Synthesis Report 90Accommodation Policies for States' Alternate Assessments based on Alternate Achievement Standards (AA-AAS)Debra Albus and Martha L. Thurlow July 2013 All rights reserved. Any or all portions of this document may be reproduced and distributed without prior permission, provided the source is cited as: Albus, D., & Thurlow, M. L., (2013). Accommodation policies for states' alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) (Synthesis Report 90). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Table of Contents
Executive SummaryRemoving barriers to enable students to better show what they know on academic assessments has been an important focus of policy and initiatives in assessment design for some time. As states have joined together to focus on common academic standards in English language arts and mathematics (see www.corestandards.org), there is an opportunity to design assessments that incorporate the best of what is known about accommodations in order to allow students to demonstrate their knowledge on these standards. There are four federally funded consortia working on two types of assessments: two that are developing general assessment systems (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers--PARCC, and Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium--SBAC), and two that are developing systems for alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (Dynamic Learning Maps--DLM, and National Center and State Collaborative--NCSC). Current accommodations policies may assist the consortia in thinking through policies for their new assessments. Since 1992, the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) has analyzed participation and accommodation policies for students with disabilities on state administered assessments. This report focuses on accommodation policies for alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS). In addition to presenting a national overview of policies, we also address the results of our policy analysis by the four content assessment consortia (PARCC, SBAC, DLM, and NCSC). This summary of the results of our analysis of accommodation policies for AA-AAS is organized under three areas of focus: the terms states used to describe changes in assessment administration, the specific accommodations addressed in policies overall, the accommodations addressed for ELLs and accommodation guidelines provided by states. Detailed information overall and by the four consortia are provided in the report appendices. Accommodation Terms States UsedStates used a variety of terms in their policies for the AA-AAS, including accommodation, adaptation, and modification. Even when the same term was used by two states, it sometimes meant different things. In addition, within states, the same term might be used inconsistently across documents such as in test administration manuals, frequently asked questions pages, and other accommodation policy documents. Accommodation Policies for AA-AASWe separated our analysis of AA-AAS accommodations into "traditional" and "unique" accommodations. We defined traditional accommodations to be those that were in previous policy analyses for general assessments. These included accommodations such as directions read; scribe; amplification; extra breaks; and so on. The traditional accommodations for which most states had differing policies were: scribe; passages or items read; explanation of terms/provide examples; and specific math supports. We defined unique accommodations to be those that were rarely found in policies for the general assessment or that were new in AA-AAS policies. Examples of these are:
For unique accommodations, states showed the most differences in policy on Prompting with cues to answer, modeling, physical prompting/guiding, and alter task. Addressing ELLs in Accommodation PoliciesTen states had information on accommodation policies for ELLs or students who use a language other than English. Accommodations that directly addressed linguistic factors were:
The most controversial of these accommodations across states were translating test and oral translation. Overall, for both traditional and unique accommodations for the AA-AAS, very few states addressed AA-AAS accommodations by content area (e.g., reading, writing). This is generally unlike the policies for the general assessment. Accommodation Guidelines Provided for AA-AASSome states provide specific guidelines for how accommodations are administered. Seven states (Florida, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Wisconsin, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Virgin Islands), provided guidelines for one or more accommodations on AA-AAS. Four of the seven states provided guidelines for using pictures/objects, and three states each had guidelines for description/labels and encouragement/prompt. Other guidelines were provided, but by fewer than three states, for teacher moves manipulatives, physical prompting/guiding, read aloud, repeating items, response mode, transcriber, and translator. Top of Page | Table of Contents OverviewRemoving barriers to enable students to better show what they know on academic assessments has been an important focus of policy and initiatives in better assessment designs for some time (Thompson, Thurlow, & Malouf, 2004; Gong & Marion, 2006, Quenemoen, 2008; Ysseldyke, Thurlow, & Linn, 1999). Now that most states have joined