2015-2016 APR Snapshot #16:
Martha Thurlow and Yi-Chen Wu July, 2018 All rights reserved. Any or all portions of this document may be reproduced and distributed without prior permission, provided the source is cited as: Thurlow, M. L. & Wu, Y.-C. (2018). 2015-2016 APR snapshot #16: State assessment participation and performance of students receiving special education services. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Table of Contents
BackgroundThis brief provides a snapshot of the participation and performance of students receiving special education services in statewide assessments used for Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) accountability. Using federally submitted data for the 2015-16 school year, we present information on participation and performance in reading and mathematics statewide assessments administered to grade 8 students. Figures displaying statewide assessment data for other grades are provided in this report following each figure. Data tables for all grade levels are available at nceo.info/Resources/publications/APRsnapshot/data. Throughout this brief, we use the term “students with disabilities” to refer to students receiving special education services. Thus, students on 504 accommodation plans are not included in these analyses. Top of page | Table of Contents FindingsParticipation in ReadingOverall participation of students with disabilities in statewide grade 8 reading assessments in the regular states is presented in Figure 1. Four of the 50 states are not included in this figure because not all of the data needed for calculations were available (e.g., participation number for the alternate assessment was not reported); the needed data were either not reported or were suppressed for data quality issues. Students with disabilities may participate in the regular assessment or in assessments designated for students receiving special education services only. In 2015-16, the other assessments included the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) and the alternate assessment based on grade-level achievement standards (AA-GLAS). States were encouraged to phase out the alternate assessment based on modified achievement standards (AA-MAS) by 2014-15 (Lazarus, Thurlow, & Edwards, 2013) and the data indicated that this did occur. No AA-MAS data were reported in 2015-16 data. Total participation rates of students with disabilities (across all assessments) were typically 90% or higher across the 46 regular states, with the average participation rate being 95.1%. The percentages of students with disabilities participating in other statewide assessments (AA-AAS and AA-GLAS) varied dramatically, resulting in different rates of participation in the regular assessment. The AA-AAS for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities was available in all of the 46 states with data available. The participation rate in the AA-AAS varied from 4.7% to 17.7% of all students with disabilities (including those in other assessments). The average rate across states was 9.4% of students with disabilities. Two states reported testing students on an AA-GLAS. The percentages of students in this assessment were relatively small, with one state having a participation rate of 0.25% and the other 0.01% of all grade 8 students with disabilities. In most states, the test that is taken by the majority of students with disabilities is the regular assessment. Still, with their participation in other assessments, the participation rates of students with disabilities in the regular assessment varied from 61.5% to 93.2%. An average of 85.6% of students with disabilities participated in the regular grade 8 reading assessments in 2015-16. The average participation rate was higher at lower grade levels and lower at higher grade levels. Figure 1. 2015-16 Participation Rates for Eighth Grade Students with Disabilities in Reading Assessments for Regular States
Grades 3 - 7 and High School Reading. Click the images to enlarge.
Ten unique states reported data in grade 8 reading assessments, but one unique state’s data were excluded from Figure 2 because the regular assessment data were not available. Overall participation rates of students with disabilities in grade 8 reading assessments (across all assessments) in unique states that reported data (n=9) varied from 18.2% to 100% (see data available at nceo.info/Resources/publications/APRsnapshot/data). No unique state reported data for an AA-GLAS assessment, indicating that the overall participation rates are based on the regular assessment and the AA-AAS. Participation rates for the AA-AAS in the unique states varied from 0% to 33.3% of students with disabilities. Regular assessment participation made up the bulk of the assessment activity for students with disabilities in the unique states. These states reported a range of 18.2% to 100% participation in the regular assessment at the 8th grade level. Figure 2. 2015-16 Participation Rates for Eighth Grade Students with Disabilities in Reading Assessments for Unique States
Grades 3 - 7 and High School Reading. Click the images to enlarge.
