E D UC AT O RS ’ D I RE C TI ON S F OR A DM IN IS T RA TI O N
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Overview of the Educators’ Guide ................................................................................................. 4
Structure of the guide .................................................................................................................. 4
Intention of the Guide ................................................................................................................. 4
Introduction & Overview ................................................................................................................ 5
Background on Alternate Assessment ........................................................................................ 5
Participation ................................................................................................................................ 5
Assessment Design ......................................................................................................................... 7
Design Overview ........................................................................................................................ 7
Development Efforts ................................................................................................................... 7
Content Assessed ........................................................................................................................ 8
WA-AIM Terminology ............................................................................................................... 9
Scope of the WA-AIM Alternate Assessment .......................................................................... 10
Assessment Delivery..................................................................................................................... 11
Engrade online platform ........................................................................................................... 11
Support Using Engrade ............................................................................................................. 11
Access Point Frameworks ............................................................................................................. 12
Performance Task Requirements .................................................................................................. 14
Steps for Administering the WA-Access to Instruction & Measurement..................................... 16
Overview ................................................................................................................................... 16
Preparing to Administer the WA-AIM ......................................................................................... 17
Step One: Confirm Students to be Assessed ............................................................................. 17
Step Two: Familarize Yourself with the Engrade Online Assessment Platform ...................... 18
Step three: Review the Access Point Frameworks ................................................................... 19
Step Four: Review the Performance Task Documents for Each Content Area ........................ 20
Administering the WA-AIM ......................................................................................................... 22
Step Five: Determine the appropriate access Point level for each standard ............................. 22
Step Six: Review the Performance Task for the Selected Access Point ................................... 23
Step Seven: Administer Baseline Performance Task................................................................ 25
8.
Observer Attestation ................................................................................................... 29
9.
Seventy-Five Percent Rule ......................................................................................... 29
Step Eight: Provide Instruction ................................................................................................. 30
Step Nine: Administer Final Performance Task ....................................................................... 31
Submitting the WA-AIM for Scoring ....................................................................................... 33
Scoring and Reporting .................................................................................................................. 34
Scoring ...................................................................................................................................... 34
Reporting................................................................................................................................... 34
Appendix A ................................................................................................................................... 35
IEP Team Decision Making Guidelines Regarding Student Participation in Statewide
Assessments .............................................................................................................................. 35
Appendix B ................................................................................................................................... 39
Engagement Rubric: Criteria for use ........................................................................................ 39
Engagement Rubric ................................................................................................................... 40
Appendix C ................................................................................................................................... 41
Observer Role and REsponsibilities ......................................................................................... 41
Appendix D ................................................................................................................................... 42
WA-AIM Access Point Framework & Performance Task Development Committees ............ 42
Appendix C ................................................................................................................................... 43
Ways of Communicating Matrix .............................................................................................. 43
OSPI Contacts & Support ............................................................................................................. 44
WA-AIM Information & Support ............................................................................................. 44
OSPI Division of Assessment and Student Information ........................................................... 44
3
OVERVIEW OF THE EDUCATORS’ GUIDE
STRUCTURE OF THE GUIDE
The Educators’ Guide to Administering the WA-Access to Instruction & Measurement (WAAIM) alternate assessment begins with a background on alternate assessments and the ways
students with significant cognitive challenges participate in state assessment programs. The
Educator’s Guide then moves to provide detailed descriptions of the two main components of the
assessment, the Access Point Frameworks and the performance task requirements and is then
