INCA Education around the world
USA : Assessment arrangements
6.5.1 CONTROL
6.5.2 PURPOSE(S)
6.5.3 PARTICIPATION
6.5.4 NATURE
6.5.5 ADMINISTRATION
6.5.6 GRADING PROCESS
6.5.7 CONSEQUENCES
6.5.8 USE OF RESULTS
6.5.9 OUTPUT STATISTICS
6.5 PUBLICLY-FUNDED PROVISION OUTSIDE MAINSTREAM EDUCATION
[see 3.2.5]
THAT IS, PROVISION FOR STUDENTS WITH PARTICULAR NEEDS SUCH AS THOSE WITH DISABILITIES, LEARNING DIFFICULTIES, HIGH ABILITY, BEHAVIOURAL DIFFICULTIES, OR THOSE FROM PARTICULAR ETHNIC GROUPS OR TRAVELLER COMMUNITIES
6.5.1 CONTROL
General/national
In accordance with the IDEA legislation,1 schools must develop performance goals, drawn from general classroom students, for all students with disabilities. They must then develop performance indicators to assess the achievement of these goals, with necessary adaptations and modifications.16 That is to say that, since 1 December 1998, states have been held accountable for the academic progress of special needs students. 18
Individual states may develop guidelines for participation in alternative forms of assessment for those students who are unable to participate in state assessment programmes.7
Under a regulation in the No Child Left Behind Act (see section 1.2.1 of the mainstream archive), formalised in December 2003, states, school districts and schools are now able to count the proficient scores of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities who take assessments based on alternate achievement standards. Students are therefore assessed by their achievement based on standards considered appropriate for their intellectual development, thus allowing states to more accurately gauge their progress.
The No Child Left Behind Act prohibits schools from excluding students with disabilities from the accountability system so that parents are able to keep track of their children's progress and check that they are receiving a high quality education. In addition, the Act states that students with disabilities should participate in the same tests taken by their peers. Some of these students should be allowed increased time or the use of assistive technology to ensure that their individual needs are met.41
A detailed copy of the regulation is available at: www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/finrule/2003-4/120903a.html
Kentucky
In Kentucky, students take part in the state-wide Commonwealth Accountability Testing System (CATS). This includes two forms of state-wide test - the Kentucky Core Content Test and the Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS/5).12
Special forms of these tests are made available for students who are hearing or visually impaired. The tests are also available in Braille on request. For full details of CATS see section 6.2 of the mainstream USA Archive.
Massachusetts
See 6.5.3.
Wisconsin
In Wisconsin, students take part in the state-wide Wisconsin Student Assessment System (WSAS), which includes the Wisconsin Reading Comprehension Test (WRCT) for students in Grade 3 (aged 8-9) and the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations (WKCE) for students in Grades 4, 8 and 10 (aged 10, 14 and 16 respectively).24 (Further details of these assessment systems are provided in the mainstream USA Archive. Please click on the mainstream 'button' on the top left of this page to access this Archive.)
For students with a disability, there are three broad options available:
- participation in the standard assessment with no accommodations (that is to say modifications/amendments to the standard assessment system);
- participation in the standard assessment with accommodations; and
- participation through an alternative assessment (see 6.5.4).25
Accommodations refer typically to a change in the testing environment or the way a student responds to questions from a test.24 The only appropriate justification for a student not to participate in the WRCT or WKCE tests is a decision by his or her IEP team that, even with accommodations (modifications), the student would be unable to demonstrate at least some of the knowledge and skills tested through the standardised assessment.25
6.5.2 PURPOSE(S)
General/national
Until recently, many states throughout the USA allowed individual school districts to exclude students with disabilities from state-wide tests. In June of 1997, however, President Clinton signed into law a Bill re-authorising the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and this Bill included many changes in the way that schools provide education to children with disabilities. Included in these changes was a provision that required all students with disabilities to participate in state-wide (and district-wide) assessments. To help students with disabilities participate in these assessments, the federal law specified that students with disabilities must be provided with appropriate 'accommodations', when necessary. (An accommodation typically is a change in the testing environment or the way a student responds to questions from a test.) The federal law also specified that students with disabilities must be provided with alternate assessment when participation in the state-wide test is not appropriate, even with accommodations.24
These changes were made for three reasons:
- Firstly, to provide To provide students with disabilities with the same opportunity with the same opportunity as students without disabilities to demonstrate the knowledge and skills learned through their educational experiences. Students with disabilities are a diverse group of learners with a wide range of abilities and skills. As a result, many students with disabilities are able to perform well on assessments when provided with appropriate accommodations.
