Infants and One-Year Olds - Columbia Public Schools
[pic]
Assessment Committee
2002-2003
Lynn Barnett Executive Assistant
Wesley Bird DESE, Director Curriculum & Technology Integration
Don Bristow Director, Columbia Area Career Center
Wanda Brown Principal, Hickman High School
Diane Bruckerhoff Coordinator, Health Science K-12
Dana Clippard Literacy Support Teacher
Linda Coutts Coordinator, Math K-5
Cheryl Cozette Assistant Superintendent
Jerri Deming Coordinator, Early Childhood/Parents as Teachers
Skip Deming Assistant Superintendent
Karla DeSpain Board Member
Curt Fuchs Director of Media Services
Val Garton Coordinator, Language Arts 6-12
Nancy Gerardy Director, Gifted Programs
Mary Ann Graham Coordinator, Staff Development
John Hagar Data Analyst
Sharon Hoge Coordinator, Language Arts K-5
Mary Humlicek Director, Title 1
Nyle Klinginsmith Principal, Jefferson Jr. High School
Ann Landes Director, Guidance
Becky Litherland Coordinator, Science K-12
Chris Mallory Assistant Superintendent
Julie Marrone Parent Representative
Jan Mees Media Director, Hickman High School
Monica Naylor Coordinator, Multicultural Programs
Judy Parsons Coordinator, Social Studies K-12
Kim Ratcliffe Director, Special Education
Carolyn Roof Coordinator, Elementary Counselors
Tom Schlimpert Principal, Lange Middle School
Chip Sharp Coordinator, Math 6-12
Leslie Trogdon Coordinator, Grants
JoNetta Weaver Principal, Shepard Elementary
Bruce Whitesides Director, PE/Athletics
Table of Contents
Part I: Introduction 1
Part 2: Testing of Student Achievement 3
Part 3: Guidelines for Including Students With Special Needs in State and District-Wide Assessments 30
Part 4: Local Assessment of Standards Not Assessed by MAP 38
Part 5: Guidelines for Professional Development Related to Student Assessments 40
Part 6: Teaching Test-Taking Strategies for MAP and District-Wide Assessments 41
Part 7: Test Security Policy for all Standardized Tests 43
Part 8: Motivating Students to Do Well on State and District-Wide Assessments 47
Part 9: Making Changes as a Result of Data Analysis 49
Appendix A: i
Approved by the
Board of Education
July 2003
Part 1: Introduction
Philosophy Statement: Educators in Columbia Public Schools believe that assessment must be an ongoing, systematic, standards-based measure of student learning. Information about student learning and development will inform instruction, direct resources and lead to improved student achievement.
Rationale: In September of 1997, the State Board of Education adopted a new assessment rule that requires districts to have a written assessment plan to assess all students (including special populations) and that, at a minimum, the plan shall include all components of the Missouri Assessment Program being developed as a result of the Outstanding Schools Act of 1993. The plan must also include strategies for assessing locally the Show-Me Standards not assessed on the statewide assessment. The plan does not have to be submitted to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, but will be reviewed by the visiting Missouri School Improvement Team as part of the MSIP review program. This rule gives districts flexibility in planning off-grade assessments.
The Board supports the establishment of the Assessment Plan as one indication of the success and quality of the total education in the district. With time and effort, the Assessment Plan will produce:
• a comprehensive assessment program which monitors a variety of learning indicators for a variety of purposes;
• data driven decision making in regard to curriculum, assessment, instruction, and programs;
• teachers and administrators who are knowledgeable about types of assessments and their uses, data analysis, motivating students to do well on tests, test security policies, and strategies for teaching test-taking skills;
• increased public awareness of student achievement.
Overview: This Assessment Plan includes all components as specified in MSIP Standard 6.2. In compliance to the standard, the Assessment Plan includes:
• a description of tests included in the district-wide assessment program, the purpose of each, and how the results will be used;
• guidelines for including students with special needs into the state and district-wide assessment programs;
• a description of how and in what subjects the district is assessing the Show-Me Standards which are not assessed by the MAP;
• guidelines for staff development in relation to state and local assessment;
• guidelines for teaching test-taking strategies;
• a test-security policy.
Additional components of the Assessment Plan include:
• motivation of students to perform well on assessments;
• informing instruction through data analysis;
• glossary of important terms.
Description of the Process and Involvement: The district used varied processes to develop the different components of the Assessment Plan. Representatives from the district attended an inservice on developing an effective assessment plan. Ideas from this inservice as well as input from teachers, administrators, parents, the Board of Education, community, and students were used to create the Assessment Plan. An Assessment Committee, comprised of central office administrators, principals, district-wide coordinators, and members of the Board of Education, met monthly during the 2002-2003 school year to develop each section of the Plan.
Evaluation of the Assessment Plan: The district believes the Assessment Plan reflects local autonomy and will lead to improved student learning. The Assessment Plan will be reviewed on an annual basis in order to make necessary modifications as needed.
This Assessment Plan document was updated by the Office of Research, Assessment, and Accountability in November, 2005, to reflect adjustments in assessments during the 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 school years and special education modifications. This document has also been updated to reflect testing dates for the 2005-2006 school year. The Office of Research updated the Assessment Plan once again in July, 2008, to address changes in assessments during the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 school years. At this same time, the Office of Research inserted the 2008-2009 testing calendar.
Part 2: Testing of Student Achievement
Rationale: The district-wide assessment program is designed to facilitate and provide information for the following:
1. Student Achievement: To produce information about relative student achievement so that parents/guardians, students, and teachers can monitor academic progress of the general population and subpopulations.
2. Student Counseling: To provide data as a tool in the counseling and guidance of students for further direction and for specific academic placement and remediation.
3. Instructional and Curriculum Change: To provide data which will assist in the preparation of recommendations for instructional and curriculum changes to:
a. Inform classroom instruction
b. Inform curriculum revision
c. Inform instructional policy
d. Inform the Board of Education in the adoption of instructional policy
4. School and District Evaluation: To provide indicators of progress of the district toward the goals and objectives of the CSIP.
The district-wide assessment program will implement the components of the Missouri Assessment Program to monitor the progress of all students in meeting the Show-Me Standards. Other assessments given on a district-wide basis to all students (large scale) and to selected groups of students (small scale) are described in the chart. In some cases, participants in “Small Scale” assessments comprise a large part of the student population at particular grade levels, such as those students who take the ACT. However, that assessment is not required of every student, so it is included in the “small scale” section.
Although the chart is intended to be comprehensive, changes in assessment requirements and needs will necessitate changes in this plan. For that reason, the work of the district Assessment Committee and the Office of Research, Assessment, and Accountability will be ongoing, producing revisions as needed.
Selected Infants and One-Year Olds
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|ACADEM|Denver II |A measure of development in the areas of | | | |
|IC | |language, fine motor/adaptive, gross motor and | | | |
| | |personal/social development as compared to other | | | |
| | |children of the same age | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | |Administered by Parent Educator to all | | |
| | | |children in participating PAT families at |Identify children who need referral |Verbal and written summaries provided to |
| | | |6, 12, 24, and 36 mos. of age |and/or further evaluation |parents Information stored in family file |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| |Hearing Observation |Gather information about response to voice and | | | |
| | |ability to locate sounds | | | |
|HEALTH|Parent Questionnaire |Gather information regarding prenatal care, | | | |
| | |birth, health and developmental history, vision | | | |
| | |and appearance of eyes, responsiveness to | | | |
| | |auditory stimuli, immunization, etc. | | | |
| |Functional Assessment of |Identify potential problems with vision by | | | |
| |Vision |examining pupillary response, corneal light | | | |
| | |reflex, blink reflex, alternate cover response, | | | |
| | |tracking and peripheral vision | | | |
| |Physical Measurement |Compare height, weight, and head circumference to| | | |
| | |expected standards | | | |
| |Nutritional Assessment |Identify possible nutritional deficits | | | |
| |Dental Check |Identify possible obvious problems with teeth or | | | |
| | |gums | | | |
| |Hear Kit |Screen for possible deficits in hearing acuity |Administered by Parent Educator to | | |
| | | |eligible children at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, | | |
| | | |and 36 mos. of age | | |
| |Tympanometry |Identify potential problems in the middle ear |Administered by supervised MU audiology | |Verbal summary to parent |
| | | |students to children from 6 mos. to school| |Sign-in sheet |
| | | |age | | |
Selected Two and Three Year Olds
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|ACADEM|Denver II/DIAL R |Identify potential problems in the areas of | | | |
|IC | |language, concepts, fine motor/adaptive, gross | | | |
| | |motor and personal/social development | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | |Administered by Parent Educator to all | | |
| | | |eligible children in participating PAT | | |
| | | |families at 6, 12, 24, and 36 mos. | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | |Identify children who need referral |Information stored in family file |
| | | | |and/or further evaluation | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | |Verbal summary to parent |
| |Hearing Observation |Gather information about a child’s behavior, | | | |
| | |language, social skills, response to voice, | | | |
| | |ability to locate sounds, general physical | | | |
| | |development, etc. | | | |
|HEALTH|Parent Questionnaire |Gather information regarding prenatal care, | | | |
| | |birth, health and developmental history, vision | | | |
| | |and appearance of eyes, responsiveness to | | | |
| | |auditory stimuli, immunizations, and parent | | | |
| | |concerns | | | |
| |Lighthouse Flash Cards or |Screen for possible deficits in visual acuity | | | |
| |HOTV Chart | | | | |
| |Functional Assessment of |Identify potential problems with vision by | | | |
| |Vision |examining pupillary response, corneal light | | | |
| | |reflex, blink reflex, alternate cover response, | | | |
| | |tracking and peripheral vision | | | |
| |Physical Measurement |Compare height and weight to expected standards | | | |
| |Nutritional Assessment |Identify possible nutritional deficits | | | |
| |Dental Check |Identify possible obvious problems with teeth or | | | |
| | |gums | | | |
| |Pure Tone, Hear Kit, |Screen for possible deficits in hearing acuity |Administered by Parent Educator, | | |
| |Audiometry and/or |and/or the functioning of the middle ear |supervised MU audiology students, or | | |
| |Tympanometry | |preschool screener to children from 6 mos.| | |
| | | |to school age | | |
Selected Four and Five Year Olds
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|ACADEM|DIAL 3 |Identify potential problems in the areas of | | |Verbal and written summary provided to |
|IC | |language, motor and concept development | | |parents |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | |Administered by preschool screener to |Identify children who need referral | |
| | | |children whose parents request screening |and/or further evaluation | |
| | | |services | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| |Observation during and |Gather information about a child’s behavior, | | | |
| |before testing |speech and language and hearing, cognitive | | | |
| | |skills, social skills, general development, etc. | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | |Information available to elementary |
| | | | | |personnel upon request |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
|HEALTH|Parent Questionnaire |Gather information regarding prenatal care, | | | |
| | |birth, health and developmental history, vision | | | |
| | |and appearance of eyes, hearing, immunizations | | | |
| | |and parent concerns | | | |