followed by step-by-step directions for administration. The Educators’ Guide touches on the
online assessment platform (Engrade) that will be used to administer, deliver, and submit the
WA-AIM lays out resources for educators administering the assessment. Appendices provide
supporting materials, additional details, and supplementary resources. The engagement rubric
for students with the most significant cognitive challenges (students who fit the criteria of being
at or near the awareness level) as well as the directions for implementing the engagement rubric
are also in the appendices.
INTENTION OF THE GUIDE
The intention of the Educator’s Guide is to provide a working document that encompasses all
aspects of the WA-Access to Instruction & Measurement (WA-AIM) alternate assessment. The
Educators’ Guide will need to be supplemented with additional training and resources in order
for educators administering the WA-AIM assessment to be fully prepared to correctly administer
the assessment to yield valid results of their students’ knowledge and skills. The Educators’
Guide is intended to provide an overview of the steps for administration as well as further
information on the structure of the assessment and details on Engrade, the online assessment
delivery platform.
4
INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW
BACKGROUND ON ALTERNATE ASSESSMENT
The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) Amendments of 1997 and 2004, as well as the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) also known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB),
require that all students with disabilities, even those with the most significant cognitive
challenges, participate in state and district assessment programs.
In particular, NCLB legislation ensures, “…that all children have a fair, equal, and significant
opportunity to obtain a high- quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on
challenging State academic achievement standards and state academic assessments.” (2001)
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) dictates that states develop alternate
assessments that:
• Are aligned with the states’ academic content standards. (SECTION 602 (3) of IDEA
97)
•
•
•
•
•
Improve the results for students with disabilities through improved teaching and learning.
Raise expectations for students with disabilities.
Increase access to the general curriculum.
Provide parents information about their child’s achievement.
All students are to be assessed based on grade--‐level content standards. (2003)
These pieces of legislation have complemented each other in their insistence that alternate
assessments for students with significant cognitive challenges:
• Are academic in nature.
• Are aligned with the same challenging state standards as for all other students.
• Promote access to and demonstrate performance in the general education curriculum.
• Reflect professional judgment of the highest achievement standards possible.
• Provide meaningful access to their assigned grade-level content in the areas of reading,
writing, mathematics, and science.
PARTICIPATION
School districts are required to include all students in state assessments, including students with
the most significant cognitive challenges. States are charged with developing alternate
assessments aligned to alternate achievement standards so that students with significant cognitive
challenges may meaningfully participate in the academic assessment program.
For the purposes of assessing with the alternate assessment, students with “significant cognitive
challenges” are those who:
require intensive or extensive levels of direct support that is not of a temporary or
transient nature. Students with significant cognitive challenges also require specially
5
designed instruction to acquire, maintain or generalize skills in multiple settings in order
to successfully transfer skills to natural settings including the home, school,
workplace, and community. In addition, these students score at least two (2) standard
deviations below the mean on standardized, norm-referenced assessments for adaptive
behavior and intellectual functioning. (OSPI, 2010)
Figure 1: Guidelines for Participating in the Alternate Assessment Graphic. See Appendix A
for the complete document.
The alternate assessment is designed for a small percentage (1%) of the total school population
for whom traditional assessments, even with accommodations, are not an appropriate means to
measure student progress. Each student’s IEP team will determine the most appropriate
assessment. Guidance for IEP teams has been developed, Guidelines for Participating in the
Alternate Assessment: Guidance for IEP Teams and can be found in Appendix A as well as on
the OSPI website.
6
ASSESSMENT DESIGN
DESIGN OVERVIEW
The WA-Access to Instruction & Measurement (WA-AIM) is a Performance Task type
assessment aligned to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in English language arts and
mathematics and the Washington Essential Academic Learning Requirements (EALRs) in
science. At grades three through eight and eleven, one standard from each of the five
mathematics domains and one standard from five of the English language arts strands has been
developed into an Access Point Framework. One standard from five of the science EALRs has
also been developed into an Access Point Framework.
The Access Point Frameworks provide the backbone for the WA-Access to Instruction &
Measurement (WA-AIM). Access Point Frameworks with three levels of complexity were
developed to provide students a continuum of entry points along which to show their knowledge
and skills aligned to the Common Core State Standards and Washington Science EALRs.
Performance tasks will be used to assess the knowledge and skills called out in the Access Point
Frameworks. Performance task requirements and examples for administration are presented for
every Access Point.
The WA-Access to Instruction & Measurement is designed to be a baseline/final assessment with
a minimum of six weeks of instruction between the baseline and final administration. The WAAIM will be delivered and submitted for scoring via an online delivery platform.
DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS
The WA-Access to Instruction & Measurement was a joint development effort between the
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), Washington educators, and Measured
Progress test development experts. Washington educators participated in the development of
both the Access Point Frameworks as well as the Performance Task Requirements.
The Access Point Frameworks were developed first, articulating knowledge and skills aligned to
the Common Core State Standards and Essential Elements1. The Access Points went through
multiple iterations of review during their development including review by educator committees2
comprised of both expert general educators and special educators as well as LEA administrators
and OSPI staff. The review committees carefully considered issues of academic intent,
accessibility, and bias and sensitivity.
The work of the review committees guided test developers in the initial drafting of the
Performance Task requirements, which were then brought to educator committees. The
