Accommodations for standardized testing, ugh!

[Kanin]

I'm hoping some of you with more experience in public schools can chime in about accommodations for standardized testing. At my private school, we do MAP testing (only 50 or so questions in each test) in reading and math. It's always a drag, but since it's computerized, it's not so terrible for the kids. Each test is supposed to take about an hour, but in my room we do 10 questions a day in each class for 5 days. Our accommodations are that all kids can take breaks when they need them, they get as much time as they need, and I can read the math test aloud. 

The other day I asked if I could give them a multiplication chart during the math test. The coordinator looked surprised, then said sure, as long as I note it in the final report. I tell the kids, who are all happy. A bunch of them can do the multiplication algorithm with big numbers, but they don't have facts memorized. They also understand when multiplication should be used in a word problem, but again, can't do the calculation without the chart. In the past it has REALLY been awful seeing them try to manually figure out things like 7x9 by adding. They CAN DO IT, but it takes FOREVER and sometimes that's only one part of a problem.

Now coordinator says actually, sorry, she was wrong, can't use chart. Because 1) we didn't use it in the fall, so the "growth" we see by spring won't be valid, and 2) it's a norm-referenced test and they're being measured against their peers, so a chart will make the test invalid.

I don't give a phooey about the growth being somewhat unreliable because they have the chart now and didn't before. I want to see what they can do NOW, with their charts. Their ability has skyrocketed this year! I also think that a chart will allow them to show what they know relative to their peers.... not artificially inflate their scores. There are only 50 questions, for pete's sake. Ugh.

I'm heartbroken that I have to go back on my word and tell the kids they can't have the chart. I feel that the test is still valid with the chart, because it's a needed accommodation, just as much as a reader for math, or getting breaks. I was furious last night, and many kind-of-polite emails went back and forth. Now it seems as if I've lost for good. Am I wrong? Is a chart going to invalidate the test?

More importantly, perhaps... should we give accommodations in class and then strip them away for standardized tests? What is the actual purpose of the tests? It doesn't do anything for me, the teacher. I can't even see the questions unless I hover over their shoulders while they take the stupid test. Maybe the school district (we have many district-funded students) uses the data to... do something? Maybe?

 

[Lecka]

This all just "ime." 

First, accommodations are on students' IEPs.  They can change between different times of year if they get added to a students' IEP, is what I would say.  Without accommodations on an IEP, I wouldn't expect any kind of accommodations to be allowed. 

Second, even taking the tests is something that is discussed at IEP meetings for my son who has greater needs.  I just got a note reminding me that it's time to send in my opt-out letter for one of my kids, because that is what we discussed at the IEP meeting.  The teacher does NOT want to have a bunch of kids having a bad time in her room.  However -- I would let my son do MAP testing because the questions adjust to the student (that's my understanding at least).

Also my understanding is that on the MAP test, a lot of math questions have a calculator pop up within the test for students to use. 

I have heard here that if you get unlimited time, that teachers aren't allowed to prompt kids to say they are done, and kids will just sit there all day -- it sounds horrible. 

Good luck with it all -- however I am going to say, my impression from my previous school district is that MAP testing really isn't so bad because it adjusts the questions based on previous questions being answered right or wrong. 

Now I'm not sure!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  But that is what I think, lol.

As far as how accurate the testing is -- my older son in particular does not perform consistently from one test to the next, and one of two things happens.  Either the teacher says that all the students are having that same pattern, because of the order they cover things in the curriculum or they think the students are struggling with something.  Or, the teacher says the test is not showing what she sees in class and says what she is seeing in class. 

I've also heard about MAP testing, that the teachers get results quickly enough that they can actually use the results to adapt their teaching and review things some students need to review. 

Here I have heard the results come back so late that the teachers can't use them. 

And this is still all my impression, I don't really know.

But I think it may not be too bad for a lot of your students.  You may be able to tell them if there will be calculator pop-ups or not (if you can ask around) and that might make up for not having the times table.  And then, if you are not in a position to amend IEPs then you really can't do much about accommodations. 

