DC. 363 044. - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 372 558 EC 303 190 AUTHOR Shriner, James G.; And Others TITLE...

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 372 558 EC 303 190

AUTHOR Shriner, James G.; And OthersTITLE State Special Education Outcomes, 1993: A Report on

State Activities in the Assessment of EduckitionalOutcomes for Students with Disabilities.

INSTITUTION National Association of State Directors of SpecialEducation, Alexandria, VA.; National Center onEducational Outcomes, Minneapolis, MN.; Saint CloudState Univ., MN.

SPONS AGENCY Special Education Programs (ED/OSERS), Washington,DC.

PUB DATE Mar 94CONTRACT H159C00004NOTE 107p.; For previous reports, see ED 348 805 and ED

363 044.AVAILABLE FROM Publications Office, National Center on Educational

Outcomes, University of Minnesota, 350 Elliott Hall,75 East River Rd., Minneapolis, MN 55455 ($15).

PUB TYPE Reports Research/Technical (143) StatisticalData (110)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC05 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Data Collection; *Disabilities; Dropouts;

*Educational Assessment; Elementary SecondaryEducation; High School Graduates; High Schools;National Surveys; Needs Assessment; *Outcomes ofEducation; State Programs; *State Standards; StudentEducational Objectives; Student Participation;Student Placement

ABSTRACTThis report presents the results of the third

national ,.irvey of state activities in the assessment of educationaloutcomes for students with disabilities. The report does not containactual outcomes data on students with disabilities. Twenty-threetables present data on: number of students in general education andspecial education in each state; types of participation and exit datacollected; state assessments of outcomes; inclusion of students withdisabilities in data collection; barriers to outcome assessment andstate needs for outcomes assessment, state practices, programs, andplans; and nontraditional state assessments. For each state, textsections descriLe activities in selected outcomes areas, includingacademic achievement, post-school status, vocational skills,functional living, and attitudes and aspirations. Findings indicatethat, while states continue to focus on participation and exit data

.

for students with disabilities, the following trends include: statesare attempting to produce better information on the numbers ofstudents with disabilities taking part in statewide assessments;guidelines on acceptable testing accommodations and adaptations arebeing advanced by state assessment p/ograms; and states implementingnontraditional forms of assessment seem to retain the same approachto including students with disabilities and making accommodations asin their traditional assessments. (JDD)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOthce of Educational Research and Improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

Es'<is document has been reproduced asreceived from the person of organizationoriginating it

P Minor changes have been made to imorovereproduction quality

Points of view or opinions stated in this documerit do not necessarily represent officialOE RI position or policy

diiDt `i\IrV; :, I

s, t.gi -`J ,

' 1,6 s', .A

4,t Z11.11-;.

, '

L " ,

73 7-," t n. '. .7' i '

.!,71

.-.: ' ,-

, . . ,......1. . t. -, ,

,

'

n 1.1

' 1

,, .' ., / ' .-,

.1, ' .S-

1 ' ' ' 1 . /,

J, ,/ . if,/ r * ,:t

.# ,

#f ,

.1 .

s,.:

" Pr i '. ,s, , ,

7

, N

4.6 14,4

,14.,/v

s.i: - .,-; ..,1;:o.' :- . . ,,

,,,....,,...

- r I..'. i .. 7. ' "tiN_ . ,

., , V 'i , ,

;' ,,,,.. '':', .'',, ,, '

,

*, \ ,N. a . 1

.. . 1-'

,r -

V

4

StateSpecial EducationOutcomes

0

National Centeron Educational Outcomes

College of EducationUniversity of Minnesota

in collaboration withSt. Cloud State University andNational Association of StateDirectors of Special Education

Supported by theOffice of Special Education ProgramsUS. Department of Education

" ' ' , ,"$:$ s).' S ,$0" ," ,

z.";-5- - ; , )

,s

,

Ce

4.':IzePortwons:

>

, 5 ,,

Slide Actwittes mthe Assessment o

Educational Outcomesor Students with

* 41,Difiabatties

St

?

,

March 1994

NCEO Core Staff:

Robert H. BruininksRonald N. EricksonPatricia J. GrafstromKevin S. McGrewDorene L. ScottJames G. ShrinerGail E. SpandeMartha L Thurlow,

assistant directorJames E. Ysseldyke,

director

The National Center on Educa-tional Outcomes (NCEO) wasestablished in October, 1990 towork with state departments ofeducation, national policy-making groups, and others tofacilitate and enrich the develop-ment and use of indicators ofeducational outcomes forstudents with disabilities. It isbelieved that responsible use ofsuch indicators will enablestudents with disabilities toachieve better results from theireducational experiences. TheCenter represents a collaborativeeffort of the University ofMinnesota, the NationalAssociation of State Directors ofSpecial Education, and St. CloudState University.

The Center is supported througha cooperative agreement with theUS. Department of Education,Office of Special EducationPrograms (H159C000e4).Opinions or points of view donot necessarily represent those ofthe U.S. Department of Educationor Offices within it.

A644100444e4oftftw

-;'

ri#0#019AkciOii,e''Si'

Acknowledgments

Many people provided input onboth the content and format ofthis updated survey. NCEOespecially expresses its apprecia-tion to those individuals whospent many hours reviewing andupdating data.

Special recognition and thanksgo to:

Office of SpecialEducation Programs,U.S. Department of Education:

Lou Danielson

Report Update:

Trish Grafstrom

The 1993 version of this report wasprepared by lames G. Shriner, GailE. Spande, and Martha L. Thurlow.

State Directors of Special Education

ALABAMA KANSAS NEW YORKBill East Betty Weithers Tom Neveldine WEST VIRGINIA

Nancy JohnsonALASKA KENTUCKY NORTH CAROLINA

Myra Howe Kenneth War lick Lowell Harris WISCONSINJuanita Pawlisch

ARIZONA LOUISIANA NORTH DAKOTAKathryn Lund Leon Borne Gary Gronberg WYOMING

Margie SimineoARKANSAS MAINE OHIO

Diane Sydoriak David Stockford John Herner

CALIFORNIA MARYLAND OKLAHOMA AMERICAN SAMOALeo Sandoval Richard Steinke John Corpolongc .Jane French

COLORADO MASSACHUSETTS OREGON BUREAU OF INDIANFred Smokoski Pamela Kaufmann Karen Brazeau AFFAIRS

Lena MillsCONNECTICUT MICHIGAN PENNSYLVANIA

Torn Gil lung Richard Baldwin Cheryl Keenan DISTRICT OFCOLUMBIA

DELAWARE MINNESOTA RHODE ISLAND Lila VanderhorstMartha Brooks Wayne Erickson Robert Pryhoda

GUAMFLORIDA MISSISSIPPI SOUTH CAROLINA Steven Spencer

Bettye Weir Carolyn Black Ora SpannMARIANA ISLANDS

GEORGIA MISSOURI SOUTH DAKOTA Bartara RudyJoan Jordan John Heskitt Deborah Barnett

MARSHALL ISLANDSHAWAII MONTANA TENNESSEE Kanchi Hosia

Margaret Donovan Robert Runkel Joe FisherPALAU

IDAHO NEBRASKA TOCAS Peter ElechuusFred Balcom Gary Sherman ill Gray

PUERTO RICOILLINOIS NEVADA UTAH Adela Costa

Gail Lieberman Gloria Dopf Steve KukicU.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS

INDIANA NEW HAMPSHIRE VERMONT Priscilla StridironPaul Asn Robert Kennedy Dennis Kane

IOWA NEW JERSEY VIRGINIAThese were the state directors ofspecial education in October 1993when the survey was conducted.

Frank Vance Jeffery Osowski Austin Tuning

NEW MEXICO WASHINGTONLinda Witson 6 Douglas Gill

Executive SummaryThis report presents the results ofthe third national survey of stateactivities in the assessment ofeducational outcomes for stu-dents with disabilities. NCEOmailed a separate copy of the1992 report to state directors ofspecial education in the fiftystates and nine unique statesreceiving special education funds(e.g., Puerto Rico, Guam).

Respondents were asked to markdirectly on the copy any changesin their state's information. Thesurvey results include the follow-ing areas:

III federally-reported dataassessments of outcomes

III inclusion of students withdisabilities in state assess-mentsstate needs

practices, programs, and plansrelated to outcomes

nontraditional assessmentsstate activities in selectedoutcomes areas.

In addition, a questionnaire onthe participation of students withdisabilities in nontraditional,performance-based assessmentswas sent to selected state assess-ment personnel.

indings

New trends emerge LI several aspects of the information fromstates. While states continue to focus on participation and exitdata for students with disabilities, the following trends areevident:

States are attempting to produce better information on thenumbers of students with disabilities taking part in state-wide assessments.

More attention is being directed toward guidelines that helpdefine who participates in statewide assessments, with theapparent goal of increasing the number of students whoparticipate.

Guidelines on acceptable testing accommodations andadaptations are being advanced by state assessmentpro-grams. The trend is to allow more kinds of modifications, inboth low and high stakes assessments.

States implementing nontraditional forms of assessmentseem to retain the same approach to including students withdisabilities and making accommodations as in their tradi-tional assessments.

This report does not contain actual outcomes data on students withdisabilities. Several states have provided NCEO with their data, butthe variability in measures, grades assessed, and content areascombined with the small number of states make it impossible tointegrate the data meaningfully. An NCEO report on the state dataaggregation efforts is being prepared.

Table of Contents

Introduction 1

State Contexts 3Table 1 - Students Ages 5-17 4Figure 1 - Students Ages 3-21 6

Federally-Reported Data 7Table 2 - Participation Rates 8Table 3 - Exit Data Extensions 9Table 4 - Uses of Participation and Exit Data 10

State Assessments of Outcomes 11Figure 2 - Outcomes Assessment Activities 13Table 5 - Participation in General Education Assessments . . . . 15Table 6 - Achievement Data 16Table 7 - Vocational Skills Assessed 18Table 8 - Post-School Status 19Table 9 - Uses of Achievement and Post-School Status Data 20Table 10 - Uses of Vocational Skills Data 22Figure 3 - Regular States' Use of Collected Data 23Figure 4 - Types of Achievement Assessments 26Figure 5 - Tests Used for Reading and Math 27Table 11 - States Assessing Reading and Math 28

Including Students with Disabilities 31Figure 6 - Alternative Assessments 33Figure 7 - Alternative Achievement Assessments 34Figure 8 - States with Accessible Achievement Data 35Table 12 - Estimated Participation 36Table 13 - Decision Rules for Inclusion 38Table 14 - Decision Makers for Inclusion 40Figure 9 - States with Rules for Inclusion 42Figure 10 - States with Accommodation Guidelines 43Table 15 - Testing Accommodations Allowed by States 44

State Needs 47Table 16 - Barriers to Outcomes Assessment 48Table 17 - State Needs for Outcomes Assessment 50

Practices, Programs, and Plans 53Table 18 - State Practices, Programs, and Plans 54

Nontraditional State Assessments 57Table 19 - Current Areas Assessed 59Table 20 - Types of Nontraditional Items 60Table 21 - Participation Rates 61Table 22 - Types of Accommodations/Adaptations 62Table 23 - Reporting Results 63

State Activities in Selected Outcomes Areas 65

Introduction

NCEO produced the first reporton state special education out-comes for 1991. Since then, stateshave been engaged in manyactivities, and much has hap-pened in the areas of educationalaccountability and outcomes.Because of the rapid changestaking place overall and withinspedal education, documentingcurrent practice related to specialeducation outcomes continues tobe important and the reason forproducing State Special Educa-tion Outcomes 1993.

The first two reports highlightedoutcomes accountability. Theynoted that

states were being pushed tolook at the outcomes achieved bystudents within their educationalsystems

there was a dear press forpolicy-relevant informationabout the performance of stu-dents in our educational system

information on the outcomes ofstudents with disabilities wasneeded as well.

Many national data bases areunable to provide adequate databecause students with disabilitiesare excluded. Discussions nowtake place on how to developmore inclusive guidelines forparticipation in national assess-ment programs. Although stillsmall, the amount of nationaldata on students with disabilitiesis increasing. This is true at thestate level as well.

States provide the Office ofSpecial Education Programs withimportant information on theinput, context, and process ofspecial education, but littleinformation on outcomes (otherthan graduation, dropout, andother school completion informa-tion). But states are continuing tothink about and beginning to usestudent performance outcomes intheir special education programs,as evidenced in this report.

NCEO's PurposeNCEO is a collaborative effort ofthe National Association of StateDirectors of Special Education(NASDSE), the University ofMinnesota and Saint Cloud StateUniversity. Part of the Center'smission is to provide nationalleadership in identifying educa-tional outcomes for students withdisabilities and in developingpossible indicators that could beused to monitor those importantoutcomes.

The Center works with nationalpolicymaking groups, statedepartments of education, andother groups and individuals topromote national discussion ofeducational goals and indicatorsthat include students with dis-abilities. To accomplish this,NCEO has four major goals:

Goal 1 To promote the develop-ment of a system of indicatorsfor use with all students in-cluding those with disabilities.

9

Goal 2 To support and enhancethe measurement of educa-tional outcomes and indicatorsfor students with disabilities.

Goal 3 To enhance the availabil-ity and use of outcomes infor-mation in decision making atthe federal and state levels.

Goal 4 To identify and developindicators that can be used tomake judgments about theextent to which educationworks for students with dis-abilities, and that can be usedto improve programs andservices.

Many activities are underway toaccomplish these goals. Besidesthe state survey, the Centerexamines and analyzes existingnational and state data that mayprovide information on outcomesfor students with disabilities. Itworks with other groups andorganizations (e.g., NationalCenter for Education Statistics) toaddress issues related to assess-ment efforts already underway.And it is developing and refininga conceptual model of outcomesand indicators by working withstate and national agencies,parents and professionals.

