Designing from the Ground Floor: Alternate Assessment on Alternate Achievement Standards
Step 5 requires us to understand the level of cognitive demand or depth of knowledge required in and assessment activity or item. We will use a group activity to help the group understand the concept of levels of cognitive demand. We will use Webb's model of cognitive demand for this activity and module. Your state may have their own model or another model they wish to use.
Step 5 Activity
First, divide your group into smaller groups of 6-8 people. You should keep a variety of content specialists, regular educators, and special educators in each group. All are needed in each group.
The activity requires the team to identify at least one sample assessment activity at each level of cognitive demand and record them on chart paper to be posted and shared. Obviously, more activities can be identified at each cognitive demand level. For example: In the 10 th grade mathematics activity, a Level 0 activity would be to identify two dimensional geometric shapes, while a Level 1 activity might have the student simply choose the correct polyhedron shape. We want to think about approaching the standard with less to more complex assessment activities. Teams may find that for some standards, higher levels of cognitive demand that can be assessed are difficult to determine. Trainers can utilize the activity in slides 47 and 48 to practice identifying activities at each level of cognitive demand.
After completion of the activity, slide number 50 will demonstrate the level of cognitive demand for the sample worksheet.
Step 6: Prioritize, summarize, and chart the content using prioritization questions
Prioritize content (Check all that apply) |
___ Standard/indicator is assessed at this grade level.
___ Standard/indicator is observable and measurable.
___ Standard/indicator can be represented, expressed, and engaged through multiple modalities.
___ Standard/indicator is required for future learning environments.
___ Standard/indicator is required for participation in avariety of practice communities.
|
|
Step 6: Prioritize, summarize, and chart the content using prioritization questions
Content Summary Chart
Content Area:_________________
Grade-level:__________________
| Standard and related skills/concept |
Observable/ Measurable Yes/No |
Represent / Express/ Engage in Multiple Modalities Yes/No |
Highest Level of Cognitive Demand Rate 1-4 |
Needed in current or next learning environment Yes/No |
Needed now or in the future in a community of practice Yes/No |
| 1) |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2) |
|
|
|
|
|
| 3) |
|
|
|
|
|
| 4) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Summarize |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Step 6: Prioritize, summarize, and chart the content using prioritization questions
Content Summary Chart
|
| Level 1 |
Level2 |
Level3 |
Level4 |
Summary |
| Phonemic Awareness |
|
|
|
|
|
| General Comprehension |
|
|
|
|
|
| Informational Text |
|
|
|
|
|
| Literary Test |
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Step 6 uses a series of checks to help us prioritize the inclusion of the grade-content standard in the alternate assessment. The team checks all that apply to the grade level standard on the worksheet.
The first check, "Standard/indicator is assessed at this grade-level" is designed to assist teams in eliminating standards that may be needed by individual students but are not assessed in the general curriculum at the specified grade-level. This standard if not taught at this grade-level but is needed by the student can be included on the students Individualized Education Program (IEP). Eliminating standards that are assessed at a lower grade level may help reduce the observation demand placed on the teacher to assess a range of standards at a particular grade-level.
The second check, "Standard/indicator can be observable and can be measurable" allows the team to decide if the standard and its accompanying indicators can be assessed for this population of students.
The third check, "Standard/indicator can be represented, expressed and engaged through multiple modalities" asks the team to consider whether or not the standard could be used by a population of students who may need alternative means to understand the assessment item, respond to the assessment item, or engage the item without compromising the intent of the standard.
The fourth check asks the team to identify the highest level of cognitive demand that they were able to identify for the standard and its skills/concepts.
The fifth check asks the team to identify whether or not this standard and its skills/concepts are needed to continue learning in this content area.
The sixth check requires the team to consider whether or not the standard and its skills/concepts would be used either now or in future communities of practice (e.g., work, recreation, other academic endeavors).
Step 7: Evaluate the
Content Linking Chart
- To complete the last step of this process in developing the content linking chart (step 7), there are several questions that must be answered on the following slide. However, you cannot complete this process until reviewing the final part of this module (Part VII: Measurement Perspectives for "Alignment) to clarify specific terms within the questions.
|
Step 7: Evaluate the
Content Linking Chart
- Do you have categorical concurrence?
- Do you have a range of knowledge?
- Do you have a balance of representation?
- Do you have a reasonable range of cognitive demand?
- Is the observation demand reasonable?
- Is there a reasonable progression across grades?
|
Step 7 requires the team to summarize the results of the prioritization questions from the content linking chart for each of the standards that were evaluated at that grade-level. In order to complete this last step in the process, several questions which appear on slide 55 must be answered. However, this section cannot be completed until reviewing part VII of this training module as this new vocabulary is defined within the final module. Therefore, as we are nearing the conclusion of part VI, remember we will have to learn new terminology from part VII to complete the final step of evaluating the content linking chart.
When your group of stakeholders decides to complete this step of the process (step 7), they must consider the questions within slide 55.
REMEMBER…
Your content linking chart and
supporting document(s):
- Must be linked to grade-level content standards.
- Promote access to the general curriculum.
- Reflect professional judgment of the highest learning standards possible.
- Grade-level content may be reduced in complexity
- Should be defined in a way that supports individual growth because of their linkage to different content across grades.
|
Your content linking document should be linked to grade-level content standards, promote access to the general curriculum, reflect professional judgment of the highest learning standards possible, may contain grade-level content reduced in complexity, and should be defined in a way that supports individual growth because of their linkage to different content across grades.
Final Checkpoint
Checkpoint
- Do we clearly understand assessment terminology (e.g. Can we differentiate between content and achievement standards)?
- Did we find ways to link instruction to grade-level content standards?
- Did the principles of UDL help us find ways to make the content accessible for all students?
- Were we able to find a range of cognitive demand?
- Did the content prioritization questions help us think about the most important content?
|
Notes
 Previous | Next 
|
Information About PDF