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities (SWSCD) Are Capable of So Much More Than We Knew…
Teaching John Steinbeck’s The Pearl
This 1 minute video clip is part of the work done by National Center and State Collaborative (NCSC) to show how students with SCD can be taught to engage in a challenging story, which has been modified in complexity.
education.state.mn.us

3. Activity: Bridging Instruction & Assessment
Agenda
Key advancements in assessing students with significant cognitive disabilities (SWSCD)
Working together to improve student outcomes
Using performance data to evaluate expectations
Increasing accessibility for all
Activity: Bridging Instruction & Assessment
Soliciting your feedback: what works best?
education.state.mn.us

4. The MTAS: Where do we go from here?
This is the assessment we have has for 9 years. In the beginning, many people questioned whether a standards-based assessment was reasonable or even possible for SWSCD. There was a concern that this academic assessment would detract from the teaching of functional skills.
Is your perspective on the role of standards for SWSCD any different today? If so, how?
The MTAS has some strengths, but we also know that it is far from perfect. There are 2 alternate assessment consortia (DLM and NCSC) that have been using what we’ve learned to build assessments that produce better outcomes for students. We are going to take a close look at some of those findings, and we’re hoping you’ll provide some feedback about applying these changes to our assessment.
education.state.mn.us

5. A Shared Goal
Improved self-help, literacy and numeracy skills for students with significant cognitive disabilities (SWSCD), that will lead to improved post-secondary options
This is a goal that is most likely shared by all who work to support students with disabilities. We want students to continue to make progress in self-help and academic skills so that they can become more independent, successful, and happier in life once they leave school.
education.state.mn.us

6. A Model for Coordinating Curriculum, Instruction & Assessment
Grade level lessons
Standards-based IEPs
Curriculum
Linked to MN Academic Standards
Assessment
Formative
summative
If we hope to be successful in designing an alternate assessment that measures important, standards-based skills in meaningful ways for all students, people with expertise in curriculum, instruction and assessment will need to work together.
education.state.mn.us

7. Linking Standards & Instruction
Developing Standards-based IEP Goals & Objectives
Discussion guide can help develop IEPs that increase access for our students
Here is a professional development opportunity to help align instruction with the standards.
education.state.mn.us

8. Link SB-IEPs to Standards-based Instruction
Enroll now!
bit.ly/SB-IEPenroll
(case-sensitive)
education.state.mn.us

9. State 4 (NCSC Research)
Performance data in several states suggested that expectations for students with SWSCD might need to be reevaluated. The performance gap among students with disabilities taking the general assessment and the alternate assessment suggests that the AA might not be challenging enough. This is an example of one of NCSC’s states. You see a very significant gap between proficiency results on the Alternate Assessment and proficiency results from students with disabilities taking the general education assessment.
NCSC: “If the expectations were about the same, the percentages of proficient students in the two assessments would be about the same. In contrast, much higher percentages of students in the AA-AAS are deemed proficient and advanced than are students with disabilities in the general assessment.”
Quenemoen, R. F. & Thurlow, M. L. (2015, June). AA-AAS: Defining high expectations for students with significant cognitive disabilities (NCSC Brief #2). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center and State Collaborative.
Something to think about: Should we do more to challenge our top performing students who take the Alternate Assessment?
education.state.mn.us

10. MTAS-III & MCA-III
Here is some comparable data from Minnesota. This chart shows a comparison of MTAS-III and MCA-III data. When we looked at our “proficient” ALDs, the skills do seem to be challenging, but ensuring high expectations for SWSCD is something we need to continue to reevaluate.
In this graph, we are comparing the math performance (all grades) of students with disabilities who took the MCA-III and the MTAS-III. In 2015, there was a 37.3% performance gap for math, a 42 % gap for reading and a 54% gap for science.
education.state.mn.us

11. Increasing Assess
Not all students are able to show what they know on the MTAS. Possible reasons:
They don’t have a way to communicate what they know.
If a student hasn’t learned a particular skill, the assessment should reflect this.
We want to distinguish these students from those who can’t show what they know. If students lack expressive communication skills, we can’t be certain of what they do know.
The consortia are working hard to bring the right AAC devices to students who need them.
When developing the next generation of alternate assessments, we also need to pay attention to the levels of complexity of the items. Students need both: 1) the right tools and strategies to interact with the concepts, and 2) the appropriate level of complexity, so they can develop an understanding of the concept.
Assessment specialists AAC that will help students develop needed communication skills. have the technology and training needed to PD and resources they need to help students develop
education.state.mn.us