About the State SurveyThis third annual state surveyaddresses the need for statedirectors, policymakers andothers to collect information onstate activities in multipleoutcomes areas and to make

1

Introduction

changes in accountability andassessment acti-ities. This isimportant because local, stateand national groups are propos-ing new initiatives and forecast-ing changes that may havesignificant impact on the educa-tion of students with disabilities.

The 1993 survey was completedby having state directors ofspecial education or their desig-nees mark changes to their state'sinformation on a copy of the 1992state report.

States were informed that itwould be assumed the informa-tion was correct if a response wasnot received. As in the past, thesurvey objectives were to:

create an ongoing trackingsystem to describe the status ofstate activities for assessingeducational outcomes

develop a monitoring systemof the procedures and practicesused by states when makingaccommodations in assessingstudents with disabilities

identify what persistent barri-ers and needs states have relatedto outcomes assessment

find state data bases that mightbe used to create a national database of outcomes for studentswith disabilities.

The target group included statedirectors of special education inthe fifty states plus in thoseunique states referred to in thisreport (e.g., Puerto Rico, Guam).

In addition, for the 1993 report,NCEO contacted state assessmentpersonnel in those states that hadindicated on a survey conductedby the North Central RegionalEducation Laboratory (NCREL)that nontraditional items werebeing used in their statewideassessments. Included in thesurvey were questions aboutparticipation of students withdisabilities and adaptationsallowed for students with dis-abilities, and how data are re-ported.

Of the 59 surveys sent to statedirectors of special education,responses were received from 23regular states and 2 uniquestates. Of the 30 surveys sent tostate assessment personnel, 21were returred.

"Outcomes" DefinedThe term "outcomes" has manydefinitions in current educationalliterature. A common meaningdescribes outcomes as including"knowledge, skills, and atti-tudes." Outcomes are consideredmost often to cover all areas ofstudent development, rather thanjust student status at the end ofschooling. For purposes of thestate survey, the followingdefinition was used:Outcome = the result of interac-tions between individuals andeducational experiences.

Overview of State ReportData in this document summa-rize the responses of state

1 0

directors and assessment person-nel. The reader must be cau-tioned that states have developedtheir own procedures, policies,and cvstems that are not easilyreprented in a quantitativeformat.

Next Steps 1994

Instead of updating the statesurvey in 1994, new questionswill be asked about state re-sponses to reform legislation andthe implications for their assess-ments of outcomes for studentswith disabilities. Then in 1995,both the information presented inthis repot and the information inthe 1994 report will be updated.

Nine Unique State /

American Samoa = Am Samoa

Bureau of Indian Affairs = BIA

District of Columbia = DC

Guam

Mariana Islands = CNMI

Marshall Islands = RMI

Palau

Puerto Rico

U.S. Virgin Islands = USVI

2

State Contexts

Student Population Receiving Special tducaiion

Table IThe numbers of special educationstudents vary in relation to thegeneral education student popu-lation. Table 1 shows the generaleducation student populationand the percentage of all studentsages 5 to 17 years served inspecial education.

Figure 1State special education studentpopulations vary. Figute1 showsstates according to the numbet- ofstudents ages 3 to 21 years servedin special education. States aredivided into three groups accord-ing to the number of specialeducation students served: thosehaving less than 50,000, thosewith 50,000 to 100,000, and thosewith mbre than 100,000 students.

3

Nationally, special educationreported serving approximately140,000 more children in 1992 thanin 1991. The number of specialeducation students in many statesreflects this trend.

4.,

I.- *k;

f I

11

State Contexts Table 1 Student Population Receiving Special Education

Student Populations Ages 5-17

StateGeneral

EducationSpecial

Education% SpecialEducation

Alabama 726,115 88,632 12.21

Alaska 115,277 14,019 12.16

Arizona 673,801 54,726 8.12

Arkansas 437,616 42,784 9.78

California 5,140,000 449,279 8.74

Colorado 593,030 54,092 9.12

Connecticut 478,300 58,719 12.28

Delaware 101,543 12,952 12.76

Florida 1,932,293 234,901 12.16

Georgia 1,177,324 99,614 8.46

Hawaii 174,249 12,633 7.25

Idaho 225,680 20,033 8.88

Illinois 1,851,000 220,046 11.89

Indiana 958,240 107,928 11.26

Iowa 491,363 54,849 11.16

Kansas 445,774 42,249 9.4Z

Kentucky 634,200 71,652 11.30

Louisiana 695,379 69,207 9.95

Maine 216,887 25,033 11.54

Maryland 736,238 81,976 11.13

Massachusetts 841,785 134,749 16.01

Michigan 1,587,082 151,470 9.54

Minnesota 775,567 72,475 9.34

Mississippi 501,525 56,792 11.32

Missouri 822,593 96,883 11.78

12

4

State Spedal Education Outcomes 1993

StateGeneral

EducationSpecial

Education% SpecialEducation

Montana 153,075 16,152 10.55Nebraska 277,652 32,229 11.61Nevada 211,810 18,383 8.68New Hampshire 173,881 18,418 10.59New Jersey 1,109,604 168,281 15.17New Mexico 297,006 35,143 11.83New York 2,645,000 282,193 10.67North Carolina 1,092,447 117,226 10.73North Dakota 117,719 11,193 9.51Ohio 1,758,071 193,715 11.02Oldahoma 579,200 62,871 10.85Oregon 498,608 51,332 10.30Pennsylvania 1,667,087 187,148 11.23Rhode Island 140,915 19,061 13.53South Carolina 627,471 72,666 11.58South Dakota 131,576 13,317 10.12Tennessee 832,330 100,526 12.08Texas 3,435,749 328,840 9.57Utah 454,218 45,050 9.92Vermont 96,802 9,789 10.11Virginia 1,016,017 108,911 10.72Washington 868,551 79,634 9.17West Virginia 320,249 39,490 12.33Wisconsin 821,550 79,676 9.70Wyoming 99,330 10,179 10.25

Numbers for 1991-92 for general education derived from Table AFB and for special education from Table AA5 (ages 6-17) + Table AA16 ( ages 5-17)(a formula yielding comparable results to thoee published in previous reports) published in the Fifteenth Annual Report to Congress (US. Departmentof Education, 1993).

5

State Contexts Figure 1 Student Population Receiving Special Education

Student Populations Ages 3 - 21

6

Federally-Reported Data

Special Educatio.9416rticipation and Exit Data

Table 2

When states collect studentparticipation information beyondthat required in reports to thefederal government, they oftenaccount for each student's time ingeneral or special educationclasses. Twenty-six of the regularstates and one unique state havemore detailed accounts of stu-dent time. Seventeen regularstates have other types of exten-sions of required data (e.g., hoursof service by provider, atten-dance data, suspension/expul-sion information, extracurricularactivities, or other data such astime spent out of general educa-tion). The number of statesreporting extended participationdata collection in 1993 is aboutthe same as in 1992.

Table 3Most states collecting informa-tion beyond the required exitdata know more about thecircumstances surroundingstudents leaving school. Themost frequently cited reasons areto evaluate graduation anddropout rates, and assess trends.In addition, fourteen states thataward multiple diploma typeskeep track of these at the state

level for special educationstudents. Data on reasons forstudent dropout are alsocollected by fourteen states.

Uses Of Data

Table 4

Almost all states that collect extraparticipation and exit data usethe data in reports for stateagencies, legislatures, and localand state education agencies(LEAs and SEAs). Data are alsoused for accountability andprogram evaluation. Other usesof participation and exit datainclude in6,vidual school reportcards and fund distribution.Participation and exit datacontinue to be a major part ofstates' data collection efforts, andshow potential usefulness forpurposes other than federal andstate reporting.

7

1'

Currently, the Office of SpecialEducation Programs (OSEP)requires states to report annually onstudent participation and exit data.Participation information includescounts of the numbers of students invarious special education categoritand placements by grade and/or age.Exit information includes counts ofthe numbers of students who exitschool by graduating, dropping out,earning completion certificates, etc.Some states collect information thatexceeds these OSEP requirements.Twenty-six regular states and oneunique state have state-wide collec-tion of extra participation informa-tion. Twenty-eight regular statesand no unique states have state-widecollection of exit information beyondthat required by OSEP.

Federal! -Re orted Data Table 2 Partici ation Rates

Participation Rate Extensions

STATEgtr

tz5c.

<et

CaliforniaColoradoConnecticut

0

FloridaGeorgiaHawaiiKansasKentuckyMarylandMassachusettsMichigan

NebraskaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew Mexico

North CarolinaOhio

tkegonSouth DakotaTexasUtah .

VermontVirginiaWest Virginia

WisconsinWyomingCNMI e

. 1 7

8

1

Federally-Reported Data Table 3 Exit Data Extensions

Exit Data Ektensions

STATEArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareFloridaGeorgiaIowa

KansasKentuckyMarylandMassachusettsNebraskaNevada

New HampshireNew JerseyNorth CarolinaOhio

OregonPennsylvania

Rhode IslandSouth DakotaTexas

UtahVermontVirginia

West VirginiaWyoming

-

9

Fede

rally

-Rep

orte

d

Dat

a

Tab

le 4

Part

icip

atio

n

and

Exi

t

Dat

a

Use

s

of

Par

ticip

atio

n

and

Exi

t

Dat

a

toey

ond

OS

EP

Req

uire

men

ts

/ 4 o1 i'"*

I s 1 4,

le t- & .ck SR &4P .I

-. 1 / ce

STA

TE

Part

icip

atio

n

Exi

i

Ala

ska 1 1 1 1 1

Cal

ii

Tni

a 1 se. j 1 1 1 1

Col

orad

o

V 1 1 j 1 1

Con

nect

icut

of st

Del

awar

e / se'

Flor

ida I

Geo

rgia

Haw

aii 1 1 1

Iow

a

Kan

sas 1 1 1

Ken

tuck

y 1 / of / 1 1 1 / 4/

Mar

ylan

d 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Mas

sach

uset

ts 1 se / i 1

Mic

higa

n 1 1 1

Neb

rask

a

Nev

ada

New

Ham

pshi

re 1 1 1 1

New

Jers

ey

New

Mex

ico

Nor

th

Car

olin

a 1 1

Ohi

o 1 1

Ore

gon 1 1 le 1 1 ,-/ 1 l 1 1

Rho

de

Isla

nd I 1

Sout

h

Dak

ota / / / /

Tex

as V if 1

Uta

h 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1

Ver

mon

t 1 1 I 1 i 1 i

Vir

gini

a / 1 1 / 1 1 1 1

Wes

t

Vir

gini

a i 1 1 1 1 1

Wis

cons

in 1 1

W omin

: 1

10

State Assessments of Outcomes

Outcome Areas and Assessors

Figure 2The primary outcome areascovered by state assessmentactivities are achievement,vocational skills, and post-schoolstatus. States that collect informa-tion in these areas are shown inthe maps in Figure 2. Theseassessment activities sometimesreflect a general education effort,a special education effort, or acombination of general educationand special education. Overall,collecting achievement data atthe state level (meaning studentswith disabilities are included)ranks high with forty-four regu-lar states and all of the uniquestates.

Under vocational skills, assess-ments indude only in-schoolvocational. Post-school voca-tional skills assessment is cap-tured in the post-school statuscategory.

Table 5This year's survey of statesindicates that forty-four of theregular states and all of theunique states collect state levelachievement data that indudestudents with disabilities. Asshown in Table 5, most of thisactivity is conducted by generaleducation (thirty regular statesand five unique states). Assess-ment of in-school vocational

skills occurs in thirteen regularstates and three unique states. Ineight of the regular states andtwo of the unique states, bothgeneral and special educationcollect data. Information on thepost-school status experiences offormer special education stu-dents is collected in twenty-onereguirs states and three uniquestates, mostly through specialeducation.

Table 6Forty-four states collect achieve-ment data. Nearly twice as manystates collect information in theareas of reading, math, andLanguage arts than in science,social studies, and other areas(e.g., humanities, employability).

Table 7Table 7 identifies thirteen regularstates and three unique statesthat collect vocational skillsinformation. Enrollment invocational education and jobplacement are the most fre-quently collected data, althoughalmost as many states collect datakm type of vocational programand employment during theschool years. Other categoriesmentioned by states includestudent and parent satisfaction,quality of life, and summer jobs.

11

)

Assessment activities in a state maybe directed by different groups. Fordescriptive purposes, the "assessor"is defined as the primary unit ordepartment responsible for datacollection. In this report, the assessoris categorized as general education,special education, or both. Voca-tional education and state assess-ment units are considered to be partof general education.

State Assessments of Outcomes

Table 8All of the twenty-one regularstates and four unique states thatcollect post-school status datareport on the employment statusof students with disabilities. Ofthose, more than two thirds alsoreport on students' wages.Information on enrollment inschool of special educationstudents is collected by twenty ofthe twenty-one states that collectpost-school status data. Othercategories of: data collectionidentified by states includepersonal adjustment, maritalstatus, community involvement,ability to access services, andfriendships.

Uses of Data

Table 9Information on outcomes areused for a variety of purposes byeither special education or gen-eral assessment personnel. Thistable illustrates that most statesuse collected information formore than one purpose. Achieve-ment data are used most fre-quently for reports to local schooldistricts and state agencies, butare also used often for account-ability, program evaluation, andreports to parents. Post-schoolstatus information, when used, ismost often for evaluating pro-grams and reporting to variousgroups (e.g., state legislature,local school districts, etc.). Otheruses identified by a few statesinclude accountability, programimprovement, and reports toother groups, such as the stateDevelopmental DisabilitiesCouncil.

Table 10Vocational data are used forfewer purposes overall. Moststates that collect these data usethem for program evaluationsand reports to local educationagencies. The "other" categoryincludes long-range planningand reports for other state units,such as the Department of Labor.

Figure 3Figure 3 provides a generalsummary of the primary uses ofdifferent types of data. The mostobvious comparison is thatrequired data (participation andexit) and achievement data areused most often to producereports for the Office of SpecialEducation Programs and otherconstituencies. Achievementdata, and to some extent post-school status data, are used forprogram evaluation andaccountability.

