Resources
Search Filters
Search Results
- Selected filters():
NCEO Synthesis Reports: Massachusetts: One State's Approach to Setting Performance Levels on the Alternate Assessment (#48)This year 2002 report describes Massachusetts' approach to setting performance levels on its Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) Alternate Assessment. The state's portfolio approach was based on "expanded" state standards describing academic outcomes appropriate for students with significant disabilities. The report explains the technical phase of standard setting and describes the context of earlier conversations and theoretical debates that came before their decisions in the development process of the alternate assessment. The report further describes how performance levels were calibrated between the alternate and general assessments, due to the alternate being used for high school diploma requirements, and the ways performance levels in each strand were combined to produce an overall performance level.
Published: November 2002
NCEO Synthesis Reports: 2001 State Policies on Assessment Participation and Accommodations (#46)Formats: OnlineThis year 2001 report analyzes state participation and accommodation policies nationwide. Among the major findings are: (1) participation options beyond the usual three (participation without accommodations, participation with accommodations, alternate assessment) have become more evident -- generally these are: partial participation, additional alternate assessments, and out-of-level testing, (2)"emotional anxiety" is more frequently noted as a reason for students to not participate in assessments, (3) policies for both participation and accommodations are becoming more specific, often indicating implications for how accommodated students' scores are reported, (4) the number of states that allow accommodations for specific groups (i.e., all students and students no longer on IEPs), and (5) that most controversial accommodations continue to be read aloud, calculator, and scribe. The analyses suggest that states continued to adjust their policies to ensure that students with disabilities have opportunities to participate in statewide assessments, and at the same time to understand the meaning of the scores from their assessments.
Published: July 2002
NCEO Synthesis Reports: Access to Computer-Based Testing for Students with Disabilities (#45)This year 2002 report recommends a five step process for the transformation of paper and pencil tests to computer-based tests based on an overview of the opportunities and challenges of computer-based testing and a presentation of research findings and accommodation considerations. This process assumes that the principles of universally designed assessments have been followed and include the following five steps: (1) assemble a group of experts to guide the transformation, (2) decide how each accommodation will be incorporated into the computer-based test, (3) Consider each accommodation or assessment feature in light of the constructs being tested, (4) consider the feasibility of incorporating the accommodation into the computer-based test, and (5) consider training implications for staff and students. Authors also make initial considerations for common accommodations within the categories of timing/scheduling, presentation, response, and setting.
Published: June 2002
Moving Your Numbers: Key Practices GuideFormats: PDFA guide describing six essential practices for increasing achievement of students with disabilities and other at-risk learners as part of whole-district reform efforts. All six practices are described within the context of the district achievement profiles included in this publication. They are also organized for easier reference as a pull-out insert that provides suggestions for state education agency personnel, district and school personnel (including regional technical assistance providers), and parents/family members who might be interested in learning more about what questions to ask, or how to initiate and/or contribute to a conversation in their state, region, or district that supports all students to learn at higher levels.
Published: 2012- NCEO Reports: The Role of Assessment Data in State Systemic Improvement Plans (SSIPs): An Analysis of FFY 2018 SSIPs (#425)
This report presents the findings of an analysis of states’ FFY 2018 State Systemic Improvement Plans (SSIPs), submitted to the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) in April 2020. It specifically addresses how assessments were included in states’ State-Identified Measurable Results (SIMRs). For states with assessment-related SIMRs, SSIP evaluation plans were also analyzed to see how assessments were being used for evaluation and reporting. The SSIPs for both regular states (e.g., Alabama, Wyoming, etc.) and unique states (e.g., Guam, Federated States of Micronesia, etc.) were analyzed. As part of OSEP’s new federal accountability framework, Results Driven Accountability (RDA), states are required to develop an SSIP, which is a comprehensive, multi-year plan designed to improve outcomes for children with disabilities, and within this plan, to commit to improving a SIMR focused on student outcomes. Many, but not all states, specified SIMRs that use assessment data as the outcome measure.
Published: February 2021 
NCEO Synthesis Reports: Graduation Policies for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities Who Participate in States' AA-AAS (#97)A report analyzing the graduation requirements and diploma options for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities who participate in states' alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS). The authors found that nearly 70% of states' policies indicated that students with the most significant cognitive disabilities who participate in the AA-AAS can receive a regular diploma. The criteria for doing so in these states were extremely varied, from those that have the exact same requirements to those that allow the IEP team to set the criteria. In states with policies that indicated that students with the most significant cognitive disabilities who participate in the AA-AAS could not receive a regular diploma, all but one state indicated that other end-of-school documents (e.g., certificates, special diplomas) were available to these students. The information the authors found and that was provided during the verification process provides important information for the field. Their findings should provide a basis for discussions within states as they consider their policies in light of college and career readiness imperatives.