together to develop assessments based on common academic standards in English language arts and mathematics (Achieve, 2010; Porter, McMaken, Hwang, & Yang, 2011), there is an opportunity to design assessments that incorporate the best of what is known about accommodations so that all students will be able to demonstrate their knowledge on these common standards. The standards, which were developed by the National Governors' Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, along with other organizations (see www.corestandards.org), are supposed to be clearer, fewer, and higher, which should promote better accommodation policies than have been possible in the past. There are currently six federally-funded consortia working on three types of assessments. Two of the consortia are developing English language proficiency assessments (ASSETS and ELPA21) for English language learners. The other four are focused on assessing the common core standards in English language arts and mathematics. Two of the consortia are developing general assessment systems for students without significant cognitive disabilities (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers--PARCC, and Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium--SBAC). An additional two consortia are developing systems for alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) (Dynamic Learning Maps--DLM, and National Center and State Collaborative--NCSC). The development of credible and appropriate accommodations is important for all of these assessments, but is perhaps most challenging for the AA-AAS consortia. It is this assessment that at one time many years ago was called the "ultimate accommodation" (Thurlow, Elliott, & Ysseldyke, 2000), but which we now know needs to be clearer about the constructs that are being measured and about the changes that can be made to testing materials and procedures to maintain the validity of results because the changes do not alter the construct being measured. Since 1992, the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) has analyzed participation and accommodation policies for students with disabilities on state administered assessments. This report focuses on accommodation policies for alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS). In addition to presenting a national overview of policies, we also present the results of our policy analysis by the four content assessment consortia (PARCC, SBAC, DLM, and NCSC). This report provides an update to previous reports that included AA-AAS accommodations in their analyses but did not separate them out, although details could be found in appendix tables (e.g., Christensen, Braam, Scullin, & Thurlow, 2011). Given the new AA-AAS development activities by many states through the DLM and NCSC consortia, it is important to look specifically at accommodations in the AA-AAS. This report presents information on the extent to which states report information on accommodations policies for the AA-AAS, the terms used by states, and the policies and guidelines that they present. In addition, we examine policies addressing ELLs in states' AA-AAS accommodations policies. Top of Page | Table of Contents Organization of ReportWe examined both where accommodations policies for AA-AAS are found and the content of the policies. The first part of this report focuses on where accommodation policies were found for AA-AAS and the terms used by states in policy documents (e.g., accommodation, modification, adaptation, etc.). The information is presented first by all states overall, and then by consortia. In the second part of the report, we present the nature of the accommodation policies found in documents. We separated the policies according to whether they reflected traditional accommodations (i.e., those often found for general assessments) or accommodations unique to AA-AAS. Then, we provide information on accommodations identified for English language learners (ELLs) participating in the AA-AAS. We conclude with additional guidelines that states provided for administering AA-AAS accommodations and issues of consistency in use of terms within states. Top of Page | Table of Contents MethodNCEO staff reviewed state department of education websites, collecting information on both participation and accommodation policies in August and September of 2011. Results from the examination of participation policies were summarized by Albus and Thurlow (2012). Information was collected for all states. This included the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 8 special entities (American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Republic of Palau, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico). We did not gather information from the Bureau of Indian Education or the Department of Defense. The Bureau of Indian Education uses the policies of the states in which their schools are located. From collected policy documents (see Appendix A), staff compiled notes on accommodations for AA-AAS (see Appendix B tables). After compiling in a spreadsheet the categories of accommodations using state policy language, each state's information was entered into a form for use in verifying the data with each state. An email was sent to the state assessment director or state AA-AAS staff explaining our request for verification, with an individualized state form that summarized the information we found