Resources
Search Filters
Search Results
NCEO Synthesis Reports: Alternate Assessments Based on Alternate Achievement Standards (AA-AAS) Participation Policies (#88)A report focusing on participation policies for alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS). Since 1992, NCEO has analyzed participation and accommodation policies for students with disabilities on state administered assessments, and has developed reports on policies for regular assessments, AA-AAS, and alternate assessments based on modified achievement standards (AA-MAS). Publicly available participation guidelines were compiled and analyzed for 58 states and entities (Washington DC, Guam, etc.). In addition to providing a national picture of policies, it presents the results of the policy analysis by each of the four content assessment consortia that have been funded to develop new assessment systems: two that are developing regular assessment systems (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers - PARCC, and Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium - SBAC), and two that are developing systems for alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (Dynamic Learning Maps - DLM, and National Center and State Collaborative - NCSC).
Published: December 2012
Forum on Evaluating Educator Effectiveness: Critical Considerations for Including Students with DisabilitiesFormats: PDFA report summarizing the discussion at the Forum on Evaluating Educator Effectiveness held in June 2012 in Minneapolis. Thirty-six individuals representing a dozen states, four testing companies, and six other organizations participated in the forum, which was a pre-session to the Council of Chief State School Officers National Conference on Student Assessment, and was a collaboration of the Assessing Special Education Students State Collaborative on Assessment and State Standards and the National Center on Educational Outcomes. Its purpose was to address the challenging issues that exist in including students with disabilities and their teachers in educator evaluation systems, and to provide state representatives and other interested parties with an opportunity to meet and share their perspectives on this topic, particularly in light of the changing nature of accountability systems across the United States. This report summarizes the introductory material provided to participants, and presents a summary of the discussions in three facilitated topic discussion sessions focusing on including assessment results of students with disabilities, using IEP goals or student learning objectives, and developing a balanced model for educator effectiveness evaluations.
Published: 2012
NCEO Technical Reports: A Summary of the Research on the Effects of Test Accommodations: 2009-2010 (#65)A report providing an update on the state of the research on testing accommodations as well as identifying promising future areas of research. Previous reports by NCEO have covered research published since 1999. The authors summarize the research to review current research trends and enhance understanding of the implications of accommodations use in the development of future policy directions, implementation of current and new accommodations, and valid and reliable interpretations when accommodations are used in testing situations. In 2009 and 2010, 48 published research studies on the topic of testing accommodations were found. The studies in 2009-2010 demonstrated several similarities when viewing them in comparison with previous research, especially in relation to the 2007-2008 studies examined in the previous accommodations research review. However, there were several differences, or shifts, as well.
Published: November 2012
NCEO Technical Reports: Test Administrators' Perspectives on the Use of the Read Aloud Accommodation in Math on State Tests for Accountability (#66)A report describing a study conducted by NCEO, in collaboration with the South Dakota Department of Education, that used focus group methodology to look closer at what happens in the room on test day when the read-aloud accommodation is used on mathematics assessments. Focus groups were conducted with educators who had administered the read-aloud accommodation for the South Dakota state mathematics assessment. Focus group discussions revealed a variety of issues on the read-aloud accommodation. Results from this study may inform local and state level policies on read-aloud administration.
Published: October 2012
NCEO Technical Reports: Using Cognitive Labs to Evaluate Student Experiences with the Read-Aloud Accommodation in Math (#67)A report describing a study of the read-aloud accommodation, which is frequently used on mathematics assessments. However, Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams often find it difficult to make appropriate decisions about this accommodation. NCEO and the South Dakota Department of Education examined how students performed on a math test with the read-aloud accommodation compared to how they performed without it. The study also explored students' perceptions of how the accommodation worked. Results from the study, found in this report, can help inform local and state level policies and procedures.
Published: September 2012
The Focused Approach Planning Guide: Tools to Improve Student AccessA report describing an activity conducted by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction to refine and pilot a set of planning tools that can be used to improve access of all students, including low-performing students with disabilities, to grade-level content. Wisconsin conducted this work as part of the Multi-state GSEG Consortium Toward a Defensible AA-MAS. The intent of this publication is to provide information about such tools so that other educators and planning teams can use them to develop plans that will lead to better access to academic content for all learners.
Published: September 2012
NCEO Brief: Including Students with Disabilities in Common Non-Summative Assessments (#6)A brief -- the sixth in a series for the Race to the Top Assessment Consortia -- addressing the Consortia's need to develop an inclusive approach to their non-summative assessments, including their optional interim assessments. Consideration should be given to: (a) the implementation of universal design principles; (b) the development of clear participation criteria and guidelines; and (c) accommodation policies that account for good testing practices, embedded features of technology-based assessments, and additional accommodations. This brief encourages the Consortia to build on what has been learned from inclusive large-scale assessments.