Participation in MathematicsOverall participation of students with disabilities in statewide grade 8 mathematics assessments in the regular states is presented in Figure 3. Four of the 50 states are not included in this figure because the regular assessment data were either not reported or were suppressed for data quality. Total participation rates for students with disabilities (across all assessments) were typically 90% or higher across the 46 regular states, with the average participation rate being 94.7%. The percentages of students with disabilities participating in other statewide assessments (AA-AAS and AA-GLAS) varied dramatically, resulting in different rates of participation in the regular assessment. States tested an average of 9.5% of all students with disabilities (including students in other assessments) on an AA-AAS. The range across states was from 4.7% to 18.6%. Only one state reported testing students on an AA-GLAS. The percentages of students in this assessment were relatively small, with one state having a participation rate of 0.04% for grade 8 students with disabilities. In most states, the test taken by the majority of students with disabilities was the regular assessment. An average of 85.2% of students with disabilities across the 46 states with data participated in this assessment. The range in participation was from 59.0% to 93.1%. Figure 3. 2015-16 Participation Rates for Eighth Grade Students with Disabilities on Mathematics Assessments for Regular States
Grades 3 - 7 and High School Mathematics. Click the images to enlarge.
Ten unique states reported participation data in grade 8 mathematics assessments. Only nine unique states data were included in Figure 4 because one unique state only reported participation data for the AA-AAS. Overall participation rates of students with disabilities in grade 8 mathematics assessments (across all assessments) in unique states (n = 9) that reported data varied from 18.2% to 100% (see data available at nceo.info/Resources/publications/APRsnapshot/data). No unique state reported data for an AA-GLAS assessment. Participation rates for the AA-AAS at the 8th grade level in unique states ranged from 0% to 33.3%. Regular assessment participation made up the bulk of the assessment activity for students with disabilities in the unique states. These states reported a range of 18.2% to 100% participation in the regular assessment at the 8th grade level.Figure 4. 2015-16 Participation Rates for Eighth Grade Students with Disabilities in Mathematics Assessments for Unique States
Grades 3 - 7 and High School Mathematics. Click the images to enlarge.
Proficiency in ReadingProficiency rates were calculated for each assessment. If a state reported information for either the regular assessment or AA-AAS alone, the proficiency rate was calculated based on that assessment; all of these results are included in this brief. In total, 48 states were included for reading proficiency (see Figure 5)—44 states reported both regular assessment and AA-AAS data, 3 states reported regular assessment data only, 1 state reported AA-AAS data only, and 2 states reported AA-GLAS data. The number of regular states with performance data for 2015-16 reading assessments was higher than the number of states with participation data. The two states not included for reading proficiency had their data suppressed because of data quality issues or because the number was not reported. Four of the 48 states only reported proficiency rates for one assessment (either the regular assessment of the AA-AAS, and had small cell size on the other assessment). For these states, only one proficiency rate was included. Overall proficiency rates for students with disabilities in grade 8 (across all reading assessments) ranged from 4.2% to 43.9% (see Figure 5, with states ordered according to the percentage proficient or above on the regular assessment). Forty-four states reported both regular and AA-AAS proficiency rates. The average grade 8 proficiency rate across all reading assessments was 16.3%. Six states reported overall proficiency rates of more than 30%; three of these states reported total proficiency of 40% or more. For students with disabilities participating in the AA-AAS, between 0.7% and 29.1% were proficient or above on the AA-AAS across the 45 states with AA-AAS data (based on all students with disabilities, not just those participating in the AA-AAS). The average percentage of students taking the AA-AAS who were proficient and above was 5.3%. For students with disabilities participating in the AA-GLAS (in the two states that offered this assessment), only one state reported a proficiency rate, with it being 0.1%. Proficiency rates on the regular assessment varied from 2.2% to 38.5%. An average of 12.3% of students with disabilities were at or above the proficient level on regular grade 8 assessments across 47 states in 2015-16. Figure 5. 2015-16 Performance Trends for Eighth Grade Students with Disabilities on Reading Assessments for Regular States
Grades 3 - 7 and High School Reading. Click the images to enlarge.
