Practices in Support of the Transition to Next Generation Alternate - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Practices in Support of the Transition to Next Generation Alternate Assessments Based on Alternate Achievement Standards

Session Participants

Susan Weigert, Moderator Sharon Hall, edCount (NCSC), Presenter Meagan Karvonen, Center for Educational Testing and Evaluation (DLM), Presenter

Panelists: State Partners

• Gretchen Cagle, Mississippi Department of

Education GCagle@mde.k12.ms.us

• Melissa Gholson, West Virginia Department of

Education mgholson@k12.wv.us

• Toni Wheeler, Idaho State Department of

Education tcwheeler@sde.idaho.gov

• Leila Williams, Arizona Department of

Education Leila.Williams@azed.gov

U.S. Department of Education

Susan Weigert, Ph.D. Office of Special Education Programs General Supervision Enhancement Grants to Support State Assessments

History of AA-AAS

• First required in 2001
• Shift from functional to academics (aligned to

grade level)

• Alternate achievement standards
• Often portfolio, performance assessment, or

rater checklist approach

• May be based on grade-level or extended

academic content standards

• Some advances in AA-AAS quality, but still gaps

and limitations

Next Generation Alternate Assessments

• Equality of opportunity is a core American

value.

• Inclusion of all Students in Educational

Reforms is an Equity and Civil Rights Issue

• Education can and must provide a path to a

better life for all children.

Next Generation Alternate Assessments

• Young people must have equal opportunity to

learn and demonstrate their achievements

• States and districts can become models of

educational assurance

• Students with the most complex support

needs should have access to next generation alternate assessments

GSEG Consortia Membership

• DLM – 20 States (confirmations expected by

July 31)

• NCSC – 24 States (confirmations expected by

July 1)

• Several states not committed to either

alternate assessment

Next Generation Alternate Assessments

• Fit coherently with the Race to the Top Assessment

(RTTA) program;

• Full performance range of eligible students;
• Measure knowledge and skills against a common set
• f college and career-ready standards
• Elicit complex demonstrations of knowledge and

skills

• Provide a valid measure of student growth

Next Generation Alternate Assessments

• Validly, reliably, and accurately measure student

achievement

• Result in high-quality data for use in evaluating the

performance of schools, districts, and States.

• Produce data (including achievement and growth data) that

can be used to inform

– school effectiveness – principal and teacher effectiveness – determinations of principal and teacher professional development needs; – teaching, learning, and program improvement.

Other GSEG Program Requirements

• Develop a strategy to make student-level data

available on an ongoing basis for research;

• Help prepare States to implement the

alternate assessments in the 2014-2015 school year;

• Maximize the interoperability of assessments

across technology platforms

Teacher Reactions to Field Testing

DLM:

• "I have to say, I really wasn't expecting it”
• "She was able to feel successful and not

pressured”

• A classroom of 4th through 6th graders with SCD

were able to take the computerized test alongside their peers.

Teacher Reactions

NCSC:

• “A non-verbal freshman student came to

us with functional goals:

• Answered all of the questions with 80-100%

accuracy

• I have never been so happy to rewrite an IEP

in my life”.

Next Generation Alternate Assessments

• Accurate measurement is a responsibility
• Target Instruction appropriately
• Ensure technical adequacy
• Scaling and Equating
• Valid measure of growth

Next Generation Alternate Assessments

• Valid and reliable
• Support the measurement of growth
• Cost-effective, easy to administer
• Appropriate, accessible, and engaging for

students

• Technically sound

NCSA 2014

The National Center and State Collaborative Alternate Assessment System: Transforming Assessment and Instruction

Theory of Action

Long-term goal:

To ensure that students with the most significant cognitive disabilities achieve increasingly higher academic outcomes and leave high school ready for post-secondary options (college, career, community). A well-designed summative assessment alone is insufficient. To achieve this goal, an AA-AAS system also requires:

• Curricular & instructional frameworks
• Teacher resources and professional development

NCSC GSEG 6/29/2014 17

A Comprehensive System

1) Incorporating evidence-based instruction and curriculum models; 2) Developing comprehensive approaches to professional development delivered through state-level Communities of Practice; and 3) Producing technically defensible summative assessments.