1
Dynamic Learning Maps Consortium (2013). Dynamic Learning Maps Essential Elements for Mathematics.
Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.
2
Please see Appendix B for a list of the participating educators.
7
committee edits and considerations were taken into the last phase of development and are
represented in the final assessment documents.
CONTENT ASSESSED
The WA-Access to Instruction & Measurement (WA-AIM) is the alternate assessment for grades
three-eight and eleven. The WA-AIM assesses mathematics, English language arts, and science.
Mathematics
• All grades
English language arts
• All grades
Science
• Fifth, Eighth, & high school
Figure 1: Content and Grades Assessed
In mathematics, one standard for each of the five domains of mathematics is assessed at each
grade.
THIRD GRADE MATH
Geometry
Measurement & Data
Numbers Operations Fractions
Operations and Algebraic Thinking
Numbers and Operations in Base Ten
Figure 2: Third grade math standards
In the Common Core State Standards, English language arts is encompassing of reading
(literature and informational), writing, and speaking & listening. In English language arts, one
standard for each strand is assessed at each grade.
THIRD GRADE ELA
Reading Literature: Key Ideas & Details
Reading Informational: Craft & Structure
Reading Foundational Skills: Phonics & Word Recognition
Writing: Text Types & Purposes
Speaking & Listening: Comprehension & Collaboration
Figure 3: Third grade English language arts standards
8
For each content area and at each grade, the standards to be assessed have been developed into
Access Point Frameworks. (The Access Point Frameworks are discussed in detail in the next
section.) At each grade level, there is one Access Point Framework for each of the five domains
in math and each of five strands in English language arts. There is one Access Point Framework
for five science Essential Academic Learning Requirements (EALRs) at grades five, eight and
eleven. Students are assessed on all five of the standards at each content area at each grade.
Educators will determine the appropriate complexity level of the standard, but the standards to be
assessed are predetermined. The map of standards selected for assessment are presented in
Appendix C of this document. Mathematics is presented first with each domain developed into
an Access Point Framework, and therefore assessed, indicated. The mathematics blueprints are
followed by English language arts. The science blueprints are presented last and only show
grades five, eight, and high school as those are the only assessed grades.
WA-AIM TERMINOLOGY
Figure 4: WA-AIM Terminology
9
SCOPE OF THE WA-AIM ALTERNATE ASSESSMENT
At each grade, all students are assessed on the same standards for mathematics, English language
arts, and science. The standards have been preselected; they are the standards that are developed
into access point frameworks. There is one standard from each of the five domains of math and
one standard for five strands of English language arts, which is inclusive of reading, writing, and
speaking and listening. In grades 5, 8, and 11, students are assessed on five science EALRs.
Students will be assessed with a performance task for each of the five math domains and with a
performance task for each of five English language arts strands that have been developed into
Access Point Frameworks at each grade.
Figure 5: Example home screen displaying a student’s assessment
Engrade is the online assessment system used to deliver the WA-AIM. Each student has a home
screen in Engrade that displays all of the standards in her/his assessment. Engrade is discussed
in detail in the following section.
10
ASSESSMENT DELIVERY
ENGRADE ONLINE PLATFORM
The WA-Access to Instruction &
Measurement (WA-AIM) will be
delivered and submitted electronically
using an online educational platform,
Engrade. Engrade has been custom
built for OSPI to deliver the WA-AIM
assessment. Educators will use
Engrade throughout the assessment
processes.
Each educator will have a unique account. District Assessment Coordinators are working with
building based administrators or coordinators who will then send teachers their logon credentials.
Districts and schools have already been pre-populated with students, so teachers will only need
to add her students to be assessed to her class. Throughout the assessment window, educators
can also add or delete students to the assessment platform as needed. Engrade will enable
educators to track not only the progress of a single student, but that of all of their students
simultaneously.
SUPPORT USING ENGRADE
Engrade has developed a Users’ Guide that will provide instructions for accessing the platform
and using Engrade to administer the WA-AIM assessment. Engrade will also be supported with
a helpdesk as well as an online module to familiarize educators with the system. These resources
are posted on the WA-AIM website under the “Administration Platform” tab.
Figure 6: Engrade Users’ Guide/Procedures Manual and
customer support information are posted to the WA-AIM
website.
11
ACCESS POINT FRAMEWORKS
The Access Point Frameworks are expended frameworks that provide students with significant
cognitive challenges multiple entry points to the grade level Common Core State Standards. The
Access Point Frameworks are built on three levels of complexity giving students the opportunity
to apply, understand, and identify key knowledge and skills aligned to the content standards.
The mathematics and English language arts Access Point Frameworks follow the same design:
the Common Core State Standard is presented on the left, with the associated Essential Element3
directly to the right. The Access Point Framework follows. The Access Points on each
framework move from More complex on the right (closer to the CCSS), to Intermediate
complexity, to Less complex. The layout of the Access Point Frameworks presents the spectrum
of instruction for students, working from the grade level standard on the left to the less complex
Access Point on the right.
Figure 7: Anatomy of an Access Point Framework graphic. This graphic appears in the front of all the Access Point
Framework documents.
3
Dynamic Learning Maps Consortium (2013). Dynamic Learning Maps Essential Elements for Mathematics.
Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.
Dynamic Learning Maps Consortium (2013). Dynamic Learning Maps Essential Elements for English language arts.
Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.
12
The Access Point Framework documents are organized by content area and then by grade. At
the start of each new grade, a map of the standards expanded into Access Point Frameworks is
presented.
Figure 8: Map of sixth grade mathematics Common Core State Standards developed into Access Point Frameworks
13
PERFORMANCE TASK REQUIREMENTS
Student performance on the skills and knowledge detailed in the Access Point Frameworks will
be measured through teacher administered performance tasks. Performance Tasks Requirements
and Examples have been developed for each Access Point within all of the frameworks at every
grade and for every content area.
Each Access Point in
the framework has
an associated