Figure 6 presents proficiency rates for unique states, with states ordered according to the percentage proficient or above on the regular assessment. Six unique states reported proficiency information. Specifically, four unique states reported data for the regular assessment, with the other two having their data suppressed. Four unique states had data available for the AA-AAS, with one of the other unique states having its AA-AAS data suppressed due to small cell sizes and one other not reporting any data for the AA-AAS. Overall proficiency rates in unique states that reported 2015-16 assessment data varied from 2.9% to 23.6% (see data available at nceo.info/Resources/publications/APRsnapshot/data). No unique state reported data for an AA-GLAS assessment. Four unique states reported proficiency rates for the AA-AAS. These states reported a range of 1.1% to 5.2% (based on all students with disabilities, not just those in the AA-AAS). Proficiency on the regular assessment made up the bulk of the overall proficiency rate for students with disabilities in the unique states. These states reported a range of 2.9% to 22.5% proficient on the regular assessment. Figure 6. 2015-16 Performance Trends for Eighth Grade Students with Disabilities on Reading Assessments for Unique States
Grades 3 - 7 and High School Reading. Click the images to enlarge.
Proficiency in MathematicsAs for reading, the number of regular states with performance data for 2015-16 mathematics assessments was higher than the number of states with participation data. A total of 48 regular states had performance data for mathematics 2015-16 assessments (see Figure 7). Two states were not included because the number of students at or above the proficient level was not reported (one state had its data suppressed due to quality issues and the other one had no data because its assessment was cancelled). Of the 48 states, 45 states had performance data on both regular assessments and AA-AAS, another two states had performance data for regular assessments only, and one state had performance data for the AA-AAS only. Overall proficiency rates for students with disabilities in grade 8 (across all mathematics assessments) in the regular states were generally lower than proficiency rates for reading. Figure 7 shows mathematics performance for states ordered according to the percentage of students with disabilities proficient or above on the regular assessment. Proficiency rates ranged from 4.7% to 42.1%, with the average across the 45 states with proficiency rates calculated for both regular and AA-AAS being 13.0%. None of these states reported performance data for the AA-GLAS. Five states reported overall proficiency rates of more than 30% and only two states reported total proficiency rates of more than 40%. For students with disabilities participating in the AA-AAS, between 0.4% and 38.7% were proficient or above on the AA-AAS across the 46 states with complete data (based on all students with disabilities, not just those participating in the AA-AAS). The average percentage of students taking the AA-AAS who were proficient and above was 5.1% across 46 states. Proficiency rates on the regular assessment varied from 1.8% to 32.7%. An average of 9.3% of students with disabilities were at or above the proficient level on regular grade 8 assessments across 47 states in 2015-16. Figure 7. 2015-16 Performance Trends for Eighth Grade Students with Disabilities on Mathematics Assessments for Regular States
Grades 3 - 7 and High School Mathematics. Click the images to enlarge.
Seven unique states reported proficiency information for mathematics assessments. Two unique states had performance data for both the regular assessment and AA-AAS, another two states only had performance data for regular assessments (data for the AA-AAS in these states were suppressed because of small cell sizes), and the other three states only had performance data for the AA-AAS (data for regular assessments were suppressed because of small sample sizes). Overall proficiency rates in unique states that reported 2015-16 mathematics assessment data varied from 2.9% to 9.1% (see data available at www.cehd.umn.edu/nceo/APRsnapshot/data). No unique state reported data for the AA-MAS or the AA-GLAS. Five states reported proficiency rates for mathematics at grade 8 on the AA-AAS. These ranged from 1.0% to 9.1% (based on all students with disabilities, not only those taking the AA-AAS). The average rate was 5.1%. Only four unique states reported proficiency rates on their regular assessments in grade 8. These ranged from 1.8% to 5.8% with the average rate of 3.8% (based on all students with disabilities). Figure 8. 2015-16 Performance Trends for Eighth Grade Students with Disabilities on Mathematics Assessments for Unique States
Grades 3 - 7 and High School Mathematics. Click the images to enlarge.
