1. Options for Participation and Related IEP Decisions http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/toolkit/index.asp

2. Options for Participation in Current Federal Regulations: Option of the General Assessment

3. Option of Alternate Assessments: Type 1- Grade Level Achievement

4. Option of Alternate Assessments: Type 2- Modified Achievement See the U.S. Department of Education’s interim policy on modified achievement standards at http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/raising/disab-options.html (retrieved October 20, 2005).http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/raising/disab-options.html

5. Option of Alternate Assessment: Type 3- Alternate Achievement

6. Options Summary * Some states make this option available to other students.

7. The Decision Framework IEP teams must determine how students with disabilities participate in statewide assessments for accountability, not whether they participate.

8. Premise: All students with or without disabilities, should participate in the general assessment without accommodations unless the IEP team determines otherwise.

9. Implications for IEP Teams In Choosing Assessment Option What is not relevant What is relevant

10. What is Not Relevant for the IEP Team’s Decision “Exemption” All students participate Separate, Specialized Curriculum All options are aligned with general curriculum/ grade level content standards Placement Disability Label Boosting Schools Outcomes on AYP

11. What is Relevant Prerequisite Considerations Has the student had access to grade level content? Has the student had evidence-based instruction? Was instruction by highly qualified teacher? IF answer to above is “NO”, continue to apply grade level achievement standards and evaluate response to intervention

12. What is Relevant Student’s Educational Needs How does the student access the general curriculum? What has been the student’s response to academic interventions? How does this student interact with text? Do the supports the student requires change the complexity of grade level material? What inferences can be made about generalization?

13. When an option for test participation is selected what will it mean?

14. What Inferences can Be Made When the team chooses grade level achievement standards Inferences from test results can be made to the breadth, depth, and complexity of the standards in the test specification for the general assessment with the general assessment, general assessment with accommodations, or alternate assessment-grade level achievement

15. What Inferences can Be Made When the team chooses modified achievement standards Inferences from test results can be made to grade level expectations with specified level of breadth, depth, and complexity Alternate assessment judged against modified achievement standards

16. What Inferences can Be Made When the team chooses alternate achievement standards Inferences from test results can be made to grade level content that is extensively prioritized but maintains expectation for progress in general curriculum And assumes student performance is contingent on having the supports specified for the assessment Alternate assessment judged against alternate achievement standards

17. Who might take the Alternate Assessment Judged Against Modified Achievement Standards? No final regulations had been established at the time this paper was released.

18. What are Modified Achievement Standards? Designed to enable inferences about grade level content expectations somewhat reduced in breadth, depth, or complexity Inferences are constrained

19. Who are the 2% students? Students with IEPs who are very, very, very hard to teach

20. Who are the 2% students? Students who can learn grade level content, but in the time available Cannot cover as much content Cannot cover the content in as much depth Cannot learn the content to the same degree of cognitive complexity

21. Grade Level Content Content Standards and Achievement Standards specified for the general assessment.

22. Content reduced in breadth Content Standards and Achievement Standards specified for grade level content with reduced breadth.

23. Content reduced in depth Content Standards and Achievement Standards specified for grade level content with reduced depth.

24. Content reduced in cognitive complexity Content Standards and Achievement Standards specified for grade level content with reduced cognitive complexity.

25. Who are the 2% students? Have persistent academic difficulties Despite intensive, appropriate, relentless, evidence-based interventions Over sufficient length of time Cannot close the achievement gap

26. The time there is to learn it! All there is to learn Most Students Start lower; Work harder and longer; Achieve the same amount? Students with Disabilities Need to learn more, faster to end at same place

27. The time there is to learn it! Start lower; Work hard to maintain pace; Achieve less. All there is to learn Most Students Students with persistent academic difficulties Learn slower and less, and can’t catch up despite…

28. Decision Framework applied to 2% 1. In what way does the student access the general curriculum? S’ can learn a ‘streamlined” version of the content 2. What has been the student’s response to academic interventions S’ has persistent academic problems despite appropriate, intensive interventions

29. Decision Framework 3. How does the student interact with text? Controlled vocabulary reduced reading levels May need text reader 4. Do the supports needed by this student to perform or participate meaningfully change the complexity or cognitive demand of the material? Needs supports that reduce complexity, breadth, depth of the content Teacher scaffolding & Fewer choices

30. Decision Framework 5. What inferences can be made about student’s generalization/transfer of learning Inferences constrained Transfer of learning more limited May transfer only to similar or familiar contexts

31. Who are the 2% students? Simply stated, they are students for whom: The alternate assessment judged against alternate achievement standards is too easy The general assessment judged against grade level achievement standards is too hard