for its AA-AAS accommodations. These emails were sent on November, 21, 2011 and the requested deadline for response was December 23, 2011. A short extension to this deadline was allowed for gathering and clarifying data into early January, 2012. Overall, 36 states or unique entities verified data in response to the request. In the verification process, 57 of the 58 states and unique entities had documents available that contained policy information for AA-AAS. Of these, 32 states had policy information on specific accommodations. Six additional states made statements during the verification process that either all administration changes listed on the sheet could be used or that the changes were already considered to be acceptable in the design of the assessment, so the state did not refer to them as accommodations. These six states were not counted in the total that had accommodations information, but their responses are included in Appendix B. The documents included in this report were those with the most recent information relevant to the study. Overall, 10% of the states/entities had documents from before 2011, 44% had documents for 2010-2011, 42% had documents for 2011-2012, and 7% had documents with no date. We organized the information on accommodations for AA-AAS both overall across all states and by the states in each of the four content assessment consortia. The four consortia are referred to in figures by their abbreviations:
State membership designations for the consortia were accurate as of January, 2012. Some states were in both of the general assessment consortia (PARCC and SBAC) at that time (Alabama, Colorado, Delaware, Kentucky, New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina), and others were in none of the consortia (Minnesota, Nebraska, and Texas). In all figures, unless stated otherwise, the data reflect accommodations that were mentioned by at least five states. Accommodations mentioned by fewer than five states are included in Appendix Table B.6, Table B.9, and Table B.12. Top of Page | Table of Contents Location and Nature of Accommodation PoliciesAccommodation policies can be found consolidated in one state document addressing all state assessments, or in multiple state documents addressing specific populations or specific assessments. In this section, we address where accommodation policies for AA-AAS were found. We also describe other types of information states reported, such as information on accommodations for English language learners (ELLs) or for specific content areas. We summarize the terms states used to describe changes to the administration or materials of the AA-AAS (e.g., accommodation, adaptation). Both the information about policy documents and accommodation terms are presented first by states overall, then by consortia. Accommodation Policy Documents Across StatesAccommodation information for AA-AAS was collected from a variety of policy documents. Figure 1 shows the number of states and entities that addressed accommodation policy in various ways and in different types of documents. Fifty-seven states that had policy information are represented in this figure, but could be represented in more than one entry (e.g., addressed in special education document, ELLs addressed). Most states addressed accommodations in a separate special education document (N=24), and some addressed them in both regular and special education documents (N=7). Only one state addressed AA-AAS accommodations exclusively in a document for regular policy development. The number of states that addressed accommodations for ELLs taking the AA-AAS was small (N=10), and only eight states addressed accommodations for specific content areas. Appendix Table B.1 provides details by state, including those states that indicated they had similar changes that they did not label as accommodations. Figure 1. Accommodation Policies Across States
Accommodation Policy Documents by ConsortiaAcross consortia, most states reported information on accommodations for AA-AAS in a separate special education document (the smallest percentage was 87% of the states in one consortium). A much lower number of states reported accommodations for AA-AAS in its general assessment policies (the highest percentage was 30% of the states in one consortium). We found that a small number mentioned ELLs in AA-AAS accommodation policies (the highest percentage was 30% of states in one consortium). A smaller number addressed specific content areas in the AA-AAS accommodations policies for at least one accommodation (the highest percentage was 23% of states in one consortium). Terms Used Across States OverallStates vary in the terms they use to refer to changes in the administration procedures or materials of an AA-AAS. Some states do not use a special term at all while others use terms such as accommodation, modification, adaptation, or other terms. Of the 57 states or entities that had AA-AAS policy, 40 states used some type of term to refer to these types of changes. These 40 states are presented in Figure 2 (see Appendices Tables B.2 and B.3). Six other states did not use any accommodation terms, but provided other information during the verification process (see Appendix Table B.4).Figure 2 presents the number of states that used the various terms (allowing states to be counted twice if more than one term was used), and the number of states that used one or more terms