Top of page | Table of Contents ConclusionsThe data presented in this report represent a snapshot of the participation and performance of students receiving special education services on their states’ reading and mathematics assessments. Forty-six regular states and 9 unique states had participation data available for analysis. Forty-five regular states had proficiency data for both reading and math assessments, and 5 unique states and 7 unique states had proficiency data for reading and mathematics assessments separately that were available for analysis. Variability identified in participation and performance rates reflects the differences in the state assessment systems themselves, including where the proficient cuts were set and whether alternate assessment options such as the AA-AAS and AA-GLAS were available for students with disabilities. In most of the regular states, students with disabilities at the earlier grade levels generally showed higher rates of proficiency on state mathematics assessments compared to their performance on state reading assessments. As the grade level increases, more states’ students with disabilities showed higher proficiency rates in reading than in math. This same pattern was found in previous years’ APR snapshots (Vang & Thurlow, 2013, 2014; Thurlow & Wu, 2016, Wu & Thurlow, 2017). In the 2013 and 2015 NAEP results (The Nation’s Report Card, n.d.-a, n.d.-b) more students with disabilities showed proficient performance at the lower grades compared to the higher grades on mathematics, but showed basically the same proficiency rates in the higher grades for both reading and mathematics assessments. It is apparent from this snapshot of the participation and performance of students with disabilities that examining their performance levels is more complicated than it is for students not receiving special education services because the participation and performance data are not only from the regular assessment, but also from one or more alternate assessments. Students with disabilities are proficient in varying rates across the different assessments offered within states. In just looking at the regular assessment, it becomes apparent that the scores on this assessment are likely a major reason for that discrepancy (whereas performance on alternate assessments may be more consistent across content areas). This complexity is not necessarily reflected in public reports of participation and performance (Lazarus, Albus, & Thurlow, 2016; Thurlow, Albus, & Lazarus, 2017).Top of page | Table of Contents ResourcesLazarus, S. S., Thurlow, M. L., & Edwards, L. M. (2013). States' flexibility plans for phasing out the Alternate Assessment Based on Modified Academic Achievement Standards (AA-MAS) by 2014-15 (Synthesis Report 89). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Lazarus, S. S., Albus, D., & Thurlow, M. L. (2016). 2013-14 publicly reported assessment results for students with disabilities and ELLs with disabilities (NCEO Report 401). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Vang, M., & Thurlow, M. (2013). 2010-2011 APR snapshot #4: State assessment participation and performance of students receiving special education services. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Vang, M., & Thurlow, M. (2014). 2011-2012 APR snapshot #7: State assessment participation and performance of students receiving special education services. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. The Nation’s Report Card. (n.d.-a). 2015 mathematics & reading assessments—Overall achievement levels 4th grade. Retrieved February 21, 2017, from https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_2015/#mathematics/acl?grade=4 The Nation’s Report Card. (n.d.-b). 2015 mathematics & reading assessments—Overall achievement levels 8th grade. Retrieved February 21, 2017, from https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_2015/#mathematics/acl?grade=8 Thurlow, M. L., Albus, D. A., & Lazarus, S. S. (2017). 2014-15 publicly reported assessment results for students with disabilities and ELs with disabilities (NCEO Report 405). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Thurlow, M. L., & Wu, Y.-C. (2016). 2013-2014 APR snapshot #10: State assessment participation and performance of students receiving special education services. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Wu, Y.-C. , & Thurlow, M. L. (2017). 2014-2015 APR snapshot #13: State assessment participation and performance of students receiving special education services. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
|