Assessment of Basic Skills

Figure 4States are using many differentkinds of instruments to assessachievement. Most common arenorm-referenced tests used inthirty regular states and fiveunique states overall. Whenexamining states that haveaccessible data on students withdisabilities, twenty-five regularstates and three unique statesreport a high use of norm-refer-enced tests. Important, but notdirectly evident here, is thegeneral shift away from the useof norm-referenced devicestoward the use of instruments

21

developet, specifically by or for astate's education agency andreflecting the state's curricularemphases. So far, two regularstates report using portfolioassessments.

Figure 5To determine whether stateshave specific test data that couldbe used to form a common datapool, it is necessary to look atspecific instruments that areemployed. Of the norm-refer-enced instruments utilized mostoften, no single test is used bymore than a handful of states,regardless of whether they haveaccessible data on students withdisabilities. It is unlikely thatdata from different states wouldbe merged unless first translatedto a standard measurement unit.Then, it may be possible toproduce common data on theachievement of special educationstudents.

Table 11This table identifies the readingand math norm-referenced testsused by states that includestudents with disabilities in theirassessments. Most frequentlyused is the Stanford AchievementTest. Nine states use more thanone norm-referenced test forreading and math assessment.The "other" category refers tospecific norm-referenced stateassessment measures that wereidentified by certain states (e.g.,Kentucky Instructional ResultsInformation System, Norm-referenced Assessment Programfor Texas, etc.).

12

State A7sessments of Outcomes Figure 2 Outcomes Assessment Activities

Achievement and Vocational Skills

t=ici

ACHIEVEMENT

NH

MA

RICTNJ

DE

MD

Shaded states collect state-level information

VOCATIONAL SKILLS

2 (I4

NH

MA

RICTNJ

DE

MD

Am Samoa

B1A

CNMI

DC

Guam

Eg Palau

PR

RMI

USVI

Am Samoa

BIA

CNM1

Ej DeEl GuamEl PalauE PR

RM1

El USVI

13

State Assessments of Outcomes Figure 2 Outcomes Assessment Activities

Post-School Status

a HI

govb

POST-SCHOOL STATUS

AK

Shaded states collect state-level information

23

El Am Samoa0 BIA0 CNM10 DC

Guam

Palau

0 PRRMI

0 USVI

14

State Assessments of Outcomes Table 5 Participation in General Education

Participation in General, Education Assessments

STATE

%.S Ao4 if4, erv STATE

.0.

044. _40,14 NY

4..si° e0.90V *er

Alabama New Mexico..,

AlaskaArizona

New York

North CarolinaArkansas North Dakota MECalifornia Ohio

Oklahoma ,ColoradoConnecticut

t Delaware ,

Florida

Oregon 11111111111PennsylvaniaRhode Island

Georgia South CarolinaHawaii South DakotaIdaho Tennessee e .

Illinois TexasUtahVermont

IndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisiana

Virginia

WashingtonWest Vir ia

MaineMarylandMassachusetts

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Michigan ,' Am Samoa

BIA

DC

Minnesota

Mississippi ..

MissouriMontanaNebraska

Guam,

CNMI

; u 11111111

PalauPuerto Rico

USVI mmil I

Nevada

New HampshireNew Jersey

MIIII

24

GeneralEducation

Spada!Education

Combined

15

c

State Assessments of Outcomes Table 6 Achieveniel4

Achieyement Data for Reading, Math, Language, Science and Social. Studies

STATEC

AlabamaAlaskaArizona .

-.1

i 0-

ArkansasCalifornia .

. .r

Connecticut .;

Delaware, if ,

Florida 1I,

,

1

GeorgiaHawaiiIdaho !

IllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentucky

,

LouisianaMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichigan

Mississippi 5

NevadaNew HampshireNew Jersey .

New Mexico

16

State Special Education Outcomes 1993

STATEcsb

rt,477

New YorkNorth CarolinaNorth Dakota

,

OhioOklahomaOregon tPennsylvaniaRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth Dakota

,Tennessee

Texas ,

UtahVermontVirginia

WashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsinAm SamoaBIA

GuamCNMIRMIPalau LPuerto RicoUSVI

26

17

State Assessments of °LI-comes Table 7 E Vocational Skills

Vocational Skills Areas Assessed

Employment During Type ofVocational ProgramSchool Years

DelawareMarylandNew Mexico

OhioOregonSouth DakotaVermontDC

Guam

Enrollment inVocational Education

DelawareFloridaGeorgiaKentuckyLothsianaMarylandMissouriOhioOregon

a South DakotaVermontWest VirginiaDC

DelawareFlorida -

Georgiaa Kentucky

MarylandMissouriOhioOregonSouth DakotaVermontWest Virgima

Job Placement

DelawareFloridaGeorgiaMarylandOhioOregonSouth DakotaVermontWest VirginiaDCGuamPalau

Other

27

New MexicoOhio

a OregonVermontWest Virginia

State Assessments of Outcomes Table 8 u Post-School Status

Emplbyment Status, Wages, Enrollment in School, Living Arrángements

STATEa)"

ArizonaDelawareFloridaGeorgiaIdahoIowaKentuckyMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaNevada

New HampshireNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaOhio

OregonTexas

UtahVermont

Iiginia.

DC5

GuamRMIPalau

28

19

State Assessments of Outcomes II Table 91 Uses of Data

Uses'of Achievement and Post-Skhool Status Dat4.

t- es o<;e1 4i) 4

s." a- a- k- e 4t,P e

I. 6, ..)t. ,,,,..., i ig e i 4%, 4, e. , s ,- ,O 0- R (? I P G'4-v ...,1 4.." K" x --, .4. -. s-, -%. .... ---, -.. c

STATE Achievement Post-School StatusAlabama 11 //I / liAlaska ce. / III / / 1Arizona 1 4/ of 1 1Arkansas 1 /California / I It / I,I 1 1Connecticut 1 i 1 / le se i /Delaware 1 / se I If i i IFlorida I 1 1 / 1 1 i / I /Georgia / I/ i of le 11, / IHawaii / 1 / / 1 1 ItIdaho / / sI 1 iIllinois if Sr i i iIndiana It of 1 / / of 1 / iIowa 1 1Kansas 1 / If / / iKentucky -I 1 1 / I it le 1 I I i I 1Louisiana It /Maine I 1' 1 i i 1 1Maryland / / i i / i i i i , /Massachusetts of 1 1Michigan V / / It / of st /Minnesota /Mississippi se 1 / ee sI if ifNevada VNew Hampshire / / It ItNew Jersey / If / i

2 9

20


ee ..9

1/41 k L.

so e if' $ -sr -9 4`7.;,-,- et (r- k- 4 --

4 e6?14P1ca. -fy

4lTiiiJ.. . . . - . N

STATE Achievement Post-School StatusNew Mexico / 11 / f I IINew York 1111 / /1North Carolina / of / 1 I 1 1 1North Dakota le / 1 1 1 1 / I V /Ohio of / 1 of IOklahoma it i 1Oregon It I 1 of I 1 I 1 / /Rhode Island *1. / le / it / 1 /South Carolina le s, / /111South Dakota se I If 11 ofieTennessee 1 of 1 / 1Texas 1 1 l I / 1 1 I 1 1Utah i 1 1 1 1 1 of / 1 I 1 IVermont 1 1 1 I le 1 1 IVirginia / 1 / 1 1 IWashington / / / i i i iWest Virginia 1 1 1Wisconsin 11 ,/ 111 /IAm Samoa / / 1BIA 1DC I sGuam of 1 / / 1CNMI /RMI 1 it / se

Palau / 1Puerto Rico oft 7USVI

30

21

State Assessment of Outcomes Table 10 Uses of Vocational Skills Data

Vodational;Skills Data in Reports and Evaluations

Report toState Legislature Program Evaluation

MarylandOhioOregonVermont

Report to LEAs

FloridaGeorgiaMarylandNew MexicoOhioOregonSouth DakotaVermontWest Virginia

DelawareMarylandOhioOregonSouth DakotaGuam

Internal SEA Reports

Palau

Other

31

DelawareSouth DakotaVermont

22

State Assessment of Outcomes Figure 3 s Regular States Use of Collected Data

Participation Data

NZ.;...:**

a", ...... xx.:::SW,44Vat. .

6

10

zk.AloW

. .

e N4j::44k

3 2 AMOR F

23

State Assessment of Outcomes a Figure 3 Regular States Use of Collected Data

a

:§ks:\

I . .

2

5

13

11

" ASICOPVI;atzlai24

%.`

Vocational Skills Data

, :`S " , -

, tA. ,,.."

-

k*\"':,.;`,

kkid' .

:).k''',4;`''''

,,,,...,:..,,,,,,,,3,,,,

, :.:.,,x-s,s,,z,k Zty.,,,A

- : ,

.

-' : ,

,-;:)4.,,, ...%' S.,. -491,1:15.\41 taitt=,:.71

Z`. 55, ?.N. ".r. a":54.

,,5 ,

k...., . ....., , i,,,,,...... ,..,.... 5

,5e...,:,-55 ,,, -,-i.-

0

--

I I

,

, , - . 5. , ,

% ,7.. . ..... ,-, ..<

5.... .., :::,..5,.,..-. ,......, -,z,,.:2,..,,,,-,

..-.::,,.7,.p.- -.-.5,,,,, .5.,

,esttr,',1',;,;-,r''''s,(,,

'44

swp, rjep>,-0,,,,--;-5-x*,,w,, <5<,-,....17,-. -0,4,- 5,

I

a a

Overall1:7

7,7

5.SS V.4

,' i ''<'6',.., 5 5 5 . 55 5

' ,

..\i'.4.!: \5 5':'S 5 5:5': 5 SZ

\lI" Z;`'`"

v.,..,-;...":::., ', , , '...', , z ",,s., ',;;M:MW.,,M.174'.wr cr\-s.S..41z,.,TASactlk, .W. s

-,,%,,,. ;.,-....::\,;,\,..., c.u.:........,;,..4,3,,,,..., ,,,,,_?,..., .r.,

a a a a

States with Accessible Data on Students WithDisabilities

SS '5 55 1: .-- ---M

3-, :,',...:,.. - 55 . ...-,..: ':.:-- ,.'

ki: '' ,s, ,'

, vs',,i, , ,',..-,,..-< 1 0

,7* , s,,?4>

,

,k <,, ,

:.,

C. ', :, 1

k--,S , .

w;,,-,, ,- ,,,,,.. ,,- . ,

;s .0"

i..s41).

s5.;.<4.9.tmi I;;CA1r

a a

Norm-Referenced Tests

s

1, 5 Z4:

S.

.

. S..

State Assessment of Outcomes Table 11 States Assessing Reading & Math

Norm-referenced. Tests Used to Assess Reading and Math

STATE 4:2

co-

AlabamaAlaskaArizonaArkansasDelawareFlorida

a

GeorgiaHawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKentuckyLouisianaMarylandMississippi

Nevada

New Hampshire

New JerseyNew Mexico

Tests are those used in state-level assessment programs.

CAT = California Achievement Test

CTBS = Comprehensive Test of Basic SkillsITBS Iowa Tests of Basic SkillsMAT = Metropolitan Achievement TestStanford = Stanford Achievement TestTAPS = Tests of Achievement and Proficiency

37

28

State S ecial Education Outcomes 1993

STATE (7.

North CarolinaNorth DakotaOhio 6

OklahomaOregonRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennessee

Texas

UtahVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaAm Samoa

BIA

DC

CNMI

RIVII

Puerto Rico

USW

29

Including Students With Disbilities

Participation in Aaievemënt Assessments

Figure 6Students with disabilities who donot participate in general educa-tion achievement assessmentsoften participate in alternativeassessments. States using alterna-tive forms of assessment areshown in Figure 6. Typically, thelEP is the focus of the alternativeassessment.

Figure 7Figure 7 illustrates, in summaryform, the types of alternativestudent achievement data thatare collected in those states thatoffer alternative achievementassessments. References to "IEPevaluation component" reflectsome states' efforts to makegreater use of the IEP documentand annual evaluations ofwhether students meet IEPobjectives.

Figure 8Although students with disabili-ties participate in most state-levelachievement assessments, onlythirty-five regular states and fiveunique states identify specialeducation students in their datasets. Figure 8 shades those stateswhere data are accessible forstudents with disabilities whoparticipate in achievementtesting. Some states do not haveaccessible data on students withdisabilities because they choose

not to separate students inspecial education from thegeneral education population.Several other states want toidentify students withidisabilitiesbecause it provides them withachievement information onspecial education students: *-4

Table 12States find it difficult to es tethe number and percentage ostudents with disabilities whoparticipate in statewide assess-ments. Estimates range from lessthan teri percent to more thanninety percent, with many statesunable to provide estimates. Inchecking the percerpges,participation rates yary consider-ably from one state to the next.Thirty-three states and six uniquestates have an estimate for thepercentage of students withdisabilities in state achievementassessments. Of thosi, fourteensay that less than one-fourth ofstudents with disabilities takepart in assessments. Only sixstates say that more than sev-enty-five percent of the studentsparticipate in alssessments.

Better data are needed on theeducational outcomes of studentswith disabilities. A first logicalstep would be to find out howmany students witll disabilitiesactually participatep existingassessment systemi. The next

39

Including students with disabilitiesinvolves more than identifying thenumbers of students participating inassessments. It involves consideringthe available alternative assessments,

-the guidelines for determining whoparticipates, and the allowabletesting accommodations andadaptations.

k

'74

31

Including Students With Disabilities

step would be to look at thevariability in rates to determineways to reduce it.

Accommodations

Table 13States use many types of decisionrules for inclusion. These rulestake into consideration the levelof service received, time ingeneral education, studentcharacteristics, and undefineddecisions made at the local level(usually at the school level).Almost two thirds of the stateswith inclusion guidelines allowthe decision to be made at thelocal level.