performance task
with specific
requirements.
The performance
task requirements
reflect the Access
Point’s level of
complexity and
provides examples
on how to measure
the knowledge and
skills called out in
the Access Point.
Figure 9: Relationship of Access Point Frameworks to performance tasks
All of the performance tasks are structured identically with sections for: requirements,
adaptations, examples and restrictions. The requirements section details what requirements are
necessary in order to accurately measure the Access Point. Standard Requirements include five
unique items for each performance task and any necessary features specific to the task (e.g.,
objects must have straight and curvy lines, text must be informational). The adaptations detail
ways in which the performance task may be adapted to meet the needs of different students.
Adaptations can include using manipulatives, a tablet, or pictorial representations. The
restrictions section details any materials or procedures that are restricted as they would violate
the construct being measured (i.e., yield an invalid measure). In mathematics, a restriction might
be that the teacher may not count for the student, in English language arts, a restriction might be
that a multiple-choice item may not be used.
14
CCSS Domain
& Strand
Access Point
Requirements
Adaptations
Restrictions
Figure 9: Performance Task with highlighted components
The first Performance tasks will be administered as a baseline that determines the appropriate
Access Point Level for assessment. The final Performance Task will be the same task
determined as appropriate at the baseline and will measure the student’s knowledge and skills in
each content area after instruction. There must be minimum of six weeks of instruction between
administering a baseline and administering the final performance tasks.
15
STEPS FOR ADMINISTERING THE
WA-ACCESS TO INSTRUCTION & MEASUREMENT
OVERVIEW
The steps for administering the WA-AIM alternate assessment are broken down into two
sections: preparing to administer the WA-AIM alternate assessment and administering the WAAIM alternate assessment.
PREPARING TO ADMINISTER THE WA-AIM
1. Confirm the students to be assessed
2. Familiarize yourself with the Engrade assessment platform
3. Review the Access Point Frameworks
4. Review the performance task requirements documents
ADMINISTERING THE WA-AIM
5. Determine the Access Point level for each standard
6. Review the performance task for the selected Access Point
7. Administer baseline performance task to determine correct A.P. level
8. Provide instruction
9. Administer final performance task
Preparing for the WA-AIM begins by familiarizing yourself with the assessment platform, the
Access Point Frameworks and the performance tasks. The Access Point Frameworks provide
instructional and planning guidance and the performance tasks provide a way to measure a
student’s knowledge and skills called out in the Access Point Frameworks. Administering the
assessment to the student is when you will use the performance tasks to measure a student’s
knowledge and skills and record that performance in Engrade, the online system.
16
PREPARING TO ADMINISTER THE WA-AIM
STEP ONE: CONFIRM STUDENTS TO BE ASSESSED
1. Confirm that the student is to be assessed with the WA-Access to Instruction &
Measurement has the alternate assessment documented in her/his IEP.
a. The student’s IEP team will determine if the student will be assessed with the
general assessment, Smarter Balanced, or the alternate assessment, the WAAccess to Instruction & Measurement. If the student is to be assessed with the
alternate assessment, WA-AIM, it should be documented in her/his IEP.
2. The participation criteria for the alternate assessment has not changed. IEP teams will
use the OSPI provided guidance (2010)4 to aid in the decision making process. The
participation criteria are in Appendix A as well as posted to the WA-AIM website under
the “Resources” tab.
4
The participation criteria has not changed. The IEP Team Decision Making Guidelines have been updated to
reflect the CCSS assessment system as well as reorganized, but the criteria for participation remains the same as
previous years.
17
STEP TWO: FAMILARIZE YOURSELF WITH THE ENGRADE
ONLINE ASSESSMENT PLATFORM
Engrade is the online assessment platform educators will use to
administer the WA-Access to Instruction & Measurement. A link
to the Engrade portal is posted to the WA-AIM webpage as well
as the Engrade Users’ guide, a training module for using the Engrade system and the Engrade
support desk contact information.
1. Each educator will have a unique account.
a. District Assessment Coordinators work with building based administrators who
send teachers their logon credentials. Districts and schools have already been prepopulated with students, so teachers will only need to add the students to be
assessed to her class.
2. Review the Engrade Users’ Guide/Procedures Manual and/or view the Engrade Users’
online module.
3. There is a test account available for educators to familiarize themselves with the system
prior to operational administration. The link to the test site is on the WA-AIM
website/administration platform. The test account will remain live during the
administration window.
4. The Engrade system will be live for the operational administration at the beginning of
November, 2014.
Figure 9: Support for using the Engrade platform is provided by CTB via email or phone. This information
is located on the WA-AIM administration platform page.
18
STEP THREE: REVIEW THE ACCESS POINT FRAMEWORKS
The next step is to review the Access Point Frameworks. The Frameworks are organized by
content area: Math, English Language Arts and science. The documents are posted to the WAAIM website. The Access Point Frameworks are designed as learning progressions and are
aligned to the Common Core State Standards and Essential Element. The framework documents
can be used for instructional and planning guidance.
1. The Access Point Frameworks are located on the OSPI WA-Access to Instruction &
Measurement website.
Figure 11: Location of Access Point Frameworks on OSPI WA-AIM webpages
2. The Access Point Frameworks are organized by content area and are inclusive of grades
three through eight and eleven.
3. Review the Access Point documents for each content area, paying close attention to the
grade at which each student is assessed. *Remember, the CCSS and Essential Elements,
and therefore the Access Points, are unique at each grade.
19
STEP FOUR: REVIEW THE PERFORMANCE TASK DOCUMENTS
FOR EACH CONTENT AREA
The performance tasks are organized by grade. Each grade consists of English language arts and
mathematics and at grades 5, 8, and eleven, science. The documents are organized in the same
fashion: the Access Points for each standard are presented followed by the associated
performance tasks. The performance tasks are arranged in the order of more complex,
intermediate complexity, and less complex. English language arts comes first, followed by math
and, where applicable, science.
Figure 12: Example of performance task document layout: sixth grade math: ratio and proportional relationships
Universal to all the performance tasks:

is the requirement for five unique items. On the Engrade performance screen there is a
place for five item responses. “Unique” means that a student is asked five different or
unique questions (i.e., the student cannot be asked the same question multiple times).

is the number of response options is determined by the complexity level. The more
complex (M) and intermediate (I) levels will have three answer options for each item in
a multiple choice question. The less complex (L) level will have two answer options
for each item in a multiple choice question.
20
1. Go to the WA-AIM webpage and select the performance task requirements document for
the student’s enrolled grade.
2. Read through the grade level document to familiarize yourself with the way the
performance tasks correspond with the Access Points at each level in the content areas.
21
ADMINISTERING THE WA-AIM
STEP FIVE: DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE ACCESS POINT
LEVEL FOR EACH STANDARD
For each standard assessed, educators will use professional judgment to determine the
appropriate level of Access Point, More (M), Intermediate (I), or Less (L) on which to assess the
student.
1. Consider the Access Point Framework for each standard separately.
2. Begin with the Intermediate Access Point.
a. What does the student know about the concept?
b. What skills associated with the Access Point can the student perform?
Start at the Intermediate level.
3. Use the Access Point documents in conjunction with the Performance Task documents to
determine the appropriately challenging level for the student to be assessed.
o The expectation is not that the student can demonstrate full mastery of the access point.
o If the student has mastered the knowledge and skills detailed in the Access Point then
then it is not complex enough and the student should move up a level.
o A student may be performing at different Access Point levels on different standards
within a content area.
22
STEP SIX: REVIEW THE PERFORMANCE TASK FOR THE
SELECTED ACCESS POINT
Every performance task has the same components: requirements, examples, adaptations and
restrictions and is structured identically. The provided examples must be used to frame out the
performance task. Educators will make adaptations to the example in order for the five items to
be accessible to each unique learner.
assessed
Access Point
Requirements
Examples
Adaptations
Restrictions
Figure 13: Diagram of a performance task: Sixth grade ratio and proportions
23
1. The vast majority of the performance tasks have at least two example set ups to choose
from.