exclusively. Most states used the term accommodation to indicate changes in materials or procedures for the AA-AAS (N=36). A smaller number of states used terms such as adaptation, modification, or some other term. Although states using the term modification are grouped together (N=15), only four states indicated that the use of the modification had implications for scoring, and ten indicated that the use of the modification had no implications for scoring. In these states the term modification was used interchangeably with accommodation or adaptation. One state used the term modification both ways in the same document, defined one way in the glossary and treated another way in the body of the text (see Appendix Table B.5). Figure 2. Terms Used Across States for Changes in Administration Procedures or Materials
Terms Used Across ConsortiaAs shown in Table 1, terms used for changes in materials or procedures were similar across consortia overall. A higher percentage of states within consortia used "accommodation" for their AA-AAS (54% in NCSC to 69% in DLM). A lower percentage of states used adaptation (15% in DLM to 40% in PARCC) and modification (27% in SBAC to 40% in PARCC). Those states using "modification" varied as to whether there were scoring consequences. A range of 15% (DLM) to 29% (PARCC) of states in consortia groups used some other term. Of the states within consortia that used "accommodation," a range of 12% to 46% used this term exclusively. A range of 23% to 46% of states used accommodation along with another term. A range of 7% to 17% of states only used the "other" term. Data for each consortium are presented here. Table 1. Percentage of Terms Used Across Consortia
Top of Page | Table of Contents Accommodation Types and Policies on Effects of Their UseFor this report, we wanted to identify both those accommodations that are familiar and used in general assessments and those that seem to be unique to the AA-AAS. Thus, we separated accommodations found in policies into either traditional accommodations or unique ones. Both types were evident in the AA-AAS policies, but in this report we explore the unique accommodations in more depth. Traditional AccommodationsTraditional accommodations are those typically found in policies of general assessments and alternates assessments based on modified achievement standards. They are often referred to by a category of accommodation (i.e., presentation, response, equipment, etc.) and may be found in states' 2009 policies (Christensen, Braam, Scullin, & Thurlow, 2011). Table 2 lists the traditional accommodations with the number of states that addressed each within their policy documents for the AA-AAS. The most common traditional accommodations listed for the AA-AAS, across categories, were supports for visual limitation, passages or items read, adapt computer or other machines, and braille. Also, there were some accommodations in AA-AAS documents that were not identified by Christensen et al. (2000) because fewer than five states listed them. These were directions restated by student; passages, items, script modified without providing cues; and providing timing information for student (time remaining, timer, etc.). See Appendix Table B.6, Table B.7, and Table B.8. for detailed information on traditional accommodations. States Allowing Traditional Accommodations for AA-AASTraditional accommodations for AA-AAS that showed the most differences across states as to whether they were allowed, affected scoring, or were prohibited were scribe; passages or items read; explanation of terms/provide examples; and specific math supports. More detailed information about these accommodations is found in Appendix Table B.8. Information on policies on traditional accommodations for AA-AAS for the four consortia is summarized in Tables B.6 and B.7. Table 2. Traditional Accommodation Mentioned in AA-AAS Policy
Braille materials (including braille editions, equipment) Student uses braille materials, braille ruler or other equipment. Directions read/reread/clarified Teacher reads or rereads directions, emphasizes key words, explains or clarifies directions. Passages or items read (includes reading script) Passages or any test item is read aloud or reread to student, including the reading script, audio, or digital voice taped administration. Teachers may present items as sound, or create a loop tape for spoken choices to allow students to scan in auditory mode, have an auditory list of choices or auditory substitutes for materials or supports. Student reads to/records self Student reads aloud to self/records self-reading aloud and plays back. Direction restated by student Student restatement of test directions. Directions signed Signing of teacher read directions or statements. Passages or items signed, cued, manually coded, finger spelled, or total communication Teacher signs, cues, manually codes, or finger spells for the oral script. This includes a person providing interpretation or sign language interpreter software (e.g., iCommunicator).This includes signing of questions, tasks, activities, directives, etc. Passages, items, script changed without providing cues Modifying script with familiar terms that does not affect the intent or difficulty. Familiar trained test examiner Test administered By SpEd Teacher/familiar trained person. Explanation of terms, providing examples, clarifying, etc. Provide extra examples