1. Oregon’s Statewide Assessment Options for Students with Disabilities Updates Dianna Carrizales ODE COSA Fall Conference October 4 th and 5 th

2. Mr. Elephant

3. Alternate Assessment Peer Review  General Assessment System: Approved Content standards Achievement standards Full assessment system Technical quality Alignment Reporting  Extended Assessment System: No status assigned  Criteria to be re-addressed Achievement standards  Approved, re-established alternate academic achievement standards Technical quality  Technical report and standard setting process report  Reliability and validity documentation Alignment  Establish that grade-level content standards for 6 – 10 can be assessed in a single test  Alignment/links of Extended Assessment to alternate standards

4. Oregon’s Response Achievement standards  Alternate Achievement standards:  Set in May and June by Oregon teachers  Approved in August by state Board of Education Technical quality  Technical documentation  Administration, Participation, Standard Setting, Reliability and Validity  Test Specifications and Blueprints Alignment  Establish that grade-level content standards for 6 – 10 can be assessed in a single test  Vertically aligned content standards  Grade level achievement standards  Intent to divide into three levels instead of two  Alignment/links of Extended Assessment to alternate standards  Alignment studies and reviews

5. Standard Setting  Method: Bookmarking  Participants: 35 Oregon teachers administrators, specialists, and community representatives representing regions from around the state  Outcomes: Cutscores for all grades, all subjects all categories (Does not meet, Nearly Meets, Meets, Exceeds) Achievement level descriptors for each grade, each subject, and each category

6. Placing the Bookmarks in the Item Ordered Booklets Meets Nearly Meets Exceeds

7. Meaning of a Cutscore  Items at the bookmark indicate that students have mastery of all previous items (likely to know all the correct responses) and therefore meet the minimum requirements of category membership  Individuals within a category will display a range of scores

8. Extended Assessment Caveats for Bookmarking Decisions  Students must have some success on some of the content prompts to meet a grade level achievement standard  Each grade level will have an individual achievement standard  Scaffold and Standard Administrations will hold students to the same standard

9. Standard Setting Evaluation Feedback

10. Adopted Reading Standards

11. Adopted Mathematics Standards

12. Adopted Writing Standards

13. Adopted Science Standards

14. 2006-2007 Extended Assessment Participation by Disability  Elementary Mental Retardation (25.5%) Specific Learning Disabilities (20.75%) Autism Spectrum Disorders (16.5%) Communication Disorder (12.25%)  Middle High Mental Retardation (42%) Autism Spectrum Disorder (18%) Specific Learning Disabilities (12.25%) Other Health Impairments(9.5%)

15. 6 – 10 Justification: Vertical Alignment Alternate assessment items focused on the subset of content standards that are linked by a common cohesive construct across at least 3 grade levels Basis for the link was either:  standards were the same across the grades in the grade band, or  standards were linked to each other via a distinct developmental progression  The vertical alignment process ensured that students would be exposed to a minimum number of items outside of their grade level while simplifying the test design

16. 6 – 10 Justification: Standard Setting by grade Alternate achievement standards were set by Oregon teachers for each individual grade level for each assessment.  Setting standards by grade ensured that Oregon teachers could make achievement determinations for students at each grade using information contained in the Achievement Level Descriptors.

17. 6 – 10 Justification: Increasing Rigor by grade  Increases in scale- scores by grade is combined with decreases in the percentage of students passing the assessment in the higher grades.  This decrease suggests an increase in rigor of expectations of the assessments as grades increase.

18. 6 – 10 Future Plan: Split grade levels 07-08  ODE will continue with the original plan to develop separate middle and high school assessments in phase-two of development 2007- 2008  The 2007-2008 Extended Assessments will reflect three grade bands:  Elementary (grades 3 – 5)  Middle (grades 6 – 8)  High (grades 9 and above or CIM)

19. Current Assessment Options for Students with Disabilities  General assessment With accommodations Without accommodations  Extended assessment Standard administration Scaffold administration

20. Anticipated changes?  Oregon has decided to create an assessment for students “whose disability has prevented them from achieving grade-level proficiency and who will likely not reach grade-level achievement in the same time frame as other students” Alternate assessment 2 – 3 years of development Allowances for an additional 2% of district AYP The IEPs of students who are assessed on this assessment must: include IEP goals that are based on the academic content standards for the grade in which the student is enrolled and be designed to monitor the student’s progress in achieving the standards-based goals. http://www.schoolsmovingup.net/events/standards basedspecialed

21. Decision Making for 2007-2008  No changes

22. Consider General Assessment with or without accommodations if  Student: Performs at or around grade level Has academic difficulties that primarily surround reading but may be average or close to average in other subject areas Has academic difficulties in areas other than reading that are “mild to moderate” and can typically be addressed by using simplified language Is reading within two to three grades of his or her enrolled level  Instruction: Is primarily general curriculum instruction (but may also use a specialized curriculum in some areas)  Some Judgment variables: What assessment did he take last year? How is his attention? What types of behaviors should be considered?

23. Consider Extended Assessment if  Student: Performs well below grade level Is significantly below grade level in reading Has academic difficulties that are generalized (to all subject areas) and are significant Benefits from specialized individual supports  Instruction: Is primarily a specialized curriculum or From general curriculum must be significantly reduced in breadth, depth, and complexity  Some Judgment variables: What assessment did he take last year? How is his attention? What types of behaviors should be considered? Previous relevant experiences

24. Consider Scaffolded Administration of Extended Assessment if:  Student: Performance is significantly impacted by a disability Does not read Has academic, mobility, and receptive and expressive language difficulties that are generalized and significant Relies on individual and significant supports to access reduced content materials  Instruction: Is from a specialized curriculum and has functional components and/or Includes academic goals that are significantly reduced in depth, breadth, and complexity from grade level content  Some Judgment variables: Is the student able to interact with instructional material in a way that provides meaningful feedback?

25. District Level Decision Making  1% of students meeting on the Extended Assessment (whether scaffold or standard administration) can count toward district AYP performance counts  All students taking an Extended Assessment (as appropriately determined by an IEP team and meeting minimum participation requirements) can count toward district AYP participation counts

26. Accommodations Accommodations of Setting Response Presentation Timing/Scheduling  Examples Extended time Frequent breaks Change in test directions Change in font or size of text Assistive technology Test setting Manipulatives  When used? In the classroom vs. Testing only?

27. Changes: Assessment and Materials  Refinements Overall difficulty Wording of the “preamble language” in the Scaffold administration Reporting possibilities (i.e. links to score reporting categories or strands)  Changes There will now be three assessments covering 3 grade bands: Elementary (grades 3 – 5), Mid-Level (grades 6 – 8), and High School (grade 10) Location and number of the Prerequisite Skills items Scoring values of Content Prompt items (0,1, vs. 0, 1, 2) Number of content prompt items (field test items, anchor items)

28. Changes: Data Entry  Refinements Data entry, speed, ease of entry, general issues as reported throughout the year including capacity Clarity surrounding which level of the assessment is being accessed Clarity surrounding which administration of the assessment is being accessed  Changes Changes to retain consistency with changes to the assessment Reports

29. Changes: Training Train the trainer model 8 regional trainer trainings Between October and December Approximately 300 trainers Web training and proficiency Assessors can be trained as early as trainers are trained and ready Trainers will have more flexibility to determine the length of the trainings depending on the needs of the trainees District funding allocations similar to those provided in 2006-2007

30. Testing Window  Has been widened to fall between February 15th and April 25th.

31. For Information  Links to information: http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=178  Contact: Dianna Carrizales (503) 947-5634 Dianna.Carrizales@state.or.us