Approximately one third of thestates use criteria such as studentspecific characteristics, level ofservice received and time ingeneral education. Over twothirds of the states use a combi-nation of criteria or decisionrules. State personnel noting"other" in their responses identi-fied the following types of con-siderations in their decision rulesabout inclusion: lEPs, statelaws/board rules, extent ofcognitive disability, and coursesfor which the student ismainstreamed. The emphasis onlocal control is evident in thetypes of decision rules used bystates.

Table 14Responsibility for decidingwhether to include specificstudents with disabilities is oftengiven to the IEP team. This is thecase in about eighty percent ofthe states. Principals are identi-fied as key decision makers innine regular and five uniquestates. An emphasis on localcontrol is evident in who makesdecisions about inclusion.

Figure 9Many states have written rulesabout the inclusion of studentswith disabilities. The thirty-sixstates and four unique states thathave formal or written guidelinesfor inclusion decisions areshaded in Figure 9. Despite theseguidelines, questions remainabout how consistently they areimplemented in different set-tings. Variations in participationcan be attributable to whetherdecision makers include orexclude students with disabilitiesin large-scale assessments.

Figure 10Accommodations in testingprocedures often are necessarywhen students with disabilitiesparticipate in general educationassessments. State educationagencies in thirty-one regularand two unique states publishformal or written guidelines. Inforty-five regular and six uniquestates, accommodations of sometype are allowed.

4 0

Table 15There are four main types ofaccommodations for studentswith disabilities: alternatepresentation mode, alternateresponse mode, flexibility of timelimits, and flexibility of setting.Table 15 presents the types ofaccommodations allowed bystates and further indicates thetypes of alternate presentationsand responses allowed by eachstate. Alternate presentationmodes include Braille, oralreading, sign lanpage, largeprint materials, and other IEP-determined modes. Alternateresponse modes include the useof computers, oral responses,sign language, and other IEP-determined modes. Numerousstates indicated that all of thesetypes of accommodations areavailable upon request.

32

EJ

Sha

ded

stat

es h

ave

alte

rnat

ive

achi

evem

ent

asse

ssm

ents

NH M

AR

IC

TN

JD

EM

D

41

tasa

lf-

1

Am

eric

an S

amoa

Bur

eau

of In

dian

Affa

irs (

BIA

)

Com

mon

wea

lth o

f the

Nor

ther

n M

aria

na Is

land

s (C

NM

I)

Dis

tric

t of C

olum

bia

(DC

)

Gua

m

Pal

au

Pue

rto

Ric

o (P

R)

Rep

ublic

of t

he M

arsh

all I

slan

ds (

RM

I)

U.S

. Virg

in Is

land

s (U

SV

I)

42

Including Students With Disabilities Figure 7 Alternative Assessments

5P555

SS5SS

4E1), Eviittation, 8Oomponent

s

4e

t,-,Wrtpng nlpiepf

,sCtirrioutilai»Based. ss

r Measuress,:,

e Gradeilotjeeklisui,s

s

4

4

^

SIEP Eygipahon 5

Co;n4Oon§r4 5, ;.5

, -s,

rttJng $aMpiestCurr,iputuS143asedMeasure0'

>

"OriOes/ohe (*Viotti,

7

2

1

Note: All of the information in Rgure 7 is from State Special EducatiOn Outcomes 1992.

34 4:-; rig CDR OWN:

Sha

ded

stat

es h

ave

achi

evem

ent d

ata

NH M

AR

IC

TN

JD

EM

D

44

Am

eric

an S

amoa

Bur

eau

of In

dian

Affa

irs (

BIA

)

Com

mon

wea

lth o

f the

Nor

ther

n M

aria

na Is

land

s (C

NM

I)

Dis

tric

t of C

olum

bia

(DC

)

Gua

m

Pal

au

Pue

rto

Ric

o (P

R)

Rep

ublic

of t

he M

arsh

all I

slan

ds (

RM

I)

U.S

. Virg

in Is

land

s (U

SV

I)

45

Including Students With Disabilities Table 12 Estimated Participation

Estimated Participation of Students with Disabilities in 'State Achievement,Assessments

STATE o\O

45-

AlabamaAlaskaArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareFlorida

,

GeorgiaHawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaine

MarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippi

MissouriMontanaNebraska*NevadaNew HampshireNew Jersey-------.

4

36


STATENew Mexico

New YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaOhioOklaholna*OregonPennsylvaniaRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeTexasUtahVermontVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsin

Wyoming*Am SamoaBIA*

DC

GuamCNMIRMIPalauPuerto Rico

USVIThis information was unavailable or students didn't participat. in assessment.

47

37

Including Students with Disabilities Table 13 Decision Rules for Inclusion

-

STATE

AlabamaAlaska

ese° ee 0. 0,cf

*e . c.., dr--9 c2 =..t, co b

..f,

pr,.it,

4,Q., c, _....,./ 0 0 QV

ArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareFloridaGeorgiaHawaii

IdahoIllinois

IndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichigan

MinnesotaMississippi

Missouri

MontanaNebraskaNevada


4

38

Stat

e

Sped

al

Edu

catio

n

Out

com

es

1993

STA

TE

New

Mex

ico

New Yor

k

Nor

th

Car

olin

a

Nor

th

Dak

ota

Ohi

o

Okl

ahom

a

Ore

gon

Penn

sylv

ania

Rho

de

Isla

nd

'

Sout

h

Car

olin

a

Sout

h

Dak

ota

Ten

ness

ee

Tex

asU

tah

Ver

mon

tV

irgi

nia

Was

hing

ton

Wes

t

Vir

gini

a

Wis

cons

inW

yom

ing

Am

Sam

oa

BIA

DC

Gua

mC

NM

I

RM

IPa

lau

Puer

to

Ric

o

USW

4 9

39

Including Students with Disabilities Table 14 Decision Makers for Inclusion

Decision Maker's tor Inclusion in State Assessments -

STATE_

AlabamaAlaskaArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareFloridaGeorgiaHawaiiIdahoIllinois

IndianaIowa*

KansasKentuckyLouisianaMaine

MarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippiMissouriMontana*Nebraska*Nevada


5 0

40


STATE A!'

New Mexico

New YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaOhio

Oklahoma*OregonPennsylvaniaRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeTexas

UtahVermont*VirginiaWashingtonWest Virginia

WisconsinWyomingAm SamoaBIA

DC

GuamCNMI

RMI*PalauPuerto RicoUSVIThis Inistenetion s unsvellatee or studnts did not participate In sssewnsid.

51

41

ED

Sha

ded

stat

es h

ave

form

al/w

ritte

n ru

les

54.

A

RI

CT

NJ

DE

MD

Am

eric

an S

amoa

Bur

eau

of In

dian

Affa

irs (

BIA

)C

omm

onw

ealth

of t

he N

orth

ern

Mar

iana

Isla

nds

(CN

MI)

Dis

tric

t of C

olum

bia

(DC

)

Gua

m

Pal

au

Pue

rto

Ric

o (P

R)

Rep

ublic

of t

he M

arsh

all I

slan

ds (

RM

I)

U.S

. Virg

in Is

land

s (U

SV

I)r J

= F

orm

al/W

ritte

n G

uide

lines

Rep

orte

d

NH M

AR

IC

TN

JD

EM

D

.0e)

at, QG

HI

5 4

LEA

Lia.

A

Am

eric

an S

amoa

Bur

eau

of In

dian

Affa

irs (

BIA

)

Com

mon

wea

lth o

f the

Nor

ther

n M

aria

na Is

land

s (C

NM

I)

Dis

tric

t of C

olum

bia

(DC

)

Gua

m

Pal

au

Pue

rto

Ric

o (P

R)

Rep

ublic

of t

he M

arsh

all I

slan

ds (

RM

I)

U.S

. Virg

in Is

land

s (U

SV

I)

55

Including Students with Disabilities Table 15 Accommodations Allowed

Testing Accommoations Allowed by States

4. e4.p.e,ez) 74?

4' 4231o

4-64r414?- e /

44,cY or V .7

Aiternate Presentation

f a a cr ka

Alternate ResponseSTATE Accommodation Type

Alabama 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Alaska 1 1 1 1 of 1Arizona i 1 / i ,,, i i / / i i se st ItArkansas j 1 1 1 1 1 1 se I 1 1 se

California 1 1 1Colorado 1 1 /Connecticut i i I 1 i 1 i se i 1 1Delaware 1 1 1Florida f f 1 1 / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Georgia 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 of

Hawaii of f 1 of of le 1 1 1 1 1 / 1 1Idaho 1 1 1 1Illinois 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 / le # iIndiana 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 / 1IowaKansas 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Kentucky 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 le if /Louisiana i se / / It 1/ It i 1 if I of i 1Maine 1 1 1 1 i se i e i i # # #Maryland 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Massachusetts 1 / / 1 i 1 i 1 1 1 1 1Michigan 1 1 1 1 1 1 IMinnesota

Mississippi 1 1 se ie i i # i if # iMissouri 1 1 1 / 1 IMontanaNebraskaNevada I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l' 1New Hampshire i 1 i 1 i 1 i 1i 1 ----7 i I

1New Jersey le / i 1

5 6

44


sr e4 Cb ..c)4i e 4,1---

1 i ,g 1 , 4,e

egz4' 1d- cr 4,7

STATE Accommodation Type Alternate Presentation Alternate Response

New Mexico / le if 1 / -1 / 1 / I / / / 1New York le 1 / 1 le / / oe 1 V / I / /North Carolina le ,,, / 1 / / V V V / I / VNorth Dakota 1 / se / I' /Ohio / of V V / V le V V / 1 i / /Oklahoma / / / se / 1 / IOregon 1 1 I 1 V V 1 V / V / I / stPennsylvania V I / V V / or V V / 1 ,,, 1Rhode Island 1 V V / V V /South Carolina / 1 / / / V V / 1 1South Dakota / / J 1Tennessee V 1 V V V / I ITexas V I V / l / / V 1 j i j iUtah / /VermontVirginia I f 1 I/ 1 1 , , , V V I I I VWashington le / / / 1 / / / / /West Virginia If / J 1Wisconsin 1 1 of / 1 / 1 le 1 se I / se

WyomingAm Samoa / 1 1 1BIA of i if 1 of

DC 1 /Guam / of st / se

CNMIRMIPalau / se 1Puerto Rico / of / / I 1 /INV1

5 7

4 5

State Needs

Barriers to Outcomes Assessment andAssistance Needs

Table 16Specific barriers to successfulassessments have been listed inTable 16. These were identified byeither the state director of specialeducation or by assessmentpersonnel in each state. The mostprevalent barriers were related tosystem-wide issues, data use, andassessment instruments. Twostates identified additionalbarriers to outcomes assessment:shortage of funding and lack ofstatewide consensus.

Table 17States identify a range ofassistance needs, as Table 17illustrates. States continue toidentify a need to increase stake-holder awareness of the value ofoutcomes information. They alsoindicate that time and technicaladvice are criticaL The three stateshaving responses in the "other"category mention funding and thedevelopment of assessment tools.

58

Successful state assessments ofeducational outcomes for studentswith disabilities are becoming moreimportant for two reasons. One,because educational reforms aregaining public attention, and two,because parents and policymakers areasking eucators to use accountabilitysystems that focus on the results ofeducation. In the process of assessingeducational outcomes, states identifyspecific barriers to outcomesassessment and a range of assistanceneeds.

47

Technical

Expertise

LEA

Concern

About

Data

Use

Need

for

Useable

Models

System-Wide Concerns Staff

Limitations e Limitations

Definitions

of

Outcomes Teacher

Concerns

Assessment nstruments General

Education

Unit

Concerns

Other


STATE

CO

Qf e

471 al".)0

0 co

4*-90

0 0 0;."-,,,. L.,-:- 0 6,

-:" 5.." 1 e..4 ..,/ 4: 0ca.

0 0

eec,) i.,9

d7e e b c0 0 0 40 4.

0 0 rd <...

$:..,.

/.0 (....New Mexico

New YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaOhio

OklahomaOregonPennsylvania

Rhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennessee

Texas

UtahVermontVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsin

Wyoming *

Am SamoaBIA

DC

GuamCNMIRMI

/

PalauPuerto RicoUSVI

49

State Needs Table 17 State Needs for Outcomes Assessment

State Assistance Needs foi. Outcomes Assessment

STATE

AlabamaAlaskaArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareFloridaGeorgiaHawaiiIdahoIllinois

IndianaIowa

KansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesota

MississippiMissouriMontanaNebraskaNevada


61

50


STATE

e e,e 43

0 1tr.S'.

42 Vke ..

co irr0 03*

.40 C:*.4.,

37 qr.4'

A.;.`ra a,

cal'6 co

... <2°

New Mexico

New YorkNorth Carolina .North DakotaOhioOklahomaOregonPennsylvania

Rhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth Dakota'Tennessee

Texas

UtahVermont 0

VirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsin

WyomingAm SamoaBIA

DC

GuamCNMI

RMIPalauPuerto RicoUSVI

6 2

51

Practices, Programs, and Plans

Practices, Programs, and Plans Related to Outcomes

Table 18States are engaging in manyoutcomes-related practices andmaking plans foa- future state-leveloutcomes activities. Table 18 liststhe general categories ofoutcomes-related activities beingemphasized in states, according tothe responses of State Directors ofSpecial Education.

Most states with computer/management information systemshave invested in data manage-ment systems to maintaincomprehensive records of specialeducation students' schoolcareers. Some of these systems(e.g., Ohio, USVI) are beingdesigned to follow students afterthey leave school.

States that mentioned coordina-tion with general education oftenhad joint efforts between specialeducation and general educationwhen designing assessmentsystems (e.g., Arkansas, BIA,California, Georgia, Minnesota,New Mexico). States also men-tioned efforts to increase coopera-tion and collaboration betweenspecial education and generaleducation at all levels within theirstates.