| |Functional Assessment of |Identify potential problems with vision by | | | |
| |Vision |examining pupillary response, corneal light | | | |
| | |reflex, blink reflex, alternate cover response | | | |
| | |and tracking | | | |
| |Lighthouse Flash Cards or |Screen for possible deficits in visual acuity | | | |
| |Chart | | | | |
| |Physical Measurement |Compare height and weight to expected standards | | | |
| |Nutritional Assessment |Identify possible nutritional deficits | | | |
| |Dental Check |Identify possible obvious problems with teeth or | | | |
| | |gums | | | |
| |Pure Tone, Audiometry and/or|Screen for possible deficits in hearing acuity |Administered by preschool screener or | |Verbal summary to parent |
| |Tympanometry | |supervised MU audiology students to | | |
| | | |children from 6 mos. to school age | | |
Kindergarten—Large Scale (all students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|ACADEM|District Developed Checklist|Assess the progress in attaining skills |Administered by classroom teacher |Informs instruction |Kept by kindergarten teacher to gauge |
|IC | |considered important for children to develop |throughout school year as appropriate | |progress |
| | |during the kindergarten year | | | |
| |Components of the |Document progress in literacy development |Administered by classroom teacher |Informs instruction |Shared with Asst. Supts. and principal to |
| |Observation Survey | |throughout school year as appropriate | |gauge progress |
| |Developmental Reading |Document progress in reading: comprehension, |Administered by classroom teacher in the |-Informs instruction and provides data |Shared with Asst. Supts., principals, and |
| |Assessment 2 (DRA2) |accuracy, and fluency |winter and spring |for progress toward district reading |Board of Education to gauge progress toward|
| | | | |goal |district reading goal |
| | | | |-Identifies students needing literacy | |
| | | | |plans | |
| |Parent Questionnaire |Gather specific information concerning each child| | |Kept by kindergarten teacher |
| |Teacher-Student Interview |Assess the child’s expressive language, book | | | |
| | |handling skills and word knowledge | | | |
|COMMON|Mathematics: |Document progress toward proficiency in |Administered by classroom teachers at the |Informs instruction |Shared with students, parents, principals |
|DISTRI|Investigations’ End-of-Unit |mathematics |end of each unit of study | |and district math coordinator |
|CT |Assessments | | | | |
|ASSESS| | | | | |
|MENTS | | | | | |
|GIFTED|Bias Controlled Teacher |Screen for participation in gifted program |Administered by teacher in |Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Used for screening only |
|PROGRA|Assessment | |October/November |and sorted by percentile ranking | |
|M | | | | | |
| |District-made Creativity |Evaluation for participation in gifted program |Administered by teachers in Primary Gifted|Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Used for evaluation only |
| |Test | |Program in October and November | | |
Kindergarten—Large Scale (all students), continued
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|ESL |Home Language Questionnaire |Screening for participation in English as a |Completed by parents as part of enrollment|Kept in permanent record |ESL Teacher or Coordinator |
| | |Second Language Program | | | |
|HEALTH|Pure Tone and/or |Screen for possible deficits in hearing acuity | | | |
| |Tympanometry | | | | |
| |Health Check |Monitor health records | | | |
| |School Vision Tests |Screen for possible deficits in visual acuity and| | | |
| |Titmus II School Vision |muscle balance | | | |
| |Tester/Allen Preschool | | | | |
| |Cards/HOTV Chart/Snellen | | | | |
| |Chart | | | | |
Kindergarten—Small Scale (selected students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|ESL |Woodcock Munoz Language |Determination of level of English proficiency and|Administered by ESL Coordinator or ESL |Kept in ESL Office |Reported to Parents and Teachers |
| |Survey |possible placement in English As A Second |Teacher upon enrollment | | |
| | |Language program | | | |
| |Missouri Assessment of |Missouri Law requires this assessment. |Administered by ESL Teacher in spring |Results are used for program placement, |Reported to Parents, Teachers, Principals, |
| |English Language Learning |Determines adequate yearly progress in English |during MAP window |program evaluation and student |District, State |
| | |language learning | |achievement. | |
|GIFTED|Test of Non-Verbal |Evaluation for participation in Gifted Program |Administered by teachers in Primary Gifted|Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Shared with parents, counselors, teachers, |
|PROGRA|Intelligence – 3rd Edition | |Program from November to January to |and sorted by percentile ranking |principals |
|M | | |students scoring in top 10-15% on Bias | | |
| | | |Controlled Teacher Assessment | | |
| |District-made Behavioral |Evaluation for participation in Gifted Program |Completed by parents of candidates for |Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Used for evaluation only |
| |Checklist | |gifted program in December/January | | |
Grade 1 – Large Scale (all students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|COMMON|Literacy: Observation |Screening of children at risk in literacy |Administered by reading specialist |Utilized for determining need for |Fall and spring results shared with Asst. |
|DISTIR|Survey |learning |individually to targeted children |additional instructional support |Supt. And principal |
|CT | |Document progress in literacy development |throughout school year |Informs instruction | |
|ASSESS| | | | | |
|MENTS | | | | | |
| |Reading: Developmental |Document reading behaviors including accuracy, |Administered by classroom teacher in the |-Assists teachers making instructional |Fall and spring results shared with Asst. |
| |Reading Assessment 2 (DRA2) |fluency and comprehension |fall and spring |decisions for individuals and groups |Supts., principals to gauge progress toward |
| | | | |Provides cumulative record of change |district reading goal |
| | | | |over time |Information shared with parents at |
| | | | |-Identifies students needing literacy |conferences |
| | | | |plans |Cumulative record kept on file |
| |Running Record |Document reading behaviors including accuracy, |Administered 3-4 times per month |Informs instructional decisions for |Grade level teams, principal |
| | |fluency and comprehension | |individuals and groups | |
| |Writing Assessment |Document progress toward district benchmarks |Administered by classroom teachers in the |Informs instruction |Performance shared with Asst. |
| | | |fall and spring | |Superintendents, principals, and parents. |
| |Mathematics: Investigations'|Document progress toward proficiency in |Administered by classroom teachers at the |Informs instruction |Shared with students, parents, principals |
| |End-of-Unit Assessments |mathematics |end of each unit | |and district math coordinator |
|ESL |Home Language Questionnaire |Screening for participation in English as a |Completed by parents as part of enrollment|Student placement |ESL Teacher or Coordinator |
| | |Second Language Program | | |Kept in permanent record |
|HEALTH|Titmus II School Vision |Screen for possible disorders in visual acuity | | | |
| |Tester/Allen Preschool |and muscle balance | | | |
| |Cards/HOTV Chart/Snellen | | | | |
| |Chart | | | | |
| |Pure Tone and/or |Screen for possible deficits in hearing acuity | | | |
| |Tympanometry | | | | |
| |Health Check | | | | |
| | |Monitor health records | | | |
Grade 1 – Small Scale (selected students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|GIFTED|Bias Controlled Teacher |Screen for participation in gifted program |Administered by teacher in |Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Shared with parents, counselors, teachers, |
|PROGRA|Assessment | |October/November to new students and |and sorted by percentile ranking |principals |
|M | | |advocacies | | |
| |Test of Non-Verbal |Evaluate for participation in Gifted Program |Administered by teachers in Primary Gifted|Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Shared with parents, counselors, teachers, |
| |Intelligence – 3rd Edition | |Program from November to January to new |and sorted by percentile ranking |principals |
| | | |students and advocacies | | |
| |District-made Behavioral |Evaluate for participation in Gifted Program |Completed by parents of candidates for |Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Used for evaluation only |
| |Checklist | |gifted program in December/January | | |
| |District-made Creativity |Evaluate for participation in Gifted Program |Administered by teachers in Primary Gifted|Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Used for evaluation only |
| |Test | |Program in October and November to new | | |
| | | |students and advocacies | | |
|ESL |Woodcock Munoz Language |Determination of level of English proficiency and|Administered by ESL Coordinator or ESL |Kept in ESL Office |Reported to parents and teachers |
| |Survey |possible placement in English As A Second |Teacher upon enrollment | | |
| | |Language program | | | |
| |Missouri Assessment of |Missouri Law requires this assessment. |Administered by ESL Teacher in spring |Results are used for program placement, |Reported to parents, teachers, principals, |
| |English Language Learning |Determines adequate yearly progress in English |during MAP window |program evaluation and student |District, State |
| | |language learning | |achievement. | |
|SPECIA|Observation, Evaluation of |Provide information about speech and language, |Administered by specialists as needed |Special Education Evaluation |Evaluation Team |
|L |Classroom Performance, |behavior, health, vision, academic performance, | | | |
|SERVIC|Formative Testing, |hearing and cognition that will aid in screening | | | |
|ES |Diagnostic Teaching, |students for special programs | | | |
| |Parent/Teacher Referral, and| | | | |
| |Rating Scale | | | | |
Grade 2 – Large Scale (all students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|COMMON|Reading: Developmental |Document reading behaviors including accuracy, |Administered by classroom teacher in the |Assists teachers in making instructional|Aggregated data shared with Asst. Supts., |
|DISTRI|Reading Assessment 2 (DRA2) |fluency and comprehension |fall and spring |decisions for individuals and groups. |principals to gauge progress toward |
|CT | | | |Provides cumulative record of change |district reading goal |
|ASSESS| | | |over time for individuals and groups |Student information shared with parents |
|MENTS | | | |-Identifies students needing literacy |Cumulative record kept in student permanent|
| | | | |plan |file |
| |Running Record |Document reading behaviors including accuracy, |Administered by classroom teacher 2-4 |Informs instructional decisions for |Grade level teams, principals |
| | |fluency and comprehension |times per month |individuals and groups | |
| |Writing Assessment |Document progress toward district benchmarks |Administered by classroom teachers in the |Informs instruction |Performance shared with Asst. |
| | | |fall and spring | |Superintendents, principals, and parents |
| |Mathematics: Investigations'|Document progress toward proficiency in |Administered by classroom teacher at the |Informs instruction |Shared with students, parents, principals, |
| |End-of-Unit Assessments |mathematics |end of each unit | |and district math coordinator |
|COGNIT|Cognitive Abilities Test |Diagnose and screen for general abilities and |Administered by classroom teacher in |Helps to inform instructional planning |Kept in student cumulative file |
|IVE | |gifted program |November |Provides screen for special programs | |
|ESL |Home Language Questionnaire |Screening for participation in English as a |Completed by parents as part of enrollment|Kept in permanent record |ESL Teacher or Coordinator |
| | |Second Language Program | | | |
Grade 2 – Small Scale (selected students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|HEALTH|Titmus II School Vision |Screen for possible disorders in visual acuity | | | |
| |Tester/Allen Preschool |and muscle balance | | | |
| |Cards/HOTV Chart/Snellen | | | | |
| |Chart | | | | |
| |Pure Tone and/or |Screen for possible deficits in hearing acuity | | | |
| |Tympanometry | | | | |
| |Health Check |Monitor health records | | | |
|ESL |Woodcock Munoz Language |Determination of level of English proficiency and|Administered by ESL Coordinator or ESL |Kept in ESL Office |Reported to Parents and Teachers |
| |Survey |possible placement in English As A Second |Teacher upon enrollment | | |
| | |Language program | | | |
| |Missouri Assessment of |Missouri Law requires this assessment. |Administered by ESL Teacher in spring |Results are used for program placement, |Reported to Parents, Teachers, Principals, |
| |English Language Learning |Determines adequate yearly progress in English |during MAP window |program evaluation and student |District, State |
| | |language learning | |achievement. | |
|SPECIA|Observation, Evaluation of |Provide information about speech and language, |Administered by specialists as needed |Special Education Evaluation |Evaluation Team |
|L |Classroom Performance, |behavior, health, vision, academic performance, | | | |
