No Child Left Behind:
Considerations for the Assessment
of Students with Disabilities
Martha Thurlow and Sandra Thompson
National Center on Educational Outcomes
University of Minnesota
No Child Left Behind
. . . a reauthorization of ESEA
continuing in the context of the
standards-based reform
movement . . .with an emphasis
on system accountability
Purpose of
No Child Left Behind
“…to ensure that all children have a
fair, equal, and significant opportunity
to obtain a high-quality education
and reach, at a minimum, proficiency
on challenging State academic
achievement standards and state
academic assessments”
NCLB does NOT require
student accountability
(e.g., graduation exams
to get a diploma)
• NCLB does require
SYSTEM level
accountability to ensure
that all students learn to
high levels.
Requirements
• State standards for what a child should
know in math and reading now, and in
science by 2005-06
• Test every student's progress toward the
standards. Beginning in 2005-06, test in
grades 3 through 8 and once in high
school in math and reading. Beginning in
2007-08, science achievement must also
be tested.
Under NCLB
Assessments shall provide for…
• Participation of all students
• Reasonable adaptations and accommodations for
students with disabilities (IDEA & 504), and
alternate assessment
• Inclusion of limited English proficient students
with accommodations, including, if practicable,
native-language versions of the assessment
• Assessment in English of reading/language arts
for any student in US for 3 consecutive school
years
But, isn’t IDEA our
law? Why do we
have to worry about
NCLB?
IDEA 1997
. . . a reauthorization created
within the context of the
standards-based reform
movement . . . with another
reauthorization coming in
2003
Key Provisions in IDEA 97
• Statement of present levels,
needs, and how they affect
involvement and progress in
general curriculum
• Annual goals and objectives to
allow involvement and progress in
the general curriculum
Key Provisions in IDEA 97
• General educator collaboration
• Assessment – full integration into
standards-based reform
The key provisions in IDEA 97 really
address equity concerns – access to
common standards, challenging
curriculum, and effective instruction
How do IDEA and NCLB
“fit together?”
NCLB
Requirements
IDEA
Requirements
Together, they require us to address
content standards, achievement
standards, assessment and access to
the general curriculum
Assumptions that underlie
both NCLB and IDEA point
to the benefits of
standards-based systems
for all students
 All children can learn
 We need to be responsible
for the learning of all
children
Standards-Based Reform Context
--- Everything else
is negotiable --schedules, place, time, structure,
curriculum, instructional methods,
methods of assessment. . .
This is SO important …
“It is not possible to predict which
children will be in the top half of the
achievement distribution at any given
level of general intelligence.”
Kevin McGrew (2003)
IQ=75 + 5
Child A in School
What should our
expectations
be for “Child in
School” in
reading?
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Educators’ views of
expected reading
achievement
performance based
on IQ of 75
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
BRS
Basic Rdg Skills SS
(for GIA SS = 70-80)
Where will
most of the
Child A’s of
the world
achieve in
reading?
Regressionbased expected
score
How can
this be ?
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
BRS
Basic Rdg Skills SS
(for GIA SS = 70-80)
“For most students with below average
IQ scores, it is NOT possible to predict
individual levels of expected achievement
with the degree of accuracy that would
be required to deny a student the right to
high standards/expectations.”
Kevin McGrew (2003)
http://www.iapsych.com/iapdirector.htm
Data Are Emerging
16,000
13,528
14,000
Number of Students
New York Regents
Exam, 2001: Number
of students with
disabilities passing is
higher than the
number taking in the
past
12,607
12,000
10,000
9,514
8,000
6,000
5,647
7,545
4,419
4,000
2,000
3,414
4,175
0
1997
1998
Number Tested
1999
2000
Number Passing with Score of 55-100
Trend data across grades in
large southern state – special
education population changes
over time mask closing of gap
between special education and
general education students
Recent article in the Boston Globe
(December 22, 2002)
Katie Bartlett has spent all of her 17 years
exceeding the expectations the world placed on
her when she was born with Down syndrome. . .
.Still no one was quite sure what would happen
when Bartlett took the MCAS exam, now a
requirement for a high school diploma in
Massachusetts.
This is what happened: She passed
Critical Assessment Issues
 Decision Making
 Accommodations
 Universally Designed Assessments
 Alternate Assessments
3 Ways to Participate in
Assessments
 Same way as other students
 With accommodations
 In an Alternate Assessment
But, this does not mean that it is simple
Decisions and the IEP team
The IEP team has authority to make
decisions. . .
But this does not mean that it is simple
• WHO needs to be part of the discussion?
