Monitoring Growth & Achievement with Special Education Students

Special Education Development · August 2013

Monitoring Growth & Achievement with Special Education Students — Special Education Development, August 2013.
Published

August 22, 2013

Event
Invited talk
Slides
6
Format
Converted from Keynote

This deck is an image-based copy of the original slides. Builds and animations are flattened; the slide text is reproduced below for search and screen readers.

Slide text
  1. Monitoring Growth & Achievement with Special Education Students Damian Betebenner National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment Thursday, August 22, 13
  2. Our daughter Şilan Monitoring Development Height Weight Head Circumference Sleep routine Peeing and pooping Thursday, August 22, 13
  3. Monitoring the (academic) development of students: Growth & Achievement Advanced Reading High Achievement CSAP Reading ● Scale Score ● Typical Proficient Growth Low ● Level Percentiles High 66th − 99th Typical 35th − 65th Part Proficient ● Low 1st − 34th Unsatisfactory Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Next Year Scale Score 462 539 563 609 Achievement Level Unsatisfactory Part Proficient Part Proficient Proficient Achievement Growth Percentile 66 66 90 Growth Level High High High Growth Thursday, August 22, 13
  4. Achievement: Criterion referenced in terms performance levels Growth: Norm & Criterion referenced as student growth percentiles (SGPs) Norms and Criteria apply equally to all students taking state assessment Advanced Reading High Achievement CSAP Reading ● Scale Score ● Typical Proficient Growth Low ● Level Percentiles High 66th − 99th Typical 35th − 65th Part Proficient ● Low 1st − 34th Unsatisfactory Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Next Year Scale Score 462 539 563 609 Achievement Level Unsatisfactory Part Proficient Part Proficient Proficient Achievement Growth Percentile 66 66 90 Growth Level High High High Growth Thursday, August 22, 13
  5. • Understanding human development (including academic) is based (fundamentally) on both norms and criteria (e.g., failure to thrive) • Under what circumstances do we define distinct norms and criteria for different groups of individuals (e.g., male/female height and weight charts) • In all state assessment programs, students identified as special education have (on average) lower achievement and lower growth than non-special education students. Thursday, August 22, 13
  6. Thank you Thursday, August 22, 13