|SERVIC|Formative Testing, |hearing and cognition that will aid in screening | | | |
|ES |Diagnostic Teaching, |students for special programs | | | |
| |Parent/Teacher Referral, and| | | | |
| |Rating Scale | | | | |
Grade 2 – Small Scale (selected students), continued
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
|GIFTED|Bias Controlled Teacher |Screen for participation in gifted program |Administered by teacher in |Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Used for screening only |
|PROGRA|Assessment | |October/November to new students and |and sorted by percentile ranking | |
|M | | |advocacies | | |
| |Test of Non-Verbal |Evaluate for participation in Gifted Program |Administered by teachers in Primary Gifted|Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Shared with parents, counselors, teachers, |
| |Intelligence – 3rd Edition | |Program from November to January to new |and sorted by percentile ranking |principals |
| | | |students and advocacies | | |
| |District-made Behavioral |Evaluate for participation in Gifted Program |Completed by parents of candidates for |Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Used for evaluation only |
| |Checklist | |gifted program in December/January | | |
| |District-made Creativity |Evaluate for participation in Gifted Program |Administered by teachers in Primary Gifted|Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Used for evaluation only |
| |Test | |Program in October and November to new | | |
| | | |students and advocacies | | |
| |WISC-III (Wechsler |Evaluate for participation in Gifted Program |Administered by Psychological Examiners in|Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Shared with parents, counselors, teachers, |
| |Intelligence Scale for | |June |and sorted by percentile ranking |principals |
| |Children - Third Edition | | | | |
| |Stanford Binet - Fourth |Evaluate for participation in Gifted Program |Administered by Psychological Examiners in|Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Shared with parents, counselors, teachers, |
| |Edition | |June |and sorted by percentile ranking |principals |
| |Divergent Thinking from |Evaluate for participation in Gifted Program |Administered by Psychological Examiners in|Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Used for evaluation only |
| |WISC-III | |June | | |
Grades 3-5 – Large Scale (all students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|COMMON|Reading: Scholastic Reading|Screen student reading performance |Administered by classroom teacher in the |-Informs instruction and provides data |Aggregated data shared with Asst. Sup. for |
|DISTRI|Inventory | |fall and spring |for progress toward district reading |Elem. Ed, and principals to gauge progress |
|CT | | | |goal |toward district reading goal |
|ASSESS| | | |-Identifies students needing additional | |
|MENTS | | | |assessment | |
| | | | | | |
| |Writing Assessment |Document progress toward district benchmarks |Administered by classroom teachers in the |Informs instruction |Performance shared with Asst. |
| | | |fall and spring | |Superintendents, principals, and parents. |
| |Developmental Reading |Diagnose reading ability to determine |Administered by classroom teacher in the |-Assists teachers in making |Information shared with parents, teachers |
| |Assessment 2 |instructional focus: comprehension, accuracy and|fall and spring |instructional decisions for individual |and principals |
| | |fluency | |students | |
| | | | |-Provides cumulative record of change | |
| | | | |over time | |
| | | | |-Identifies students needing literacy | |
| | | | |plans | |
| |Mathematics: Investigations'|Document progress toward proficiency in |Administered by classroom teacher at the |Informs instruction |Shared with students, parents, principals |
| |End-of-Unit Assessments |mathematics |end of each unit | |and district math coordinator |
|ACADEM|Missouri Assessment Program |Law requires MAP Assessments. The assessments |Administered by teachers during the |Results are used to evaluate programs, |The board, administrators, and teachers |
|IC | |are used as a means to evaluate school districts |designated testing window. Communication |student achievement and to monitor |annually review performance data both in |
| | |and programs. |Arts and Mathematics are tested in Grades |achievement of subpopulations. |aggregated and disaggregated form in order |
| | | |3, 4, and 5. | |to effectively monitor student achievement. |
| | | | | |Results provide longitudinal data for |
| | | | | |comparative purposes. Students and parents |
| | | | | |are provided with student reports. |
| |Integrated Literacy |Collect representative samples of student work |Compiled by classroom teacher – Grade 5 |Assist in curriculum planning, |Contents of portfolio are reviewed by |
| |Portfolio Program |and current level of performance | |monitoring of academic achievement and |teachers, shared with parents and used for |
| | | | |individual program planning |student reflection |
Grades 3-5 – Large Scale (all students), continued
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
|ESL |Home Language Questionnaire |Screening for participation in English as a |Completed by parents as part of enrollment|Student Placement |ESL Teacher or Coordinator |
| | |Second Language Program | | |Kept in permanent record |
|PHYSIC|Physical Education Fitness |Document progress in physical development |Administered by teacher in Grade 5 |Student self assessment, monitor student|Physical education teacher, DESE, the |
|AL |Test |Screen for possible concerns | |achievement and program evaluation |student, parents, Director of PE, |
|EDUCAT| | | | |Coordinator |
|ION | | | | | |
|HEALTH|Pure Tone |Screen for possible hearing deficits |Grades 3 and 5 annually and Grades 4 as | | |
| | | |needed | | |
| |Titmus II School Vision |Screen for possible deficits in visual acuity and|Grades 3 and 5 annually/Grade 4 as needed | | |
| |Tester/Snellen Chart |muscle balance | | | |
| |Spinal Screening |Screen for possible spinal deformities |Grade 5 - Girls | | |
| |Health Check |Monitor health records | | | |
Grades 3-5— Small Scale (selected students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|COGNIT|Cognitive Abilities Test |Diagnose and screen for general abilities and |Administered to new students in grades 3|Determine learning expectations |Reported to parents. Kept in student |
|IVE | |gifted program |and 4 and to all students in grade 5 by |Provides screen for special programs |cumulative file |
| | | |classroom teachers | | |
|ESL |Woodcock Munoz Language |Determination of level of English proficiency and|Administered by ESL Coordinator or ESL |Kept in ESL Office |Reported to Parents and Teachers |
| |Survey |possible placement in English As A Second |Teacher upon enrollment | | |
| | |Language program | | | |
| |Missouri Assessment of |Missouri Law requires this assessment. |Administered by ESL Teacher in spring |Results are used for program placement, |Reported to Parents, Teachers, Principals, |
| |English Language Learning |Determines adequate yearly progress in English |during MAP window |program evaluation and student |District, State |
| | |language learning | |achievement. | |
|GIFTED|WISC-III (Wechsler |Evaluate for the gifted program |Administered by Psychological Examiners in|Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Shared with parents, counselors, teachers, |
|PROGRA|Intelligence Scale for | |June |and sorted by percentile ranking |principals |
|M |Children - Third Edition) | | | | |
| |Stanford Binet - Fourth |Evaluate for the gifted program |Psychological Examiners |Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Shared with parents, counselors, teachers, |
| |Edition | | |and sorted by percentile ranking |principals |
| |Divergent Thinking from |Evaluate for the gifted program |Psychological Examiners |Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Used for evaluation only |
| |WISC-III | | | | |
|SPECIA|Observation, Evaluation of |Provide information about speech and language, |Administered by specialists as needed |Special Education Evaluation |Evaluation Team |
|L |Classroom Performance, |behavior, health, vision, academic performance, | | | |
|SERVIC|Formative Testing, |hearing and cognition that will aid in screening | | | |
|ES |Diagnostic Teaching, |students for special programs | | | |
| |Parent/Teacher Referral, and| | | | |
| |Rating Scale | | | | |
Grades 6-7—Large Scale (all students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|COMMON |Developmental Reading |Diagnose for instructional focus. |Administered to grade 6 students in |-Informs instruction and provides data for progress|Reported to Coordinator, Literacy Support |
|DISTRICT |Assessment 2/ |Document progress in reading: |fall and to grade 7 students in spring |toward district reading goal |teacher, Parents, and Students. |
|ASSESSMENT|Supplemental |comprehension, accuracy, and fluency |by classroom teacher or literacy |-Identifies students needing literacy plans |District-wide data is reported to Assoc. |
|S | | |support teacher as needed | |Superintendent- for Curriculum and |
| | | | | |Instruction |
| |Writing |Support performance-based assessment and |Administered and scored holistically by|Fall—Results are used to establish instructional |Reported to Coordinator, Literacy Support |
| | |state established standards for writing |teachers in fall and spring. |goals and to support instructional collaboration |Teacher, Classroom Teacher, and Principal |
| | | | |Spring—Results are used to evaluate writing | |
| | | | |instruction and document student performance | |
| |Mathematics |Document the progress of mathematical |Administered by teacher at end of units|Track the progress of students on mathematical |Math Coordinator and Teachers |
| | |understanding | |goals over grades 6-12 | |
| |Science |Document the progress of scientific |Administered by teachers in the fall |Track the progress of students on science goals |Science Coordinator and teachers |
| | |understanding |and spring | | |
|ACADEMIC |Scholastic Reading |Screen student reading performance |Administered by teacher and/or Literacy|Results are used to identify students needing an |Reported to Coordinator, Literacy Support |
| |Inventory | |Support teacher in fall and spring |individual DRA/Supplemental reading assessment and |Teacher, Classroom Teacher, and Principal |
| | | | |an instructional Literacy Plan | |
| |Missouri Assessment |Law requires MAP Assessments. The |Administered by teachers during the |Results are used to evaluate programs, student |The board, administrators, and teachers |
| |Program |assessments are used as a means to |designated testing window. |achievement and to monitor achievement of |annually review performance data both in |
| | |evaluate school districts and programs. |Communication Arts and Mathematics are |subpopulations. |aggregated and disaggregated form in order |
| | | |tested in 6th and 7th grades. | |to effectively monitor student achievement. |
| | | | | |Results provide longitudinal data for |
| | | | | |comparative purposes. Students and parents |
| | | | | |are provided with student reports |
| |Integrated Literacy |Collect representative samples of student |Compiled by Grade 6-7 teachers |Assist in curriculum planning, monitoring of |Contents of portfolio are reviewed by |
| |Portfolio Program |work and current level of performance | |academic achievement and individual program |teachers, shared with parents and used for |
| | | | |planning |student reflection |
Grades 6-7—Large Scale (all students), continued
|Assessment|Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results | |
|Instrument| | | | | |
|or Process| | | | | |
|HEALTH |Spinal Screening |Screen for possible spinal deformities |Girls: Grades 6 and 7 | | |
| | | |Boys: Grade 7 | | |
Grades 6-7— Small Scale (selected students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|ESL |Woodcock Munoz Language |Determination of level of English |Administered by ESL Coordinator or ESL |Kept in ESL Office |Reported to Parents and Teachers |
| |Survey |proficiency and possible placement in |Teacher upon enrollment | | |
| | |English As A Second Language program | | | |
| |Missouri Assessment of |Missouri Law requires this assessment. |Administered by ESL Teacher in spring |Results are used for program placement, program |Reported to Parents, Teachers, Principals, |
| |English Language Learning |Determines adequate yearly progress in |during MAP window |evaluation and student achievement. |District, State |
| | |English language learning | | | |
|HEALTH|Pure Tone |Screen for possible hearing deficits |As needed | | |
| |Titmus II School Vision |Screen for possible deficits in visual |As needed | | |
| |Tester/Snellen Chart |acuity and muscle balance | | | |
| |Health Check |Monitor health records | | | |
|SPECIA|Observation, Evaluation of |Provide information about speech and |Administered by specialists as needed |Special Education Evaluation |Evaluation Team |
|L |Classroom Performance, |language, behavior, health, vision, | | | |
|SERVIC|Formative Testing, |academic performance, hearing and | | | |
|ES |Diagnostic Teaching, |cognition that will aid in screening | | | |
| |Parent/Teacher Referral, and|students for special programs | | | |
| |Rating Scale | | | | |
Grades 6-7— Small Scale (selected students), continued