Several states now have transi-tion/follow-up/follow-alongprograms. These efforts to collectoutcomes information on formerstudents usually start with federalfunds and often involve statedepartments of education.

Several states incorporateoutcomes-oriented principles byimplementing initiatives such asoutcomes-based educationmodels, performance assessments,performance accreditations, andcollaborative teaching methods.Additionally, states are increasingassessment participation, includ-ing special education in learneroutcomes, and developing stateindicators.

Practices, Programs, and Plans Table 18

Practices, Programs and Plans of States

STATE

....s,p,' , ..:z

..g, e ...-s.,... ...0 ,,,, ..,. ip 0.., <c°

c-

4:2 '77..) -Z.-ti -ti 0, et,

1/4 1/40 tb 0 1/40C.? 4 C.)0.... C., 4t

Alabama

AlaskaArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareFloridaGeorgiaHawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesota

Mississippi

MissouriMontanaNebraskaNevada


6 4

54

NontraditionalState AssessmentsStates interested in reform arebeginning to explore using non-traditional assessments, alsoknown as "performanceassessments" and "authenticassessments," because theyperceive standard multiple-choiceassessments to be inadequate.

Traditional, multiple choice testsare now thought to be inappropri-ate for measuring what studentsknow and are able to do in areformed educational system.Multiple choice items tend toassess lower-order factual recalland comprehension skills,whereas nontraditional perfor-mance items measure higher-order thinking, problem solving,and analytic skills.

Nontraditional assessments maytake many different forms. Theycan vary from writing samples, toscience experiements, to portfoliosthat are compiled by studentsover extended periods of days,weeks, even months.

Over time, considerable contro-versy has developed about the useof traditional and nontraditionalitems in state assessments. One ofthe issues being debated byresearchers and policymakers iswhether alternative assessmentsare reliable, valid, and authentic.

Despite the controversy, however,many states have either begunconsidering the development ofsuch assessments, are in theprocess of developing them, or

have started implementatingthem.

Because a growing number ofstates use nontraditional assess-ments, the North Central RegionalEducational Laboratory (NCREL),in collaboration with the Councilof Chief State School Officers(CCSSO), included 4uestionsabout nontraditiondl assessmentsin their annual survey of stateassessment personnel.

In the section of the kirvey onnontraditional assessments,NCREL asked states:

Which content areas usenontraditional assessments?What type of nontraditionalassessments are being used ineach content area?What stage of development arethe nontraditionalassesssments?

With permission from CCSSO andNCREL, NCEO used data fromthe NCREL survey and conducteda follow up. The purpose of thisactivity was to identify whatimplications new assessments willhave on students with disabilities.NCEO personnel contacted thoSestates that indicated they wereeither pilot testing or using non-traditional item formats in theirstatewide assessments.

For each nontraditional item type,NCEO asked states how many,students with disabilities partici-pated in the assessment, bycategory of disability, if possible.

57

iNCE0 wants'to know howextensively alkrnative assess-rIsents are incllisding and makingaccommoaa lions fpr students with

:1 1

Because alic e assissmentsare recent, ers canconsider ho cludeSTudents'with disabilitie erly in the 1

developmentPi &e.g. They canalso plan for aiivnodarions andmodifications t` inelrease theparticipationb tuents withdisabilities.

Researchers andAlicymakersdisagree about whIthernontraditional assessments make iteasier to include sOdents withdisabilities. SQme cy-gue that theyallow larger numb s of students 'with disabilities toin fact, pkomotemance by those sargue that such asemphasize problemhigher-order thinkiwill pres&tt the schallenges to studedisabilities.

articipate and,er perfor-nts. Others

SSSITIents

olvitg andg syls and

or 4greaterds with

Nontraditional State Assessments

The survey also asked states toanswer

What are your guidelines forusing accommodations andadaptations during nontradi-tional assessments?

III How do you summarize andreport data from nontraditionalassessments for students withdisabilities?

According to the 1992 NCRELsurvey, thirty states indicated theyeither pilot tested or usednontraditional items in assessinga variety of content areas. NCEO'ssurvey to those states showed thefollowing 21 states used nontradi-tional items in their statewideassessments in 1992:

Alabama MarylandAlaska MinnesotaArizona NevadaArkansas New jerseyCalifornia New YorkConnecticut OhioDelaware OregonFlorida PennsylvaniaGeorgia TennesseeIllinois VermontKansas

Table 19 lists the specific contentareas in which each state usednontraditional assessment items.The number of reported areas fornontraditional assessments variedconsiderably from one (in Alaska)to as many as seven (in Connecti-cut). Writing was the most com-monly assessed area, occurring in17 of 21 states, followed by mathin 12 of 21 states, and reading in 9of 21 states. "Other" areas includehistory, foreign language, arts,career education, and integratedcontent.

Participafion of Studentswith DisabilitiesNCEO's survey included aseparate response page for eachtype of nontraditional assessmentitem: enhanced multiple choice;short-answer open-ended; ex-tended response open-ended;interview; observation; individualperformance assessment; groupperformance assessment; portfolioor learning record; project, exhibi-tion, demonstration; or other. Theresponse page also noted howmany students with disabilitiesparticipated in the assessment.

Table 20 charts the types of non-traditional items used with stu-dents with disabilities. The largestnumber of states (13) used ex-tended response open-endeditems in all content areas. Severalstates utilized short-answer open-ended, individual performanceassessment, and enhanced mul-tiple choice in most content areas.Only one state each used portfolioand learning records (VT) andobservations (GA), and no statesused interviews.

Table 21 summarizes the numberof students with disabilitiesparticipating in the nontraditionalassessments. Only 7 of the 21states knew the number of partici-pating students with disabilities.Another two states estimated thepercentage of students withdisabilities who participate. In thenine states providing eitherestimates or actual numbers, fourcan break their numbers down bygrade level and only two canbreak their numbers down bycategory of disability.

6 7

Types of Accommodationsand AdaptationsNCEO's survey also asked statesto list what accommodations oradaptations they used in each oftheir assessments, see Table 22.

Most states said they rely on theIEP to specify what accommoda-tion is needed, without otherstate-defined guidelines. An equalnumber of states do and do nothave guidelines. When guidelinesexist, they are typically specific indetailing the types of accommoda-tions and adaptations that may beused, and generally these cover arange of possibilities. Some states(for example in Maryland) allowspecific accommodations forspecific categories of disability.

Reports of Resultsat State LevelAs Table 23 illustrates, states varygreatly in the way they reportdata from assessments that in-clude students with disabilities:II all data together, withoutdifferentiation,

data for students withdisabilities presented separatelyfrom other students' data,

data for students with disabili-ties not included in any way.

Eight states include data onstudents with disabilities in theiroverall report without separatingit, three states present the dataseparately, and six states do notprovide any data for studentswith disabilities.

58

Table 19 Content Areas Assessed with Nontraditional Assesment Items

Content Areas Assessed with Nontraditional Assesment Items

STATE -er

4.>

AlabamaAlaska

ArizonaArkansasCaliforniaConnecticutDelawareFloridaGeorgiaIllinoisKansasMarylandMinnesotaNevada

New JerseyNew YorkOhio

OregonPennsylvaniaTennessee

Vermont

Note: Indicates that this area was assessed. Information is br.sed on responses to the NCEO survey for only those states responding andbeyond the pilot test stage. Four states did not respond: Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maine, and West Virginia.

Connecticut used nontraditional items in two other areas (listening and integrated content), Maryland in one other area (social studies),and New York in two other areas (history and foreign language).

66

59

Table 20 Types of Nontraditional Items in State Assessments

Types of Nonfladitional Items

Nontraditional item States Using Areas in Which Used

Enhanced multiple choice CA CT IL KS MDPA

Reading , Writing, Math,

Eng/Lang Arts, Science, Social

Studies

Short answer open-ended AZ CT MD MNNJ NY PA

Reading, Writing, Mail', Eng/Lang

Arts, Science, Listening, Integratad

Content, Social Studies

Extended response open-ended AL AK AZ AR CTFL KS NJ NY OHOR PA VT

Reading, Writing, Math, Eng/LangArts, Science, Listening, Integrated

Content

Interview

Observation GA Reading, Math

Individual performance

assessment

DE GA KS MNNV NY TN

Reading, Writing, Math, Foreign

Language

Group performance assessment MD PA Writing, Math

Portfolio or learning record VT Writing, Math

Project, exhibition,

demonstration

DE MN Reading, Writing

Other, nonspecified CT NJ Reading, Writing, Math, Eng/Lang

Arts, Science, Listening, Integrated

Content

6 9

60

Table 21 Students with Disabilities Participating in Nontraditional Assessments

Participation Rates of Students with Disabilities

STATENumber of studentsin assessment *

Data broken downbi grade?

Data broken downby category?

AlabamaAlaskaArizona

NA

NA

1,636 YES NOArkansasCaliforniaConnecticut

NA

NANA

DelawareFloridaGeorgia

(70-80%)

20,326

1,353

NO

NO

YES

NO

YES

NOIllinoisKansasMaryland

20,277

4,505

(95-98%)

YES

NO

NO

NO

NO

NOMinnesotaNevadaNew Jersey

NA

NA

7,194 YES YESNew YorkOhioOregon

60,885

NA

NA

NO NO

PennsylvaniaTennessee

Vermont

NA

NA

NA

Highest number when more than one content area was assessed. "NA indicates that the participation rate informationwas not available.

70

61

Table 22 Accommodations/Adaptations in Nontraditional Assessments

Types Of Accommodations/Adaptations

STATE

AlabamaAlaskaArizonaArkansasCaliforniaConnecticut *Delaware *FloridaGeorgiaIllinoisKansasMarylandMinnesotaNevadaNew JerseyNew YorkOhio

OregonPennsylvania *Tennessee

Vermont *These states gave unique rsponses. Connecticut indcated it is in the process of revising its guidelines. Delaware indicated that a range ofaccommodations is used, but did not specify what they are. Pennsylvania indicated it is allowing anything thatensures indmion. Vermontallows anything that is allowed in instruction. Pennsylvania and Vermont were codedas allowing the four types of accomnxxiationsladaptations because no specification was given that the IEP had to list what was allowed.

71

62

Table 23i Reporting Results at the State Level

Reporting Results on-Students with Disabilities at the State Level

STATE

AlabamaAlaska *ArizonaArkansasCalifornia *ConnecticutDelaware *FloridaGeorgiaIllinoisKansasMarylandMinnesotaNevadaNew JerseyNew YorkOhio

OregonPennsylvania

Tennessee *VermontThese states Gave unique rsponses. Alaska indicated that it reported data at the district level only. California indicated that it did not yethave data available to report Delaware indicated that it reports data at the individual student level; data for students who takeassessments under more than minor accommodations are not included in data reports. Tennessee indicated that it has not yet deddedabout reporting.

72

63BEST COPY AVAILABLE

State Activities inSelected Outcomes Areas

73

65

State Activities in Selected Outcomes Areas

State Academic Achievement Post-School Status

ALABAMA

ALASKA

ARIZONA

Alabama uses the Integrated Reading and WritingAssessment for Grade Two, the Basic CompetencyTests (BCT) (grades 3, 6, & 9), the StanfordAchievement Test (grades 4 & 8), the Otis-LennonSchool Ability Test (grades 4 & 8), the AlabamaDirect Assessment of Writing: Grade Five, theAlabama Direct Assessment of Writing: GradeSeven, the Algebra I End-of-Course Test, theGeometry End-of-Course Test, and the High SchoolBasic Skills Exit Exam. All are part of a generaleducation effort and administered once duringthe school year except for the Bit Exam. This isadministered twice (fall and spring) in grades11 and 12 (giving those failing in llth gradeadditional opportunities to pass). The decisionto include a student with disabilities is made bythe student's IEP and/or 504 committee. Testaccommodations, if needed, are available.

Alaska started collecting inforznation in 1989using the Iowa Test of Basic Skills in grades 4, 6,and 8. All areas in the test are used, whichincludes reading (including vocabulary),language (including spelling) and math. Allachievement data are collected annually (indesignated grades) through a general educationeffort All students with disabilities participatein the assessment, unless the lEP states that thismeasurement is inappropriate for the child. Thecollected information is presented in an annualreport and used to provide the state depart-ment with basic information on school districts.In addition, the information is also reported toparents and used for accountability purposes.

For 10 years, Arizona has been collectinginformation on reading, math, and languagearts using the Iowa Test of Basic Skills and theTests of Achievement and Proficiency. Adminis-tration of these instruments is required once ayear in grades 2-11, and optional in grades 1and 12. All students with disabilities participateto the extent recommended by the LEP team.The tests are administezed lorAlly. A contractorscores the locally administered tests andsubmits reports to the local units and state unit.The information is thus used to produce bothstate and local reports.

7 4

Alabama collects employment information onspecial education students who have beenplaced in jobs by vocational education pro-grams. Data are gathered by local units, usingstate-developed follow-up questionnaires, andare reported to the state. This type of informa-tion has been gathered for about 10 years,mostly on students considered to have milddisabilities. Reports are sent to local educationagencies and to the legislature where theinformation is used for funding requirementsand related decisions.

Arizona temporarily collects information onunemployment, enrollment in school, andliving arrangements for all special educationstudents as part of a Federal Grant. Multiplesources, including teachers, parents, andstudents are used in the information-gatheringeffort. The information that is collected is usedfor program evaluation.

66


Vocational Skills Functional Living Attitudes and Aspirations

Alabama collects data on vocationalinterest, aptitude, and aspirations usingthe Differential Aptitude Tests with CareerInterest Inventory. This information iscollected in the 8th grade through ageneral education effort. The decisionwhether to include a student withdisabilities is made by the student's IMPcommittee. Limited test accommoda-tions are available. If the assessment isdeemed inappropriate, an individualvocational evaluation is availablethrough Vocational Rehabilitation.

