1. Slide 1 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) States’ Data-Based Responses to Low Achieving Students on State Assessments Martha L. Thurlow National Center on Educational Outcomes OSEP Project Directors Conference July-August, 2006

2. Slide 2 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) Percent of Students who earned a Competency Determination - Class of 2003 47 %pts 38 %pts 32 %pts 25 %pts 17 %pts 12 %pts

3. Slide 3 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) Percent of Special Education Students Attaining the Competency Determination (through the May 2004 MCAS)

4. Slide 4 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) Student Performance on Alternate Assessments is Improving 20012002200320042005 12% 34% 61% Portfolios that scored “Progressing” MCAS-Alternate Assessment 76% 68%

5. Slide 5 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) States Ask Questions Examples of Actual State Questions  Are special education students the state’s low performing students?  Are most low performing students in special education?  What do we know about the characteristics of students “in the gap”? What are the implications of all of these – for assessments and instruction?

6. Slide 6 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) From Marion, Gong, and Simpson, 2005

7. Slide 7 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)  Are special education students the state’s low performing students? No – special education students are represented at all scale scores in the distribution  Are most low performing students in special education? No – many general education students are found in the lowest scoring three percent of students

8. Slide 8 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) State Study of Low Performing Students Some students known as “Students in the Gap” are not served well by Colorado’s current assessment system in that they score poorly and fail to demonstrate longitudinal growth, and thus these tests may not be the best way to measure their knowledge of state content standards. The passage of HB 05-1246 created a committee to examine and evaluate the impact of the assessments on these “Students in the Gap.” The outcomes of the study were revealing –

9. Slide 9 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)  1637 IEP students scored in the lowest 1/3 of Unsatisfactory in Reading and 4332 in Math.  117 IEP students earned perfect scores on CSAPA in Reading/Writing and 16 in Math. Low Performance Not Low Performance

10. Slide 10 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)  250 students (of 444,407) across grade levels were determined to be “students in the gap” on the CSAP Reading Test.  659 students (of 444,910) across grade levels were determined to be “students in the gap” on the CSAP Math Test. This group represents fewer than 1000 students; the group believed that CSAP as currently administered may not reflect these students’ academic achievements; however, if appropriate accommodations and more intensive instruction were provided, these students too might make more gains.

11. Slide 11 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) Other Findings: Bottom 1/3 of scale scores on CSAP is almost twice as likely to be Black or Hispanic students as students scoring higher. For IEP students scoring in bottom one-third of scale scores, and where a match the following year was able to be made (only 60%), substantial longitudinal growth occurred from one year to the next.

12. Slide 12 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) Evidence-Based Practices Donahue Institute Study (University of Massachusetts) Study identified urban districts and schools that demonstrated better than expected MCAS achievement among students with special needs

13. Slide 13 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) Donahue Institute Study Practices identified as central to the success of urban districts and schools for special education students 1.Pervasive emphasis on curriculum alignment with the MA frameworks 2.Effective systems to support curriculum alignment 3.Emphasis on inclusion and access to the curriculum

14. Slide 14 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) Donahue Institute Study Practices central to the success of urban districts and schools 4.Culture and practices that support high standards and student achievement 5.Well disciplined academic and social environment 6.Use of student assessment data to inform decision making

15. Slide 15 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) Donahue Institute Study Practices central to the success of urban districts and schools 7.Unified practice supported by targeted professional development 8.Access to resources to support key initiatives 9.Effective staff recruitment, retention, and deployment

16. Slide 16 National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) Donohue Institute Study Practices central to the success of urban districts and schools 10.Flexible leaders and staff that work effectively in a dynamic environment 11.Effective leadership is essential to success