12. Communication Level and AAC Use Symbolic
79 % of SWSCD use language symbolically. (Student uses verbal or written words, signs, Braille, or language-based augmentative systems to request, initiate, and respond to questions, describe things or events, and express refusal.) Of these students, 7% use some type of Augmentative and Alternative Communication. (93% do not.)
education.state.mn.us

13. Communication Level & AAC Use Emerging Symbolic
13.7% of the population of SWSCD uses intentional, or Emerging Symbolic communication. (Student uses understandable communication through such modes as gestures, pictures, objects/textures, points, etc., to clearly express a variety of intentions). Within this group, 56% uses some type of AAC. (44% do not use AAC).
We need to find ways to help students in the latter group develop a means of showing what they know.
education.state.mn.us

14. Communication Level & AAC Use Pre-Symbolic
2.6% of the population of SWSCD uses pre-symbolic communication (Student communicates primarily through cries, facial expressions, change in muscle tone, etc., but no clear use of objects/textures, regularized gestures, pictures, signs, etc., to communicate.) Within this group, 62% use some type of AAC. (38% do not use AAC).
We need to find ways to help students in the latter group develop a means of showing what they know.
education.state.mn.us

15. Increasing Assess
Not all students are able to show what they know on the MTAS. Possible reasons:
They know something about the skill, but not at the level of complexity assessed
Similarly, if students are not able to respond at the tested level of complexity, we can’t be sure of what they know.
The consortia have developed different models of items at varying levels of complexity. The Dynamic Learning Maps (DLM) items have 5 levels of complexity, and NCSC items have 4 levels of complexity. In Minnesota, we have discussed the possibility of developing items with 3 complexity levels.
It is uncertain what the test blueprint would look like, but students would take different items depending on their needs and prior performance. This design could give us much more accurate information and would allow us to provide more meaningful results for students who are at varying stages of symbolic language use.
Students would not take an item multiple times with additional scaffolding they way they do now.
education.state.mn.us

16. Design 1: Science
Level
Identify and describe how states of matter change as a result of heating and cooling. 3
What can change water from liquid to solid? (cold*, heat, wind) 2
What happens to water when it is left in the freezer? (becomes liquid, becomes food, becomes solid*) 1
Which bowl has something liquid in it? (straw, block, water*)
Here is a sample item at varying levels of complexity.
education.state.mn.us

17. Design 2 (Math) Level 3
This fraction circle is divided into 8 equal parts. What part of the fraction circle is shaded? 1/2 1/4 1/8
Here is another example. This is the highest level of complexity.
education.state.mn.us

18. Level 2
This fraction is bar divided into 4 equal parts. 1/4 One part is shaded. The fraction bar shows ¼. [Now that students have seen a similar problem solved, the original problem is represented.]
This is a mid-level of complexity for the same item family.
education.state.mn.us

19. Level 1 The rectangle is divided into 2 equal parts.
1 of 2 parts is shaded. …
Which circle shows 1 of 3 parts shaded?
This is the lowest level of complexity for the item family.
education.state.mn.us

20. Activity: Bridging Instruction and Assessment
Select a reading or math concept
Discuss students’ instructional needs as they develop competence with this concept.
Write tasks at 3 levels of complexity.
Record any important factors for teaching this concept.
Benchmarks for reading and math at various grades have been posted around the room. Work together to discuss ways to instruct and assess benchmark concepts. See if you can develop items at three levels of complexity for a benchmark.
education.state.mn.us

21. Ways to Create Feedback Loops
Ongoing Feedback Through?
Wiki?
list?
One-page surveys?
Online modules?
Face-to-face?
Web conferencing?
Social media?
Write your selections (as many as you want)
on your paper for us to tally
education.state.mn.us

22. Thanks for coming! Donna Tabat donna.tabat@state.mn.us Garrett Petrie
“Leading for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one.”