|
New USDOE regs spell out inclusion of student results
on alternate assessments in AYP
States may adopt alternate achievement standards for
children with the most significant cognitive disabilities and include
assessment scores based on those alternate standards in Title I adequate
yearly progress (AYP) calculations, according to final regulations issued on
December 9, 2003.
In the US Department of Education’s final regulations,
states are allowed to count a student’s proficient score on assessments based
on alternate achievement standards the same as any other student’s proficient
score on a state assessment, subject to a 1% cap. To clarify the difference
between achievement standards and alternate achievement standards, USDOE
states that alternate achievement standards are an expectation of
performance that differs in complexity from a grade-level achievement
standard.
The new set of regulations applies a 1% cap to the
inclusion of student results on alternate assessments and alternate
achievement standards, counting those students performing as proficient or
higher. The cap is not a limit in the number of students who may take an
alternate assessment. The inclusion of 1% of students scoring at proficient on
alternate achievement standards applies to the calculation of AYP at the
district and state level, but not at the building level.
The South Dakota Department of Education is working
quickly to put the necessary structures into place to allow the students with
the most significant cognitive disabilities to participate fully in the
standards and accountability under NCLB and to allow schools to receive credit
for making progress with these students. At this time, it is planned that
these systems will be in place for the Spring 2005 tests. This amount of time
is necessary in order to first develop the systems and then to inform and
train school personnel regarding the changes in instruction and assessments.
To implement these new regulations, there are several
important steps that must be completed by the department. 34 C.F.R. 200.1(d)
states that for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities who
take an alternate assessment, the state may, through a documented and
validated standards-setting process, define alternate academic achievement
standards, providing those standards are aligned with the State’s academic
content standards, promote access to the general curriculum and reflect
professional judgment of the highest achievement possible.
South Dakota is currently in the process of developing
alternate achievement standards in consultation with the Buros Center for
Testing at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Staff from DOE’s Office of
Educational Services and Support, Special Education Programs, along with
panels of special education teachers from across the state, will work closely
with the Buros Center staff to conduct an examination of the alignment of the
alternate academic content standards (commonly referred to as the functional
standards) with the State’s academic content standards.
Groups of special educators will be gathered to assist in
establishing alternate achievement standards in reading and math for the
STAARS. Next, Buros psychometricans will review the STAARS testing program to
examine the technical quality of the assessment tool and provide
recommendations for improving the validity and reliability of the tool as
required under the NCLB. Finally, panels of special education teachers from
across the state will convene for a one-day workshop to set performance level
cut score values for the STAARS.
While the process for developing the alternate
achievement standards comes together, the department will convene a workgroup
of representatives in special education to define several important pieces of
the new regulations. This workgroup will be comprised of educators,
administrators, school psychologists, parents and state agency
representatives.
A primary responsibility of this workgroup is to define
the term “significant cognitive disabilities” as it applies to South Dakota.
34 CFR 200.6(a)(iii) states it is the responsibility of the State to determine
the guidelines for IEP teams to apply in determining when a child’s
significant cognitive disability justifies the administration of an alternate
assessment based on alternate achievement standards. DOE special education
program staff will also be asking the workgroup to assist in the development
of a process for districts to use in making application to exceed the 1% cap.
Federal regulations provide the State the authority to grant exceptions to the
1% cap of students counted as proficient and included in the calculation of
AYP (34 CFR 200.13(c)(3)) .
For more information regarding the new regulations, a
question-and-answer document is available online at
http://www.state.sd.us/deca/TA/basic/ ; scroll down to “Sec.1111 state
plans” and click on the link Questions
and Answers on Title I Alternate Achievement Standards . |
