Assessment practice in inclusive education
What is assessment?
According to the Growing Success (2010), “assessment is the process of gathering information that accurately reflects how well a student is achieving the curriculum expectations in a subject or course” (p. 28). Data collection tools and interventions are viewed through a pedagogical lens in that the context in which assessment takes place is within the fold of education. Accordingly, the primary purpose of assessment is, as the Ministry of Education expressively claims, “to improve student learning” (p. 28).
An implication of this observation is that the purpose of using an assessment tool is not so much an issue of when it is used (i.e., in the case of for, as, or of student learning in the continuum of assessment practice) but how the tool is used as a means to inform further teaching practice. Accountability is therefore inextricably woven into the system of assessment practice in today’s public education system, so educators are understood to be conscientious about which tools are selected and how these are to be used in supporting their anticipated teaching and learning practices.
Another implication of situating assessment practice before and within the goal of improving of student learning is that assessment practice cannot be parsed into sequential parts (for, as, and of) or assume a chronological temporality (for before as, as before of, so for before of) because designing assessment in this way supports a vision of the teacher as an objective (i.e., possessing an all-encompassing eye) auditor of perceived strengths and weaknesses of student learning throughout the practice of data collection.
We know that it is impossible to be omniscient, so assessment needs to take a practical but thoughtful approach to data collection. This means that instead of conducting one test or intervention at a particular time, the educator can situate his or her assessment practice as a multi-modal construct, where the characteristics of simultaneity, synergy, and holism (for, as, and of occur at once) are the norms of the discipline. This is where it is incumbent upon the educator to partake in the participation of assessment through multiple interest groups (e.g., school administration, parents/guardians, educational paraprofessionals, school resource team, health practitioners, community groups, students, board level personnel), multiple data collection tools (formal assessments and educational assessments), and multiple contexts of assessment practice (e.g., in the classroom, in the home environment, in the community, at recess, during physical education, one-on-one, group-work, and so on). In amassing such data, the issue then becomes how to interpret this information validly and credibly.
Member checks (Hays and Singh, 2012) are a research intervention strategy designed to add validity to research results. These are conducted when information is shared across a team of individuals, as in groups or teams, so that analyses of the data becomes a socially accepted construct and where differences and similarities of opinion are waged and debated before proceeding to a final analysis or conclusion. In other words, assessment practice within the education system can be enhanced through member-checking practices, where insights into the nature of the students’ perceived strengths and needs come about through principles of rigor, reflexivity, and praxis.
Case study: Early identification strategy (K to Grade 3)
Background
The Thames Valley District School Board (TVDSB) pursues a “tiered” approach to prevention and intervention. This is a systematic approach to providing high-quality, evidence-based assessment and instruction and appropriate interventions that respond to students’ individual needs (See TVDSB General Model of Special Education, 2016). It is based on frequent monitoring of student progress and the use of assessment data, focusing on learning rate and level, to identify students who are facing challenges in learning and to plan specific assessment and instructional interventions of increasing intensity to address their needs effectively. The tiered approach can be used to address both academic and behavioural needs. The nature, intensity, and duration of interventions may be decided by teachers individually or in collaboration with a school team, yet always on the basis of evidence derived from monitoring student achievement (Learning for All, 2013).
(i) as an initial intervention
(ii) when initial interventions are unsuccessful
The second stage in the process of prevention and intervention encompasses an in-depth consideration of the areas of perceived strengths and learning needs of the student, and what context would be best suited to address these perceived strengths and needs. At the TVDSB, such a stage is rooted within a pedagogical orientation that believes “that most exceptional children can and should have their needs met, using a variety of strategies, techniques and resource support in regular classes, in their home schools” (TVDSB Special Education Plan, 2017, p. 50). However, not all cases of program placement are ideally suited to the classroom environment (Eaton vs. Brant County Board of Education, 1997). The TVDSB points out that “the application of appropriate programs, services, and placements (which may include regular class, withdrawal assistance, self-contained class, or attendance at a Provincial school) is determined through the Program Development Team (PDT) and/or the Identification Placement and Review Committee (IPRC) processes, in consultation with parent(s)” (TVDSB Special Education Plan, 2017, p. 50).
(i) to assist with the placement of a student with an exceptionality
(ii) in curriculum placement, e.g., modifications or accommodations
The third stage in the process of prevention and intervention considers how previous efforts across all vested parties (i.e., the quality of coordination of programs and services) have impacted the performance of student success overall. Should the student have an Individual Education Plan (IEP), this document is used to inform next steps as part of a review strategy (TVDSB Special Education Plan, 2017, pp. 61-63) as part of an overall IEP process cycle. Throughout this policy cycle, educators, as the primary policy actor in question, take into account the extent to which specific instructional strategies have been effective in supporting the perceived strengths of the student while also linking such strategies to program evaluation tools and procedures. School administration, Learning Support Teachers (LSTs), classroom educators, parents/guardians, the student, and community organizations all have a role in shaping the programs and services for students identified with exceptionalities and/or those requiring special education support (see TVDSB Coordination of Programs and Services, 2016). Efforts to increase the capacity of educators to respond inclusively and equitably as possible is somewhat addressed in ongoing professional learning programs, workshops, and courses of study (See Staff Development below), and those concerns which address overall program effectiveness at the Board level are considered to a large extent through the TVDSB’s Special Education Advisory Committee (SEAC).
(i) to assist with decisions in instructional evaluation
(ii) to assist with decisions in program evaluation