to student including asking clarifying questions or providing examples. Page turning assists Turn pages for student, use Velcro tabs to engage student in turning pages. Format changes Student is allowed format changes to materials such as highlighting, underlining, bolding key elements, added space and related approaches, side by side placement of two test booklets, locating bubbles directly along-side answer choices, etc. Order adjustments Administer subtests to student in different order (e.g., longer subtest first), and allow flexibility in the order of content area tests. Scribe or transcriber Scribe/proctor records response; student requires transcriber to transfer responses from test book to answer sheet. Adapt computer/other machines/Special software Adapt computer or machines including portable computer, scanner, word processor, keyboard, touch screen, or adapted calculators (e.g., talking calculator). This includes special software such as voice recognition, digital or electronic text, etc. Student signs (e.g., ASL) Student signs, with some states allowing ASL or coded English. This includes use of unique student symbol system. Time information for student (time remaining, timer, etc.) Provide students information about the remaining time by using various methods including timer, clock, etc. Other with approval Other accommodation is allowed with approval. Amplification Amplifying equipment or aids. Supports for visual limitations Use of visual supports: use enlarged text/pictures or provided manipulatives/materials. includes enlarged letter size; using cards that present letters in different font; visual aids with enlarged pictures, bolded outlines, simplified pictures, line drawings; colored pictures or clipart/version of test materials; texturizing pictures/materials as substitutes: reverse the color/intensity of the foreground and background of graphics/black and white print; magnifying equipment; cctv; overhead projector; large print version of materials; or materials magnified by teacher. Light/acoustic adjustments Student uses special lighting or acoustics such as noise buffer, white noise, light box, etc. Specific math supports (calculator or abacus) Allow student to use abacus or calculator. Masking templates, place markers Use template or paper to mask materials, or use marker to maintain place. Adaptive furniture/tools/and stabilizing student for most controlled movement possible Providing student adaptive furniture and tools. Stabilize student for most controlled movement possible. These items may include multiple tables to set up skills, arm supports, fidget toys, weighted vest, special chair, slant board/wedge, etc. Writing supports (writing guides, word prediction, etc.) Allow student to use writing guides, word prediction, or sentence starters. Preferred writing tool Signing of teacher read directions/statements or state says signing is allowed, but does not specify what part(s). Colored overlays Use of colored overlay or colored computer screen overlay. Special paper (e.g., familiar paper, graph paper) Provide paper to students that they typically use in class, including graph paper or paper to keep numbers in proper columns, etc. Graphic organizer/checklists, etc. Use of graphic organizer, checklists, Venn diagrams, etc. Extended time for test Student is allowed extended time or extended wait times during test. Extra breaks Allow breaks during tasks, dividing testing over several sessions, and reactivating test if needed. Preferred day or time of day Student may test on a preferred day, at a time of day most beneficial to student. Multiple days Student test session is over multiple days. Different Location (e.g., SpEd room, home, hospital, preferred seating) Student is allowed to take assessment in a different location (e.g., Special Education room, home, hospital, or is allowed preferred seating). Minimize distractions Testing environment chosen to minimize distractions, such as study carrel, quiet location, earphones, etc. Individual administration Student is individually administered the assessment. Small group Student takes assessment in small group. Movement opportunities Student is allowed opportunity to move, stand, or pace. Unique AccommodationsUnique accommodations are those infrequently mentioned in policies for general assessments or that were new in AA-AAS accommodation documents. Table 3 lists the unique accommodations with the number of states with policy addressing each. The nature of the policy (e.g., allowed without restriction, has implications for scoring, prohibited, etc.) is included as well. The most frequently mentioned unique accommodations were: communication aids; use manipulatives modified, with teacher or student moving them; and picture/photos/objects for words or pictures. These were also the accommodations that were most frequently allowed without any restrictions. Only a few accommodations were prohibited by some states. These included prompting with cues to answer; physical prompting/guiding; alter task/modified required response; and modeling. For more detailed information on these accommodations, see Appendix Tables B.9 through B.11. A few of the accommodations listed in the 2009 policies (Christensen et al., 2011) are included with the unique accommodations for AA-AAS because they were listed infrequently. These were supports such as number line; number stamp, etc.; prompt /encourage student; secure paper to work area; visual cues (varying by degree); tactile graphics (grouped with tactile manipulatives/objects); and pointing. Table 3. Potential Impact of Unique Accommodation Use Across States