7 5

67



ARKANSAS Arkansas collects information using both thestate-developed Mir aim Performance Tests(grades 3, 6, 8) and the Stanford AchievementTests (grades 4, 7, 10). State-developed testinformation is collected on reading and mathachievement in grades 3, 6, and 8, and onlanguage arts, social studies, and science ingrades 6 and 8. The test is used in grades 3 and6 to formulate an academic improvement plan,and in grade 8 to determine promotion to 9thgrade. With the Stanford, informafion is col-lected on reading (including word knowledgeand word analysis), math, language (includingspelling), science, and social studies in grades 4,7. and 10. All achievement information iscollected once during the designated gradesthrough a general education effort that startedin apprmdmately 1983. All students withdisabilities participate in the state-developedtests "if applicable." Only those students withdisabilities who are receiving resource levelhelp are included in the Stanford testing (i.e.,those in self-contained classes are excluded).Generally, participation in the testing programis left to the discretion of the IEP team. Arkan-sas also sends the data to an outside contractor,who returns a report to the state. The Stanford isused internally to assess school district perfor-mance and is included in state reports.

CALIFORNIA California used the California AssessmentProgram (CAP) since the mid 1970s to collectinformation on reading comprehension, mathcalculation, spelling, and written language ingrades 3, 6, 8, and 12. These data were collededannually (in the designated grades). Thesystem has been suspended and a new perfor-mance-based approach, California LearningAssessment System (CLAS), is currently beingpiloted.

COLORADO Since 1984, Colorado has annually collecteddata on placements after preschool for allstudents with disabilities. Data are collected bythe University of Colorado on placements afterpreschool (grades K-12) in comparison tochildren without preschool experience. Vari-ables range from language scores to educationalcosts. The data are used for planning, particu-larly related to PL 99-457.

76

68


Vocational Skills Functional Livin Attitudes and As irations

Now completed are three years of pilotstudies to collect outcome data on stu-dents with disabilities at grades 3, 6, 8, 10,and 12. Data are collected in the areas ofacademic/developmental functioning, IEPprogress, personal-social characteristics,and community-economic indicators. Theinformation will be used to establishfuture direction in the collection ofstudent outcome data at the postsecondary level.

7 7

69


State Academic AchievementConnecticut collects achievement informationin math, language arts, and writing in grades 4,6, and 8 using the state criterion-referencedConnecticut Mastery Test (CMT). This locallyimplemented general education effort is man-aged, scored, and reported at the state level.The CMT has been given annually since 1985.Students with disabilities have participatedsince 1989-90. While any student with adisability may participate, 60-75% of those whodo are students with mild disabilities (LD,SED). CMT data are used for: (1) reporting tothe state, (2) reporting to districts, (3) reportingto parents, (4) program evaluation, (5) assessingstudents' basic skills and need for remedialhelp, (6) accountability and equity issues, and(7) assessing special education outcomes.

CONNECTICUT

DELAWARE

FLORIDA

For academic achievement, Delaware's generaleducation unit collects math, reading, andlanguage arts data in grades 3, 6, 8, and 11using the Stanford Achievement Test for allstudents, unless exempt by IEP or a local leveldecision. Contractors annually collect data inthe districts and submit it to the state where itgets reported back to schools, districts, Chapter1, and parents. In addition, the information isused for accountability purposes. The specialeducation unit also collects grades in all coursework for all secondary-level students. Districtssubmit transcripts to the state from Rth gradeand the year of exit The ste uses the informa-tion for decisions about transition.

Post-School Status

Florida uses a state criterion-referenced highschool graduation test to measure minimumstudent performance standards in communica-tions and mathematics for all 11th gradestudents. It has a norm-referenced test for allstudents in grade 10. Students with disabilitiesare not required to participate. Score reports areprovided and national comparison data in-cluded for those students who took the testunder standardized conditions. A new writingperformance test is being given in grades 4, 8,and 10. Although participation has not yetbeen determined, student responses will beholistically scored according to a specifiedrubric. Districts administer the tests and thestate provides scoring and reporting services.All programs generate student, school, dist-id,and state level information.

78

Delaware has two postsecondary status grants:1) to develop a transition model, and 2) todevelop a follow-along tracking system from9th grade through 2-3 years post school. Thespecial education unit collects district informa-tion on employment, wages, living arrange-ments, and school enrollment for all specialeducation students in 9th grade and the year ofexit. Districts collect and submit data to thestate. Started in 1989, the follow-up grantannually conducts telephone interviews for alldisability groups. This enables cross-file accessand tracldng of individual students. The stateuses the information for long range planningand for evaluation of program effectiveness.

The Florida Education Training and PlacementInformation Program (FETPIP) and OSEP grantpersonnel are using multiple sources to collectinformation on the type of employment (mili-tary, private sector, or civil service), quarterlywages, and post-secondary education ofgraduating special education students (1-2years post-school). Information is collectedlocally and reported to the state. The state usesthe data to report back to the districts. Theprogram has been operating since 1989.

70


Vocational Skills Functional Livin Attitudes and As !rations

The special education unit annuallycollects for the state: grades in vocationalcourses, types of support needed foremploy..tent, and types of work experi-ence students had in school. For severalyears, the data have been collectedthrough transcripts and exit interviewforms for all students with disabilities ingrades 9 and 12, and on exit informationforms for all students in grade 12. Thedata are used for: deciding long-termplanning for adult services, providingfeedback to the districts, evaluatingprogram quality and effectiveness, andmaking program changes.

The Division of Vocational Adult andCommunity Education annually collectsdata on vocational program enrollment,completion, and placement of grades 7-12and post-school students within one yearof program completion. Forms indicatewho completes programs and who gainsmarketable skills. The data have bemcollected locally since 1986 and reportedto the state where it is used to: report tothe districts, match individuals to em-ployment, monitor enrollment in com-munity colleges and universities, reportan analysis to the State Board of Voca-tional Education, legislature and otheragencies, and evaluate the program. A1992 bill, HB 167, will help study theprogress of disabled students in theseprograms.

7P

71


1111111111

State

GEORGIA

HAWAII

Academic Achievement

reading, math, writing, science, social studies,work study skills, and school readiness. A newstatewide testing program is using state crite-rion-referenced tests: the (1991-92) GeorgiaCurriculum-Based Assessments in grades 3, 5, and8 (for science, social studies, language arts,reading, mathematics, and writing) and theGeorgia High School Graduation Test (GHSGT) ingrade 11 (for English/language arts, health,mathematics, science, social studies, andwriting). Two norm-referenced tests are used:the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) for all studentsin grades 3, 5, and 8 (for reading and mathemat-ics) and the Test of Achievement and Proficiency(TAP) in grade 11 (on a matrix sampling inreading, mathematics, written expression,science, and social studies). For school readinessassessment, Georgia uses the state-developedGeorgia Kindergarten Test . For all assessments,students with disabilities are included unless"the nature or severity of an individual'shandicapping condition may require 'exclusionfrom the testing program." For all types ofassessment, the local district collects the dataand reports them to the state. The state uses theinformation to: (1) report to the legislature, (2)report to local units, (3) allocate remedialeducation funds, and (4) conduct instnrctionalplanning. Performance on the GHSGT alsodetermines eligibility for graduation.

For more than 10 years, Hawaii has used theStanford Achievement Test to annually collectdata on reading, math, and language in grades3, 6, 8, and 10. Since 1983, it has used the HawaiiState Test of Essential Competencies annually forgrades 10 and 11, and twice a year for grade 12.These data are collected from all students,including students with disabilities (unlessexempted under state-developed guidelines). Alocal contractor gives the tests and reports thedata to the State Education Agency, where theyare reported to the legislature and the localeducation agencies. The information helps tomake curriculum improvements and to deter-mine eligibility for graduation. Students withdisabilities who pass the test receive a diploma.Those who do not pass, but meet their IEPgoals, receive a "Program Certificate." A newoption gives al"Course Completion Certificate"as a graduation certificate.Idaho's Division of Instruction testing program

Post-School Status

The Psychoeducational Network of Georgiacollects information on students with emo-tional disorders (ED) one year following highschool. Ulu% a state-developed question-naire, information is collected on employ-ment, post-secondary schooling, militaryservice, an support services received bythese stud ts. The information has beencollected reported to the state educationagency since 1982. The state uses the infor-mation for program planning.

4

;

72


Vocational Skills

Measurable goals and accountabffitymeasures for special populations weredeveloped in conjunction with thestandards described in 115 of the Carl D.Perkins Vocational and Applied TechnologyEducation Act of 1990. Monitoring theannual evaluation by local recipientsensures that the programs meet thesegoals.

Functional Livin Attitudes and Aspirations_

Hawaii has an evaluation section intheir state office that collects a"General Graduation Satisfaction"rating (satisfactica with publiceducation) from all students. In thefall of 1990, Hawaii used theNorthwest Regional Education Labto produce a report about specialeducation. The report includedinterviews with stakeholders abouttheir concerns, problems, issues inspecial education, and satisfactionwith programs. State board mem-bers, district and state people,teachers, principals, parents andstudents in special education wereinterviewed. This was a one-timeevaluation project that might berepeated occasionally.

73


State

IDAHO

Academic Achievement Post-School Status

ILLINOIS

INDIANA

Idaho's Division of Instruction testing programhas a norm-referenced test with direct writingsamples. Since 1986, the Test of Ac_hievement andProficiency has been given to all 11th gradersannually in reading, math, science, socialstudies, writing, problem-solving, and perfor-mance information. The locally collected dataare submitted to the state for analysis andreporting to local districts and the legslature.Additionally, the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (Ins)has been used annually since 1985 to testreading, math, science, and social studies for all6th and 8th gaders. A contractor collects thedata, submits them to the Division of Instruc-tion, and reports to local districts and thelegislature. For 10 years, writing samples havebeen collected from all students and submittedto the state for scoring and reporting. Studentswith disabilities participate unless they areexempted by their school principal and teacher.Distxicts are free to use the state recommendedtests or they may choose to use other tests.

The Illinois Goal Assessment Program tests formathematics, writing, and reading in grades 3,6, 8, and 10, and for science and social studiesin grades 4, 7, and 11. The State Board ofEducation develops the tests to determine howschools are meeting goals for learning. Legisla-tion (HB1890), adopted in 1992, says thatexemption from participation shall be madeonly on an individual student basis as deter-mined by the pupil's individualized program.The state reports results to schools, schooldistricts, students, parents, and the legislature.

Indiana collects information on math andEnglish/language arts using the Indiana State-wide Testing for Educational Progress (ISTEP).This general education data collection effortonly tests those students with disabilities whoare integrated for math and language arts.Since 1986, testing has been conducted annu-ally in grades 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, and 11 by localdistricts that report results to the state. Theseresults identify students needing remediationthrough summer school. (The first time astudent does not pass, that student is directedto attend summer school. The second time, thestudent is retained in grade.) Also, the assess-,ment is one of four factors considered inoutcome-based accreditation for schools.

Idaho has been involved in postsecondaryprojects since 1988. The current longitudinaltransition tracking program is conducted bythe University of Idaho and the specialeducation section of the Idaho Department ofEducation. The state uses a locally developedquestionnaire once every year to assessstudents' safisfaction with school programs,employment status, residential placements,accessibility to community services, andsocial involvements. Students with disabffi-ties are contacted prior to their graduationand thereafter are contacted once a year forthree years. Sixty-six percent of the districtsparticipate. The information is being used toreport back to the local education agenciesand the legislature, and to conduct programevaluations.

Indiana collects information on the numbersof students who are pursuing higher educa-tion or post-seccndary education/training.This information is collected along with exitdata using the sWe form from the Division ofInformational Systems (general education).Data are collected on all students beforeleaving high school, but students withdisabilities are not separated from the total.(Data are separated only by ethnicity andgender.) Since 1975, the information has beenreported to the state annually and used formonitoring accreditation.

74



82

75


State

IOWA


KANSAS

KENTUCKY

LOUISIANA

Kansas collects information on reading and mathfor all students in special education, unlessexcluded by their IEPs. A state math test is givento all students in grades 3, 8, and 10. Thisinformation is reported to the state legislatureand the state, and is used for accreditationpurposes. In 1993, tests in communication(language arts), social skills, and science will begiven state-wide in the same grades.

Kentucky collects data in grades 4, 8, and 12within: 1) transitional items/tasks (multiplechoice, open-ended, and writing prompts); 2)performance events; and 3) writing and mathportfolios. The transition component coversmath, science, social science, writing, andinterdisciplinary items in arts/humanities,practical living, and vocational education. Theportfolio component covers writing and math.All special education students, except those withsevere disabilities, participate in the regularassessment. As of. 1992-93, students with severedisabilities will be assessed via an alternateportfolio.

All Louisiana students with disabilities pursuinga high school diploma in regular education takepart in the assessments. In grades 3, 5, 7, andhigh school, the Louisiana Educaiional AssessmentProgram is is used annually to assess languagearts and math. Seventh graders get assessed inwritten composition and high schoolers aretested in science and social studies. Collectedsince 1988, the data are used by the LEA andstate to ensure student mastery of grade levelskills. Students with disabilities in grades 4, 6,and 9 are assessed annually using the CaliforniaAchievement Test (CAT), although students usingtest modifications are excluded from statesummaries. CAT data are used to comp Iv stateperformance with natonal norms.

Iowa uses a state-developed questionnaire toget data on students with learning disabili-ties, behavioral disabilities, and mild mentaldisorders (not low incidence disabilities).This special education effort contracts witharea professional education agency staff tointerview students during summer months.Since 1986, information has been collected onformer students one, three, and five yearspost school. The data become a measure ofproduct effectiveness for the state, and haveimplications for practice and policy.

Kentucky collects information on successfultransitions to adult life for all students as partof the Kentucky Instructional Results andInformation System (KIRIS) The data are usedas part of the overall school accountabilityindex.

