MI-Access Science: The State of the Extended Benchmarks

Vincent J. Dean, PhD Assessment Consultant for Students with Disabilities

Session 52

OEAA Conference 2007

Today’s Topics

• MI-Access Science Assessments

• Assessment Plan Writing Team (APWT)

• EB and Item Development/Samples

• Instructional Relevance

• Present and Future EB Endeavors

MI-Access Science Assessments

• NCLB – 2007/2008

• Science in grades 5, 8, and 11

• Functional Independence, Supported Independence, Participation

• Extended Benchmarks from Michigan Curriculum Framework v.2000

Assessment Plan Writing Team (APWT)

• Members

• Charge: Develop Assessment Plan

• Five meetings/work sessions over the time period of July 2005 through March 2006

APWT Primary Goal

• Extend the Benchmarks in science for three groups of special education students who function as if they have mild to severe cognitive impairments:

Functional Independence (FI)

Supported Independence (SI)

Participation (P)

APWT Secondary Goals

• Achieve consensus on abilities and skills of each population – Should vs. Can

• Attain a better understanding of the P/SI student populations - Wing Lake Developmental Center

APWT Secondary Goals

• Evaluate alternate assessments and item-type formats

• Generate preliminary assessment blueprints and item specifications

• Generate prototype items

APWT Process

Extending Benchmarks from Michigan Curriculum Framework Science Content Standards, 2000 version (MCF v.2000)

- 3 Questions –

Extending Benchmarks

Question 1

“What is the fundamental meaning or content of this cluster of standards and benchmarks?”

Question 2

“What are the underlying key concepts and understandings?”

Question 3

“What knowledge and skills will be assessed?”

Extended Benchmarks (EBs)Examples of EBs across grade spansExamples of EBs across populations

Elementary Middle High

Benchmark

Extended BenchmarksPhysical Science

Benchmark

Describe sounds in terms of their properties

Explain how sound travels through different media

Relate characteristics of sounds that we hear to properties of sound waves

FI EB Describe sounds in terms of their properties

Recognize how sound travels through different media

Describe how sound travels through different media

Benchmark

SI EB Identify and create sounds

Compare properties of sound

Identify vibration as the source of sound

Benchmark

P EB Identify different characteristics of sound

Identify ways to create sound

Identify sources of sound

Benchmark

FI EB Recognize how sounds travel through different media

SI EB Compare properties of sound

P EB Identify ways to create sound

Benchmark

FI EB Recognize how sounds travel through different media

SI EB Identify vibration as the source of sound

P EB Identify sources of sound

Benchmark

Recognize how sounds travel through different media

Compare properties of sound

Identify vibration as the source of sound

Identify ways to create sound

Identify sources of sound

Extended Science Benchmarks Life Science

MCF v.2000

Benchmark

Compare andcontrast (K-2) orclassify (3-5) familiarorganisms on thebasis of observablephysicalcharacteristics

Compare and classifyorganisms into majorgroups on the basis oftheir structure.

Classify major groups oforganisms to thekingdom level.

Identify observable physical characteristics of plants and animals.

Classify organisms in major groups based on their structure.

Classify organisms in major groups based on their structure

SI EBDifferentiate between plants and animals.

Identify the characteristics or parts of selected plants and animals.

Identify the differences between characteristics or parts of plants and animals.

P EBIdentify plants and animals.

Identify plants and animals.

Additional components of the EBs:

• Key concepts

• Real-world contexts

• Taken from the general education Benchmarks when possible; added for each population as appropriate

Key Concepts/Real-World Contexts

• Participation EB (Physical Science):

“Identify attributes/properties of common objects.”

Key Concepts:

“Texture-rough, smooth. Smell-pleasant, unpleasant. Size-larger, smaller. Color-common color words. Shape-circle, square, triangle. Weight-heavy light.”

Key Concepts/Real-World Contexts

• Participation EB (Physical Science):

“Identify attributes/properties of common objects.”

Real-world contexts:

“Leisure activities, clothing choice, personal hygiene, carrying objects, environmental signs, animals.”