Honestly I think at times it can be okay to see how kids do without accommodations.  Maybe if they score low it will trigger them getting extra help or tutoring.  I don't know, sometimes it can work out that way though.  It's how kids could get before-and-after-school tutoring at our old school and my older son did it for a while and it was helpful for him. (Edit ----- I DON'T think it's okay for kids to have a bad experience and be traumatized by testing ------- however my impression is MAP testing isn't like that because it adjusts to kids and gives them easier questions.  I'm sure some kids can see through that but my younger son did fine with it when he did it, and it was nice to see how he did. 

[Lecka]

Also -- my son (my younger son) absolutely scores lower on tests at times (like IQ testing!!!!!!) because they can't do accommodations without invalidating the results.  Well the results aren't valid because they are not showing my son's performance.  (Specifically they are only allowed to provide two prompts to ask for an answer or to ask for more detail in an answer....... and so then they will tell me "I'm sure he could have expanded on his answer and gotten more points, but I wasn't allowed to give a third prompt."  Well -- they don't exactly say that, but they kind-of say that.)

Well -- that's just how testing is!  Sometimes they are just wanting to see how kids do without accommodations even when they know it's not going to be accurate!

I have an impression like for MAP testing ----- the weak math facts might show up mainly on a fluency section, and then a calculator may be allowed on other sections.  And then -- I think there can be a point to be made, that it's reasonable to have a lower score on math fluency, especially if they get adjusted to easier questions that they can answer, so that they aren't just having a miserable experience with getting question after question wrong.  Which ----- maybe I have rose-colored glasses but that's what I thought about MAP testing. 

Here I hear different things and will be opting him out of state testing.  However there is something called STAR testing that seems more like MAP testing -- and he is going to do that twice a year just so we have something.  His teacher says kids do not have a bad time with it. 

Edit:  My impression for MAP testing is for word problems they will usually get a calculator -- so not having the harder math facts memorized hopefully won't bring down their scores on those sections unfairly.  However ----- I don't actually know ------- I have more of impressions as a parent.  I have three kids who used to do MAP testing 3 times a year, though!  For what that is worth. 

[Lecka]

Back to the charts, though..... my impression/thought is that in a public school, if the IEP team recommends using a times table on testing, then it will be on there.  This is covered in IEP meetings.  Often it will be based on scores from an eval, and then the person who did the eval recommending whatever accommodations.

I have no idea specifically about times tables being a common or recommended accommodation ------ it's never been something for my kids, so I don't know. 

[Lecka]

Another thing ----- I'm not sure, but I feel like I've heard that it's okay to tell kids to just skip to the next question if a question is very hard, and then it will give them easier questions.  I am really not sure but I think I have heard this.  Maybe ask around on that?  

[Kanin]

Thanks, Lecka. You're right that MAP isn't so bad as tests go, and yes, it does adjust to kids if they get questions wrong. The issue I have is that let's say he gets something like 13 x 7 wrong, it'll give him something easier like 6 x 9. If he still gets that wrong, maybe he doesn't get any more multiplication. I like that it adjusts - but since he CAN do these problems with a chart, it bugs me that he'll get bumped down in difficulty when in reality he COULD get 13 x 7 right, and then should get bumped UP to something like 24 x 58. He might then get that wrong, but I don't want the test to show that he's got a low calculation score when really he does quite well. With MAP, teachers get an overall score that is MAP-specific, and we also get the student's score in relation to other students all over the country. We also get a ranking in four different categories, with labels like "low," "average," "high average," etc. The categories are numbers/operations, geometry, algebraic concepts, measurement/data. 

I'm just bugged by the whole thing. 

I'm not in a public school, so we kind of "do our own thing" which is usually awesome, but in this case is bothering me. Someone should know exactly what the rules are, and what accommodations are potentially allowed. 

[City Mouse]

General education students without an IEP would not be allowed to use a multiplication chart. However, is my state, students are allowed plain paper to work out problems. They are allowed to make their own multiplication chart on blank paper. The students do need to be making the calculations on their own. Using preprinted multiplication chart would show that the he student knows how to use the chart. It would not show that the student knows how to multiply. Using repeated addition, while much slower, does show that the student understands the process of multiplication.