8 4

76

1

State S edal Education Outcomes 1993


Louisiana collects information on thevocational education enrollment of allstudents with disabilities unless ex-empted. This combined general andspecial education effort for assessingstudents enrolled in vocational courseswas implemented for the first time inthe 1992-93 school year. The informa-tion generated from this effort will beused as required by Federal regulations.

Kentucky's accountability assessmenthas a noncognitive component with oneindicator being "successful transition toadult life." A successful graduate is: 1)enrolled as a full-time postsecondaryschool student; 2) employed at least 30hours per week ("non-temporary"); 3)an active member of the United Statesmilitary; or 4) any combination of theabove adding up to at least 30 hoursper week. School districts now trackgraduates to determine who makes asuccessful transition to adult life.

85

77


State

MAINE


MARYLAND

MASSACHUSETTS

MICHIGAN

Maine has developed a test for student achieve-ment in reading, math, writing, social studies,science, and the humanities. All students infgades 4, 8, and 11 are tested, including thosewith disabilities. A contractor scores the tests.The state reports the information to the schoolsand includes directions for how it should beshared with parents. The information also helpsplan staff development and school improve-ment.

Maryland uses the Comprehensive Test of BasicSkills and the Maryland School PerformanceAssessment Program in grades 3, 5, and 8, and toprovide the state with information on schooldistricts. Functional tests in reading, math,writing, and citizenship are administered twiceper year in grades 9-12. Students with disabili-ties pursuing high school diplomas participatebecause these tests determine eligibility forgraduation.

Massachusetts collects information biannuallythrough general education in grades 4, 8, and12. The state-developed Massachusetts EducationAssessment Program (MEAP) uses both multiplechoice and open-ended questions and includessections on reading, math, language arts(including a writing sample), social studies,and science. Students with disabilities partiu-pate, unless exempted through their lEPs.Scores for students receiving more than 25%special education services outside of the regularclassroom are not included in scores reportedto school districts and individual student scoresare not provided. The state reports MEAPresults to school districts and the legislature.

Michigan collects information annually onreading and math in grades 4, 7, and 10 and onscience in grades 5, 8, and 1 l. For 15 years, thestate-developed Michigan Educational AssessmentProgram (MEAP) has been used by the state toreport back to districts, state boards, and parents.Usually students with mild or sensory disabilities areincluded, but participation is locally determined. By1994, students must pass proficiency tests inreading, math, and 13cience in order to receive highschool diplomas with State Endorsement Specialeducation students may be exempt by using ap-proved alternative testing accommodations that meetthe individual needs of the student

Maryland annually collects data on allgraduates, one year post school, using theStatewide High School Graduate Follow-upSystem. For 20 years, this program hascombined efforts of the state, general, voca-tional, and special education units. A mailquestionnaire collects data on attendance atpostsecondary schools, employment, andincome. The data are used for reports to thelocal education agencies and the legislature.

Massachusetts uses the Exit Fact Data ReportSheets to collect information on all specialeducation students, ages 14-22. (Data arecollected on the number of students going tocollege, the number going to other post-secondary educational opportunities, and thenumber employed in regular and supportedwork places.) The local agencies have re-ported to the state annually, since 1985.

In Michigan, local districts conduct telephonefollow-up interviews of students withdisabilities (or with parent if necessary) oneyear after the student has left school. Thisspecial education effort includes all studentswith disabilities and seeks data on maritalstatus, transportation, living arrangements,recreational functioning, voting, drivel'slicense, employment, income, and happiness.The information has been collected annuallysince 1984, and is still being revised. The dataare collected locally and used in a statewidereport and district reports to help makedecisions about programs at the local level.

State Spedal Education Outcomes 1993


With the Division of Career and Tech-nology Education, Maryland hasannually collected data on the voca-tional programs and services receivedby students with disabilities over grade8. For 10 years, local districts have usedit to evaluate programs, comparehandicapped with the nonhandicappedpopulations, and prepare state andfederal government reports.

Functional living outcomes are mea-sured through the Life Skills CurricularFramework developed by the state andimplemented at the district level.

87

Maine collects information on theattitudes and future plans ofstudents through questions that areincluded with tests.

Maryland annually samplesparents and teachers on attitudes/satisfaction with programs forstudents with disabilities at allgrade levels. Student attitudes andaspirations also are identified andpublished in the annual MarylandSchool Performance Report.

79



MINNESOTA

MISSISSIPPI

MISSOURI

MONTANA

NEBRASKA

NEVADA

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Mississippi uses the Stanford Achievement Test ingrades 3, 5, and 8. This annual assessment effortstarted in 1985 and includes all children, thoughstudents with severe disabilities usually do notparticipate. The general education administra-tion collects the data, profiles districts, anddetermines services eligibility in local schools.Additionally, since the late 1970s, course workgrades have been collected on a case by casebasis for all students with disabilities at all age/grade levels by teams of state departmentemployees who determine eligibility for service.

Nevada collects information using the Compre-hensive Test of Basic Skills in grades 3, 6, and 9.Reading, math, and language are assessedthrough a special education effort. All studentsparticipate unless they are exempt.

New Hampshire uses the California AchievementTest (CAT) annually in grades 4, 8, and 10 (forreading, math, language, social studies, andscience). Since 1985, data have been jointlycollected by general and special education. Allstudents mainstreamed for at least 50% of thetime participate, unless the IEP team andparents feel it is inappropriate. The data appearin an annual state report and provide the SEAwith basic information on school districts.

A state-developed questionnaire collects dataon employment status and location, wages,and post-secondary schooling for students inall disability goups. The Department ofVocational Education collects the data inpude 12 aild one year after exiting school.Each school must report every five years forfederal reporting and the Perkins Reports.

Nebraska collects information on skills,independence, leisure and social activities,satisfaction, vocational success, and income.Since 1988, these data have been collectedannually using surveys and interviews withall students with mild or moderate retarda-tion who exit programs.

Nevada annually (since 1990) collects infor-mation using parent, student, and teachertelephone interviews for a sample of studentsfrom all disability groups during their senioryear, and one and two years post high school.

New Hampshire collects information onemployment status, relevance of vocationaltraining, wages, hours per week employed,and work performance ratings. These dataare collected annually (since 1982) on allstudents with disabilities who are in voca-tional education programs. A vocationaleducation effort compiles and reports thedata to local agencies.

80



Missouri collects data on state-devel-oped forms for all students in grade 11by local agencies and reported to theSEA. They have been annually collectedfor 10 years and used to report to localdistricts and the legislature.

89

81


State

NEW JERSEY


NEW MEXICO

NEW YORK

New Jersey uses the state-developed HighSchool Proficiency Test (HSFT) in the 11th grade.The HSPT annually collects information inmath, reading, and writing through a generaleducation effort that started in 1986. All stu-dents participate unless exempted due toadverse effects of the testing situation and/orbecause the goals and objectives in the IEP donot address the HSPT proficiencies. The testsare sent to the state agency where results arereported back to the local districts. Localdistricts use the HSPT to determine graduationeligibility for individual students.

New Mexico collects data annually using theNew Mexico Reading Assessment, AchievementAssessment (Reading, Language Arts, Math,Science, Social Studies), and Direct WritingAssessment. Since 1986, the reading test has beengiven in grades I and 2, the achievement ingrades 3, 5, and 8, and the portfolio writing ingrades 4 and 6 (competency-based test). Allstudents participate, unless exempted (deter-mined by IEP team), and scores go to the stateboard for accountability parposes. The HighSchool Competency Exam (HSCE) is given to allstudents, unless exempted by an IEP team, ingrades 10, 11, and 12 to determine diplomaawards. The HSCE has been given annuallysince 1986 (with one extra administration forseniors each Fall). Both types of tests are givenby the local districts and sent to a contractorwho forwards the information to the state.

All children, unless exempted by the IEP team,participate in: the Pupil Evaluation Program Test(PEPT) in math and reading in grades 3 and 6,and writing in grade 5; Program Evaluation Testsin science in grade 4, and in social studies ingrades 6 and 8. Scores are used for earlyidentification of students needing remediationand to compare students with disabilities tonondisabled students. Preliminary CompetencyTests in reading and writing are administered ingrade 8 or 9. The Regents Competency Tests(RCI's), which are related to graduation re-quirements, are administered to secondarylevel students in mathematics, science, reading,writing, global studies and U.S. history andgovernment.

New Mexico collects information on employ-ment status and placement through teacherand employer surveys/interviews. Thisgeneral education effort collects informationon employment status for all students (noexception), but only students with milddisabilities are included in the collectionefforts for job placement. All vocationaleducation information is used to report to theLEAs.

82



91

83


State

NORTHCAROLINA

NORTHDAKOTA


North Carolina has changed its testing pro-gam. End-of-grade tests are being developedfor grades 3-8, and some end-of-course tests aredeveloped in several areas for grades 9-12. Thetests are multiple choice and open-ended andare based on the North Carolina StandardCourses of Study. These state tests replace theCalifornia Achievement Test (CAT).

North Dakota collects information using thereading, math, language, word analysis, studyskills, spelling, science, and social studiesportions of the Comprehensive Tests of Basic Skills(CIBS). The CMS is given annually in grades3, 6, 8, and 11 to all general education studentswho are able to read. Local districts administerthe test and report the results to the state forpolicy making. In April of 1991, the NorthDakota legislature passed a bill mandating thatschools implement performance-based testing.

OHIO Ohio uses commercially prepared and state-developed proficiency tests. Since 1989, schooldistricts have selected commercially preparedand state approved test. The tests are given toall children, if appropriate (the IEP determines),annually in grades 4, 6, and 8 in reading, math,and language. Districts report the data to thestate, where it is compiled and reported to thepublic and the local districts. The four-kiart,state-developed tests are given twice a year toall students unless exempted, beginning ingrade 9, until passed. Seniors who pass all partsof the 9th grade proficiency test by January 1,1994, take the 12th grade test. Local districtscollect and report the information to the state.

OKLAHOMA

OREGON Oregon has a statewide assessment in reading,math, written expression, and language arts forgrades 3, 5, 8, and 11 that includes studentswith disabilities unless exempted by the teacherresponsible for the IEP because of curnculumconsiderations. The assessment determinesstudents' level of performance on the state'scurriculum. Achievement data in reading andmath are collected annually through a generaleducation effort. Reporting occurs in the state'sannual assessment report unless the assessmentwas based on modified conditions, and used tocompare districts of similar socio-economiccharacteristics.

For the past ten years, the Vocational Educa-tion Department has annually interviewedstudent, for employment, postsecondaryeducation, and school satisfaction informa-tion. It is collected only for those enrolled invocational education. The state receives the ,

data from the local units and gives feedbackto local and state education agencies.

North Dakota collects information onpostsecondary experiences using a follow-upsurvey or interview. A special educationeffort collects information on all specialeducation students one year after exitinghigh school. Beginning in 1990, state trainedpeople have been collecting the data from thelocal districts. The information is used forprogram improvements.

Oregon annually collects data on the last yearof school and two years post school. Theschool component uses computer-assistedquestionnaires given to teachers, parents, andstudents through a University of Oregoneffort. The out-of-school data are collected bycomputerized telephone interviews. Studentsfrom all disability categories are includedand the information is used for (1) providingdata for state level policy, and (2) providingdata for local community program improve-ment.

84



Oregon collects data on employmentstatus, enrollment in and type of voca-tional education, and job placement ofall students with disabilities. Through aspecial education and University ofOregoa effort, the data are collectedfrom teachers, parents, students, docu-ment reviews, and the Oregon Follow-Along Study. They are in reports to thestate legislature and to LEAs. They alsoare used to generate internal SEAreports and to evaluate SEA programs.

93

OTHER AREAS: Ohio collects andevaluates data about IEP goalsachieved by the instructional areafor students in the Chapter 1 (89-313) program. Progress is rated ona three point scale: little/no im-provement, moderate improve-ment, and much improvement.The information is collected using astate-developed form, for alldisability groups, ages 3-21.Through a special education effort,state supported and state operatedagencies have been reporting theinformation to the state for morethan 10 years.

85

State Activities in Selected Outcomes AreasOnwl


PENNSYLVANIA Pennsylvania State Board of Education curricu-lum regulations (March 1992) assign responsi-bility for assessment to different levels ofitheschool system. State level data comes frorschool-based assessment of reading and math- Iematics at grades 5, 8, and 11, and writing at 4,

grades 6 and 9. All students with disabilities areencouraged to participate in these assessinents. 4

Results are published in a combined readingAmathematics school report that is distributectitoall participating local districts. A separatereport is prepared for writing.

Rhode Island collects achievement informationin reading and math using the MetropolitanAchievement Test at grades 4, 8, and 10. A,writing assessment is administered at grades 3and 6. Most special education students atetested and limited exemptions occur bated on (

IEP determinations. Special education tus isrecorded for state analysis of perfoTeachers and parents receive copies of estresults.

RHODE ISLAND

SOUTHCAROLINA

South Carolina collects information in reading,language/English, and mathematics using theStanford Achievement Test (SAT 8th edition) ingrades 4, 5, 7, 9, and 11. Information also isobtained through the Basic Skills AssessmentProgram (BSAP): reading and math tests ingrades 1 and 2; reading, math, and science testsin grade 3; reading, math, science, and writingtests in grades 6 and 8; and reading, math and 1

writing subtests at the exit examination level.The Exit Examination is given to all students inthe 10th grade. Students in the 11th and 12thgrades take any subtest(s) that they have notpreviously passed. All data are collectedannually in the spring with 12th graders takuigthe exit examination in the fall. All studentswith disabilities participate unless they haveIEPs that specifically state that the testingprogram is inappropriate. The collected iinfor-mation is reported to the state legislature, localschool districts, students, and parents. The dataare used to place students into the next gradeand for incentive programs. Students must passall three subtests of the Exit Examination inorder to receive a South Carolina High SchoolDiploma. Both testing rrograms are currentlybeing examined for revision.