Published: 2014
NCEO Synthesis Reports: Earning a High School Diploma through Alternative Routes (#76)A report based on a study examining the alternative routes to passing the high school exit exam that were available during the school year 2008-09 to students to earn a standard high school diploma. It examines alternative routes in the 26 states with active or soon-to-be active exit exams, and documents the alternative routes available for all students and those specifically for students with disabilities. Earning a standard diploma has increased in importance during the past several years. Not only is it a document that improves postschool outcomes, but it also has become a part of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) accountability system at the high school level--with the required graduation rate including only those students who have earned a regular/standard high school diploma or higher. Complicating matters in several states is the addition of an exit exam requirement to the traditional coursework requirements. The addition of a testing requirement to other requirements for earning a standard diploma is a challenge for students who do not perform well on assessments. Many, but not all, of these students have disabilities.
Published: June 2010
NCEO Synthesis Reports: High Stakes Graduation Exams: The Intended and Unintended Consequences of Minnesota's Basic Standards Tests for Students with Disabilities (#62)This year 2006 report examines the intended and unintended consequences of Minnesota's high stakes graduation exam on students with disabilities through focus group data and interviews. The study included focus groups included parents of students with disabilities, special educators from six schools in two large urban and suburban school districts, and member of the Minnesota Association of educational Assessment and Evaluation, and interviews from building administrators, school district representatives, and a state representative. Findings include a combination of positive and negative consequences such as increasing exposure to curriculum, increased participation in testing, raising expectations, high levels of anxiety and frustration, and drop-out concerns among other findings. The author concludes that further studies are needed to document empirically whether these consequences are occurring for students with disabilities.
Published: August 2006
NCEO Synthesis Reports: Progress Monitoring in an Inclusive Standards-Based Assessment and Accountability System (#53)This year 2004 report describes how progress monitoring--a set of techniques for assessing student performance on a regular and frequent basis--can be an essential and integral part of an inclusive standards-based assessment and accountability system This report discusses contextual challenges that affect its implementation for students with disabilities including: historical limited access to challenging curriculum, instruction, and assessment; concerns about the target of measurement (i.e., only basic skills or a full range of challenging content); and limited use of data for effective provision of instructional strategies, interventions, and supports. Further, the authors discuss the benefits and uses of progress monitoring methods and formative data sources in four general categories: (1) Curriculum-Based Measurement; (2) Classroom assessments (system or teacher-developed); (3) Adaptive assessments; and (4) Large-scale assessments used during the year to monitor growth of individual students and groups of students. Several recommendations for practice are also offered.
Published: February 2004
Learning Modules on English Learners (ELs) with DisabilitiesFormats: OnlineThis free training helps educators look at important issues surrounding students who are ELs with disabilities. Participants follow the story of Emma, a middle school student with a learning disability, while also providing additional case studies of students with other disabilities who need accommodations to access instruction and assessments. The training especially models how educators and parents or guardians can work together to make and implement good decisions about accommodations as members of the featured student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP) team.
Published: 2013-06-06
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 Synthesis Reports: Large-Scale Assessment and Accountability Systems: Positive Consequences for Students with Disabilities (#51)This 2004 report examines both empirical and anecdotal evidence for positive consequences of large-scale high-stakes assessments for students with disabilities. The analysis uses multiple methodologies to gather data on positive consequences: a qualitative media survey, an environmental scan of State Special Education Directors, a focus group, and a national survey on state assessment practices. Primary findings show these positive consequences for students with disabilities found consistently across all methodologies: increased participation of students with disabilities in testing programs, higher expectations and standards, improved instruction, and improved performance. Secondary findings found in fewer sources are as follows: improved assessments, improved diploma options, decreased dropout rates, and increased collaboration and communication between parents and special education and general education teachers. The authors discuss the limitations of the study, and address it as a starting point for further research. Overall, the findings suggest that large-scale high stakes assessments can have intended and unintended positive consequences for students with disabilities.
Published: May 2004
NCEO Technical Reports: Where's Waldo? A Third Search for Students with Disabilities in State Accountability Reports (#25)This year 2000 report analyzes state education reports to determine what types of information are provided on students with disabilities. It is the third such study conducted by the National Center on Educational Outcomes, and was based on 170 reports from state accountability offices and state special education offices. Findings reported include the following: (1) despite IDEA requirements for public reporting of assessment participation and performance data for students with disabilities, only 14 states included participation data and 17 states included performance data for students with disabilities in state assessments, (2) participation levels varied from 33% to 97% of students with disabilities, and (3) information on performance levels varied widely. The report presents several recommendations to states. These include the need for states to indicate how they will move toward meeting IDEA requirements for reporting data on students with disabilities, to consider how best to present these data to avoid unintended consequences, and to ensure an accounting of participation data for each performance score that is reported.