- Second, to gain an accurate understanding of how the educational system is functioning for all students, students with disabilities must be included in assessments that are administered for accountability purposes.
- Third, many states have begun to use test scores as a criterion for promotion to the next grade or for graduation. Current Wisconsin law, for example, requires that test scores be considered in making promotion and graduation decisions beginning in 2002-2003. In addition, many colleges and universities require students to complete tests for admission. Students with disabilities who have never had the opportunity of participating in such tests are potentially at a disadvantage because they have not had previous experience with these types of testing situations.24
A major subsequent piece of legislation, the No Child Left Behind Act builds on the principles of IDEA. A regulation in this Act, which was formalised in December 2003 allows states, school districts and schools to count the proficient scores of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities who take assessments based on alternate achievement standards. This aims to allow a more accurate assessment of their achievements, judged on standards appropriate for their development. The Act also prohibits schools from excluding students with disabilities from the accountability system and states that most students with disabilities should participate in the same tests as their peers, with special accommodations, where appropriate.41 See also section 6.5.1.
Maryland
The Early Identification and Intervention Programme (EIIP) was developed in response to a bill enacted in 1973 by the Maryland General Assembly requiring that "each student entering his first year in any primary grade (age 5+) in any public school should be evaluated for the purpose of identifying learning disabilities". The EIIP is administered by the local school system for students in primary phase education in Maryland (that is, in Kindergarten and Grades 1-3, aged 5+-9). It provides guidance to schools for the identification, referral, review and evaluation, and intervention services for students who may have special educational needs or disabilities. Students who may have a disability are referred for special education screening. 25
Through EIIP, children are screened early in their school careers. This allows children with identified learning disabilities to receive the help they need through instructional intervention or help in the classroom, and, if necessary, support from specialised school programmes. All of this is done while children are young so that they can immediately get the support they require to learn the knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed for long-lasting success in school. Students in Kindergarten and Grades 1-3 benefit from EIIP by receiving support for the early foundations of learning that will maximize their potential for academic success.25
6.5.3 PARTICIPATION
General/national
In view of the fact that recent state and federal special education legislation emphasises access to the general curriculum for students with disabilities, educational goals in students' individualised education plan (IEPs) are usually based on academic content standards. Consequently, federal and state special education legislation generally requires that all students with disabilities should, wherever possible, participate in standard state-wide and district-wide assessments. However, the IDEA legislation also recognises that state- or district-wide assessment programmes may need some modification for some students with special needs. Equally, it recognises that, for some children, alternative methods of assessment will need to be developed.25
There are a very small number of students nationwide whose IEPs specify that they should be excluded from regular assessments. Several state and national reviews concerning alternative methods of assessment for students with special needs have suggested that approximately 10 to 20 per cent of students with disabilities, or one to two per cent of the total student population would participate via an alternative form of assessment.25
Under a regulation in the No Child Left behind Act, which was formalised in December 2003 and builds on the principles of IDEA, most students with disabilities should participate in the same tests as their peers. Where appropriate, these students should also receive accommodations such as increased time or use of assistive technology41. See also 6.5.1.
Kentucky
See 6.5.1.
Maryland
It is the policy of Maryland to include all students to the fullest extent possible in all state assessment programmes. However, state assessment tests may be modified for students with disabilities or English as a Second Language (ESL).20
Students may, for example, be excused from testing under the statewide Maryland School Assessment programme (see section 6.2 of the mainstream USA Archive) for a variety of reasons, such as demonstrating inordinate frustration, distress, or disruption of others and/or requiring accommodations that the school is unable to provide. Students who are exempted do not take the test and are not included in the calculation of test scores for a school. Students who are excused do not take the test, but are included in the calculation of test scores. In other words, the school is not held responsible for students who are exempted from the test; it is held responsible for students who are excused from the test.20
Massachusetts
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS)
Originally, when MCAS testing was introduced, all public school students in Grades 4, 8, and 10 (aged 9-10, 13-14 and 15-16 respectively) had to take part in annual MCAS testing. Since the start of the 2001/2002 school year, students in other Grades have been involved in addition, as follows:
| MCAS tests in: | Grade 3 (aged 8-9) | Grade 4 (aged 9-10) | Grade 5 (aged 10-11) | Grade 6 (aged 11-12) | Grade 7 (aged 12-13) | Grade 8 (aged 13-14) | Grade 10 (aged 15-16) |
| English language arts | X | X | X | X | X | ||
| Mathematics | X | X | X | X | |||
| Science and technology | X | X | X | ||||