4



95

87



SOUTH DAKOTA

TENNESSEE

TEXAS

South Dakota collects achievement data inreading, mathematics, language, social science,and science. The local general education unitsadminister the Stanford Achievement Test (SAT)for grades 4, 8, and 11 and forward it to acontractor who compiles results for the stateand local agencies. All students participateunless exempted by school officials. Collectedsince 1983, achievement data are used by thestate to give feedback to LEAs and to improvethe program. Information can be shared withparents and Chapter I programs may use thedata for program evaluation. The SEA is usingthe data in school accountability efforts for thefirst time during 1992-93.

Tennessee uses the Tennessee ComprehensiveAssessment Program (T-CAP) in grades 2-8 and10 (optional in grades 1, 11, and 12). Areasinclude: reading, language, math, science, socialstudies, and study skills. Started in 1989, thisgeneral education program includes all studentswith disabilities, unless the multi-disciplinaryteam decides it is inappropriate. Results help tomonitor student improvement and determinewhether students obtain a regular diploma. Thestate also administers the Tennessee ProficiencyTest twice per year in grades 9-12 for English,reading, spelling, and math. It is not knownwhen this general education assessment started,but all students with disabilities participate andthere are no exemption guidelines.

Texas collects information on reading, writing,math, science, and social studies achievementusing state-developed criterion-referenced tests(CRT), the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills(TAAS) program. This general education effortreports results for all students, with specialeducation scores disaggregated from otherscores. The current assessment plan requiresCRT testing annually in reading and math forgrades 3 through 8, and in writing, science, andsocial studies for grades 4 and 8. Students taketheir first exit level test at grade 10 in reading,writing, and math, with an opportunity toretest in grades 11 and 12. With results, the statedevelops district report cards and districtsevaluate student achievement All students aremandated by law to participate in the CRTtesting, unless given a special education exemp-tion by an admission, review, or dismissalcommittee.

Texas conducts a survey of special educationstudents in transition that includes thefollowing: service needs of students withdisabilities, placement at graduation, andoutcomes of in-school and post-schoolstudents. A new system is being developedto report data in conjunction with the currentstatewide data management system.

9 6

88


Vocational Skills Functional Livin

South Dakota collects information onemployment status, enrollment invocational education, type of vocationalprogram, and job placement of allstudents with disabilities. The data,collected through a joint special educa-tion and South Dakota Department ofLabor effort, are obtained from teachersand students. The information is used toreport to the LEAs, SEAs, and theDepartment of Labor.

Texas collects data using The SpecialEducation Outcomes Study. Develop-mental quotients of a sample ofapproximately 1,000 special educationstudents (in all 9 disability areas) Arecollected using developmental oradaptive behavior assessments such asthe Vineland and Adaptive BehaviorScales. Scores are from grade 12assessments (or within past two years).The data, collected locally in 1990when the study began, are reported tothe state. The information will beincluded in the overall profiles of thesample students and eventually beused to compar; student outcomeswith types of programs, types ofdisabilities, and adaptive behaviorskills of students exiting high school.

97

Attitudes and Aspirations

89


State

UTAH


VERMONT

VIRGINIA

WASHINGTON

Utah collects information on reading, math,written expression, social studies, and scienceusing the Stanford Achievement Test (SAD. Thisgeneral education effort, begun in 1990, in-cludes all students at all grade levels, except forthose students with multiple handicaps andsevere or profound disabilities. The informationhelps determine how students are doingstatewide. Utah is in the process of developinga criterion-referenced assessment for reading,math, art, music, vocational education, andfunctional adaptive behavior skills.

Vermont uses Portfolio Assessments in gades 4and 8. The areas tested are math and writing,which are collected annually through a collabo-rative general and special education effort.Started in 1991, this assessment effort includesall students with disabilities. The information isreported to the state and used to determineschool-wide performance, needed curriculumchanges, needed resources, and overall im-provement of the "Vermont Landscape" ofwhich all students are a part

Virginia collects information on reading, math,and written expression through its LiteracyTesting Program. Begun in 1989, this programis implemented at grade 6 and is basically acriterion-referenced system administered by thegeneral education unit. A local decisionexempts students. Data are also obtainedthrough norm-referenced testing (Iowa Test ofBasic Skills , grades 4 and 8; Tests of Achievementand Proficiency, grade 11). Local districts admin-ister all tests and report to the state. Informa-tion is used for feedback to the schools, foroverall program improvement, and in theVirginia Outcome Accountability Project.

Washington collects information on readingand math using the Metropolitan AchievementTest (MAT) in grades 4, 8, andll. All studentswith disabilities may participate at the discre-tion of parents and teachers. All achievementdata are collected annually through the Assess-ment Unit. Contractors with the test publisherscompile the data and send them to the state,where they are used in budget planning, statereports, and feedback to the local units. Thisgeneral education effort is approximately 10years old. Washington is currently in theprocess of changing achievement tests.

Since 1988, Vermont has annually used apost-secondary quesfionnaire to collect dataabout employment, education, living ar-rangements, friendships, decision making,wages, and school satisfaction on a sample ofstudents with disabilities who exit school.Joint efforts of the Department of Education,University of Vermont, Local EducationAgencies, and State Education Agencycompile the data into a statewide database tomodify programs and increase opportunities.

Virginia collects information on the postsecondary education and successful employ-ment of all students with disabilities whograduate from school or drop out by contact-ing them within one year of exiting school.This information is collected by the Depart-ment of Rehabilitation, Department ofMental Health/Mental Retardation, and theEmployment Commission. First piloted in1989, the official data collection began in1990 and is done annually. These data areused to determine outcome indicators.

90


Vocational Skills FunctIona! Living Attitudes and Aspirations

9 9

91



WEST VIRGINIA

WISCONSIN

WYOMING

West Virginia collects information on reading,math, language arts, science, and social studiesfor all students with disabilities unless they areexempt. A criterion-referenced test, as well asthe Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills, is used toassess achievement. General education collectsthe data for use in reports to the state and to theLEAs, and for accountability purposes.

Wisconsin collects data on reading comprehen-sion using a state-developed criterion-refer-enced test. Since 1989, this general educationeffort has been gival annually to all students,unless exempted, in grade 3. Local schoolsadminister the test and report the data to thestate. The state reports results to the legislatureand the local districts, where it could be usedfor individual student reports. Beginning in1992-93 on a voluntary basis and 1993-94 on amandatory basis, Wisconsin districts will giveknowledge tests to 8th and 10th grade studentsusing the ACT 8th grade EXPLORE and 10thgrade PLAN. These test mathematics, reading,English, and science and ask for a writingsample with two prompts per grade level.

The Bureau for Vocational Education inWisconsin gathers post high school data for asample of students from one fifth of theschool districts in the state. Responding toPerkins requirements, Wisconsin will de-velop a new data collection plan to beapplied on a yearly basis. The variablesinclude dropout rates, attendance, retentionin grade, graduation rates, number of sus-pensions and expulsions, percentage ofpupils in extracurricular and communityactivities and advanced placement courses,percent of graduates enrolled inpostsecondary education programs, andpercentage of graduates entering the workforce.

AMERICANSAMOA(Am Samoa)

American Samoa collects information using theStanford Achievement Test (SAT) (for grades 4, 6,8, 10, 12) and a minimum competency test (forgrades 9-12). Both tests provide information onreading, language arts, math, science, and socialstudies. The SAT is administered annuallythrough a general education effort. The mini-mum competency test has been used since 1986;it is ur.known when use of the SAT began. Allmainstreamed students with disabilities partici-pate in the assessments; students who are inself-contained classrooms do not. Both the testsare used for local district evaluations. The SATis used to determine system progress and theminimum competency test is used to determineeligibility for graduation. Curriculum refer-enced tests are being developed locally in allfive major subject areas and in Samoan Lan-guage Arts.

toe

92


Vocational Skills Functional Lim

West Virgima collects information onenrollment in vocational educauon andon the type of vocational program forall students (no exceptions). These dataare gathered through the Department ofVocational Education and are used toreport to both local and state educationagencies.

Attitudes and Aspirations

93



BUREAU OFINDIAN AFFAIRS(BIA)

MARIANAISLANDS(CNMI)

DISTRICT OFCOLUMBIA(DC)

The BIA collects information using a variety ofassessments. For math, reading, language, and'social studies, it uses subtests of the Comprehen-sive Test of Basic Skills for students identified aslearning disabled, speech impaired, and otherhealth impaired in grades 1-12. Information hasbeen collected annually through a generaleducation effort for more than 10 years. Localunits report to the test publisher, who reports tothe schools and the state education agency.Results from the academic achievement testsare used to modify curriculum, train staff andprovide technical assistance to local schools.Local districts may also choose to use theeducational assessments used in their state.

The CNMI uses the California Achievement Test(CAT) to collect data on reading and math ingrades 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11. This general educationassessment only includes students with disabili-ties who are not identified (e.g., students withlearning disabilities). Students with other typesof disabilities participate occasionally, whenspecial efforts successfully get them in theassessment. Achievement data have beencollected every other year since 1983-1984.Schools administer the tests and send them tothe state agency where the raw scores arepulled from the test protocols, summarized,and used to evaluate student progress.

Since 1989, the District of Columbia has col-lected data on stakeholder satisfaction witheducational and related programs. This specialeducation effort uses telephone interviews forall students with disabilities (from 3-21 years),their parents, and either an interview or ques-tionnaire with their teachers. The state collectsthe data during site compliance monitoringvisits and uses it to produce an analysis reportfor program directors and assistant superinten-dents.

1 CI 2

94



1.113

195


State

GUAM

PALAU

PUERTO RICO

Academic AchievIment Post-School Status--

Guam collects information on reading, math-ematics, and writing. A state-developed crite-rion-referenced test, the Life and School SurvivalSkills Test (BLSST), is given to all non-exemptstudents during the odd years in elementaryschool and every year during high school. TheBLSST has been administered twice per yearsince 1986, through a general and specialeducation effort. The Briganee (pre and post) hasbeen given twice per year to all students in theelementary grades since 1989. The local districtsadminister both tests and send the data to thestate to be aggregated. Local schools use thestate report for instructional planning, decision-making for students, and program evaluation.

Palau collects data on reading, math, science,and social studies using a criterion-referencedtest developed with WRRC assistance. Allstudents participate during grade 8 or whendeemed ready. Since 1980, all achievement datahave been collected annually through a generaleducetion effort at identified sites. Test resultsgo to the Superintendent of Education and arereported to local districts for use in high schoolplacement decisions.

Puerto Rico collects information using thenorm-referen led test, APRENDA, which wasdeveloped whh the assistance of The Psycho-logical Corporation. The reading comprehen-sion and language (writing) subtests are givenin grades 1-12, math in grades 1-9, and basicskills in grades K-2. The tests have been givento all students with disabilities, if integrated,annually since 1990. The tesft; are administeredlocally and sent to the Data Center at theDepartment of Education to be used for island-wide comparisons, individual student deci-sions, and IEP preparation and revisions.

Guam is in the process of collecting data onliving arrangements for all disability groups.This special education effort collects informa-tion using telephone and mail interviewsone, two, and three years after graduation.This information has been collected annuallysince 1989 by the state agency to facilitatetransition planning.

Palau collects information on postsecondarystatus using the Transition Team Programcase notes. This post-exit information hasbeen gathered continuously through a specialeducation tifort since 1989 for all studentswho were enrolled in the transition program.Data are used to evaluate students' statusand former programs.

104

96



Guam collects infortmt:on on employ-ment during school years and jobplacanent for all students. This informa-tion is collected through a specialeducation effort that uses teachers,students, parents, employers, anddocument reviews as sources of infor-mation for program evaluation.

Palau collects inforn lation on workplacement for all students enrolled inthe transition program. These data havebeen collected since 1988 by the Transi-tion Team using individual case studiesfor students in grade 8 and above.Reports are filed on students with theSEA. The SEA tracks what happens tostudents, concentrating on those who donot attend an academic high school.

1 5

97



MARSHALLISLANDS(RMI)

U.S. VIRGINISLANDS(USVI)

The RMI collects information on reading andmath using the Wide Range Achievement Test(WRAD. Since 1972 this special education efforthas been administered twice each year (pre andpost). Students identified as learning disabledin grades 1-8 participate. Local schools (diag-nostician) report the information to the stateagency where it is reported back to the schoolsand parents. Children in the special educationearly childhood program (ages 3-5), are as-sessed using a profile checklist in the areas ofreading and math. This tesfing began in 1990and is given annually by consultants whoreport the results to the state where the infor-mation is shared with the schools and parents.

The USVI has conducted assessment, throughthe general education unit, annually since the1960s. The Metropolitan Achievement Test (MAT)tests students in grades 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11,including those with mild disabilities, in math,langlage skills, reading, and general concepts.Students with disabilities participate in thetesting if they are in mainstreamed classes. Thedata are collected, analyzed, and reported bythe Test Research and Evaluation Departmentstaff. The state uses the information for pro-gram planning, improving teachers' skills, andfor general accountability.

106

The RMI collects information on post-schoolemployment. This special education effortuses an interview to collect employment,wages, and living arrangement data onstudents identified as learning disabled andmentally retarded. The state agency collectsthe information one time per year to evaluatethe status of individual students.

98



The RMI collects information on self-help, adaptive behavior, and develop-mental motor skills for all students ages3-21. Diagnosticians and teachers collectthis information through observadonswith rating scales. This special edtica-tion effort began more than 10 yearsago and is done continuously. Theinformation is used for individual childplanning.

107

99

DC. 363 044. - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 372 558 EC 303 190 AUTHOR Shriner, James G.; And Others TITLE...

Documents

Transcript of DC. 363 044. - ERICDOCUMENT RESUME ED 372 558 EC 303 190 AUTHOR Shriner, James G.; And Others TITLE...