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|GIFTED|WISC-III (Wechsler |Evaluate for the gifted program |Administered by Psychological Examiners |Collected in Office for Gifted Programs and sorted |Shared with parents, counselors, teachers, |
|EDUCAT|Intelligence Scale for | |in June |by percentile ranking |principals |
|ION |Children - Third Edition) | | | | |
| |Stanford Binet - Fourth |Evaluate for the gifted program |Psychological Examiners |Collected in Office for Gifted Programs and sorted |Shared with parents, counselors, teachers, |
| |Edition | | |by percentile ranking |principals |
| |Divergent Thinking from |Evaluate for the gifted program |Psychological Examiners |Collected in Office for Gifted Programs |Used for evaluation only |
| |WISC-III | | | | |
Grades 8-9—Large Scale (all students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|COMMON |Developmental Reading |Diagnose for instructional focus. |Administered by classroom teacher or |-Informs instruction and provides data for progress|Reported to Coordinator, Literacy Support |
|ASSESSME|Assessment (DRESS)/ |Document progress in reading: |literacy support teacher as needed |toward district reading goal |teacher, Parents, and Students. |
|NTS |Supplemental |comprehension, accuracy, and fluency | |-Identifies students needing literacy plans |District-wide data is reported to Assoc. |
| | | | | |Supt. for C & I |
| |Writing |Support performance-based writing |Administered and scored holistically by |Results are used to evaluate writing and thematic |Reported to Coordinator, Teachers and |
| | |assessment, state established standards, |social studies and English teachers in |instruction, and to document student performance |Students |
| | |the integration of writing across content|fall and spring | | |
| | |areas. | | | |
| |Mathematics |Document the progress of mathematical |Administered by teacher at end of each |Track the progress of students on mathematical |Math Coordinator and Teachers |
| | |understanding |unit |goals over grades 6-12 | |
| |Science |Document the progress of scientific |Administered by teacher in the fall and |Track the progress of students on science goals |Science Coordinator and Teachers |
| | |understanding |spring | | |
|ACADEMIC|Missouri Assessment |Law requires MAP Assessments, including |Administered by teachers during the |Results are used to evaluate programs, student |The board annually reviews performance data |
| |Program |End-of-Course (EOC) Exams for students |designated testing window. Communication|achievement and to monitor achievement of |both in aggregated and disaggregated form in|
| | |taking Algebra I, English II, and |Arts and Math are tested in Grade 8. |subpopulations. |order to effectively monitor student |
| | |Biology. The assessments are used as a |In 2008-2009, students enrolled in | |achievement. Teachers and administrators |
| | |means to evaluate school districts and |Algebra I, English II, and Biology are | |analyze the results. The students and |
| | |programs. |required to take an EOC Exam upon | |parents are provided with student reports. |
| | | |completing the course. | | |
| |EXPLORE |Academic assessment/career |Administered in fall: Grade 8 |Results are used to evaluate programs, student |Students and parents are provided with |
| | |planning/college readiness | |achievement and to monitor achievement of |student reports and counselors use results |
| | | | |subpopulations. |in career planning curriculum units. |
| |Scholastic Reading |Screen student reading performance |Administered by teacher and/or Literacy |Results are used to identify students needing an |Reported to Coordinator, Literacy Support |
| |Inventory | |Support teacher in fall and spring |individual DRESS/Supplemental reading assessment |Teacher, Classroom Teacher, and Principal |
| | | | |and an instructional Literacy Plan | |
Grades 8-9—Large Scale (all students), continued
|Assessme|Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results | |
|nt | | | | | |
|Instrume| | | | | |
|nt or | | | | | |
|Process | | | | | |
|HEALTH -|Physical Education |Document progress in physical development|Administered by teacher in Grade 9 |Student self assessment, monitor student |Physical education teacher, DESE, the |
|PHYSICAL|Fitness Test |Screen for possible concerns | |achievement and program evaluation |student, parents, Director of PE, |
|EDUCATIO| | | | |Coordinator |
|N | | | | | |
| |Spinal Screening |Screen for possible spinal deformities |Boys: Grades 8 | |Snellen |
| |Health Check |Monitor health records | | | |
| |Titmus School Vision |Screen for possible deficits in visual |Grade 9 | | |
| |Tester/Snellen Chart |activity and muscle balance | | | |
Grades 8-9— Small Scale (selected students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|Academic|ACT/SAT |College admissions and summer programs |Grades 8-12; as appropriate to meet |Results are used to evaluate student |Results are mailed to homes by ACT/SAT and |
| | | |individual student needs |achievement and to monitor achievement of |counselors are available to interpret. |
| | | | |subpopulations. | |
|ESL |Woodcock Munoz Language Survey |Determination of level of English |Administered by ESL Coordinator or |Kept in ESL Office |Reported to Parents and Teachers |
| | |proficiency and possible placement in |ESL Teacher upon enrollment | | |
| | |English As A Second Language program | | | |
| |Missouri Assessment of English |Missouri Law requires this assessment. |Administered by ESL Teacher in spring|Results are used for program placement, |Reported to Parents, Teachers, Principals, |
| |Language Learning |Determines adequate yearly progress in |during MAP window |program evaluation and student achievement.|District, State |
| | |English language learning | | | |
|HEALTH |Pure Tone |Screen for possible hearing deficits |As needed | | |
| |Titmus II School Vision Tester/Snellen|Screen for possible deficits in visual |As needed | | |
| |Chart |acuity and muscle balance | | | |
| |Spinal Screening |Screen for possible spinal deformities |As needed | | |
|APTITUDE|Armed Services Vocational Aptitude |Help students identify areas of |Administered once a year by Career |Results are used by military when notified.|Reported to Parents and Students |
| |Battery |potential vocational aptitude |Center staff | | |
|SPECIAL |Observation, Evaluation of Classroom |Provide information about speech and |Administered by specialists as needed|Special Education Evaluation |Evaluation Team |
|SERVICES|Performance, Formative Testing, |language, behavior, health, vision, | | | |
| |Diagnostic Teaching, Parent/Teacher |academic performance, hearing and | | | |
| |Referral, and Rating Scale |cognition that will aid in screening | | | |
| | |students for special programs | | | |
Grades 10-12—Large Scale (all students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|COMMON |DRESS /Supplemental |Diagnose for instructional focus. |Administered by classroom teacher or |-Informs instruction and provides data for |Reported to Coordinator, Literacy Support |
|DISTRICT| |Document progress in reading: |literacy support teacher as needed |progress toward district reading goal |teacher, Parents, and Students. |
|ASSESSME| |comprehension, accuracy, and fluency | |-Identifies students needing literacy plans|District-wide data is reported to Associate |
|NTS | | | | |Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction|
| |Writing (10th Grade only) |Support performance-based assessment |Administered by social studies and |Evaluate writing instruction and track |Reported to Coordinator, Literacy Support |
| | |and state established standards for |language arts teachers in Grade 10 – |student progress in writing |Teacher, Classroom Teacher, and Principal |
| | |writing |fall and spring | | |
| |Mathematics |Document the progress of mathematical |Administered by teacher in spring – |Track the progress of students on |Math Coordinator and Teachers |
| | |understanding |Grades 11 and 12 |mathematical goals over grades 6-12 | |
|ACADEMIC|Missouri Assessment Program, |Law requires MAP Assessments, which |Administered by teachers during the |Results are used to evaluate programs, |The board annually reviews performance data |
| |End-of-Course (EOC) Exams |take the form of End-of-Course (EOC) |designated testing window when a |student achievement and to monitor |both in aggregated and disaggregated form in|
| | |Exams at the secondary grades. The |student has completed coursework. In|achievement of subpopulations. |order to effectively monitor student |
| | |assessments are used as a means to |2008-2009, the following EOC Exams | |achievement. Teachers and administrators |
| | |evaluate student learning as well as |are required: Algebra I, English II,| |analyze the results. The students and |
| | |school districts’ programs. |Biology. Additional EOC Exams will | |parents are provided with student reports. |
| | | |be required in 2009-2010. | | |
| |PLAN |Academic assessment/career |Grade 10 | | |
| | |planning/college readiness | | | |
| |Scholastic Reading Inventory |Screen student reading performance |Administered by teacher and/or |Results are used to identify students |Reported to Coordinator, Literacy Support |
| | | |Literacy Support teacher in fall and |needing an individual DRA/Supplemental |Teacher, Classroom Teacher, and Principal |
| | | |spring |reading assessment and an instructional | |
| | | |Grades 10 and 11 |Literacy Plan | |
| |Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
|HEALTH |Health Check |Monitor health records | | | |
Grades 10-12— Small Scale (selected students)
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
| | | | | |
|ACADEMIC |PSAT |Practice test for SAT, entry into the |Grades 10-11 |Results are used to evaluate programs, |Results are mailed to student by PSAT and |
| | |National Merit Program, and screening | |student achievement and to monitor |counselors are available for interpretation |
| | |for Missouri Scholars Academy | |achievement of subpopulations. | |
| |ACT/SAT |College readiness, college admissions |Grades 8-12; as appropriate to meet |Results are used to evaluate student |Results are mailed to student by ACT/SAT and|
| | |and summer programs |individual student needs |achievement and to monitor achievement of |counselors are available for interpretation |
| | | | |subpopulations. | |
| |Advanced Placement Tests |Give students the opportunity to earn |Grades 11 and 12 |Students can receive college credit as |Results are mailed to student by AP and to |
| | |college credit | |determined by the college |colleges and universities as requested |
|ESL |Woodcock Munoz Language Survey |Determination of level of English |Administered by ESL Coordinator or |Kept in ESL Office |Reported to Parents and Teachers |
| | |proficiency and possible placement in |ESL Teacher upon enrollment | | |
| | |English As A Second Language program | | | |
| |Missouri Assessment of English |Missouri Law requires this assessment. |Administered by ESL Teacher in spring|Results are used for program placement, |Reported to Parents, Teachers, Principals, |
| |Language Learning |Determines adequate yearly progress in |during MAP window |program evaluation and student achievement.|District, State |
| | |English language learning | | | |
|HEALTH |Pure Tone |Screen for possible hearing deficits |As needed | | |
| |Titmus II School Vision Tester/Snellen|Screen for possible deficits in visual |As needed | | |
| |Chart |acuity and muscle balance | | | |
| |Spinal Screening |Screen for possible spinal deformities |As needed | | |
Grades 10-12— Small Scale (selected students) continued
|Assessment Instrument or Process |Purpose |Administrative Procedure |Utilization |Dissemination of Results |
|APTITUDE |Armed Services Vocational Aptitude |Help students identify areas of |Administered by the Armed Services, |Results are used by military when notified.|Reported to Parents and Students |
| |Battery |potential vocational aptitude |at the Career Center. Students sign | | |
| | | |up through home high schools. Career| | |
| | | |Center schedules room for | | |
| | | |administration | | |
|SPECIAL |Observation, Evaluation of Classroom |Provide information about speech and |Administered by specialists as needed|Special Education Evaluation |Evaluation Team |
|SERVICES |Performance, Formative Testing, |language, behavior, health, vision, | | | |
| |Diagnostic Teaching, Parent/Teacher |academic performance, hearing and | | | |
| |Referral, and Rating Scale |cognition that will aid in screening | | | |
| | |students for special programs | | | |
Part 3: Guidelines for Including Students With Special Needs
in State and District-Wide Assessments
Rationale: The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (No Child Left Behind) is an education reform act designed to improve student achievement in America’s schools. No Child Left Behind requires that all children be assessed. In order to show adequate yearly progress, schools must test at least 95 percent of the various subgroups of children, including their students with disabilities. States must provide reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities. No Child Left Behind requires that each state must measure every child’s progress in reading and math in each of grades 3 through 8 and at least once during grades 10 through 12.