Published: July 2012
NCEO Technical Reports: Rules for Audio Representation of Science Items on a Statewide Assessment: Results of a Comparative Study (#64)A report describing a study that investigated an online auditory feature of an assessment designed to provide students who have challenges with print reading with content information. Large-scale educational assessment practice has moved consistently from a paper-and-pencil exercise to online assessments over the past decade. New formats for testing allow for new opportunities to provide students with disabilities access to items so that they may most validly demonstrate their knowledge. In an effort to evaluate the impact of how content is presented in auditory fashion, project personnel at NimbleTools® and the National Center on Educational Outcomes examined three approaches to "scripting" or creating audio representations of items. The results are presented in this report.
Published: June 2012
PARA Accessible Reading Assessment Reports: Developing and Researching an Accessible Reading Assessment for Students with DisabilitiesFormats: PDFA report documenting the Partnership for Accessible Reading Assessment's (PARA) field test to determine the degree to which its accessible reading assessment provided for accessibility, validity, and comparability for students with learning disabilities (LD), speech-language impairments (SLI), intellectual disabilities (ID), and deafness/hard of hearing (D/HH). The PARA field test of its accessible assessment compared to a proxy state assessment was conducted in the spring and fall of 2010 and included over 3,700 students (over 1,500 special education students and over 2,100 non-special education students). The field test included special education students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) who were categorized as having LD, SLI, ID, or D/HH.
Four primary research questions are addressed in the report:
- Is the PARA accessible reading assessment more accessible than a proxy state reading assessment for students with LD, and for students with disabilities combined (LD, SLI, ID, and D/HH)?
- Are scores from the PARA accessible reading assessment more reliable than scores from the proxy state assessment for students with LD, and for students with disabilities combined (LD, SLI, ID, and D/HH)
- Is there evidence of the validity of scores from the accessible reading assessment?
- Does the PARA accessible reading assessment demonstrate the same characteristics (student performance, reliability, validity) for students in grades 4 and 8?
Published: May 2012
NCEO Technical Reports: An Evaluation of the Extent to Which Teachers Used the "IEP Quality Tutorial-South Dakota" After Training (#63)A report discussing the use of the "IEP Quality Tutorial-South Dakota (IEPQ-SD)." During the 2010-2011 school year, the state of South Dakota piloted an online program called the "IEP Quality Tutorial-South Dakota (IEPQ-SD)". IEPQ-SD was designed to support the implementation of standards-based IEPs in schools throughout the state. Forty-nine educators in South Dakota participated in training on the IEPQ-SD tool, and they were then given access to the tool so that they could use it in their work with IEPs. This report presents the results of an evaluation of the extent to which teachers used IEPQ-SD after training, and their reactions to it. Interviews were conducted with five of the training participants approximately six months after the training session to learn about educator perceptions of the training, how their work with IEPs has been affected by the training, and how student experiences have been affected by the training. They were also asked what the educators liked about the training and what could be improved for future trainings, and if and how participants thought the IEPQ-SD tool should be rolled out to other educators in South Dakota.
Published: April 2012
NCEO Technical Reports: Diploma Options, Graduation Requirements, and Exit Exams for Youth with Disabilities: 2011 National Study (#62)A report documenting results from the fifth in a series of similar studies on state graduation policies and diploma options conducted by the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO). The present study was undertaken to update the status of graduation policies across the nation. It follows up on previous work, the last study having been conducted in 2006-2007. Three research questions served as the focus of this national study of high school graduation requirements and diploma options for students with and without disabilities: (1) What is the range and variation in state graduation requirements and diploma options across the United States for students with and without disabilities? (2) What are the intended and unintended consequences that result for students when they are required to pass exit exams to receive a high school diploma? And (3) What are the intended and unintended consequences of using single or multiple diploma options for students with disabilities? Results indicated some changes in graduation requirements and diploma options from the previous survey. Trends found include: (a) state and local graduation policies and assessment practices continue to be modified and revised on a regular basis, (b) graduation requirements are increasing in rigor across states, (c) states are continuing to experiment by making available a range of diploma options for students with and without disabilities, and (d) the participation of students with disabilities in high stakes exit exams is increasing and states are granting additional testing allowances and broader use of accommodations.