The provided examples must be used to frame out the performance task.
2. Review the teacher directions.

There are sample directions to a student.

In parentheses there are directions to teacher.
3. Review the adaptations section.

What materials are needed to make the task accessible to the student?

How will the remaining four items follow the example?
4. Review the restrictions section.

Are there any restrictions to the performance task (e.g., do not count the numbers
for the student)?
24
STEP SEVEN: ADMINISTER BASELINE PERFORMANCE TASK
Engrade facilitates the administration and is the platform that will hold all student information.
When administering the performance tasks, it will be helpful to have the performance task
documents with the examples accessible as well as the Engrade system on which to enter the
data. Educators will work between the source documents and the Engrade system to administer
the assessment to each student.


The Performance Task documents directly
correlate with the Engrade performance
screen.
When the Access Point level is selected in
Engrade, the requirements and
restrictions are populated on the screen.
Figure 14: Relationship of Performance Task documents and Engrade performance screen
25
The vast majority of the performance tasks have two guiding examples for administering the
task. Both examples provide a valid measure of the Access Point; educators need to determine
which example will be the most appropriate for each student.
1. Determine which example to use.
Figure 15: Fifth Grade Math: Geometry (I): Performance Task Document and performance scoring screen in
Engrade
26
2. Review the Teacher Directions section. In example one from Fifth grade Geometry,
Intermediate level, the teacher is showing the student a shape and asking the student to
select from a field the shape with the same number of sides.
3. Decide the materials needed to make the task accessible to the student that will yield five
scorable items. This might include the text to be read, sentence starters, and/or
manipulatives.
4. Using the prompts in the teacher direction section, administer the first item to the student.
Figure 16: This setup shows the
Performance Task document for
5th grade Geometry: Intermediate
in relation to the performance
scoring screen in Engrade for this
task.
Teacher Directions are a
summary of the directions
used for the selected
example.
Item type: the student is
selecting the correct shape
from a field. These are multiple choice items. Therefore the item type is selected response.
27
Adaptations: The adaptations are notes on what used to complete a task (e.g., manipulatives, text,
etc.). In this example the adaptations listed are flash cards with shapes.
5.
Using the first item as a guide, administer the next four items.
a. In a selected response performance task, additional items are created by changing
either the stem of an item (the question) or by changing the answer options.
Changing the stem: using the same answer options as the first example (flash cards with
the shapes: parallelogram, hexagon and triangle) present the student with a new
question: Here is a picture of a right triangle; which of these shapes has the same
number of sides?
Changing the answer options: using the same stem/question (flash card with a picture of
a square), present the student with new answer options (flash cards with a picture of a
triangle, pentagon, and diamond. Here is a picture of a square; which of these shapes
has the same number of sides?
6. Each item is scored with a 0 or 1 value. If the student got the answer correct, a 1 is
entered. If the student did not make a correct response, a 0 is entered.
7. In the teacher notes section the teacher documents the student’s either correct or incorrect
response.
Figure 17: Detail: Engrade performance scoring screen: example task: Fifth grade math,
Geometry (I)
28
8. OBSERVER ATTESTATION: The Observer Attestation is designed to strengthen the
procedural validity of the assessment and is integral to administration of each
performance task. (See Appendix C)
An educational professional (administrator, paraprofessional, educator, or service
provider) who is not the test administrator must observe the student performing the task
and verify that the student independently generated the answers documented in the
performance scoring section. The observer will enter her/his name and role on the
performance scoring screen for each performance task.
Figure 18: Observer attestation section of Engrade performance scoring screen
a. The observer may record the data in Engrade as the student is being assessed to be
confirmed by the educator. Alternately the observer may review the data the
teacher administering the assessment entered prior to entering her/his name and
attesting to the student’s performance on each assessed task.
9. SEVENTY-FIVE PERCENT RULE: At the baseline, if the student is scores above
75% on an individual performance task (4/5 or 5/5 items correctly), then the student
needs to be assessed at a higher Access Point.
a. If a student has already mastered a skill, then s/he needs to be moved to the next
Access Point level. The baseline performance task serves to place the student at
the most appropriate level for the assessment. If a student does not have any
knowledge or associated skills for the access point, that is absolutely fine. The
educator will make a professional judgment of the most appropriate place to begin
the assessment at the baseline based on knowledge of student performance.
29
STEP EIGHT: PROVIDE INSTRUCTION
The WA-AIM is designed to work with the knowledge and skills being taught during the course
of the year. Examine existing unit and lesson plans to determine at which points throughout the
year the various standards and Access Points can be addressed in your current mathematics,
English language arts, and science lessons.
1. There must be a minimum of six weeks of instruction between the administration of the
baseline and final performance task.
2. Standards may be administered on an individual basis if it is most appropriate based on
instructional practice. E.g., if lessons or IEP progress reporting fall at a particular time
during the assessment window, it would be completely appropriate to align administering
performance tasks with these events to use the data for multiple, meaningful purposes.
3. The assessment window runs November 1st, 2014 through April 10th, 2015.
30
STEP NINE: ADMINISTER FINAL PERFORMANCE TASK
The student is assessed at the same Access Point level with the same performance task
requirements from the baseline at the final assessment. “Items must be unique” means that you
will not ask the student the exact same question each time within a performance task. You may
use the same questions at both the baseline and final. Alternately, you might use one of the other
examples for the performance task or change the question. In English language arts, you might
change the text with the same set of questions. The individual items on baseline and final
performance tasks are not compared with one another, just the items within each task (i.e., there
must be five unique items within the baseline and within the final).
.
You will notice that the setup of
the performance scoring
screen is identical.
The Access Point Level is
identical, so are the
requirements.
The item type is identical,
although it does not have to be.
Figure 19: This visual is of a baseline and final performance task for a demonstration student.
31
Once a student’s assessment data has been entered into the performance scoring screen and the
data saved, you will be returned to the student’s home assessment screen. You will be able to
see an overview of the student’s entire assessment. For each completed performance task, a
green check mark appears, thereby indicating that the student has completed the assessment.
d
Figure 20: Engrade home screen showing standard with green checkmarks indicating that both the baseline and final
assessments have been completed
32
SUBMITTING THE WA-AIM FOR SCORING
The student’s home assessment screen shows a green checkmark for each completed
performance task. Once a student’s assessment is complete, and there is a green checkmark at
both the baseline and final measure for each standard, the assessment activities are over. There
is no further action required of the teacher.
Figure 21: Engrade home screen showing completed assessment. Each standard has a green checkmark at both
baseline and final indicating that the assessment is complete.
After the assessment window closes on April 10th, 2015, the assessments will be automatically
locked and uploaded via the Engrade platform for scoring.
33
SCORING AND REPORTING
SCORING
During the administration of the WA-Access to Instruction & Measurement (WA-AIM)
educators determine the most appropriately challenging Access Point and administer the
associated Performance Task. There are five items at the baseline and five items at the final
assessment. Educators score each item is scored with a 0/1 value based on a student’s response.
The scores on the items for each of the final performance tasks are the ones that will be used to
calculate proficiency. For each content area, a student will have five standards, each with five
scorable items, for a total of 25 problems.
The assessment window closes on April 10th, 2015 at which time the WA-AIM assessments will
be submitted via Engrade to be scored and the data captured for reporting. The Office of
Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) works with professional scorers and uses rigorous
methods to ensure that the scoring process yields valid and reliable results.
The process of determining what constitutes a passing scoring for the purposes of federal and
state accountability is called, “standard setting.” The standard setting process for the WA-AIM