No Child Left Behind and other federal and state laws have been enacted that call for higher standards of learning for all students, accountability for student learning, and the development of better assessments to measure the progress made in improving education. This legislation lays the foundation for the requirement that every student be accounted for in Missouri’s state assessment program and be included in districts’ assessment programs.
Missouri school districts are accountable for the assessment of all students, regardless of disability type or severity, including those receiving special services via an IEP or 504 Plan. All students will participate in either the Missouri Assessment Program (MAP) assessments or the End-of-Course assessments (EOC) developed for specific content areas, or the MAP Alternate Assessment.
Section 504 protects the rights of students with disabilities, ensuring that free appropriate public education will be provided to each qualified student with a disability.
Under Section 504, a student may be considered disabled if he or she:
• has a mental or physical impairment which substantially limits one or more of such person's major life activities.
• has a record of such an impairment.
• is regarded as having such an impairment.
Major life activities include functions such as caring for oneself, walking, seeing, speaking, learning, performing manual tasks, hearing, breathing, or working.
Specific accommodations and/or modifications in testing are allowed for eligible students if determined necessary and appropriate by a group of individuals knowledgeable about the student (504 team). Tests are administered so as best to ensure that, when a test is administered to a 504 eligible student, the test results accurately reflect the student's aptitude or achievement level or whatever other fact the test purports to measure, rather than reflecting the student's impairment (except where those skills are the factors that the test purports to measure).
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA 2004) (Public Law 108-446) provides federal funds to assist states and schools in making a free and appropriate education available to all students identified with an educational disability as defined under IDEA 2004. This act provides clear direction for including students with disabilities in state assessment programs as well as district-wide assessment programs.
With regard to assessment programs, IDEA requires that:
States establish goals and standards for the performance of students with disabilities that, to the maximum extent appropriate, are consistent with the goals and standards established for all children in the state.
States establish performance indicators that can be used to assess student progress toward meeting those goals and standards.
Children with disabilities be included in state and district-wide assessment programs, with appropriate accommodations provided as necessary.
States develop guidelines that allow children with disabilities who cannot participate in the regular assessment program to participate in an alternate assessment.
States report to the public on the progress of students with disabilities with the same frequency and in the same detail as they report on the assessment of non-disabled students.
The IEPs of all students with disabilities specify how the child will be assessed (regular or alternate assessment), the reasons for this decision and the accommodations needed.
In order to comply with federal laws and state mandates, Columbia Public Schools has developed the following guidelines for including students with special needs into the state assessment program and district-wide assessment program.
1. Decisions regarding participation in state-level testing (MAP/EOC) and accommodations will be made annually, based on a student’s instructional goals, curriculum, current level of functioning, skills, and learning characteristics. Students with special needs will participate in the MAP one of three ways:
1. MAP/EOC Subject Area Assessments without Accommodations: Students with disabilities for whom this option is appropriate would participate in the MAP subject area assessments under the same conditions as other students. They would not use accommodations, so there would be no modifications in testing procedures.
2. MAP/EOC Subject Area Assessments with Accommodations: Students with disabilities for whom this option is appropriate would participate in the MAP subject area assessments, but accommodations or modifications in testing procedures would be made to prevent their disabilities from interfering with their test performance.
3. MAP Alternate Assessment: A very small number of students with significant disabilities will not be able to participate in the MAP subject area assessments even with accommodations. These students will participate in the MAP Alternate Assessment.
2. Decisions regarding participation in the district-wide assessment program and accommodations will be made annually, based on a student’s instructional goals, curriculum, current level of functioning, skills, and learning characteristics. Students with special needs will participate in the district-wide assessment program one of three ways: assessments given district-wide without accommodations, assessments given district-wide with accommodations, or alternate assessments. Districts will develop/use alternate assessments that parallel (in purpose, type, and content assessed) assessments given on a district-wide basis.
3. The IEP team will use the following key points as a premise when making state and local assessment participation decisions.
Decision-makers should start from the premise that all students, including those with disabilities, will participate to the greatest extent possible in the state assessment (MAP/EOC) and the district-wide assessment program.
Any decisions regarding participation in the state assessment program and the district-wide assessment program must be made by a student’s IEP team and documented in the IEP along with the reasons for those decisions.
Decisions about how a student should participate in the MAP/EOC and the district-wide assessment program should be based on the goals and content of that student’s instruction.
A student with disabilities should participate in all parts of the MAP/EOC subject area assessments and all parts of the assessments included in the district-wide assessment program that are instructionally relevant for that student.
Decisions about participation should never be based on program setting, category of disability, or percent of time in the regular classroom.
Students should not be exempted from any part(s) of the MAP/EOC subject area assessments or any part(s) of the assessments included in the district-wide assessment program simply because they are not expected to do well.
4. The following information related to assessment will be included in the IEP.
4. A description of how a student will participate in the state and district-wide assessment programs.
5. Statements regarding any individual accommodations needed in the administration of the state and district-wide assessment programs.
6. A statement of why the assessment(s) are not appropriate for the student, a description of how the student will be assessed, and a statement of why the alternate assessment selected is appropriate. MAP-A is the only alternate assessment for the MAP/EOC assessments. (Note: The statements are only needed if the IEP team determines the student cannot participate in the MAP/EOC assessments any part of an assessment contained in the district-wide assessment program.)
5. The district will comply with IDEA 2004 guidelines in the reporting of state and district-wide test results.
Note:
District-wide assessment program is defined as assessments that are administered district-wide to a particular group of students (i.e. all 2nd grade students, all students enrolled in 6th grade reading classes, all boys in the district, all kindergarten students, etc.)
DESE states that if an IEP team determines that a particular district-wide assessment (or part of an assessment) is not appropriate for an individual student, the IEP must include a “statement of why the child cannot participate in the regular assessment” and “how the particular alternative assessment is appropriate.” The IEP team must consider the purpose of the district-wide assessment and make sure the alternative method is consistent with that purpose. In other words, if the purpose of the assessment is to assess reading ability, the alternative method must also result in an assessment of the student’s reading ability. Students with disabilities must take all of the MAP/EOC subject area assessments or the MAP-A assessments that are developed for their grade level. IEP teams cannot excuse students from MAP participation. If students can take the regular assessment, they should. The IEP team must determine what accommodations, if any, the student needs in order to participate in the district-wide or state assessments. The IEP team should consider all areas and the impact on school functioning to make this determination. Students must be assessed with the same frequency as non-disabled students at their same grade level.
Consideration for assessment, alternative assessment, and accommodations/modifications are IEP and 504 team decisions, must be based on evaluation data, and implemented as written in the IEP or 504 Plan.
Part 4: Local Assessment of Standards Not Assessed by MAP
Some of the Show-Me Standards require demonstrations, involve lengthy processes, or require the creation of a product and do not lend themselves to statewide paper-pencil assessment. Additionally, some standards require the use of equipment, tools, or manipulatives and/or interaction within student groups or the workplace. Assessing these types of standards at the state-level is impractical, and results in the need for these to be assessed locally. It will be a district’s responsibility to assess student progress on those standards that are not assessed by MAP. For the reasons stated above, the district has developed an Assessment Plan to assess these standards.
Below are factors the district considered when developing the plan to assess standards not assessed by MAP:
• the variance in staff, resources, course offerings, and curriculum among buildings and grade levels;
• the district’s achievement scores and areas of weakness;
• the district and building level improvement plans;
• the achievement of disaggregated groups;
• documentation for MSIP;
• the validity and reliability of multilevel or multi-curricular assessments;
• the logistics and ease of administration;
• how to track student achievement on the standards not assessed by MAP;
• alignment with current assessment practice.
Process Used to Develop a Plan for Assessing Standards Not Assessed by MAP
Curriculum coordinators used the listing of standards specified for local assessment to examine the district's curriculum to determine where in the curriculum each of the locally assessed standards was addressed and assessed. In order to show where each of the locally assessed standards occurs in the written curriculum, a listing is provided.
Locally Assessed Standards
4.4 Recognizes and practices honesty and integrity in academic work and in the workplace.
Grade: 7 Subject/Course: Art
Grade: 8 Subject/Course: Art
Grade: 9 Subject/Course: Introduction to Art
4.8 Explores, prepares for, and seeks educational and job opportunities.
Grade: 4 Subject/Course: Art
Grade: 5 Subject/Course: Art
Grade: 9 Subject/Course: Art
6. Applies communication techniques to the job search and the workplace.
Grade: 6 Subject/Course: Art
Grade: 7 Subject/Course: Art
Grade: 9 Subject/Course: Social Studies
CA #6 Participates in formal and informal presentations and discussions of issues and ideas.
E Grade: 5 Subject/Course: Math
M Grade: Subject/Course:
HS Grade: 9 Subject/Course: Health
3. Exchanges information, questions, and ideas while recognizing the perspective of others.
Grade: 4 Subject/Course: Math
Grade: 5 Subject/Course: Math
Grade: 8 Subject/Course: Social Studies
2. Conducts research to answer questions and evaluate information and ideas.
Grade: 4 Subject/Course: Health
Grade: 8 Subject/Course: Social Studies
Grade: 9 Subject/Course: Health
CA #5 Comprehends and evaluates the content and artistic aspects of oral and visual presentations.