• WHAT external opportunities and constraints
must be considered?
• IMPLICATIONS of decisions must be identified
and discussed, recorded, and reconsidered each
year.
Accommodations
Accommodations are changes in
instructional and assessment materials or
procedures that allow the student’s
knowledge and skills to be developed and
assessed.
Accommodations provide students
with disabilities access to instruction
and assessments, so that ALL can
have access, participate, and make
progress . . .
Good Accommodations Decisions
 Start with good instructional decisions
 Systematic questions about
accommodations for individual students
What helps student learn or perform better?
What has student or parents told you?
What gets in the way of the student showing skills?
What has the student been taught to use?
 Collection of data to aid decision making
Types of Accommodations
Setting
Study carrel
Small group
Individualized
Presentation
Repeat directions
Large print edition
Braille edition
Timing
Extended time
Frequent breaks
Unlimited time
Response
Mark test booklet
Word processor
Use references
Scheduling
Specific time of day
Subtests in different order
Across multiple days
Other
Test preparation
Out-of-level
Motivational cues
Report on a Case Study:
Out-of-Level Testing in a
School District
Jane Minnema
Research Questions
 Student instruction?
 Student and teacher perceptions?
 Student selection?
Data Collection Strategies
 IEP reviews (n=14)
 Teacher provided student data (n=65)
 Face-to-face interviews
 Conducted on-site in the schools
Conclusions
• Instructed below grade of enrollment
• Not reported in accountability programs
• Test scores not usable for instructional
decisions
• Policy implementation inconsistencies
• Lacked understanding of future effects
Definitional Issues
Some accommodations are considered to change
what is assessed, and others are viewed as “ok” –
But the terms used to describe what is and isn’t “ok”
vary across the states and districts.
Know what terms mean in your state
and district!
Stay on top of the literature at:
http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/
AccomStudies.htm
[NCEO’s online accommodations
bibliography with search features]
Is the the choice of
accommodations appropriate?
 Aligned with instructional accommodations, but
not an excuse not to teach
 Student needs it to demonstrate knowledge and
skills – or to participate in assessment
 Implications of using this accommodation have
been identified and carefully considered
 Not determined by test publisher, but by student
need, what is being measured (construct), and the
purpose of the test
Legal Cases Are Changing Views
About Accommodations
Oregon – a new view of
accommodations (innocent until
proven guilty)
California – cannot require a special
waiver to use needed
accommodations
Oregon Case
“Accommodations shall be considered allowable, valid,
and scorable if they are used during instruction1 or
classroom assessment and are listed on a student’s IEP
or Section 504 plan, unless ODE can show that the
accommodation invalidates the score interpretation.2
Rather than consider all accommodations first invalid
until proven valid, ODE shall consider all
accommodations valid unless ODE can show that the
accommodation would invalidate the score
interpretation.”
Oregon ASK Settlement Agreement
California Case
U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer said the state may
administer its first mandatory statewide high school exit
exam this week as planned. But he ruled that special
education students can be afforded any testing
accommodation that they have been determined to need,
including the use of calculators, spell- checkers, or extra
time, during the testing set for March 5-7…. The judge
has yet to rule on how the state should grade the tests of
students with disabilities, as well as other contentious
issues.
Education Week, March 6, 2002
Issues:
• Tendency to allow too many accommodations,
possibly reducing expectations for student
learning.
• Poor decision making about accommodations,
reflecting lack of knowledge about
instructional accommodations.
• Use of accommodations as an excuse to
exclude students scores on reports or
accountability.
Promising Practices:
• States keeping track of how many students
use accommodations and which ones.
• Out-of-the-box thinking about the use of
accommodated test scores.
• Clear decision-making criteria (e.g.,
alignment to instructional accommodations)
and training on how to make decisions.
• Teaching students about the tests they take
and about the accommodations that they
need.
Recommendations for IEP Teams
• Develop a process for making decisions
about accommodation use
• Choose accommodations based on
individual student needs and preferences
• Teach students to use selected
accommodations routinely in the
classroom, at home, and in the
community – evaluate effectiveness
Recommendations for IEP Teams
• Know state/district accommodations
policies
• Give students opportunities to use selected
accommodations on practice tests
• Make sure test administrators know about
accommodations a student will use
• Record accommodations use accurately on
test booklet (or other form)
Individualized accommodation decisions
should be linked to what is being assessed,
access tools a student uses for learning, and
the student’s characteristics
FOR EXAMPLE:
Purposeful reading – reading to select and
apply relevant information for a given task
Does this allow different ways of
interacting with print? And, what are
the implications for accommodations?