[Lecka]

For me as a parent — at the school where my kids did MAP testing, I got the scores at parent-teacher meetings.  

As far as being a parent — if I saw a low score and then the teacher said “here’s a work sample from class that your son does independently with use of a times table” then I would “get it.”  

They would have about 5 things to do and the test scores would be the smallest part, and the teacher would give some short overview of what she noticed.  

So for me it hasn’t been a big deal in of itself.  When it has been a big deal it’s been because it accurately represents some problem.  

But I don’t see people think the tests are somehow more accurate than what kids are doing daily in class.  

The thing is — for some students, who could benefit from studying their math facts more, it is actually helpful to see “oh he needs to practice more.” And then a teacher can also say (if it’s the case) something like “she does do well with problem solving, I think the score is brought down by math facts” or something like that.

But that doesn’t help your students who legitimately need accommodation and not a clue to spend a little more time on math facts.  

But anyway — I think most parents will listen to what the teacher says, as far as the parent seeing test scores.  If the parent even sees them.  

[EKS]

My understanding is that the MAP is untimed, so you're not giving an accommodation there.

That said, there is a difference between an accommodation and a modification.  Accommodations don't alter the nature of the test itself, but they are required for *some* students in order to ensure that the test is measuring the skills it claims to measure and *not* measuring the disability.  So, extended time, for a test that is timed, is an accommodation *unless* the test is testing processing speed. 

An example of a modification would be reading a reading test aloud to a student.  

Giving students access to a multiplication table is a modification if the test is testing whether kids can multiply *without* a chart.  It is a modification even if the kid has a documented math fact disability.

Modifications invalidate the test results because the test is no longer testing what it purports to test.

[Kanin]

1 hour ago, City Mouse said:

General education students without an IEP would not be allowed to use a multiplication chart. However, is my state, students are allowed plain paper to work out problems. They are allowed to make their own multiplication chart on blank paper. The students do need to be making the calculations on their own. Using preprinted multiplication chart would show that the he student knows how to use the chart. It would not show that the student knows how to multiply. Using repeated addition, while much slower, does show that the student understands the process of multiplication.

 Do you know if students with IEPs would be allowed to use a chart? All of the students in my school have at least one documented learning disability, and some have many disabilities.

[Kanin]

58 minutes ago, EKS said:

My understanding is that the MAP is untimed, so you're not giving an accommodation there.

That said, there is a difference between an accommodation and a modification.  Accommodations don't alter the nature of the test itself, but they are required for *some* students in order to ensure that the test is measuring the skills it claims to measure and *not* measuring the disability.  So, extended time, for a test that is timed, is an accommodation *unless* the test is testing processing speed. 

An example of a modification would be reading a reading test aloud to a student.  

Giving students access to a multiplication table is a modification if the test is testing whether kids can multiply *without* a chart.  It is a modification even if the kid has a documented math fact disability.

Modifications invalidate the test results because the test is no longer testing what it purports to test.

 

In that case, I guess my beef is with the draconian process of testing kids with learning disabilities using tests made for typical students. I get that we need to measure them against their typical peers to get data... maybe. I wish there was an achievement test specifically for LD kids that was easy to administer, like MAP, could give growth results and identify areas of need, like MAP....  but didn't have the need to measure them against their peers. 

[EKS]

1 hour ago, Mainer said:

 

In that case, I guess my beef is with the draconian process of testing kids with learning disabilities using tests made for typical students. I get that we need to measure them against their typical peers to get data... maybe. I wish there was an achievement test specifically for LD kids that was easy to administer, like MAP, could give growth results and identify areas of need, like MAP....  but didn't have the need to measure them against their peers. 

I agree that kids in the middle of LD remediation are difficult to test using standard methods.  But you don't have to measure them against their peers.  You could just look at growth (this is what I did for several years with my dyslexic son). 

