Transcript PARCC Assessment Design

Testing Accommodations for
Students with Disabilities
Educator Leader Cadres
February 2013
Tamara Reavis, Senior Adviser
PARCC Assessment Accessibility & Equity
TODAY’S CHARGE
Objectives:
• Review and understand research and best practices
currently in place in PARCC states
• Understand the timeline for public comment on draft
PARCC accommodations policies
• Give feedback on the draft policy recommendation
• Discuss current policies and implementation strategies
K-12 AND POSTSECONDARY ROLES IN
PARCC
K-12 Educators & Education Leaders
• Educators will be involved throughout the development of the
PARCC assessments and related instructional and reporting tools to
help ensure the system provides the information and resources
educators most need
Postsecondary Faculty & Leaders
• Nearly 750 institutions and systems covering hundreds of campuses
across PARCC states have committed to help develop the high school
assessments and set the college-ready cut score that will indicate a
student is ready for credit-bearing courses
THE PARCC GOALS
1. Create high-quality assessments
2. Build a pathway to college and career readiness for all
students
3. Support educators in the classroom
4. Develop 21st century, technology-based assessments
5. Advance accountability at all levels
6. Build an assessment that is sustainable and affordable
CREATE HIGH QUALITY ASSESSMENTS
Priority Purposes of PARCC Assessments:
1. Determine whether students are college- and career-ready or on track
2. Assess the full range of the Common Core Standards, including
standards that are difficult to measure
3. Measure the full range of student performance, including the
performance of high and low performing students
4. Provide data during the academic year to inform instruction,
interventions and professional development
5. Provide data for accountability, including measures of growth
6. Incorporate innovative approaches throughout the system
COHERENT SYSTEM ALIGNED TO COLLEGE
AND CAREER READINESS
Summative
Assessments
Implementation
& Transition
Support
PARCC
0
Assessment
System
Aligned
Instructional
Resources
Diagnostic &
Informative
Assessments
BUILD A PATHWAY TO COLLEGE AND
CAREER READINESS FOR ALL STUDENTS
K-2 formative
assessment
being
developed,
aligned to the
PARCC system
K-2
Timely student achievement
data showing students,
parents and educators
whether ALL students are ontrack to college and career
readiness
3-8
College
readiness score
to identify who
is ready for
college-level
coursework
Targeted
interventions &
supports:
•12th-grade bridge
courses
• PD for educators
High
School
ONGOING STUDENT SUPPORTS/INTERVENTIONS
SUCCESS IN
FIRST-YEAR,
CREDIT-BEARING,
POSTSECONDARY
COURSEWORK
ASSESSMENT DESIGN
ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS/LITERACY AND MATHEMATICS, GRADES 3-11
2 Optional Assessments/Flexible Administration
Diagnostic Assessment
• Early indicator of
student knowledge
and skills to inform
instruction, supports,
and PD
• Non-summative
Mid-Year Assessment
• Performance-based
• Emphasis on hardto-measure
standards
• Potentially
summative
Performance-Based
Assessment (PBA)
• Extended tasks
• Applications of
concepts and skills
• Required
Speaking And Listening Assessment
• Locally scored
• Non-summative, required
End-of-Year
Assessment
• Innovative,
computer-based
items
• Required
ACCESS AND EQUITY
ACCESSIBILITY
All students will have equitable
opportunities to access and respond to
PARCC assessment items and tasks.