APWT Process

Item types and formats

• Multiple ChoiceFI: 3 choices-text and/or graphicsSI: 3 choices-graphics P: 2 choices-graphics

• Observation/ActivityParticipation only

APWT Process

All items• aligned to extended

benchmarks• related to key concepts• related to real-world contexts• coded to adult life contexts

Sample FI Item

Which object is attracted by a magnet?

A plastic rulerB steel needle C rubber ball

MI-Access FI Science Assessment Blueprint(Number of Core Items per Standard)

Strand Standard Elementary Middle High

Constructing New and Reflecting on Scientific Knowledge

C CN 2 2 2

R RO 2 2 2

Subtotal 4 4 4

Using Life Science Knowledge

L CE 0 1 2

L OR 7 7 8

L HE 2 0 0

L EV 1 2 0

L EC 3 4 4

Subtotal 13 14 14

MI-Access FI Science Assessment Blueprint(Number of Core Items per Standard)

Using Physical Science Knowledge

P ME 3 7 7

P CM 4 3 3

P MO 2 3 2

P WV 3 1 3

Subtotal 12 14 15

E GE 2 2 5

E HY 2 2 3

E AW 2 2 3

E SS 0 2 1

Subtotal 6 8 12

TOTAL 35 40 45

Sample SI Item - MC

Which animal is a reptile?A

turtle

Picture Cards

The assessment administrator will be provided with an 8½ X 11 picture of a frog, a mouse, and a turtle.

MI-Access SI Science Assessment Blueprint(Number of Core Items per Standard)

C CN 1 1 1

R RO 1 1 1

Subtotal 2 2 2

L CE 1 1 1

L OR 5 5 5

L HE 0 0 0

L EV 0 0 0

L EC 1 1 1

Subtotal 7 7 7

MI-Access SI Science Assessment Blueprint(Number of Core Items per Standard)

P ME 1 1 1

P CM 0 0 0

P MO 1 1 1

P WV 1 1 1

Subtotal 3 3 3

E GE 1 1 1

E HY 2 2 2

E AW 1 1 1

E SS 1 1 1

Subtotal 5 5 5

TOTAL 17 17 17

Scoring Rubric - SI

Score Point Definition

2Responds correctly with no assessment administrator assistance

1Responds correctly after assessment administrator provides verbal/physical cues

Condition Codes - All condition codes result in no points.A Incorrect responseB Resists/refusesC Assessment administrator provides hand-over-hand assistance and/or

step-by-step directions

Scoring Rubric – Assessment Administrators

• Must have two observers

–Primary Assessment Administrator

–Shadow Assessment Administrator

Sample Participation Item

Which animal lives in water?

Picture Cards

The assessment administrator will be provided with an 8½ X 11 pictures of a frog and a mouse.

Sample Participation Item

Activity: The student will correctly identify body parts during a familiar dressing routine and when given directions (e.g., “Show me where mittens are worn”, or “Tell me on which part of the body do the mittens go”).

Scoring Focus: Identifying body parts

MI-Access P Science Assessment Blueprint(Number of Core Items per Standard)

C CN 1 1 1

R RO 1 1 1

Subtotal 2 2 2

L CE 1 1 1

L OR 4 4 4

L HE 0 0 0

L EV 0 0 0

L EC 0 0 0

Subtotal 5 5 5

MI-Access P Science Assessment Blueprint(Number of Core Items per Standard)

P ME 1 1 1

P CM 0 0 0

P MO 2 2 2

P WV 2 2 2

Subtotal 5 5 5

E GE 1 1 1

E HY 1 1 1

E AW 1 1 1

E SS 0 0 0

Subtotal 3 3 3

TOTAL 15 15 15

Scoring Rubric - Participation

Score Point Definition

3 Responds correctly with no assessment administrator assistance

2Responds correctly after assessment administrator providesverbal/physical cues

1Responds correctly after assessment administrator provides modeling, short of hand-over-hand assistance

Condition Codes - All condition codes result in no points.A Incorrect responseB Resists/refusesC Assessment administrator provides hand-over-hand assistance and/or step-by-step

directions

Instructional Relevance• Standards-Based IEPs

– PLAFP for AA-AAS (all 3 present levels of MI-Access)

• IDEA 2004 Regulations – PLAFP

• §300.320 (2)(ii) For children with disabilities who take alternate assessments aligned to alternate achievement standards, a description of benchmarks or short-term objectives;