will take place during July of 2015. The standard setting panels will consist of both special
educators and general educators, school psychologists, and community members representing
educational communities across the state of Washington. The standard setting panels will review
the assessment data and work with standard setting experts to make judgments as to where to set
the cut scores to determine proficiency. The standard setting panels’ recommendations will be
brought to the State Board for approval in August.
REPORTING
In the beginning of September, districts and schools will receive score reports detailing student
performance on the 2014-2015 WA-Access to Instruction & Measurement (WA-AIM). Copies
of Individual Student Reports (ISRs) will be provided to schools to send home to families that
explain student scores on the assessment.
34
APPENDIX A
IEP TEAM DECISION MAKING GUIDELINES REGARDING STUDENT
PARTICIPATION IN STATEWIDE ASSESSMENTS
The Individualized Education Program (IEP) team makes many important decisions
regarding the program and services available for students eligible for special education and
related services. One of those important decisions involves a determination of how a
student will participate in (1) the general student assessment system in grades 3-8 plus
once in high school, with or without allowable accommodations, or (2) if the student will
participate in the Alternate Assessment. Essential to an appropriate decision by the IEP
team regarding a student’s participation at any level of the statewide assessment system is
a fundamental belief in the integrity of the overall IEP process.
IEP teams should begin this decision-making process with the proposition that all students,
including all students eligible for special education, can learn grade level content and should
participate in the general assessment system to the maximum extent possible. However, there
are times in which the IEP team can decide that the alternate assessment is necessary and
appropriate for a relatively small segment (approximately 1%) of the total tested population, or
roughly 10% of the total number of special education eligible students being tested.
For example, if the total tested population in a school district is 4,000, then 40 students would
represent 1% of the total tested population. Similarly, if 400 students eligible for special
education were tested in the same school district, then 40 would represent 10% of the students
eligible for special education that were tested.
General Criteria
The decision about how an eligible student participates in the statewide assessment is an IEP
team decision, and not an administrative decision. The IEP team should use the following
criteria for determining the extent to which a student can participate in the general
assessment, with or without accommodations, or if the student should participate in the
alternate assessment system (WAC 392172A-03090 through 03110).
1) The student must be eligible for special education and must have an individualized
education program (IEP) in effect at the time of the decision.
35
2) IEP team decisions regarding a student’s participation in the statewide assessment must
be based on both current and historical evaluation and instructional data relevant to the
student.
3) IEP team decisions should be based on the student’s present levels of educational
performance, need for specially designed instruction, annual goals, learner
characteristics and access to the general education curriculum.
4) IEP Team decisions regarding a student’s participation in statewide assessments must be
made at a scheduled IEP team meeting that precedes administration of the statewide
assessment.
Alternate Assessment
The alternate assessment is a statewide testing option in lieu of the regular assessment. It is an
option only for students with significant cognitive challenges. The term “significantly
cognitively challenged” does not represent a new or separate category of disability. It is a
designation applied to a small number of students (generally 10% or less) eligible for special
education and related services participating in the statewide testing program.
For purposes students who are significantly cognitively challenged means those students who
require intensive or extensive levels of direct support that is not of a temporary or transient
nature. Students with significant cognitive challenges also require specially designed
instruction to acquire, maintain or generalize skills in multiple settings in order to successfully
transfer skills to natural settings including the home, school, workplace, and community. In
addition, these students score at least two (2) standard deviations below the mean on
standardized, norm-referenced assessments for adaptive behavior and intellectual functioning.
For a student to be considered as having a significant cognitive challenge and therefore,
appropriate for consideration as a candidate for the alternate assessment, ALL of the following
statements should be carefully considered by the student’s IEP team:
 The student’s demonstrated cognitive functioning and adaptive behavior in school, work,
home and community environments are significantly below chronological age
expectations, even with program modifications, adaptations and accommodations.
36
 The student requires extensive direct instruction and/or extensive supports in multiple
settings to acquire, maintain and generalize academic and functional skills necessary for
application in school, work, home and community environments.
 The student demonstrates complex cognitive disabilities and poor adaptive skill levels
determined to be significantly (at least two standard deviations) below chronological age
expectations by the student’s most recent individualized eligibility determination which
prevents the student from meaningful participation in the standard academic core
curriculum or achievement of the appropriate grade level expectations.
 The student’s inability to complete the standard academic curriculum at grade level is not
primarily the result of: (a) poor attendance, excessive or extended absences, (b) lack of
access to quality instruction, (c) social, cultural, linguistic, or economic differences, (d)
below average reading or achievement levels, € expectations of poor performance, (f) the
anticipated impact of the student’s performance on the school/district performance scores,
and (g) the student’s disability category, educational placement, type of instruction, and/or
amount of time receiving special education services.
When an IEP team determines that the student should take an alternate assessment, the team
must document why the student cannot participate in the regular assessment, and why the
alternate assessment is appropriate for the student. Please note that an IEP team could
document and justify that the alternate assessment could be an appropriate statewide
assessment for an individual not necessarily meeting all of parameters of the state definition of
significantly cognitively challenged on a case by case basis.
37
38
APPENDIX B
ENGAGEMENT RUBRIC: CRITERIA FOR USE
For a student’s whose level of cognitive development would be considered awareness and is
unable to participate even minimally in the performance tasks at the lower complexity level for
any standard within a content area, the IEP team may consider using an Engagement rubric to
measure a student’s engagement and attention to academic activities and provide information to
schools and families on the student’s progress in pre-academic activities.
For a student who meets the below criteria, the IEP team may decide that in lieu of participating
in the performance task aspect of the alternate assessment, a student’s engagement with the
mathematical, literacy, or science activities taking place in the classroom may be measured and
reported on. Because using the Engagement rubric replaces the performance task assessment, a
student will be placed in performance level one.
The student must meet some or all of the criteria below for the IEP team to consider using the
Engagement rubric for a content area of the alternate assessment:
 The student communicates primarily through cries, facial expressions, change in muscle
tone but no clear use of objects/textures, regularized gestures, picture signs, etc.
 The student alerts to sensory input from another person (auditory, visual, touch,
movement, etc.) but requires actual physical assistance to follow simple directions; or the
student’s response to sensory stimuli (e.g., sound/voice; sight/gesture; touch; movement;
smell) is unclear.
 Parents and teachers must interpret child’s state from behaviors such as sounds, body
movements, and facial expressions.
If after thorough review of the alternate assessment at the student’s enrolled grade, the
Engagement rubric, and the above criteria, the IEP team decides that measuring a student’s
engagement and attention to academic activities is most appropriate, the following steps must be
taken:
1) Obtain signatures from: classroom teacher administering the assessment, building based
administrator, and special education director.
2) Contact OSPI office of alternate assessment: [email protected]: subject line: WA-AIM
Engagement Rubric and request the rubric and supporting directions.
3) Scan or fax the signature page to OSPI’s assessment office: 360.725.0424
4) Directions for administration, scoring, and submission will be sent via email for use
during the assessment window.
39
ENGAGEMENT RUBRIC
40
APPENDIX C
OBSERVER ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The administration of every performance task must be accompanied by an attestation of an
outside observer. The role of the observer is to observe the teacher administering the
performance task to a student being assessed with the WA-AIM.
Who can be an observer?