E Grade: Subject/Course:
M Grade: Subject/Course:
HS Grade: Subject/Course:
5. Performs and produces works in the fine and practical arts.
Grade: K Subject/Course: Art
Grade: 1 Subject/Course: Art
Grade: 10 Subject/Course: Jewelry
2.7 Uses technological tools to exchange information and ideas.
Grade: 4 Subject/Course: Health
Grade: 6 Subject/Course: Health
Grade: 9 Subject/Course: Social Studies
CA7 Evaluates relationships between language and culture.
E Grade: Subject/Course:
M Grade: Subject/Course:
HS Grade: Subject/Course:
FA #3 Acquires a solid foundation which includes the knowledge of the vocabulary to explain perceptions about and evaluations of works in dance, music, theater and visual arts.
E Grade: 5 Subject/Course: Art
M Grade: 7 Subject/Course: Art
HS Grade: 9 Subject/Course: Intro. To Art
Part 5: Guidelines for Professional Development Related to Student Assessment
The teachers and administrators in Columbia Public Schools will participate in professional development opportunities as related to the goals and objectives of the CSIP, areas of needed student improvement based on data analysis, MSIP requirements, the results of the Professional Development Committee's needs assessment, and the results of other needs assessments. This section addresses professional development related to student assessment. For a more detailed, comprehensive description of the district's Professional Development Plan, consult the district's documentation as required by MSIP Standard 6.7.
The topics related to national, state, district-wide and classroom assessments that will be addressed in professional development opportunities include:
7. how to use the results of data analysis as a means of making changes in programs, instruction, curriculum, and assessment;
8. how to use disaggregated data (i.e. by race/ethnicity, gender, disability, LEP, or transient) to determine changes that need to be made to improve performance of subgroups;
9. how to implement instructional and test-taking strategies that will promote success on MAP and other assessments;
10. how to create and score a variety of assessments (i.e., performance, constructed response).
The Professional Development Committee of Columbia Public Schools will work in conjunction with administrators to provide professional development opportunities for teachers, administrators, and support staff. The following will be used to attain the realization of the objectives contained in the CSIP:
11. establishment of district-wide MAP teams/school improvement data teams/study groups;
12. teacher collaboration during common planning/departmental meetings;
13. attending state and regional workshops related to CSIP goals, areas of needed student improvement, and MAP;
14. training for beginning teachers;
15. early release days for buildings and district-wide collaboration;
16. incentives, substitute pay and/or inservice credit for movement on the salary schedule are given by the district for a variety of assessment-related professional development opportunities including reflective analysis of student work and the development and scoring of common district-wide assessments.
Part 6: Teaching Test-Taking Strategies for
MAP and District-Wide Assessments
Rationale: Columbia Public Schools developed guidelines for helping students acquire test-taking strategies to demonstrate their knowledge and skills on assessments.
Background information: The MAP, MAP End-of-Course Exams, standardized, and district-wide assessments generally contain three question types.
17. Multiple-choice items in which students select an answer from a given field.
18. Constructed response items in which students write their own answers. Closed constructed response questions have a narrow range of acceptable answers and often require application of knowledge. Open-ended constructed response questions have a variety of acceptable answers and may require students to support their solution process. The answer is not obvious and students must infer and/or reason through the task. Open-ended constructed response questions are intended to be thought- provoking and demand a variety of reasoning processes.
19. The performance event requires students to write an extended response. For example, on the MAP the performance event takes approximately 60-100 minutes to complete. In communication arts, the student is given a writing prompt. Students engage in a pre-writing activity, develop a rough draft, self-edit, and produce a final copy. In math, students formulate a strategy to solve a multi-step problem.
Guidelines for Test-Taking Strategies: Test-taking strategies need to be integrated into the instructional process. Strategies should address adjusting to the conditions of testing and answering various testing formats.
Teachers throughout the district will teach the skills and processes required for students to successfully respond to multiple choice and constructed response (open and closed) items and performance events. Explicit teaching in test-taking strategies will be provided, when appropriate, to introduce students to the novel conditions, item types, and strategies for managing anxiety.
In order to prepare students for the environmental conditions and behaviors required for the MAP, the MAP EOC Exams, and other district-level assessments, teachers will teach students to:
20. sit and work quietly for extended periods of time;
21. work through challenging tasks with limited teacher interaction;
22. engage in self-calming techniques when anxious;
23. self-evaluate according to a specified standard;
24. select appropriate activities while other students are working;
25. manage their time during testing.
In order to formulate quality answers to multiple-choice items, teachers will teach students to:
26. determine what the question is asking by identifying key words in the stem;
27. attempt to answer the question before reading the choices;
28. read all of the choices and eliminate any distracters;
29. avoid a choice with overly technical language;
30. consider the longest answer choice as the correct answer;
31. choose between related terms rather than unrelated terms.
When a student is attempting to decide between two close answers, the teacher will teach students to employ true/false strategies.
32. In most cases, do not choose an answer choice that contains an absolute (all, always, none, never).
33. Read the question using both choices to determine which one makes a more true statement.
34. Choose a middle answer (B, C, or D) versus a first or last choice when a guess is necessary.
35. Consider “all of the above,” as it is often the correct answer choice.
36. Avoid “none of the above,” as it is typically not the correct answer choice.
In order to formulate quality answers to open-ended constructed response items, teachers will teach students to do the following:
37. Read and identify the key words within a question.
38. Initiate a response to a question using key words from the stem.
39. Avoid using pronouns in the response. However, when necessary ensure the pronoun referent is clear.
40. Address all parts of the question.
41. Include specific examples from the text.
42. Provide specific examples to support a position.
43. Show the major steps in the solution process (math).
44. Provide multiple likenesses and corresponding differences when asked to compare and contrast.
45. Include a title and labels when creating graphic organizers.
In order to formulate quality answers on performance events, teachers will teach students in the following strategies.
46. Develop and implement a strategy or plan to complete a complex problem or task (e.g., writing to a prompt).
47. Consider multiple possibilities when completing a problem or task; select the most effective possibility, and justify the response when appropriate.
48. Recognize and respond to all required specifications.
49. Interpret data (i.e. a picture, graph, data, etc.) needed to answer a question.
50. Organize data in different forms to show meaning (construct a graphic organizer that shows… make a chart to show… draw a series of pictures to show… design a poster that shows… etc.).
51. Describe the process used for solving a problem or explain why the proposed solution is optimal.
Part 7: Test Security Policy for all Standardized Tests
Individuals Responsible for Testing Program:
The District Testing Coordinator (DTC) will be the Director of Research, Assessment and Accountability. Assistance for the testing program will be provided from Office of Research and IITS personnel (referred to as District Testing Coordinator Assistants (DTCA)).
The principal of each building will either assume the responsibility of the Building Testing Coordinator (BTC) or will name a designee for his/her school. The designee should be accessible throughout the day and have the authority to implement this policy. Principals must submit in writing the name of the BTC designee for their buildings to the DTC each year.
Storage and Access Before Test Administration
Herein, secure items are defined as student test booklets-any material that has the actual test questions that has not been released to the public by the publisher for viewing. Examiner’s manuals/instruction manuals and student practice test booklets are NON-secure items.
1. All standardized student test booklets used by the district will be kept in a locked storage facility when not in use. Student test booklets will remain in this facility except during those time periods necessary for processing, for scoring, or delivery to and from locations as part of the testing process.
2. The District Testing Coordinator Assistant (DTCA), should receive the Examiner’s Packets and District Testing Coordinator’s Packet a few weeks prior to the testing. The DTCA will check all Building Testing Coordinator’s Packets and the District Testing Coordinator’s Packet to ensure all documents and materials have been received.
3. Each BTC will receive an examiner’s manual in advance of testing to allow for copying (as needed) and distributing and to give an inservice about test administration (see next section—Inservice Prior to Testing).
4. Testing materials will be delivered to each building approximately a week before the testing period. The BTC will be responsible for recording the number of test materials per grade level received in that building. Test materials will then be kept in locked storage until distributed to teachers. If there are shortages, the BTC will contact the DTCA. The DTC will contact the test distribution center for additional materials.
5. Teachers should not have access to student test booklets until they are distributed one working day before the testing period. No teacher (regular classroom, specialist, or special education) will have access to the test booklets or be told their contents before the test is distributed.
6. On occasion, schools within the district may be asked to, or volunteer to, administer tests with secure materials that are on loan to the district. Common examples are secure forms of the NAEP, SAT or other tests needing to be standardized. In addition to the security measures above, when such testing materials arrive the BTC will carefully check and sort them in preparation for administration, making a written record of the number of booklets that will be used. The BTC will also assume responsibility for providing for the secure storage of these materials and will contact the proper authorities if the number received is inaccurate.
7. The regular within-district mail system should not be used for the transportation of student test booklets. A special mail delivery and pickup will be arranged. Signed receipts will be required from either the BTC or principal.
Inservice Prior to Testing
Prior to testing, each BTC will distribute an examiner’s manual and a testing coordinator’s manual to each teacher and will provide an inservice.
The inservice will emphasize the following:
1. The importance of test security during test administration and close adherence to the standardized procedures as stated in the examiner’s manual should be covered. Other security issues that will be addressed will include the handling and storage of the test booklets, providing directions to students, responding to questions, and monitoring the test setting. Teachers/examiners will also be asked to make sure that items that give clues to correct answers be removed from the walls of the rooms in which tests are to be administered. Some examples include: maps, multiplication tables, periodic tables, etc. Anything that may give specific clues to correct answers should be removed.
2. Completing all forms, i.e., student information sheets, inventory sheets, validity forms, completed testing envelopes, etc.
3. The test administration including publisher security and administration guidelines.
4. Procedure for collecting completed student test booklets.
5. Special procedure for IEP students, make-ups for absentees, required time schedules, etc.
Any staff member unable to attend this meeting must contact the BTC and obtain a summary of the guidelines and instructions for the administration of the test.
Test Administration
1. Regular, certificated staff members will normally administer standardized tests in the classroom. When this is not the case, the BTC must contact the DTC for clarification and approval.
2. For each major standardized test, the BTC shall prepare a testing schedule for their building. When necessary, end-of-period bells will be altered to accommodate the testing schedule or eliminated altogether to reduce distraction. Sending the test schedule to the Director of Building Services can help minimize distractions.
3. Students will not receive test booklets until the time for testing has begun.
4. Teachers/examiners will actively monitor students at all times during the test administration.
5. Building administrators/BTC will discretely move between classrooms during the test administration to assist in monitoring and to provide assistance as needed.
6. Each day, prior to testing, the examiner will get his/her test booklets from the secure area and will return them to this same area each day after test administration. The BTC will count test booklets each day upon return to ensure all booklets are accounted for.
7. Make-up tests will be given during the testing window as set forth in the district testing calendar. A designated individual or individuals (but not volunteers) in each building will administer the test according to the specified administration procedures, taking all previously mentioned precautions to ensure test security. Make-up tests are given to students that were absent or, for one reason or another, unable to take an entire subject area of the test. Make-ups should not be given to students to finish sections started and not completed on the previous day. Once a test section is started, it must be completed that day, in the time allotted according to the examiner’s manual. As a result, the BTC should try to avoid scheduling un-timed MAP testing periods to begin near the end of the school day.