Published: April 2000
NCEO Synthesis Reports: Gray Areas of Assessment Systems (#32)Formats: OnlineA 2000 paper clarifying what is meant by "gray areas of assessment" systems, delineating the primary issues that surround and contribute to gray areas, and providing suggestions for developing fully inclusive systems. As part of our nation's educational commitment to equity and excellence for all, we must develop better understanding of what it means to be accountable for all children, and identify more inclusive strategies of assessment and accountability. In response to our national commitment, and to specific legislation such as Title I of the Improving America's Schools Act (IASA) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 1997 (IDEA '97), states and school districts are in the midst of developing large-scale assessment systems. Some have considered the challenge of students who do not fit into these assessment systems as one of "gray area students." New understanding is emerging that the problem does not lie with the students, but with the systems. This paper provides brief case studies of the assessment practices in two states, thereby highlighting the reality of gray areas as states implement their assessment systems. After a review of the national reform context, it presents a model that provides a basis for defining and addressing gray area concerns.
Published: March 2000
NCEO Synthesis Reports: Learning Progressions in K-8 Classrooms: How Progress Maps Can Influence Classroom Practice and Perceptions and Help Teachers Make More Informed Instructional Decisions in Support of Struggling Learners (#87)A report describing perceptions and practices of Hawaii teachers using progress maps (learning progressions) to inform their understanding of how struggling learners progress during the school year in language arts or mathematics. Participants included (K-8) elementary and middle school teachers from six Hawaii public schools. Each teacher selected five students in his or her classroom to document progress and collect work samples from at least two quarters during the 2010-2011 school year; several of these students were ones who might have been eligible for and participated in an Alternate Assessment based on Modified Achievement Standards (AA-MAS) if Hawaii had developed one. Multiple data collection tools and processes were developed for use in this project and are described in the report. Findings from the year-long effort addressed (a) teachers' reflections on practice (instruction, assessment, and instructional decisions), (b) teachers' perceptions on learners and learning pathways, (c) facilitated collaboration sessions), and (d) unanticipated activities. This report addresses each of those, as well as the implications of the project for professional development support.
Published: January 2012
NCEO Synthesis Reports: Varied Opinions on How to Report Accommodated Test Scores: Findings Based on CTB/McGraw-Hill's Framework for Classifying Accommodations (#49)This year 2003 report outlines the challenges of state education agencies determining the most appropriate way to report test scores of students receiving accommodations. These three ways are to (1) report all scores in the aggregate (i.e., do not differentiate between accommodated and non-accommodated test scores), (2) report accommodated scores separately, and (3) report accommodated scores both in the aggregate as well as separately. These approaches reflect different beliefs on how accommodations influence test scores, and the perceived need for future accommodations research. Survey results include perceptions held by people familiar with policy or research on the way in which test scores are influenced by accommodations and how scores obtained under accommodated conditions are to be treated in reporting. The results show that the extent of agreement about how accommodated scores should be treated depends on the accommodation. The study also shows how deep-seated beliefs lead some respondents to consider almost no accommodation as changing the construct, whereas other respondents consider almost all accommodations as influencing the construct being measured.
Published: April 2003
NCEO Synthesis Reports: Appeals Processes for Students Who Fail Graduation Exams: How Do They Apply to Students with Disabilities? (#36)Formats: OnlineA report of findings about high stakes tests for students with disabilities, as of the year 2000, and the appeals processes for those who need an alternative way of demonstrating skills. High stakes tests that determine whether students earn a standard high school diploma are on the rise. They are viewed as the way to make sure that students meet high standards and graduate with the skills needed to be successful employees. At the same time that more and more states are investing in graduation exams, there are concerns about students who have met high standards, yet are unable to pass a test. To determine the extent to which there are other options for demonstrating skills, and to check the availability of these to students with disabilities, the authors studied state Web sites for information on appeals processes and the availability of waivers. They found only six states with appeals processes, and these varied considerably from locally set procedures to relatively specific requirements. In one state, the appeals process is viewed as the avenue for students with disabilities to have access to accommodations. In most states, there is no evidence that students with disabilities have been considered. Further, states do not have data on the number of students involved in appeals processes, much less disaggregated for students with disabilities. The difficulty they experienced in finding information about an appeals process is certainly encountered by students and families whose lives are affected by graduation exams. Without appeals processes, or easily found information on such processes, the likelihood that lawsuits will be viewed as the only avenue for recourse is dramatically increased.
Published: July 2000- AA-AAAS BibliographyFormats: Online
This searchable bibliographic database presents information related to alternates based on alternate academic achievement standards. Users may search by publication type, research type, keyword, or specific journals.
Published: 2010