STRATEGIES FOR INCREASING STUDENT
ACCESS
• Provide item developers with clear guidelines for writing items that are free of
bias, are sensitive to diverse cultures, are stated clearly, and use consistent
formats
• Require item developers to use principals of Universal Design to allow
participation of the widest possible range of students, and increase the
likelihood that test questions measure only what they are intended to measure
• Conduct bias and sensitivity reviews and statistical procedures that are
designed to detect bias as part of the item development/field testing process
• Develop common test accommodation and participation policies for Students
with Disabilities (SWD) and English Language Learners (ELL)
• Use technology to provide and increase access to testing accommodations
• Conduct research to determine factors that promote or hinder accessibility
TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTING ACCESS
STRATEGIES
Summer 2012
Bias and Sensitivity Guidelines
Ongoing
Bias and Sensitivity Reviews
Summer 2012
Accessibility Guidelines
Winter 2013
Common Definition ELL
Spring 2013
Common Participation Policies (SWD/ELL)
Spring 2013
Common Accommodation Policies (SWD/ELL)
Summer 2014
Statistical Reviews
Spring 2013, 2014
Research
COMMITTEES ON ACCESSIBILITY
• Operational Working Group: State representatives responsible for
the day-to-day aspects of work
• Technical Working Group: National experts who advise on issues of
accessibility, accommodations, and fairness. There are three subgroups: (1) students with disabilities; (2) English learners; (3) equity
PARCC TECHNICAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
Henry Braun
Boston College
Bob Brennan
University of Iowa
Derek Briggs
University of Colorado at Boulder
Wayne Camara
College Board
Linda Cook
Retired, ETS
Ronald Hambleton
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Gerunda Hughes
Howard University
Huynh Huynh
University of South Carolina
Michael Kolen
University of Iowa
Suzanne Lane
University of Pittsburgh
Richard Luecht
University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Jim Pellegrino
University of Illinois at Chicago
Barbara Plake
University of Nebraska- Lincoln
Rachel Quenemoen
National Center on Educational Outcomes
Laurie Wise
Human Resources Research Organization,
HumRRO
ACCESSIBILITY, ACCOMMODATIONS, &
FAIRNESS OPERATIONAL WORKING GROUP
• The AAF Operational Working Group members represent the following
states:















Arizona
Colorado*
Florida
Illinois
Indiana
Louisiana
Maryland*
Massachusetts
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
Ohio
Oklahoma
Rhode Island
Tennessee
* Co-chairs of the AAF OWG
AAF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
SUB-TWG
AAF TWG SWD Sub- Group
Affiliation
Dave Edyburn
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Claudia Flowers
University of North Carolina-Charlotte
Dianne Piche
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
Alba Ortiz
The University of Texas at Austin
Diane Spence
Region 4 Education Service Center, Braille Services
Martha Thurlow
National Center on Educational Outcomes
Daniel Wiener*
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education
*Chair of the AAF TWG and liaison to the AAF OWG
AAF ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNER
SUB-TWG
AAF TWG ELL Sub-Group
Affiliation
Diane August
Center for Applied Linguistics
H. Gary Cook
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Kenji Hakuta
Stanford University
Alba Ortiz
The University of Texas at Austin
Charlene Rivera
George Washington University
Daniel Wiener*
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education
*Chair of the AAF TWG and liaison to the AAF OWG
AAF EQUITY SUB-TWG
AAF TWG Equity Sub-Group
Affiliation
Amy Epstein
Leadership Public Schools
Keena Arbuthnot
Louisiana State University
Edward Bosso
Gallaudet University
Yvette Jackson
National Urban Alliance for Effective Education
Carol D. Lee
Northwestern University
Teresa L. McCarty
Arizona State University
Daniel Wiener*
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and
Secondary Education
Dianne Piche
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
*Chair of the AAF TWG and liaison to the AAF OWG
ACCESSIBILITY AS A PART OF THE
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Accessibility guidelines
Design review and feedback
Test blueprint development
Technology development and selection
Passage and media review committee involvement
Item review & bias and sensitivity committee involvement
Testing the efficacy of assessment items with accommodations with
the intended groups of students in pilot and field testing
• Including sufficient number of students with identified needs (across
sub-categories) in pilot and field testing
• Data review committee involvement
• Cognitive labs & item development research
EMBEDDED SUPPORTS BEING DISCUSSED
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Screen readers/ text-to-speech/speech-to-text software
Highlighting
Enlargement of text/graphics
Customized colors
Graphic organizers or representations
Customized dictionary or other home language supports/tools
Embedded/pop-up glossary
Reducing visual distractions surrounding written text
Captions for audio
Descriptive audio for students with visual impairments
Option response: adapted keyboards, StickyKeys, MouseKeys, FilterKeys
Braille (tactile/refreshable)
Signing supports (ASL)
Assistive technology
DESIGNING ACCESSIBLE ASSESSMENTS:
KEY PARCC DELIVERABLES
Selected Key Deliverables
Bias & Sensitivity Guidelines for item development
Accessibility Guidelines for item development
Item & Passage Review Committees; Bias & Sensitivity Review
Committees
Common PARCC definition of ELL
Participation guidelines for SWD & ELL
PARCC Common Accommodations Manual
Research & Cross-Consortia Collaboration
INCREASING EQUITY AND ACCESSIBILITY FOR ALL STUDENTS
DEVELOPING A COMMON
PARCC ACCOMMODATIONS
MANUAL
PARCC has committed to developing a
common PARCC Accommodations Manual
by spring 2013.