Collection of Test Materials Following Testing
1. The BTC will collect all answer documents and test booklets from the teachers/examiners immediately following the last testing session.
2. The BTC will be responsible for counting test materials, organizing them according to instructions and storing them in a secure area.
3. The BTC will prepare all student test booklets, answer sheets, examiner manuals, etc. for pick-up and delivery to the DTCA. They should include missing items noted and tracked down.
4. No parent or volunteer should be involved with the handling of the test booklets or scoring sheets.
5. The BTC must send the necessary information and materials to the DCTA on or before the announced final district collection date.
1.
Sanctions for Unfair Practices
The security measures outlined in this document should help prevent unfair practices; however, should they occur, the sanctions specified in this section will be put into motion. Following is a list of practices this district considers inappropriate.
• Copying any part of a standardized student test booklet for any reason.
• Removing a student test booklet from a building’s secure storage area without the permission of the BTC.
• Failing to return all student test booklets (used and unused) following test administration.
• Directly teaching any test item included on a standardized test (teaching practice test items and approved materials from published teachers guidebooks for assistance and guidance in teaching test taking strategies are excluded).
• Failure to follow testing guidelines as specified in the examiner’s manual.
• Altering a student’s responses to items in the booklet.
• Indicating to the student during testing that they have missed items and need to change them, giving answers or clues to questions, allowing students to give each other answers, or altering test administration procedures to give students an unfair advantage.
• Grading tests with the students.
• Altering test administration procedures in any way that violate agreements with the test publisher or sponsor.
• Undue pressure or encouragement on the part of the administrators for examiners to engage in any of the aforementioned inappropriate or unfair practices.
1.
If a district staff person is suspected of engaging in any of the aforementioned unfair practices, an immediate investigation will be initiated. If allegations are proven, a report will be forwarded to the DTC and appropriate disciplinary action will be taken.
Part 8: Motivating Students to Do Well on State and District-Wide Assessments
Columbia Public Schools has implemented strategies to motivate students to take required tests seriously and to recognize those who perform well on all assessments. While we would like to believe that each student is inherently motivated to demonstrate his/her personal best with regards to learning and achievement, we realize that some students need additional information and incentives to perform at their optimal level. Administrators, teachers and parents need to be informed and need to communicate the same message to students regarding the importance of assessment. Consistent messages to students are a powerful motivator.
Each building within the district will decide what strategies to use to motivate students to do their best on all assessments. These sample strategies have been divided into Pre-Assessment, During Assessment and Post Assessment.
Pre-Assessment:
• Schools will send an informative letter to parents regarding test dates, schedule, and tips for successful testing. Information can also be provided on Channel 16.
• Secondary students record a “commercial” for parents and students on the auto dialer the weekend before test begins, including information about importance of sleep, breakfast, and being mentally prepared to take test.
• Parent groups organize healthy snacks or treats, and “rewards.”
• Schools provide informational parent sessions regarding the importance of the assessments, including common language on how to interpret test scores.
• Schools emphasize learning as the most important thing a school does all year. Assessment is one important way to demonstrate that learning.
• Posters are placed in halls to remind students about test, self-pride, pride in school, and accountability for their learning. Motivational posters are used throughout school year.
• Students not taking the test in K-8 send cards of encouragement to older students taking the test. This may help to raise the awareness of the entire student body that this is an important event.
• Schools provide motivational assemblies or classroom visits.
During Assessment:
52. Healthy snacks and stretch breaks are provided to increase alertness and attention, e.g., cold water, peanut butter, cheese, crackers, apple slices.
53. Minimal or no homework is assigned across the building during test week.
54. Motivational books or stories about doing one’s best are read/told at the beginning of the testing window, e.g., Hooray for Diffendorfer Day! Author: Dr. Seuss.
55. Slogans and treats are used for motivational purposes, e.g., “You were mint to score high.” (Give mint with slogan attached.) “You’re on a roll” (tootsie roll).
56. Building-wide raffles are held to reward attendance during testing window. Team level smaller raffles can be used for attendance each day.
Post Assessment:
• Certificates or medals for individual students.
• Incentives such as field trips, coupons, tickets, books, etc.
• Class recognition or rewards such as parties, flags, etc.
• Applications for state reimbursements for Advanced Placement/dual credit classes based on student MAP results.
• Required summer school attendance or remedial instructional requirements.
• Drawings for a grand prize. Raffle tickets given to students who were identified by teachers as putting forth their best effort.
• Celebrations on the last day of testing for whole school. In elementary, this may be extra recess, room parties. For secondary, it may be an assembly, special event during lunch, etc.
Since MAP scores do not come back until the fall, teachers in each building may develop a program for providing incentives to students in the spring, shortly after the MAP testing. Testing behaviors such as a positive attitude during testing and the demonstration of effort during testing may be used as a means of determining whether or not a student earns the incentives. In the fall, when the district receives the MAP testing results, a special recognition ceremony may be held for high achieving students. Applications for reimbursement for Advance Placement/dual enrollment will be sent to the state.
Part 9: Making Changes as a Result of Data Analysis
The district believes it is imperative to use data as a means of making decisions for instruction, assessment, programs, policies, and student placement. All types of data, both aggregate and disaggregate, are reviewed on an ongoing basis. To ensure the results of analyzing data are being used to make needed changes for all subpopulations, progress toward school improvement goals is monitored. Changes made resulting from this process are documented. This will be done as part of the building level school improvement plan and will include:
• all types of data reviewed;
• the findings based on the review of data;
• a description of how the areas deemed as weaknesses were/will be addressed (strategies or action steps and how their effect will be measured);
• the impact of the changes; and
• a description of further action (if any) to be taken.
The strategies or activities to be implemented are defined based on teacher/team evaluation of the available data identifying students’ strengths/weaknesses, etc. (Note: The classroom teacher collects a wealth of data through in-class assessments, reading logs, observations, one-on-one student teacher conferences, etc.) In many cases, the curriculum coordinators are also consulted for appropriate strategies and methods of implementation. Annually, schools evaluate the effectiveness of their strategies and degree of goal attainment before revising and updating their school improvement plan.
The individuals involved in the data analysis process will include, but not be limited to, administrators, curriculum coordinators, guidance personnel, teachers and the Director of Research, Assessment, and Accountability. The types of data to be analyzed will include state and district-wide tests, AP/ACT/SAT results, common district assessments, dropout data/persistence to graduation, and post-graduation studies, with most analyses disaggregated based on demographics, special needs, etc.
The district realizes that using data to make needed changes is an on-going process. Schools have invited the Director of Research, Assessment, and Accountability to review with them their school test results and explain the test reports. The Director of Research, Assessment, and Accountability meets individually with administrators, principals and curriculum coordinators as needed to review test scores or develop specialized data analyses. Curriculum coordinators, principals, and staff members use this information to fine-tune the curriculum, lesson plans, and instructional strategies. The same data analyses are used to facilitate teacher collaboration and team planning as some reports can be used to facilitate identification of best practices. The results are also used to assist in determining future staff development activities.
Appendix A: Definition of Assessment and Related Terms
Academically Deficient Schools – those schools that have been identified as schools that have not successfully met state performance standards. Schools are identified as being academically deficient based upon recommendation of educational audit.
Achievement Gap - the difference between how well low-income and minority children perform on standardized tests as compared with their peers.
Achievement Test - a test that measures knowledge of acquired information and skill mastery, usually attained as a result of planned instruction or training.
Action Research - a form of collective, self-reflective inquiry undertaken by educators in order to improve instructional practices, as well as their understanding of these practices and the situations in which these practices are carried out. An action research project proceeds through cycles of planning, acting, observing, and reflection systematically and self-critically implemented and interrelated.
Adequate Yearly Progress – is an indicator of a district’s or school’s progress determined by critical variable such as student levels of proficiency, narrowing test-score gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students and providing quality instructors. "Adequate Yearly Progress" is the minimum level of improvement that states, school districts and schools must achieve each year.
Alignment, external - the process of aligning the measurable learner objectives and related activities and assessments to reflect the demands of the Show-Me Process and Knowledge Standards at the appropriate learning level.
Alignment, internal - the process of determining a clear correlation among measurable learner objectives, instructional activities, and assessments (all having external alignment to the Show-Me Standards).
Alignment, vertical - the process of aligning measurable objectives across grade levels within a content to build a coherent instructional program.
Anecdotal Records - a description of behavior; recording of information (instructional, behavioral) observed by the recorder.
Annotated Frameworks - Show-Me Standards Frameworks that contains information regarding which framework items are assessed locally or at the state level.
Annual Performance Report (APR) - a report given to each Missouri school district describing the school district's performance on 12 MSIP Performance Standards.
Aptitude Assessments - assessment of an individual’s ability to learn or develop proficiency in a particular area, based on native or acquired characteristics.
Articulation of Objectives or Content - the communication of objectives or goals across grade bands.
Assessment System – a series of assessments of student performance at different grade levels, which are based on, adopted standards to provide data on student achievement and curriculum implementation. An assessment system may consist of a norm-referenced or criterion-referenced assessment, an alternative assessment system and classroom assessments.
Assessment - the process of collecting, analyzing, and interpreting information about academic performance related to educational goals. Assessments, as opposed to tests, typically employ a variety of procedures for evaluating student work and learning.
Assessment Data - information on individuals and groups of students gathered from standardized tests, district level tests, individual tests, classroom evaluations, etc.
Authentic Assessment - a type of assessment demanding the application of skills and knowledge in a "real-life" situation.
Benchmark – an expected or anticipated skill or understanding at various developmental levels; a specified step along a path toward achievement of a goal or standard.
Building Annual Performance Report (B-APR) - a report given to each Missouri school describing the school's performance on12 of the MSIP Performance Standards.
Building-level School Improvement Plan - a plan written at the building level that includes strategies and action steps that will help the district realize its improvement objectives as identified in the Comprehensive School Improvement Plan.
Building Test Coordinator – distributes testing materials to examiners, collects and checks materials, and forwards them to the District Test Coordinator for shipping.
Classroom Assessments - an assessment developed, administered and scored by a teacher or set of teachers with the purpose of evaluating individual or classroom student performance on a topic. Classroom assessments may be aligned into an assessment system that includes alternative assessments and either a norm-referenced or criterion-referenced assessment. Ideally, the results of a classroom assessments are used to inform and influence instruction that helps students reach high standards.
Cognitive Assessments - assessment of that which is known or perceived.
Common Assessments - district level assessments that are used to determine student level of performance against district level standards. These assessments may reflect district Power Standards and content standards.
Comprehensive School Improvement Plan (CSIP) - long-range plan developed by the district with involvement by staff, board, parents, patrons to address the needs of the district. It is a plan created by the district to serve as a "road map" to the long-range improvement the district hopes to realize over a five-year period.
Constructed Response - these items ask a student to give their own short answer rather than choosing from a list of possible answers. The MAP uses two types of constructed response forms—open and closed. An open constructed response item has multiple responses that can be considered correct. A closed constructed response item has just one response that is correct.