The “door” we need to go
through: What is meant by
‘reading’ What about ‘literacy?’
The answer(s) to these questions will
determine the accommodations that
can be used when certain content
standards are taught and assessed!
Ways to interact with print: with
examples of accommodations
• Visual
• Tactile (feeling
print)
• Auditory (listening
to printed
messages)
• Multi-modal (using
any combination of
the above
modalities)
• Printed text; ASL
• Article in Braille and
Nemeth Codes
• Listen to taped articles
(Radio or TV?)
• Computer-based
“assistive” reading/ viewing
programs– (e.g., digital
talking news)
Moving to universally designed
instruction and assessment
Universally Designed Instruction
and Assessments are designed to
be accessible and valid for the
widest range of students
Think about universal design
in architecture and tool
design
 Curb cuts and ramps
 Elevators that talk to you
 Door handles rather than knobs
 Special pen shapes that are easier
to hold
Elements of Universally
Designed Assessments
 Inclusive assessment population
 Precisely defined constructs
 Accessible, non-biased items
 Amenable to accommodations
Elements of UD Assessments
(continued)
 Simple, clear, and intuitive
instructions and procedures
 Maximum readability and
comprehensibility
 Maximum legibility
“Think aloud”
• Recently interviewed 90
students using think aloud
protocol
• 4th and 8th grade
• Used multiple choice and
constructed response items
from state math test
Student Characteristics
Grade 4 Grade 8
Learning Disability
10
10
Deaf/Hard of Hearing
10
10
Mild Cognitive Impairment
5
5
English Language Learner
10
10
10
10
No disability
Overall Observations
• Students who were confident of
content did not have problems with
design
• Students who had no idea how to
solve the problem did not have
problems with design
• Students “in the middle” – not sure of
content, some reading difficulty,
design made a difference
Examples of Student Perceptions
• Many students didn’t see one of the cities on
a map
• The name of one of the cities was
“Independence” - uncommon meaning
• Box between top and bottom of item – some
students did not read entire item
• Sign for parallel gave away the answer
• Some students read fraction 3 5/8 as “35
divided by 8”
• Students unfamiliar with settings – “Glee
club does number,” “fitness club”
Considerations for Item Review
• Overall appearance is clean and
organized
• Clear format for text
• Clear format for pictures and graphics
(when essential to item)
• Concise and readable text
• Format allows for changes without
changing meaning or difficulty
• Meets criteria for measuring what it
is intended to measure
Alternate Assessments
First introduced in IDEA 97 -
for students unable to
participate in general
state assessments
Alternate Assessments
• Required for school accountability
decisions under NCLB
• Reflect shifting goals for students
with significant cognitive disabilities
Proposed Regulations
(Notice of Proposed Rule Making –
NPRM)
 NPRM: Alternate assessment is for
students with the most significant cognitive
disabilities who are 3 standard deviations
below the mean on intellectual and
adaptive behavior measures
 NPRM: Up to 1% of students above can
be held to alternate achievement standards
Assessment Decision-Making Process in
Standards-based Reform Context
Is the student working toward high standards?
If no, adjust the student’s
instruction so that he/she
is working toward standards.
When yes, go on
to the next question.
Can the student show what he/she
knows on a general assessment,
using accommodations?
If no, consider alternate
assessment participation
for the student.
If yes, the student should
participate in the general
assessment with a careful plan
for the use of accommodations.
Development of Alternate Assessments
1. Stakeholder and policymaker identification of
desired student outcomes for the population,
reflecting the best understanding of research and
practice, thoughtfully aligned to same content
expected for all students.
2. Development, testing, and refinement of
assessment methods.
3. Scoring of evidence according to professionally
accepted standards, against criteria that reflect
understanding of desired student outcomes.
4. Standard-setting process to allow use of results in
reporting and accountability systems.
5. Continuous improvement of the assessment
process.
Lara’s IEP Goals Before
Alternate Assessment
• Lara will be fed
• Lara will be cleaned up
• Lara will be moved
Critical Functions
focus on function of standard in
enhancing a student’s life
• Standard: “Student communicates
ideas through speaking to various
audiences”
• Critical Function: “Communicate
ideas”
• Alternate Form: “Use augmentative
and alternative communication system”
»Kleinert & Kearns, 2001
Alternate assessments have
produced dramatic changes in the
education of students with
disabilities
They raise expectation issues all over
again!
More information?
Visit: http://education.umn.edu/nceo
or Search for NCEO
Web site includes:
 Topic introduction
 Frequently Asked Questions
 Online and Other Resources