WHAT IS AN ACCOMMODATION?
• A testing accommodation is a change in how a test is
presented or how the test taker responds, which may
include changes in the presentation format, response
format, test setting, timing, or scheduling.
• This term generally refers to changes that do not
significantly alter what the test measures.
• It results from a student need; it is not intended to give the
student an unfair advantage.
WHY MUST PARCC HAVE COMMON
ASSESSMENT ACCOMMODATION POLICIES?
• One of the primary objectives of PARCC is to report
comparable results across all states in the Consortium
• In order to achieve comparability in results, students must
have comparable testing experiences, therefore,
accommodation policies for SWDs and ELLs, among other
factors, must be commonly defined and implemented
across PARCC states.
ACCOMMODATIONS COMPARABILITY
ISSUE
• While PARCC states currently allow for the provision of a
range of accommodations that are common among them,
there are a few that are not commonly allowed
Reading access accommodations
Writing response accommodations
Braille and signing support accommodations
Calculator use accommodations
Translations
WHY RELEASE SELECT DRAFT POLICIES
NOW?
• Teachers need to know which accommodations will be
offered
• Public feedback is essential to state-led policy development
• States need to know if PARCC accommodations policy
decisions will impact current state statue / regulation /
policy
• Accommodations information is necessary for field testing
(& item tryouts)
READING ACCESS ACCOMMODATION
POLICY
READING ACCESS
• Providing reading access accommodations, specifically for
reading aloud the passages, items, and response options on
the ELA/literacy summative assessments for SWD who
meet eligibility criteria
• The reading access accommodation may be delivered
through human read-aloud, recorded voice presented via
an audio file, and other text-to-speech technologies.
READING ACCESS
Two populations:
• Student with a specific disability that severely limits or prevents him/her from accessing
printed text even after varied and repeated attempts to teach the student to do so. The
student must be a virtual non-reader;
OR
• Student with visual impairments who has not yet learned braille;
Student must also:
• Receive ongoing, research-based interventions to access printed text or learn braille, as
deemed appropriate by the IEP team
AND
• Has access to written text in instruction only through the use of reading access
accommodations, outside time spent in direct reading or braille instruction
AND
• The accommodation is listed in an approved IEP with the disability documented by
objective, measurable data points and evaluation summaries from locally-administered,
research-based diagnostic assessments
CALCULATOR
ACCOMMODATION POLICY
CALCULATOR
• Provide calculator accommodations on the non-calculator
test sessions of the mathematics summative assessments
for SWD who meet the eligibility criteria
CALCULATOR
Population:
•
Student has a specific disability that severely limits or prevents him/her from
calculating, even after varied and repeated attempts to teach the student to do so. The
student must be unable to calculate single-digit numbers (i.e., 0-9) without a
calculation device, using the four basic operations of addition, subtraction,
multiplication, and division;
Student must also:
• Receive ongoing, research-based intervention strategies in learning to calculate, as
deemed appropriate by the IEP team
AND
• Has access to mathematical calculation in instruction only through the use of a
calculation device, outside time spent in direct instruction on calculation
AND
• The accommodation is listed in an approved IEP with the disability documented by
objective, measurable data points and evaluation summaries from locallyadministered, research-based diagnostic assessments
SCORING & REPORTING
• PARCC states will monitor the number and percentage of students
using these accommodations at the school, district, and state level
• Summative assessment scores for students who receive this
accommodation will be aggregated with the scores of all students
and those of relevant subgroups
• Scores will be included for accountability purposes
• Confidential parent/guardian reports, non-public rosters of schooland district-level results, and other non-public reports will include
notations in cases where these accommodations were provided.