Content (Knowledge) Standards - the forty knowledge standards listed under six content areas of the Show-Me Standards.
Content Validity - evidence of validity gained by showing that the test content is representative of a specified behavior domain.
Criterion Reference Assessments - an assessment where an individual’s performance is compared to a specific learning objective; tells how a student is performing on a specific goal or standard rather than how their performance compares to a norm.
Data-driven Decisions - decisions regarding program, instruction, finances, etc based on data collected about district identified priorities.
Data Teams – a team of teachers (and principal) who use formative and summative data to regularly monitor and measure their professional practices and impact on student learning. Data teams design specific improvement strategies based on classroom data. Data teams provide for reflection and feedback on the impact of instructional strategies. While annual local, district, and state test scores give information of “where to start”, data teams use classroom data to indicate, “how we are getting better” in moving all students to proficiency.
Disaggregated Data - assessment data that is compiled looking at various groups within the tested population, generally by race, ethnicity, gender, socio-economics, etc. This practice allows parents and teachers to see more than just the average score for their child's school.
District-Wide Assessments – assessments that are administered district-wide to a particular group of students (i.e., all 2nd grade students, all students enrolled in 6th grade reading classes, all kindergarten students, etc.)
District Test Coordinator (DTC) – receives, distributes, collects, assembles and ships district testing materials.
Development Reading Assessment (DRA) - an assessment administered by classroom teachers to determine a student's developmental reading level. This information is used to determine a level of instruction as well as to determine district-wide reading growth.
Equity - is the concern for fairness, i.e., that assessments are free from bias or favoritism. An assessment that is fair enables all children to show what they can do. At minimum, all assessments should be reviewed for (a) stereotypes, (b) situations that may favor one culture over another, (c) excessive language demands that prevent some students from showing their knowledge, and (d) the assessment's potential to include students with disabilities or limited English proficiency.
Formative Assessment - assessment conducted during a performance/course/program with the purpose of providing feedback that can be used to modify, shape, and improve a performance/course/program. Observations which allow one to determine the degree to which students know or are able to do a given learning task, and which identifies the part of the task that the student does not know or is unable to do.
Grade Equivalent – grade equivalents show the grade level of students whom a particular score is average or typical. For example, a grade equivalent of 1.5 means that a child’s score is the same as what the average score of children in the sixth month of the first grade would have been if these children had taken the same test. Grade equivalents do not show the level of the test. For example, a grade equivalent of 3.5 on a kindergarten test does not mean that the child can handle third grade work. It means that if third graders took that test in January, the typical score would be the same as that kindergarten child’s.
Informal Assessments - spontaneous assessment that may or may not include written and/or verbal feedback.
Inter Rater Reliability - the level of accuracy between different graders for the consistency of the scores. It is an index of concordance between different raters of
the same test(s). This is usually used for subjective ratings such as constructed response and performance events, and also with such things as the DRA2, where the rater's perception is subjective.
Locally Assessed Objectives - objectives that have been mandated at the state level to be assessed locally. See Show-Me Standards not assessed on the MAP.
MAP Alternative Assessment (MAP-A) - an alternative of the MAP designed to assess the Missouri Performance and Content Standards for those students for which it is deemed inappropriate to administer the MAP. The MAP-A allows students with severe disabilities to be assessed using a portfolio system that evaluates their progress toward their IEP (Individual Education Plan) goals and related Show-Me Standards.
Measurable Learner Objectives - descriptors of expected learner outcomes in terms of observable learner behavior including a clear delineation of the content to be learned and the learning level.
Missouri Assessment Program – is a performance-based assessment system for use by all public schools in the state, as required by the Outstanding Schools Act of 1993 mandated by Senate Bill 380. The assessment has three sections: nationally normed, constructed response and performance events. The assessment is designed to measure student progress toward meeting the Show-Me Standards, 73 rigorous academic standards that were adopted by the State Board of Education in January 1996.
Missouri School Improvement Program (MSIP) - has the responsibility of reviewing and accrediting the 524 school districts in Missouri within a five-year review cycle. State law mandates the process of accrediting school district, and the specific responsibilities of this section are outlined both by State Board Rule and in Senate Bill 380.
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) - a congressionally mandated project of the National Center for Educational Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, which since 1969 collects and reports information on what American students, in both public and private elementary and secondary schools, know and can do in several subjects including reading, mathematics, science, writing, history and geography; "the nation's report card."
National Norms - the range of test scores that represent the average or usual performance in a nationwide sample rather than in a local one. Note: National norms vary widely with respect to such factors as sample size and the degree to which they represent the population from which the sample is drawn.
Normal Curve Equivalent (NCE) - is derived from percentile ranks and is used primarily for research or for averaging scores.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act 2002 - the most recent reauthorization of the ESEA. The Act embodies the four principles of President George W. Bush's education reform plan: stronger accountability for results, expanded flexibility and local control, expanded opportunities for parents and an emphasis on teaching methods that have been proven to work. Under NCLB, tests are aligned with academic standards. Beginning in the 2002-03 school year, schools must administered tests in each of three grade spans: grades 3-5, grades 6-9 and grades 10-12 in all schools. Beginning in the 2005-06 school year, tests must be administered every year in grades 3 through 8 in math and reading. Beginning in the 2007-08 school year, science achievement must also be tested.
Norm Referenced Assessment - an assessment where student performance or performances are compared to a larger group. Usually the larger group or "norm group" is a national sample representing a wide and diverse cross-section of students. Students, schools, districts, and even states are compared or rank-ordered in relations to the norm group. The purpose of a norm-referenced assessment is usually to sort students and not to measure achievement towards some criterion of performance.
National Percentile Rank (NPR) - percentile ranks are useful because they can be compared from one subject area to another. A percentile rank shows the percentage of students in the comparison group whose scores were equal to or lower than the score given. Percentile ranks range from the low of 1 to the high of 99, with 50 meaning, “average”. Percentile ranks do not stand for actual amounts of a child’s knowledge. A percentile rank of 42, for example, does not mean that the child answered 42 percent of the questions correctly or that that child has learned 42 percent of the skills taught. A percentile rank of 42 means that the child has done as well as or better than 42 percent of the group with which he/she is being compared. (“National” means that the comparison group is a national group.)
Percent – a comparison of the number of problems answered correctly to the number of questions asked.
Performance Indicator - a discrete objective or learner outcome that leads to meeting a broader learner objective or outcome. May be considered a "measurable learner objective" for MSIP purposes in some instances.
Performance Levels - a level of achievement or performance as indicated by an assessment. The Missouri Achievement Program uses five levels of performance: Step 1 (lowest level of performance), Progressing (2), Nearing Proficiency (3), Proficient (4), and Advanced (5) (highest level).
Performance task/event (performance assessments) - complex demonstration of student knowledge (i.e., project, speech, essay, concept map, experiment, research paper, etc.)
Portfolios - organized collection of artifacts meant to represent the work of an individual or organization.
Power Standards - an agreed-upon set of standards that guide decisions, not only regarding curriculum, but also personnel and financial resources.
Priority Schools - any school that is academically deficient, unaccredited, provisionally accredited, or does not meet any of the accreditation standards on student performance based on the MAP. School districts and/or buildings, which do not meet any of the Missouri Assessment Program (MAP) grade span and reading standards, as based on the district’s or Building’s Annual Performance Report (B-APR), for two (2) consecutive years.
Process (Performance) Standards - thirty-three performance standards listed under the four broad goals of the Missouri Show-Me Standards.
Qualitative Assessments - assessment data that does not lend itself to quantitative methods but to interpretive criteria.
Quality Assurance Visits – are annual visits conducted by DESE, in Missouri schools, through a random selection process. The purpose of the visits is to assure the proper administration of the MAP, assure security of the MAP, provide feedback to DESE/test contractors, and assist schools in better understanding MAP Quality Assurance expectations.
Quantitative Assessments - assessment based on analyzed data.
Raw Score – is the number of questions that the student answered correctly. Since different test or subtest within a battery of tests could have a different number of questions as well as the difficulty level of the questions may vary from test to test or subtest to subtest, raw scores should not be compared.
Reliability - consistency in measurements and tests; specifically, the extent to which two applications of the same measuring procedure rank persons in the same way.
Results Indicators – are a listing or collection of evidence gathered on a regular basis throughout the year to determine if the strategies implemented are proving effective in increasing performance.
Running Records – a written notation of a student’s reading behavior. The teacher's recording of the student's reading of the different levels of text. From that record, the teacher figures an accuracy score, determining the appropriate instructional level.
Scaled Scores – are determined by the number of items and difficulty of the items answered.
Scoring Guides - a rubric with written expectations or levels necessary to earn a certain point value or grade. A holistic scoring guide examines the entire performance awarding an overall point or level value. An analytic scoring guide breaks the performance into sub skills or component skills and awards or evaluates each section separately.
Selected Response Items - test that requires the student to choose a correct answer from a limited lists of possibilities (multiple-choice, true-false, matching, etc.)
Show-Me Standards - thirty-three performance standards listed under the four broad goals and forty knowledge standards listed under the six content areas. The standards represent what high school graduates in Missouri should know and be able to do. Authority for the Show-Me Standards: Section 160.514 RSMO.
Show-Me Standards Not Assessed on the MAP - effective with the Third Cycle of the MSIP, beginning in July 2001, districts are required to assess Show-Me Standards that are not assessed through the MAP
Standard - expected level of quality or excellence against which judgments and accreditation decisions are made.
Stanine – like percentile ranks, stanines show how a student performed in relation to a group and can be compared from one subject are to another. Stanines range from a low of 1 to a high of 9, with 5 meaning “average.” Stanines 1, 2, and 3 are below-average scores; stanines 4, 5, and 6 are average scores; and stanines 7, 8 and 9 are above-average scores.
Summative Assessments - evaluation at the conclusion of a unit or units of instruction or an activity of plan to determine or judge students’ skills and knowledge or effectiveness of a plan or activity. Outcomes are the culmination of a teaching/learning process for a unit, subject, or year’s study.
Test Bias - the difference in test scores, or predictions from those scores, between two or more subgroups of the population that are matched on the underlying construct being measured.
Validity - the extent to which an assessment measures what it is intended to measure and the extent to which inferences and actions made on the basis of test scores are appropriate and accurate. For example, if a student performs well on a reading test, how confident are we that the student is a good reader? A valid standards-based assessment is aligned with the standards intended to be measured, provides an accurate and reliable estimate of students' performance relative to the standard, and is fair. An assessment cannot be valid if it is not reliable.
-----------------------
Updated December 2008
Office of Research, Assessment, and Accountability
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
Assessment
Plan
Columbia Public Schools
Columbia, Missouri
July 2003
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- activities for 1 year olds development
- 3 year olds preschool worksheets
- average 65 year olds savings
- jobs for 60 year olds women
- jobs for 18 year olds no experience
- activities for two year olds art
- learning activities for 3 year olds printable
- year olds grammar
- activities for one year olds in daycare
- how many 80 year olds in us
- free games for 4 year olds boys
- jobs for 11 year olds for money