| History and social sciences | X | X | X |
Source: MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (2002). Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System: Overview. [Online] at http://www.doe.mass.edu/
It is generally intended that the MCAS tests should be administered to all students in the relevant Grades, including those with disabilities and to students with limited English proficiency. Indeed, in principle, the Education Reform Act 5 provides for no exemptions from taking the tests. This policy aims to ensure that all Massachusetts public school students are provided with the opportunity to learn the materials covered by the curriculum framework learning standards which are covered by the tests(see 5.2.1)76. However, the MCAS tests may be adapted to suit the needs of students with disabilities who meet eligibility requirements. Additionally, if a student is identified as having a disability/disabilities which prevent him or her from taking the MCAS tests, even with adaptations (such as the use of computers using assistive technology aids), that student must be tested by some alternate means of assessment, which is appropriate to the student's academic development. Also, some students with limited English proficiency who have been enrolled in school in the USA for three or fewer years may be exempt from the MCAS tests, or tested using modified/adapted (in some cases, Spanish language) tests. Further details are provided online at http://www.doe.mass.edu/mcas/overview_faq.html
In addition, there is an Academic Support Services Programme (ASSP), which aims to address the needs of students scoring in the 'failing' and 'needs improvement' categories of MCAS testing. ASSP allows districts to offer intensive small group instruction and innovative programming to provide expanded opportunities for students with the greatest need to improve their knowledge and performance. School districts primarily use ASSP funds to extend student learning time before and after school, on weekends and school vacations and during the summer. 35
Further details on MCAS testing are provided in section 6.2 of the mainstream USA Archive.
Wisconsin
Wisconsin Student Assessment System (WSAS)
In general, all students, including those with special needs, must take part in the state-wide WSAS. This incorporates the Wisconsin Reading Comprehension Test (WRCT) in Grade 3 (aged 9) and the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations (WKCE) in Grades 4, 8 and 10 (aged 10,14 and 16 respectively).25 However, various 'accommodations', may be acceptable - see sections 6.5.1 and 6.5.4 in addition.
Until recently, the state of Wisconsin, like many other states throughout the USA, allowed individual school districts to exclude students with disabilities from state-wide tests. In June of 1997, however, President Clinton signed into law a Bill re-authorising the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and this Bill included many changes in the way that schools provide education to children with disabilities. Included in these changes was a provision that required all students with disabilities to participate in state-wide (and district-wide) assessments. To help students with disabilities participate in these assessments, the federal law specified that students with disabilities must be provided with appropriate 'accommodations', when necessary. (An accommodation typically is a change in the testing environment or the way a student responds to questions from a test.) The federal law also specified that students with disabilities must be provided with alternate assessment when participation in the state-wide test is not appropriate, even with accommodations.24
6.5.4 NATURE
General/national - SATs
Students with special needs who take Scholastic Assessment Tests (SATs) on completion of high school - required by many colleges or universities as part of the admission application - may take the examinations under special conditions. Students with documented disabilities may, for example, be allowed additional time to complete the tests. Prior to September 2003, the SATs papers for such students were marked with the notation "Scores Obtained Under Special Conditions". Since September 2003, the College Board (the Board responsible for SATs) has no longer been able to flag disabled students' scores with this notation. As a result, (tertiary) colleges have no way of knowing whether an applicant took the test under normal conditions, or used a computer, worked in a quiet room, or had four-and-a-half hours to take the normally three-hour test. 36
Kentucky
In April 1999, Kentucky introduced a new integrated testing and accountability programme called the Commonwealth Accountability Testing System (CATS). This replaced the previous KIRIS testing programme, and is closely linked to the Kentucky core curriculum.14
CATS includes:
- The CBTS/5 test, which is a multiple-choice test intended to enable national comparison of the performance of Kentucky students.
- The Kentucky Core Contents Tests. These are a mixture of multiple-choice and open response questions in reading, science, mathematics, social studies, arts and humanities, and practical living/vocational studies.
- A writing portfolio, which is a collection of a student's best work from various subjects over time.
- Writing prompts. These are writing tests that measure skills gathered from writing instruction.
- An alternate portfolio. This is a portfolio of student work for students with moderate to severe disabilities.14
See 6.5.1 in addition.
Maryland
Wisconsin
For students who are unable to take part in the Wisconsin Student Assessment System (WSAS) examinations due to their special needs, alternative assessment arrangements are provided. Their performance is measured by other methods, such as classroom-based tests and teacher observations, which are most closely aligned with the objectives identified in the student's individualised education plan (IEP).24
6.5.5 ADMINISTRATION
See sections 6.1.5, 6.2.5, 6.3.5 and 6.4.5 of the mainstream USA Archive in addition.
Maryland
Early Identification and Intervention Programme (EIIP)
See section 6.5.2 in addition.
