Digging Into the Data to Learn More About Low Performing

Student with Disabilities

Sheryl Lazarus

Successfully Transitioning Away from the

2% Assessment MeetingAtlanta, GA

February 11-12, 2014

National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)

This presentation will describe how a few states are using data to learn more about low performing students with disabilities.

National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)

Overview and Purpose

As you listen to this presentation, think about how your state might look at its own data to learn more about the students participating in the AA-MAS.

Multi- State GSEGConsortium Members

Some Questions States Had

National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)

• What are the characteristics of low performing students?

• Is it an assessment issue or an instructional issue? o And, if it’s an assessment issue—is a new test

needed or more universally accessible general assessments?

o If it’s an instructional issue, is the issue—access to the content? . . . IEP teams that don’t know how to write and implement standards-based IEPs?. . .an accommodations issue? . . .

Longitudinal Analysis of State Data Sets

National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)

Male Students

Source: Lazarus, Wu, Altman, & Thurlow (2010)

Reading, Grades 5 and 8

Minority

Source: Lazarus, Wu, Altman, & Thurlow (2010)

Reading, Grades 5 and 8

Free-Reduced Lunch

Source: Lazarus, Wu, Altman, & Thurlow (2010)

Reading, Grades 5 and 8

Special Education

.

Reading, grades 5 and 8

Source: Lazarus, Wu, Altman, & Thurlow (2010)

Percentage of Low Performing (LP) Students Who Stay or Move Out of LP Across Three Years

Legend: Dark Purple: PLP; Medium Purple: move in and out; Light Purple: first year only

Source: Lazarus, Wu, Altman, & Thurlow, (2010)

.

Digging Deeper

Individual State Analyses and Studies

Digging Deeper

Accommodations Issues

National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)

Additional Individual State Analyses and Studies

•South Dakota

•Alabama

Digging Deeper

South Dakota

Source: Wu, Thurlow, Lazarus, Christian, & Turner (2011)Source: Wu, Lazarus, Thurlow, & Turner (2010)

Average Number of Accommodations by Performance Group

.

Average Number of Accommodations by Placement

Source: Wu, Lazarus, Thurlow & Turner (2010)

Qualitative Studies

• Cognitive Labs

• Focus Groups (Test Administrators)

National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)

Student Performance

Source: Lazarus, Thurlow, Rieke, Halpin & Dillon (2012)

Number of Students Who Performed at Selected Levels With and Without the

Read Aloud Accommodation

.

Source: Lazarus, Thurlow, Rieke, Halpin & Dillon (2012)

Focus Groups

Purpose: The study sought to learn more about test administrators’ perceptions of the read-aloud accommodation.

Research questions:

1. What are appropriate practices in administration of the read-aloud accommodation?

2. How does the read-aloud accommodation benefit students?

3. What differences exist in the use of the read-aloud accommodation in math versus other content areas (e.g. reading, science)?

4. What differences exist between the read-aloud accommodation and other accommodations for students?

Source: Hodgson, Lazarus, Price, Altman, & Thurlow (2012)

.

Question Focus Group Responses

How does the read-aloud accommodation benefit students?

• Promotes cognitive engagement (e.g., focus, attention, and motivation)• Promotes social-emotional engagement (e.g., reduces anxiety and frustration)• Pacing• Increases student performance

Source: Hodgson, Lazarus, Price, Altman, & Thurlow (2012)

Digging Deeper

Alabama

•Which factors influence IEP team decisions about how accommodations are used for instruction and assessment?

•Are there differences in the factors and considerations identified by respondents for selecting instructional and assessment accommodations?

•What are the most frequently used accommodations for instruction and assessment?

Source: Altman, et al. (2010)

Research Questions

Survey –Special Education Teachers

Special education teachers were asked to select three factors that influenced IEP decisions about accommodations used on statewide assessments

Source: Altman, et al. (2010)

Online Accommodations Training Modules

Available at: https://nceo.umn.edu/alabama/login.php

.

Fast Forward a Few Years . . . .

.

Lessons Learned in Federally Funded Projects That Can Improve the Instruction and Assessment

of Low Performing Students with Disabilities

• Summarizes findings of 14 projects involving 26 states.

• Projects funded by the U.S. Department of Education in 2006-2007 under three funding sources (General Supervision Enhancement Grants, Enhanced Assessment Grants, and Supplemental Funding)

Source: Thurlow, Lazarus & Bechard (Eds.) (2013)

ELLs with Disabilities

Example from One State

•State wanted to learn more about the characteristics of ELLs with disabilities

•Discovered data limitations– Data not collected for some relevant

variables

– Data silos (Special Education, ELL)

•State made revisions to its system so that better data will be available in the future

National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)

National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)

What questions do you have about low performing students with disabilities or the assessments they

take that data might help answer?

(If you need a some ideas, see handout for a few suggestions.)

For More Information

National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO)

www.nceo.info

Sheryl Lazaruslaza0019@umn.edu

.

References(Available at www.nceo.info)

Hodgson, J.R., Lazarus, S.S., Price, L.M., Altman, J.R., & Thurlow, M.L. (2012). Test administrators’ perspectives on the use of the read aloud accommodation in math on state tests for accountability. (Technical Report 66). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Lazarus, S.S., Thurlow, M.L., Rieke, R., Halpin, D. & Dillon, T. (2012). Using cognitive labs to evaluate student experiences with the read aloud accommodation in math. (Technical Report 67). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Lazarus, S.S., Wu, Y., Altman, J., & Thurlow, M.L. (2010). The characteristics of low performing students on large-scale assessments (NCEO Brief). Minneapolis MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes

Thurlow, M.L., Lazarus, S.S. & Bechard, S. (Eds.) (2013). Lessons learned in federally funded projects that can improve the instruction and assessment of low performing students with disabilities. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Wu, Y., Lazarus, S.S., Thurlow, M.L., & Turner, L. (2010). What have we learned about student characteristics, accommodations, and AA-MAS? Paper presented at the American Education Research Association (AERA) Annual Conference, Denver CO, April 30-May 4.