Professional Development Framework

NCSC Summative Assessments

Technology-based System

Test administrator training, assessment administration, documentation, and reporting

Accessible Items and Form Mathematics and ELA (Reading and Writing)

• SR items, system scored
• CR/OE items, TA scored using rubric; entered into system as

correct/not correct

Writing

Student products centrally scored

Transformative Practices

• Online assessment system
• CCSS/CCC aligned mathematics, reading and

writing Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment

• Accessible items and forms
• Stakeholder involvement

– State partners involved in every component of assessment system development – state stakeholder involvement – parent information – Transition plan

The Dynamic Learning Maps Alternate Assessment S ystem: Transforming Assessment and Instruction

Meagan Karvonen

WHAT IS TRANSFORMATIVE FOR STUDENTS?

Large, Fine-Grained Learning Maps

Support student learning Multiple pathways toward targets

Assessments

Instructionally embedded Technology- based

Access to Content at Different Levels

Initial Precursor

Target Successors

Connect the map…

Behavior Testlet a

…to the items developed.

Distal Precursor Proximal Precursor

Behavior Behavior Behavior Behavior Testlet b Testlet c Testlet d Testlet e

Other Transformative Experiences for S tudents

• Expect independent responses
• Customized accessibility

WHAT IS TRANSFORMATIVE FOR TEACHERS?

Professional Development

• Integral to the system
• Multiple approaches

Instruction & Assessment

Integrated Choice and flexibility*

Dashboard: Educator Portal

Choice of content Information to support instruction Information about testlet administration Managing student records & accessibility info Managing PD

Other Transformative Experiences for Teachers

• On-demand reports show progress on

Essential Elements

• Decisions about accessibility
• Expect student independence

STATE PANEL DISCUSSION: NCSC AND DLM PARTNERS

• 1. What is transformative? (Leila)
• For Arizona there are 2 big shifts

– NCSC will be assessing writing – A big shift to focus more on instruction or academics vs functional skills

• 1. What is transformative?

(Melissa)

• Paper-based performance task

assessment versus online assessment

• Computer adaptive items
• Multiple item types
• Rigor of the Common Core S

tate S tandards

• Emphasis on academic content
• Higher expectations
• Opportunity to measure growth

• 1. What is transformative? (Toni)
• Teachers reported the presentation of the

items was appropriate: “I thought the way it was

presented was good. My students had no problems.” Southwest Idaho Extended Resource Room Teacher

• Teachers reported looking into current

instructional practices:“…this experience has

allowed me to reflect how I am currently teaching in the classroom and how I can improve and enhance the learning in the classroom to help students prepare for the future.” Idaho Extended Resource Room Teacher

• Teachers have used their experience in the

assessment to consider how they can use technology during instruction.

• 1. What is transformative?

(Gretchen)

• Moving from a portfolio based

assessment to computer based

• Essential Elements give stronger

correlation to general education standards

• Professional Development online
• Teacher attitudes!

• 2. What state level changes

are needed? (Melissa)

• ES

EA waiver language included the adoption

• f the standards in policy and provided a

professional development outline of activities for transitioning to the DLM

• Joint responsibility of OAA, Federal Programs

& OS P

• S

pecific professional development moving students towards using technology, recognizing how to teach to multiple item type assessments and more rigorous standards

• 2. What state level changes

are needed? (Toni)

• Shift from Extended Content Standards to the

same standards as general education: “Idaho Core is for all students”

• Leveraging resources from assessment,

content and special education divisions

• ESEA flexibility from double testing and

accountability allowed districts and schools to fully test their capacities and troubleshoot before assessments are operational

• 2. What state level changes

are needed? (Gretchen)

• Continued professional development

surrounding the standards and the assessment tool

• Face to face trainings to be offered
• Changes in the way teachers write

and implement IEPs

• Data file done at the state level

• 2. What state level changes

are needed? (Leila)

• ADE is working more collaboratively

between units (i.e. Accountability, Special Education, Highly Effective Teachers, etc)

– PD – IEP decisions – Teacher evaluations – Growth Model

• 3. Transformations at the District Level

(Toni)