The observe must be an educational professional who is not the teacher administering the
test.

The observer must be an employee of the district and can be another teacher,
paraprofessional, related service provider (e.g., speech language pathologist), or
administrator (e.g., principal or special education director).
What is the role and the duties of the observer?

The observer must be familiar with the performance task the student is being assessed
with.

The observer watches a teacher administer a performance task to the student being
assessed.

The observer then reviews the performance data entered into the Engrade online system
to ensure the accuracy of the documentation of student responses.

If the observer believes the data on the performance screen accurately captures the
student’s performance, then the observer will enter her/his name and indicate her/his
role, thereby attesting that the assessment data presented is accurate.
Attestation:
41
APPENDIX D
WA-AIM ACCESS POINT FRAMEWORK & PERFORMANCE
TASK DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEES
Jodell Allinger, Ed.D……………….
Diane Berry, M.A. …………………
Glenda Blankenship, M.A., NBCT...
Lori Carossino……………………...
Tanya Cochran, M.A……………….
Dawn Cope, M.Ed …………………
Cathy Corrado, M.A………………..
Mary Crosby, NBCT……………….
Rick Culbertson, M.A. …………….
Lucy EveryHope, M.A. ……………
Rebecca Fry, M.A., NBCT…………
Ann Gateley, M.Ed. ……………….
Lynn Gill, M.Ed. …………..………
Lynne Glasspool, M.Ed. …..……….
Paula Green, M.A. NBCT………….
Stacey Gruenich, M.Ed., NBCT……
Shellie Harris, M.A. ……………….
Shari Hartwig, M.A. ……………….
Katy Henry, M.A. ………………….
David L. Hoph, M.A. ……………...
Julie Knoedler, M.Ed. ……………..
Theodore (Ted) Mack, NBCT ……..
Yolanda G. McClanahan …………..
Rena Mincks, Ph.D., NBCT ……….
Courtney Myers, M.A. …………….
Chris Neese-Blackman, Ed.D. …….
Sarah Nickel, M.A., NBCT ………..
Colt Nickel, M.A. ………………….
Alisha Nimmo ……………………..
Emma Noble, M.Ed. ……………….
Kim Perisho, M.A.T., NBCT ……...
Cheryl Picolet, M.A. ………………
Karl Reddy, M.A. ………………….
Sapna Sethi, M.A. …………………
Susan Smith, NBCT ……………….
Debra Strawhun, CCC-SLP, NBCT..
Amy Vaughn, M.A. ………………..
Jennifer Veliz, M.A. ……………….
Megan Walker, M.A. ………………
Jane Wilson, M.Ed. ………………
Longview School District
Wapato School District
Federal Way Public Schools
Elma School District
Goldendale School District
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
Center for Childhood Deafness and Hearing Loss
Everett School District
Anacortes School District
Lynden School District
Bellevue School District
Seattle Public Schools
Bethel School District
Lake Chelan School District
Sunnyside School District
Kent School District
Seattle Public Schools
Mead School District
Spokane School District
Toledo School District
Evergreen-Clark School District
Moses Lake School District
Evergreen School District
Pullman School District
Evergreen Public Schools
Walla Wall School District
Pasco School District
Pasco School District
Camas School District
Spokane School District
Mukilteo School District
Bellingham School District
Washington School for the Deaf
Tacoma School District
Ferndale School District
Bremerton School District
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
Chief Leschi Schools
Federal Way Public Schools
Vancouver School District
42
APPENDIX C
WAYS OF COMMUNICATING MATRIX
Ways of Communicating Matrix from Washington Sensory Disabilities Services:
http://www.wsdonline.org
43
OSPI CONTACTS & SUPPORT
WA-AIM INFORMATION & SUPPORT
OSPI WA-Access to Instruction & Measurement website:
http://k12.wa.us/assessment/WA-AIM/default.aspx
For questions regarding administration of the WA-AIM: [email protected]
For support using Engrade: [email protected]
OSPI DIVISION OF ASSESSMENT AND
STUDENT INFORMATION
Robin Munson, Ph.D.
Assistant Superintendent of Assessment & Student Information
Michael Middleton
Director of Select Assessments
Lesley Siegel, Ph.D.
Alternate Assessment Coordinator
Kimberly DeRousie
State Test Coordinator
Collette Mason
Project Specialist
44