The problem is that if you give a test with modifications (not accommodations), the test is no longer measuring what it is supposed to be measuring.  When that happens, the test loses its value as a *standardized* measure of achievement.  The standardization is not about being compared to peers; it's about validity--that is, how well the results reflect what the kid actually knows about whatever is being tested.  If the test is supposed to be measuring multiplication skills, and the construct of multiplication the test maker is using is that "knowing how to multiply" includes having memorized multiplication facts, and the kid hasn't done this for whatever reason (including LDs) then he doesn't know how to multiply.  If you give him a multiplication table to take the test this year, that result won't be something that can be used to track growth when he actually learns the facts because the actual growth that achievement represents won't show up in the results for the next administration.

[Storygirl]

I agree with the responses you have received so far. I have two children who have IEPs that include testing accommodation, and I have a couple of additional thoughts.

First, what is allowed and not allowed is specific to each individual, so my first thought is that it would not be appropriate for an entire class to automatically get the same accommodation. Last year we asked for a testing accommodation to be added to my son's IEP, and it required some extensive discussion in the IEP meeting. Before they could add it, they had to have data to show that the specific accommodation had been documented as helpful. In other words, we had to show that he had used in his classes, and that it was an effective support for him. It wasn't permitted to just add it, because we asked for it.

It sounds like many or most of your students have used the math chart successfully as an accommodation, but that should be documented somehow. My daughter is in a private school for those with dyslexia and other LDs. She has an IEP, which is updated yearly by the public school, but the private school does not necessarily follow it. They have their own individualized learning plan for each student, with goals that line up with their mission and methods. But there is documentation and plenty of it. Does your school not have a learning plan for each student? I suspect for any accommodations on standardized testing, some kind of documentation of the need for it by the student would be required.

Secondly, my children are allowed to use calculators on some portions of the math testing, but multiplication charts have never been brought up as an accommodation option during their IEPs, even though DD12's math program uses them in class. So I don't know if they are allowable, in general, but I know a calculator is. But the sections of testing that are measuring calculation do not allow a calculator (just as some of  the reading sections do not allow the reading accommodations they are otherwise allowed).

Finally, as a parent, I have mixed feelings about measuring achievement with standardized testing. Both of my kids with LDs have scored abysmally low on some parts of testing in the past. I have viewed it not as a failure but as an exposure of their weaknesses and need. And in that way, it is fine to me to have some low scores. It reflects reality and is not disheartening to me, other than perhaps a momentary pang of sadness that they struggle. The other thing that standardized testing is helpful for (for me) is measuring improvement (or lack of it) over time. DD12's school actually has an exemption for all of the students (except high schoolers) to not have to take state testing, for certain reasons. But they do administer certain standardized testing and use it measure student progress and set goals, and I have found those reports helpful. The teachers discuss them with us during conferences and are well versed at explaining the significance of the results to parents.

All that to say that I think it is okay for the students to have lower scores on the math calculation portion of the testing, if they struggle with math calculation. No one wants them to feel disheartened, of course. But helping students and parents to understand that the test scores are just a snapshot and a tool to help measure progress can be helpful.

I think the unfortunate part of your situation is not that the students cannot use the math charts, but that the school does not seem to have a good handle on what accommodations can be allowed and how that is decided for each student and is not communicating that well to the teachers, students, and parents. I see that as a concern, personally.

[geodob]

I just had a look at the MAPS website, where it has a section: Accessibility and  Accommodations.

Which explains what accommodations can be provided.  It does allow Text to Speech and also the use of a Calculator.

It also explains the process,  where after signing the class in for the test.  You can then select which students get which accommodations.

MAPS testing is mainly to identify where a student needs interventions.  A change in their scores from using an accommodation, will show if the accommodation is helping.

Here's a link to their site:

https://www.nwea.org/map-growth/ 

[Kanin]

3 minutes ago, geodob said:

I just had a look at the MAPS website, where it has a section: Accessibility and  Accommodations.

Which explains what accommodations can be provided.  It does allow Text to Speech and also the use of a Calculator.