District and school reports available to the public will not include the
notations in cases where these accommodations were used
WRITING ACCESS ACCOMMODATION
POLICY
WRITING ACCESS POLICY
• Scribe
• Word prediction
SCRIBE
Definition
• A scribe is a human or device that records verbatim what a student
dictates
 Human scribe; recording device, augmentative communications
device; speech to text software, communication
interpretation/transliteration, or by gesturing pointing or eye-gazing
Who Requires the Accommodation?
• Student with a physical disability that impedes motor process for writing
OR
• Student with a specific disability that significantly impacts the area of
written expression
WORD PREDICTION
• Word prediction is recommended to be used as an
accommodation for eligible students
• Proposed Definition: Word prediction software provides a student
with a selection of word options based on spelling or
frequent/recent use by the student, given partial input of words (i.e.,
letter characters)
• Proposed Eligibility Criteria: Students who have difficulty
producing text due to the speed with which they are able to enter
keystrokes
AND/OR
Students who have difficulty with language recall
WE WANT YOUR FEEDBACK!
• Where Do I Find the Information?
 http://parcconline.org/open-policies-public-comment
• What Should I Read?
 PARCC Draft Writing Access Accommodations Public Comment Document
• How Do I Provide Feedback?
 Fill out the survey online.
• When Is Feedback Due?
 February 20, 2013
TIMELINE FOR ADOPTING
COMMON ACCOMMODATIONS POLICIES
Public Comment
Date
Reading access and calculator accommodation policy for
students with disabilities
Jan.-Feb.,
2013
Writing access accommodation policy for students with
disabilities
Feb.-Mar.,
2013
Draft PARCC Accommodations Manual, including
accommodations for English learners and students with
disabilities
Apr.-May,
2013
Governing Board vote on the approval of the PARCC
Accommodations Manual
June 2013
PUBLIC COMMENT ON READING
ACCESS & CALCULATOR POLICIES
DRAFT POLICIES FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
• Provide reading access accommodations, specifically for
reading aloud the passages, items, and response options on
the ELA/literacy summative assessments for SWD who
meet eligibility criteria
• Provide calculator accommodations on the non-calculator
test sessions of the mathematics summative assessments
for SWD who meet the eligibility criteria
PUBLIC COMMENT PROCESS
• Policies were released for public comment on Wednesday,
January 16, 2013
• National Stakeholder Meeting held on Friday, January 18,
2013 at Achieve (Approximately 40 participants)
• States engage stakeholders and solicit public comment
• Public comment due Monday, February 4, 2013
PRELIMINARY FEEDBACK
• 2,615 responses have been recorded.
• All Governing Board states have submitted surveys
• 48 out of 50 states, plus the District of Columbia responded
• Role of Respondents:
18% of respondents – K-12 Instructors
37% of respondents – Special Educators
12% of respondents - Parents
22% of respondents – Other
TAMARA REAVIS
[email protected]
FEBRUARY 2013
www.PARCConline.org
THE PARTNERSHIP FOR ASSESSMENT OF READINESS
FOR COLLEGE AND CAREERS