Key: A=allowed, AC=allowed in a certain circumstance, AI=allowed with implications for scoring, AI/AC=allowed in certain circumstances and with implications for scoring, A/AC=part of the accommodation defined may be allowed and another variation of it is allowed in certain circumstances, and P=prohibited. Picture/photos/objects for words or pictures, etc. A picture, photo, or object is used in place of words or pictures. Descriptions and labels for pictures/graphics Descriptions and labels are used to identify pictures or graphics used in the assessment. Encouragement/prompting without cues to answer This encouragement may go beyond simple prompting to continue, and may involve praise, confirmation, snack or other incentive, stay on task, minimal physical prompting, indirect prompts that are verbal, modeling, or gestural that does not give a cue to the answer. Encouraging/prompting with cues to answer This encouragement or prompting does give cues to the answer. Physical prompting/guiding The teacher physically prompts or guides the student in answering the question. This includes the hand over hand technique. Use of student symbol system (other than ASL) Student uses a personal symbol system for communication of test content. Alter task, modified required response Assessment task is modified so that the required response of the student changes. This may include fewer items, removing options, waive spelling, paragraphing, or punctuation, shorter or simplified text (symbols added, shortened text), or interchangeable directives tailored to individual student (e.g., show me, point to, give me, etc.) Extended response times during test Teacher allows extended response time for the student to give an answer to an item during the assessment to allow for motor and processing time or comprehension. Securing materials for student Materials for the assessment are secured in a way that is optimal for the student to participate in the assessment. This may include magnets, tape, Dycem, Velcro strip boards, magnetic board, etc. Dietary considerations Student is provided sensory dietary choices that allow him or her to optimally participate in the assessment. Use manipulatives This includes using modified ones, with the teacher or student moving them. Math supports These include number stamp, number line, adapted number line, sentence starter, etc. Other supports are listed under traditional accommodations. Writing Supports These include letter stamp, tracing lines/student traces dotted version of letter, alphabet line, etc. Other supports are listed under traditional accommodations. Communication mode This includes eye gaze, breathing pattern, gesture, vocalizations, change in muscle tone, body position/posture, etc. Communication aids These include coactive signing (expressive), kinesthetic supports, switch, stick, pointer, assistive or augmentative communication device, choice board, yes/no symbol board or cards. Figure 3 shows the unique accommodations for which state's policies were most varied, with some allowing the accommodation without restriction (A), some allowing under certain conditions (AC), some allowing with implications for scoring (AI), and some completely prohibiting them (P). As seen in the figure, the four accommodations had considerable divergence in policies--prompting with cues to answer; modeling; physical prompting/guiding; and alter task. Each bar is based on the number of states with a policy on the accommodation. For more detailed information summarized by consortia, see Appendix Tables B.11. Figure 3. Unique Accommodations with Most Differences Among States
Key A=Allowed, AC=Allowed in Certain Circumstances, AI=Allowed with implications for Scoring, P=Prohibited Note: Numbers for A, AC, AI, and P are based on the number of states with each accommodation in its policy (see number in parenthesis). Figure 4 presents the same information as Figure 3, except it presents the widest differences for unique accommodations by consortia groups. Because there is overlap with states across consortia, and the numbers are small, it is difficult to draw conclusions. The widest differences in the four accommodations are seen in the NCSC states, and in the PARCC states for physical prompting and alter task. Figure 4. Unique Accommodations with Widest Differences by Consortia
Key: A=Allowed, AC=Allowed in Certain Circumstances, AI=Allowed with implications for Scoring, P=Prohibited Note: States assignment to consortia is based on their affiliation as of January, 2012. Some states belong to more than one consortium. Top of Page | Table of Contents Accommodations for English Language LearnersTen states had accommodations information on ELLs in policy documents for AA-AAS. Table 4 shows the accommodations that states identified for students who are ELLs who use a language other than English. We include this latter category because some states did not require ELL status to use a bilingual dictionary, which infers the student uses another language (see Appendix Tables B.12 and B.13). Table 4 includes only those accommodations that were listed under a separate section for ELLs. The most controversial accommodations were translating test and oral translation. A detailed summary of the more controversial accommodations by consortia is found in Appendix Table B.14. Table 4. ELL Accommodations in AA-AAS Policies