Published: April 2012
NCEO Technical Reports: Characteristics of Low Performing Special Education and Non-Special Education Students on Large-Scale Assessments (#60)A report investigating whether the characteristics of the lowest performing students in special education differ from the characteristics of the lowest performing students who are not in special education. The investigation in this report used data from low performing students in four states: Alabama, Hawaii, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. Achievement data were disaggregated by three demographic characteristics (gender, race/ethnicity, and income status) for students taking the reading or mathematics assessments in fifth or eighth grade. In addition, researchers tracked data for each student over three years to identify how students moved in and out of the low performing category (low performing was defined as the tenth percentile and below for this report) across time.
Published: March 2012
NCEO APR Snapshot Briefs: 2008-2009 APR Snapshot #1: State Assessment Participation and Performance of Special Education Students (#1)Formats: OnlineThis year 2012 report summarizes the participation and performance of eighth grade students with disabilities, in reading and math assessments used for federal accountability in the 2008-2009 school year.
Published: January 2012
A Guide to Educational Acronyms: What's in the Alphabet Soup?Formats: PDFA resource guide providing a glossary of the "alphabet soup" of educational acronyms. NCEO developed this "acronym handbook" as a resource to define, clarify, or remind anyone involved legislative and policy discussions of definitions of routine educational acronyms. This pocket guide will be a useful tool for participants, whether they are state legislators, teachers, parents, or others.
Published: 2012
IVARED WebsiteFormats: OnlineA website presenting the Improving the Validity of Assessment Results for English Language Learners with Disabilities (IVARED) project, which aims to answer three questions:
-
Who are English language learners with disabilities?
-
How do they learn best?
-
How can teachers most effectively support their learning?
Published: 2012-
- Moving Your Numbers WebsiteFormats: Online
A website presenting Moving Your Numbers, which provides examples of real districts -- from small rural communities to large urban centers -- that are positively affecting the performance of all children, including students with disabilities, through collective and focused actions of adults. While different in demographics, each of these districts has publicly committed to improving teaching and learning for every child through effective data use and changing the ways in which adults across the system work and learn together.
Published: 2012 
Moving Your Numbers: A Synthesis of Lessons Learned: How Districts Used Assessment and Accountability to Increase Performance for Students with Disabilities as Part of District-wide ImprovementFormats: PDFA guide summarizing the lessons learned by school districts profiled in the Moving Your Numbers series. Moving Your Numbers features the work of ten districts with varying demographics that have used assessment and accountability as an impetus for positive change. In each case, districts used the increasing demand for accountability for all students and groups of students to change the conversation and practice across the district, "moving their numbers" in a positive direction for all children as a result. The stories of the ongoing journey of each district, while far from done, describe the actions of adults committed to improving their own practice as a way to support higher levels of learning for all children. While each district had its own framework or set of guiding core beliefs for organizing its work, each of them implemented a set of practices that was very similar. Evidence suggests that these six practices, when used in an aligned and coherent manner, are associated with higher student achievement:
- Use data well;
- Focus your goals;
- Select and implement shared instructional practices;
- Implement deeply;
- Monitor and provide feedback and support; and
- Inquire and learn
The lessons learned from featured districts are presented in this synthesis guide across each of the practice areas delineated above.
Published: 2012
Moving Your Numbers: District Self-Assessment Guide for Moving Our Numbers: Using Assessment and Accountability to Increase Performance for Students with Disabilities as Part of District-Wide ImprovementFormats: PDFA guide for use by district leadership teams and school-level leadership teams in gauging the district's degree of implementation and scale of actions associated with effective practices identified in the Moving Your Numbers series.
Published: 2012
Moving Your Numbers: Higher Education Guide to Moving Your Numbers: Guide for Administrator Preparation ProgramsFormats: PDFA guide connecting the report, Moving Your Numbers, to the curriculum of administrator preparation programs. It makes the connection by (1) showing how the booklet fits with curricula in such preparation programs (i.e., programs to prepare candidates for various administrative roles), (2) providing discussion questions based on the case studies presented in the booklet, (3) suggesting activities that draw on and extend the content of the case studies, and (4) presenting additional resource materials for exploring the essential educational practices that the booklet targets. Moving Your Numbers provides administrator preparation programs with real-world examples of districts in which a focus on the education of all children--including those with disabilities--guides educators' thinking and practice. These exemplar districts contrast with other districts in which low expectations about certain students' capabilities limit those students' opportunities for learning and eventually depress their academic achievement. Recent policy language characterizes this outcome as the achievement gap, and remedying achievement gaps has become a critical concern in many school districts.
Published: 2012