The Model

1
The Model

• Inclusion of Students with Disabilities
• in
• Large-Scale Assessments

2
Our Commission

• Develop a model for participation of students
  with disabilities in large-scale testing.
• Establish criteria for states to follow so their
  assessment systems are technically adequate
  (contain all the essential evidence for making
  valid decisions).
• Establish a system of development so the white
  paper is credible and acceptable.
• Do both of the above by August 1

3
The Process

• Two conference calls and three face-to-face
  meetings in Denver (June 5), San Antonio (June
  25), and Charlotte (July 9).
• Four drafts completed for review on June 1, June
  18, July 5, and July 21, the last two versions
  having been reviewed by nine individuals for
  technical soundness.
• Draft 7 was reviewed by an expert for technical
  soundness and by centers, states, and publishers
  for applicability.
• OSEP began publishing with back and forth contact
  with the authors and in April 2006 published 7
  chapters as part of Tool Kit on Teaching and
  Assessing Students with Disabilities
• www.osepideasthatwork.org/toolkit/index.asp

4
The People

• Almond, Pat Consultant
• Browder, Diane University of North Carolina
• Crawford, Lindy University of Colorado,
  Colorado Springs
• Ferrara, Steve American Institutes for Research
• Haladyna, Tom Arizona State University
• Huynh Huynh University of South Carolina
• Tindal, Gerald University of Oregon
• Zigmond, Naomi University of Pittsburgh
• Specialist Writers and Internal Reviewers
• Barton, Karen CTB-McGraw
• Flowers, Claudia University of North Carolina
• Karvonen, Meagan Western Carolina University
• Wakeman, Shawnee  University of North Carolina
• Yovanoff, Paul University of Oregon

5
The Product Seven Chapters

• Including Students with Disabilities in
  Large-Scale Assessment Executive Summary
• Validating Assessments for Students with
  Disabilities
• Reliability Issues and Evidence
• Validity Evidence
• Standards and Assessment Approaches for Students
  with Disabilities using a Validity Argument
• Professional Development on Assessment Systems
• Glossary

6
Validation Model
7
Alignment with Grade Level Content Standards
8
Changes in Supports

• Assistive technologies Any kind of encoding or
  decoding device (electronic, digital, manual,
  etc.) that allows information to be presented or
  responses to be made while interacting with test
  directions, items, or tasks.
• Prompts Any form of verbal, non-verbal, or
  physical cue to structure, pace, or signal a
  response to be made by the student. Examples
  include verbalisms like, continue, next, now
  what, or reminders of each step physical
  guidance is an example of a prompt.
• Scaffolds Any type of structural assistance
  introduced to organize information or guide
  responses embedded in the presentation of the
  item or task. Examples include the addition of
  highlights, underlines, outlines, crib sheets, or
  other information to essentialize the task or
  response.

9
Changes in Breadth Depth

• Breadth The number of standards and objectives
  being met in the assessment.
• Depth  The type of knowledge form implied in the
  standard and response demand or type of
  intellectual operation required to respond.
  Examples include various knowledge forms
  (concepts, principles, procedures) and
  intellectual operations needed to solve the
  problem or answer the question (e.g., make
  predictions, provide explanations, give
  illustrations, consider reasons and use criteria
  to make judgments).

10
Working Operationalizations

• Grade-level achievement standards are designed
  to enable inferences to the breadth and/or depth
  of standards as specified in the test
  specifications for the general education
  large-scale assessment without or with
  accommodations. Both the assessment with
  accommodations and an alternate assessment based
  on grade-level achievement standards allow
  comparable inferences. Inferences about
  comparability and meaning of proficiency are not
  constrained by the assessment methodology.
• Modified achievement standards are designed to
  enable inferences to grade-level expectations
  with specified levels of breadth and/or depth.
  Inferences about comparability and meaning of
  proficiency are constrained by the assessment
  methodology.
• Alternate achievement standards are designed to
  enable inferences to grade-level expectations
  that have been extensively prioritized but
  maintain high expectations for progress in the
  general curriculum and assume student performance
  is contingent on having the supports specified
  for the assessment. Inferences are stipulated
  because of the assessment methodology.

11
Presentations

• Overview (Tindal)-15 minutes
• Participation Options and Populations (Almond)-20
  minutes
• Reliability and Validity Evidences (Haladyna)-20
  minutes
• Approaches (Ferrara)-20 minutes
• Professional Development (Zigmond)-20 minutes