Limited Assistance in Heritage Language for Words/Phrases Student may receive limited assistance in native language to answer questions about word or phrase. Limited Assistance in Heritage Language to Answer General Questions Students may receive limited assistance in native language to answer their general questions about the test, but not for specific words or phrases in the test. Special Test Preparation Student receives special help in preparing to take the assessment. Oral or Written Clarification Student receives oral or written clarification of test directions in the native language. Translate Directions Student may have directions translated into native language. Translate Test Regular Version Student may take a translated version of the assessment. Oral Translation of Test Student may receive an oral translation of the assessment. English Word to Word /Bilingual Dictionary Student may use an English word to word or bilingual dictionary. Electronic Translator Student may use an electronic translator or electronic bilingual dictionary on the assessment. Response Written in Other Language Student responses may be written in another language other than English. Explain /Clarify Reword Directions Student may have directions explained or reworded to clarify meaning. Time Extension Student may have extended time to take the assessment. More Breaks than Scheduled Student may receive more breaks than are scheduled. Separate Location Student may be assessed in a separate location. Audio Student may use audio equipment to take the assessment. Small Group or Individual Student may be tested in a small group or individually. Minimize Distractions Student may be provided an assessment area that minimizes distractions. Multiple Day Student may take the assessment across multiple days. Top of Page | Table of Contents Other Policy Information for AA-AASAccommodation GuidelinesSome states provided additional guidelines for administering specific accommodations. Table 5 shows the states that provided additional guidelines for accommodations on the AA-AAS. This table does not include guidelines for changes or accommodations that a state considered embedded in the assessment. Seven states, including special entities, provided guidelines for one or more accommodations. Four of the seven states provided guidelines for using pictures/objects, and three states each had guidelines for description/labels and encouragement/prompt. Other guidelines were provided, but by fewer than three states. The state guidelines for these accommodations are provided in Appendix Table B.15. Table 5. Special Guidelines for Accommodations
Inconsistent Terms Across Documents in a StateStates were not always consistent across their documents about what they do or do not consider an accommodation. For example, one state used up to three different terms for several AA-AAS accommodations (i.e., accommodation, general practice, and not applicable for AA-AAS). These terms all were in documents available on the state website at the same time. Some of the differences in terms appeared in the same document in different sections. Table 6 shows the multiple and potentially contradictory terms used in one state, along with the type of document in which the different terms were found. More information, with state identifiers removed, is found in Appendix Table B.16. Table 6. Inconsistent Terms Used in One State
Top of Page | Table of Contents SummaryA summary of the review of accommodation policies for AA-AAS is organized below by the terms states used to describe changes in assessment administration, the specific accommodations addressed in policies overall, the accommodations addressed for ELLs, and accommodations guidelines provided for AA-AAS. Accommodation Terms States UsedAcross states, most states used the terms accommodation, adaptation or modification. Some of these states also used other terms, or used another term exclusively. States using the same term did not always use them consistently. For example, "modification" could mean a change with or without implications for scoring depending on the state. One state was unclear, using modification with no scoring implications in the body of the document, but then defining the term in the back of the document in a glossary as having scoring implications. Although a state may use a variety of terms to refer to assessment accommodations, sometimes a state used terms inconsistently across state documents to refer to the same accommodation. States should state clearly what changes they consider to be accommodations, general testing practices for all students, or changes not applicable to the AA-AAS, and strive for consistency across the documents that inform policy such as test administration manuals, frequently asked questions pages, and other accommodation policy documents. Further, there should be consistency regarding what accommodations are allowed across populations. For example, we found that in some AA-AAS documents an accommodation was allowed for all students taking the assessment, but was not allowed for ELLs taking the assessment. If there was a reason for this difference in policy, it should be clarified; if it is a matter of inconsistency, it should be changed. Accommodation