Instructional Relevance

Benchmarks (grades 3-8)

– MEAP

High School Benchmarks

– Michigan components of the MME

– Possible secondary credit exams

– Michigan Merit Curriculum framework

•HSCEs available for each course

•www.michigan.gov/osi

Instructional Relevance

– MI-Access

– EBs (grades 3-8 and 11)

•Functional Independence, Supported Independence, Participation

•English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science

– Student access to general curriculum

•Alignment

•IEP Goals –Standards-based

•Assessment - Classroom and Statewide

“Mining” the EBs

• Begin by discussing the fundamental meaning and content of the EB statement.

• Underline important key concepts.

• Think about the meaning of each concept—underlying knowledge/skills, concrete examples—and why it’s important.

Questions

• Do our students receive instruction on this concept?

• Where, when, and how?

– Performance Context

• If we don’t teach this now, how could we in the future?

Questions

• What types of IEP goals could we write to measure these concepts?

• Are our instructional materials covering these concepts adequately?

• What materials exist to help us figure this stuff out?

Using the EBs to Prepare for MI-Access

Questions• How many EBs from each

strand/standard will be assessed?• What will the items assessing

these concepts look like? • How will the items based on these

concepts be scored and reported?

“Mining” and Preparation Tools

• EB Documents

• Online Learning Program

• Blueprints from Assessment Plans

• Released Item Booklets

• Reports

• www.michigan.gov/mi-access

Additional Resources• MI-Access information and materials.

– www.michigan.gov/mi-access

– www.mi-access.info

• The Assist

• Administration manuals

• Surveys

• Accommodation Summary Tables

• MI-Access Committee Nomination Form

• OEAA Listserv

• dutcherp@michigan.gov

• deanv@michigan.gov

Future of the Extended Benchmarks

New Science GLCEs• Statewide field review May 14-June

29, 2007• National review July/August 2007• Final document presented to State

Board of Education for approval at November or December 2007 meeting.

• Posted final EBs will be used for the next three years

• Science APWT will be reconvened to begin extension process of new Science GLCEs

• Field reviewed, then will become basis of MI-Access

• Complete APWT process will be applied to the new GLCEs–General & Special education teacher

involvement

• Office of School Improvement science consultant will assist

MI-Access Science: The State of the Extended Benchmarks

Documents

MI-Access Science: The State of the Extended Benchmarks Vincent J. Dean, PhD Assessment Consultant for Students with Disabilities Session 52 OEAA Conference

Energy benchmarks

Gurobi 8.0 Performance Benchmarks · MILP Competitive Benchmarks ... MATLAB Benchmarks. Benchmarks –Open Source MIP and MATLAB} Gurobi, SCIP, CBC and MATLAB data from current MIPLIB

Mac Benchmarks

The DaCapo Benchmarks: Java Benchmarking Development and ...mckinley/papers/dacapo-TR-CS-06-01.pdf · The DaCapo Benchmarks: Java Benchmarking Development and Analysis (Extended Version)∗

QUANTITATIVE WASTE PREVENTION BENCHMARKS · QUANTITATIVE WASTE PREVENTION BENCHMARKS European Legal Concept of Prevention and Benchmarks ACR+ Proposals about Quantitative Benchmarks

Financial Benchmarks

Benchmarks 2015

Measurement Benchmarks

EN1993 Benchmarks

Benchmarks Isa

2005 - Benchmarks

Benchmarks Powerpoint

Edge Benchmarks

Tax Benchmarks and Variations Statement · Web viewTax Benchmarks and Variations Statement Tax Benchmarks and Variations Statement Tax Benchmarks and Variations Statement Tax Benchmarks

Marketing benchmarks

ON24 Webinar Benchmarks Report - MemberClicks · ON24 BENCHMARKS REPORT ON24 Webinar Benchmarks Report 2015 EDITION ON24 BENCHMARKS REPORT. ON24 B | 2015 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ON24

Extended Science Benchmarks Comparison · STRAND 3: USING LIFE SCIENCE KNOWLEDGE Background Information: The science benchmarks in this document are taken from the Michigan Curriculum

CPU Benchmarks

CHANNEL BENCHMARKS