It also explains the process,  where after signing the class in for the test.  You can then select which students get which accommodations.

MAPS testing is mainly to identify where a student needs interventions.  A change in their scores from using an accommodation, will show if the accommodation is helping.

Here's a link to their site:

https://www.nwea.org/map-growth/ 

Yes, that site is where this whole kettle of fish started. Nobody had mentioned calculators or math charts, but seeing that list is what got me on a tear. MAP says they don't allow or disallow any accommodations, but schools should check their local and state regulations. 

[Kanin]

10 hours ago, Storygirl said:

I think the unfortunate part of your situation is not that the students cannot use the math charts, but that the school does not seem to have a good handle on what accommodations can be allowed and how that is decided for each student and is not communicating that well to the teachers, students, and parents. I see that as a concern, personally.

Yes, this exactly! All of our students are also exempt from the state testing, thank goodness. I can't even imagine what a disaster and morale-killer that would be. The attitude here seems to be, let's do MAP to give a number to the school districts, because they're funding the students and so need some sort of "real" testing. Our school kind of wants students to do their best, and kind of doesn't care, I think, because we know that the test isn't really appropriate for our kids. One small example of that is something as simple as the font size of the reading passages. Even passages at the first grade level are in 12 point, times new roman font, and it looks REALLY intimidating on the screen. My students take one glance and say no way, not gonna happen! That annoys me because I know they COULD read the first grade passage, but emotionally, when they see that screen with the tiny font and it looks scarier than it is, they can't. 

We do have individual learning plans for each student with measurable goals, and accommodations. I'm actually not sure what would happen if "multiplication chart" would be put on there as an accommodation.... if that would mean they get it in the MAP. I suspect not. The accommodations are mostly for when the kids transfer back to their public schools, as a way to get them the best possible IEP when they go back. Since our school is so small and kids get what they need in every way, in class, basically... this testing seems to be the one place where things go south. The admin think it's no big deal because it's just one test, twice a year, that takes an hour or two in reading and math. No big deal, right? But to me, supports should be in place ALL the time, no matter if the situation is "no big deal." I can tell you that seeing a challenging multiplication problem that you CAN do easily with a chart, and then can't do at all without it, IS a big deal to my 10 year olds. 

[Lecka]

I have had a few times where a teacher kind-of mentions something to me, and then I can follow through on it as a parent while as a teacher it’s not their role to follow through on it.

I think this is something where it would be different, very possibly, if a parent brought up this concern.

I think if a parent thinks it would be demoralizing, was aware of it, etc, they could get a different hearing if they brought it up.

So — my one son is younger and his self-awareness is lower.  He would not be demoralized, I don’t think.

My older son by personality would be fine with skipping some questions, I think.  However his self-esteem about school is decent, which I think makes a huge difference with context.  For things where his confidence is low, “little” things have been very demoralizing for him at times.  But I think for him, when it is private and he doesn’t have the issue of comparison, it doesn’t come up the same way.  When he is exposed and is seeing other students fly through things that is when I think it will be bad for him.

But anyway — I think you can see and maybe, maybe you can make some comments to any parents that you see have kids who seemed to be upset.  I know it’s hard to do because the teacher doesn’t want me as a parent to go and say “the teacher told me blah blah” but I can bring things up without saying that.  And there are ways teachers can word things I think where they aren’t saying something contradictory.  

Its hard to explain, but I think maybe you have some leeway there.

But I am hopeful that your kids are mostly going to be resilient on this and not think it is a big deal.  I think if you can present it like it’s not a big deal it can help.  

I think it makes a big difference how much the tests are emphasized, if it’s just “oh yeah, today is MAP testing,” or if there are notes sent home about eating well and encouraging kids to do their best.  

It was not emphasized at all where we lived before and I think that goes a long way.  It doesn’t sound like your school is making a big deal about it, which I think does make a big difference.  

I think too, with a teacher who can have the conversation “I know you can do it with the times table” I think that goes a really long way.  I think that is what really matters, because it is day-to-day for students and I think that matters more.