In 1997, the Maryland State Department of Education created guidelines and criteria to assist local school systems in developing EIIP plans. These local plans guide the identification, referral, review and evaluation, and intervention services for those students who may have educational needs or disabilities.90
The six components of the EIIP, required in all local school system plans, include:
Goals alignment: local school systems are required to align their goals for successful school performance with state-wide EIIP goals.
Screening and assessment: each school system must have a procedure for identifying children who show signs of potential learning problems and must conduct a comprehensive evaluation of those children's abilities to succeed in the school's instructional programme.
Referral: school staff or family members bring concerns about students to the attention of a school-based team which determines the need for intervention and/or further evaluation.
Review and evaluation: documented issues of concern about a student's developmental level and/or ability to meet the expectations of the school's instructional programme are carefully considered and decisions about the need for intervention, further referral, or further evaluation are made. A plan of action is developed for students with confirmed needs. These decisions are made by a school-based team which includes professionals and family members.
Intervention services: modifications and supports both within and outside the classroom are designed to promote student success. These services are tailored to meet children's individual needs.
Accountability: each local school system must have a plan to evaluate the effectiveness of its EIIP in identifying and assisting students with learning disabilities.91
Special education staff must be part of the EIIP process to ensure that sound decisions are made regarding the referral of students to special education. 92
6.5.6 GRADING PROCESS
General/national - SATs
Students with special needs who take Scholastic Assessment Tests (SATs) on completion of high school - required by many colleges or universities as part of the admission application - may take the examinations under special conditions. Students with documented disabilities may, for example, be allowed additional time to complete the tests. Prior to September 2003, the SATs papers for such students were marked with the notation "Scores Obtained Under Special Conditions". Since September 2003, the College Board (the Board responsible for SATs) has no longer been able to flag disabled students' scores with this notation. As a result, (tertiary) colleges have no way of knowing whether an applicant took the test under normal conditions, or used a computer, worked in a quiet room, or had four-and-a-half hours to take the normally three-hour test. 36
No Child Left Behind
Under a provision in the No Child Left Behind Act, which was formalised in December 2003, states, school districts and schools are now able to count the proficient scores of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities who take assessments based on alternate achievement standards. Students are therefore assessed by their achievement based on standards considered appropriate for their intellectual development, thus allowing states to more accurately gauge their progress.41 For further information, see 6.5.1
Wisconsin
Prior to 1997-98, the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations (WKCE) reported test scores as a norm-referenced score. Since that time, proficiency scores have also been used. The proficiency scores mark students with one of four level descriptors, namely, 'minimal performance', 'basic', 'proficient' and 'advanced'. Since the 1999-2000 academic year, students with special needs participating in alternative assessment arrangements (see sections 6.5.1 and 6.5.4) have been reported in a fifth proficiency level - 'prerequisite skill' instead of the 'not tested' category which was used previously.24
When a child with a disability participates in an alternative form of assessment, this assessment should be based on the academic content standards for all students. To assist IEP teams in making these connections, the Department of Public Instruction in Wisconsin is publishing "alternate performance indicators" (APIs). These APIs are an extension of the academic content standards assessed through the Wisconsin Student Assessment System (WSAS). They provide some examples of educational goals for students with disabilities and these are aligned to the state standards. (See section 6.5.8 in addition.) 25
6.5.7 CONSEQUENCES
See section 6.5.2.
6.5.8 USE OF RESULTS
General/national
As a result of the amended Individuals with Disabilities Education Act,1 children with special educational needs should be included in assessments, performance goals and reports to the public.6
Under a regulation in the No Child Left Behind Act, which was formalised in December 2003, schools are prohibited from excluding students with disabilities from the accountability system. The aim of this is to enable parents to keep track of their children's progress and check that they are receiving a high quality education.41 See also 6.5.1.
Wisconsin
See section 6.5.6 in addition.
When a student with a disability participates in the state assessment system through an alternative form of assessment, the parent of the student may want more detailed information about their child's performance relative to the academic content standards. Alternate performance indicators (APIs) (see 6.5.6) are intended to assist IEP teams in communicating with parents and educators about a student's current level of performance relative to the academic content standards.25
6.5.9 OUTPUT STATISTICS
Between the period 1984 and 1992, nine per cent more students with special educational needs than previously graduated from high school.6
A recent federal study (US Department of Education, 1997) reported that the graduation rate for students with disabilities is around 57 per cent, as compared with 76 per cent for students without disabilities.(This figure of 57 per cent exaggerates the total somewhat in that it includes not only those students with disabilities who received a standard diploma, but also those who received a modified diploma or a certificate of completion.)16
Nearly half of all adults with disabilities have successfully completed course work in colleges and universities.0