Policies for AA-AASAccommodations can be viewed as traditional or unique. Traditional accommodations are those that have appeared in previous policy analyses for general assessments and alternate assessments based on modified achievement standards. The unique accommodations are those rarely found in previous analyses or that were new to the current AA-AAS policies. Among the traditional accommodations, two were not mentioned in AA-AAS policies: Writing in test booklet and monitoring placement of student responses. Other accommodations that were rare in general policies but were more common for AA-AAS were number line, number stamp, etc.; prompt /encourage student; secure paper to work area; visual cues (varying by degree); tactile graphics; and pointing. Accommodations unique to AA-AAS policies were: picture/photos/objects for words or pictures; descriptions and labels for pictures/graphics; encouragement/prompting without cues to answer; encouraging/prompting with cues to answer; modeling; physical prompting/guiding; use of student's symbol system other than ASL; alter task/modified required response; dietary considerations; and communication mode. As in policy analyses for general assessments, states varied in whether certain accommodations were allowed, affected scoring, or were prohibited. Among the unique accommodations, states showed the most differences in policy on prompting with cues to answer; modeling; physical prompting/guiding; and alter task. Among the traditional accommodations, most states differed on scribe; passages or items read; explanation of terms/provide examples; and specific math supports. Addressing ELLs in AccommodationsOverall, 10 states had information on accommodation policies for ELLs or students who use a language other than English. For the 19 accommodations addressed, states did not always specify or require ELL status yet allowed an accommodation that assumes another language (e.g., bilingual dictionary). Some of these ELL accommodations were the same as for other students (e.g., multiple day), but because they were listed under a separate section for ELLs they were included. Other accommodations, that directly addressed linguistic factors, were: limited assistance in heritage language for words, phrases; limited assistance in heritage language for general assessment questions; oral or written clarification; translate directions; translate test; oral translation of test; English word to word or bilingual dictionary; electronic translator; response written in other language; or explain/clarify reword directions. The most controversial accommodations across states were translating test and oral translation. Accommodation Guideines Provided for AA-AASSome states provided specific guidelines for how accommodations are administered. Seven states, including special entities, provided guidelines for one or more accommodations on AA-AAS. Four of the seven states provided guidelines for using pictures/objects, and three states each had guidelines for description/labels and encouragement/prompt. Other guidelines were provided, but by fewer than three states for teacher moves manipulatives; physical prompting/guiding; read aloud; repeating items; response mode; transcriber; and translator. Related to guidelines, we further note that very few states addressed AA-AAS accommodations specifically by content (e.g., reading, writing). States allowing changes to the administration or materials of an AA-AAS should be clear about the terms they are using (e.g., accommodations, modifications) across documents. In addition, they should also be specific about the effects and consequences of each accommodation. Clarity about those changes that produce valid results versus those that produce invalid results is essential. Top of Page | Table of Contents ReferencesAchieve. (2010). Closing the expectations gap: Fifth annual 50 state progress report on the alignment of high school policies with the demands of college and careers. Washington, DC: Author. Christensen, L. L., Braam, M., Scullin, S., & Thurlow, M. L. (2011). 2009 state policies on assessment participation and accommodations for students with disabilities (Synthesis Report 83). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Gong, B., & Marion, S. (2006). Dealing with flexibility in assessments for students with significant cognitive disabilities (Synthesis Report 60). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved November 6, 2012, from http://cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Synthesis60.html Thompson, S. J., Thurlow, M. L., & Malouf, D. (2004, May). Creating better tests for everyone through universally designed assessments. Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 10 (2). Porter, A., McMaken, J., Hwang, J., & Yang, R. (2011). Common core standards: The new U.S. intended curriculum. Educational Researcher, 40(3), 103-116. Quenemoen, R. (2008). A brief history of alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (Synthesis Report 68). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Ysseldyke, J. E., Thurlow, M. L., & Linn, D. (1999). NGA Brief: Including students with disabilities in statewide assessments and accountability systems. Washington, DC: National Governors' Association. Top of Page | Table of Contents AppendicesThe Appendices are available in separate documents. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