• Professional development typically comes

from the state

• Current shift is to regional instructional

coaches for ELA, Math and special education

• Regional coaches work with districts, schools

and teams for ongoing facilitation of improvement to instructional practices

• Local districts banding together for

instructional, curricular and material development

• 3. Transformations at the District

Level (Gretchen)

• Teachers will not be expected to

create the assessments

• Professional learning communities

started j ust for teachers of students with a S CD

• Greater emphasis on test security

issues

• 3. Transformations at the District Level

(Leila)

• Helping teachers see that many times they

are already teaching academics but now we have to make tighter connections between grade level academic content

• Writing as a permanent product (many

districts have to move beyond “copying words” to students generating their own thoughts

• Including teachers in all content professional

development training and collaboration efforts

• 3. Transformations at the District

Level (Melissa)

• Regional professional development , webinars and

mont hly updat es across st akeholder groups

• Mapping out t he changes of our current syst em t o t he

Dynamic Learning Maps

• Responding t o t he need for uniform resources and

classroom models for t eachers aligned t o t he CCEE.

• S

upport ing t he creat ion of model inst ruct ional unit s across programmat ic levels aligned t o t he CCEE’s

• Unit based diagnost ic assessment t o assess where t o

begin inst ruct ion, aligned t o t he CCEE and how t o support progress monit oring using t he st andards and providing inst ruct ional scaffolding.

• 4. Preparing Teachers for the S

hift (Gretchen)

• Monthly webinars to review online

professional development and provide updates and reminders

• Online professional development as

well as face to face

• Focus on instruction using the

Essential Elements

• Communication, communication,

communication

• 4. Preparing Teachers for the Shift (Leila)
• Showing examples of other teachers

utilizing materials

• Showing actual students using materials
• r success stories
• Rolling out NCSC materials in sections or

pieces

• Utilizing and expanding CoPs

• 4. Preparing Teachers for the S

hift (Melissa)

• Alternate Assessment Practice Test

Proj ect

• Professional development around

research strategies, unit based instruction around the academic standards

• Multiple items types and transitioning

students to technology

• Focus on instruction 2012-2014
• Focus on connecting instruction to

assessment

• 4. Preparing Teachers for the Shift (Toni)
• Grounding in Idaho Core
• 1-day regional workshops with follow-up

webinars throughout the year

• Embed NCSC instructional and curricular

materials into the work of regional content coaches with special education regional instructional coaches to support work

• Early and frequent communication to the

field

• 5. Lessons Learned from 2013-14 (Toni)
• Provide the item data which shows our kids

can be held to high academic standards

• Use feedback from pilot to plan professional

development around communicative competence

• Use the data from Idaho’s Learner

Characteristics Inventory to paint the picture

• f students who take alternate assessments

in Idaho

– Currently collaborating with University of Idaho

• 5. Lessons Learned from 2013-14 (Leila)
• Take teachers where they are
• Make connections for them (i.e. you are

already teaching some academics, you already administer the alternate online)

• Training (for NCSC Pilot) need to have time

set aside. Test administrators really struggled with finding time outside of school day to complete training

• Posing opportunities rather than make

requirements

• 5. Lessons Learned from 2013-14

(Melissa)

• Conducted focus groups from pilot and field tests to identify

areas of success and challenge

• S

uccess in the area of collaboration of school district, regional and state agencies to support the transition

• S

uccess in meeting the minimum platform requirements

• Challenge moving from our current assessment which allows

prompting support across items.

• Challenge in supporting teachers to understand how to teach

students at individual levels in ways that simulate multiple item type assessment aligned to the new standards

• Challenge in readiness, time spent assessing for the year end

summative versus embedded assessment

• Challenges continue for professional development needs in

the areas of technology, assistive technology and models for standards based instruction for students with significant intellectual disabilities

• 5. Lessons Learned from 2013-14

(Gretchen)

Mississippi Depart ment of Educat ion Perspect ive

AUDIENCE Q&A

Thank You!

For more information: National Center and State Collaborative: http://ncscpartners.org/ Dynamic Learning Maps: http://dynamiclearningmaps.org/