Statewide Assessments

Under federal and state law, state academic achievement assessments must be given to all students to determine whether schools have been successful in teaching the state academic content standards. In Texas, the academic content standards are known as the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). Additionally, students who are identified as emergent bilingual receive instruction in the English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS). Per FEDERAL REGULATIONS, the state’s student assessment program requires that all students, including students who receive special education services, be tested with the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) on grade-level academic standards in grades 3-8 and end-of-course (EOC) assessments in high school. The requirement for any student in these grades identified as having the most significant cognitive disability is the STAAR Alternate 2, which assesses the TEKS through prerequisite skills.

Note:

Remember, when a student with a disability is, or might be identified as EB, the student's ARD committee must include a representative from the LPAC for all decision making, including state assessment.

Students in grades K-12 who are EB are also required to take the Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) or TELPAS Alternate , which are aligned to the ELPS, to assess their progress in learning the English language.

Assessment/Content Area

The ARD committee will determine whether a student will take STAAR or STAAR Alternate 2. Students must meet all of the participation requirements for STAAR Alternate 2 to be eligible for this assessment.

For a student who takes STAAR Alternate 2, there must be a corresponding academic standards-based IEP goals for all tested content. Students with the most significant cognitive disabilities access all enrolled grade-level TEKS through prerequisite skills including math, reading language arts, science, and social studies, and any other TEKS based course. These goals must link to the student’s enrolled grade-level TEKS. For STAAR Alternate 2, each knowledge and skills statement has been summarized into an essence statement that serves as a link to the grade-level TEKS. However, essence statements alone do not contain the four required components of a measurable annual goal and should be crafted by ARD committees to reflect a measurable annual goal.

Justification for Alternate Assessment

The justification for taking STAAR Alternate 2 and TELPAS Alternate is a statement that supports the necessity and appropriateness of the alternate assessment selected. In this case, per TAC 89.1055(d), the ARD committee must include the STAAR Alternate 2 Participation Requirements form in the student’s IEP which documents the following information:

A statement about why the student cannot participate in the general assessment;
Why the alternate assessment is appropriate; and
In the case of TELPAS Alternate, documentation and justification for this decision, done in conjunction with the LPAC.

Testing Accommodations

Accommodations are the instructional materials or procedures that the ARD committee has determined are necessary to allow the student to participate meaningfully in testing. For a student who requires testing accommodations, the IEP must include the appropriate accommodations for the specific assessment. For the EB student, the ARD committee, in conjunction with the LPAC, must document the need for allowable testing accommodations in the student’s permanent record.

The ARD committee (in conjunction with the LPAC when appropriate) is to review the student’s PLAAFP, instructional goals, and accommodations to determine how the student accesses the grade- level/course curriculum.

Participation in the general assessment is the first consideration when determining the appropriate assessment for a student.

If the statewide assessment, with or without accommodations, is not appropriate for a student, the ARD committee must review the participation requirements for the alternate assessments.

The ARD committee’s decision (and, when appropriate, in conjunction with the LPAC) to use an allowable accommodation during an assessment is to be made on an individual student basis and take into consideration the needs of the student and whether the student routinely receives the accommodation during classroom instruction and testing.

Documented testing accommodations on state assessments must be consistent with the TEA accommodation policies. Some accommodations require TEA approval. For those that require approval through the submission of an Accommodation Request Form, the IEP is to document that the accommodations are pending the TEA approval.

Accelerated Instruction

Accelerated Instruction and Intensive Program of Instruction (IPI)

Texas law requires all students, with the exception of those who take STAAR Alternate 2, who do not achieve approaches or higher on STAAR grades 3 through 8 or EOC assessments to be provided accelerated instruction. These requirements, as part of TEC §28.0211, provide that qualifying students must be:

Assigned a Teacher Incentive Allotment (TIA) designated teacher for the subsequent school year in the applicable subject area;
OR
Provided supplemental instruction aligned with the research on high-impact tutoring in the TEKS for the applicable grade levels and subject area in the following manner:
- No less than 15 or 30 hours depending on student performance and is provided in the summer or at least once per week in the school year;
- Limited to two subjects per year, prioritizing math and reading language arts;
- Provided in a group of no more than four students, unless the parent of each student in the group authorizes a larger group;
- Designed to assist the student in achieving satisfactory performance in the applicable grade level and subject area and includes effective instructional materials designed for supplemental instruction;
- Provided by a person with training in the applicable instructional materials for the supplemental instruction and provided by one person for the entirety of their accelerated instruction.

Generally, an LEA will use the same process and procedures for a student with an IEP as it does with all other students in terms of accelerated instruction. Similarly, if a parent of a student with an IEP wishes to modify or opt his/her child out of accelerated instruction, the parent would follow the same processes for all other students, and an ARD committee meeting would not be required. At the next annual review meeting, the ARD committee must review the student’s participation and progress regarding accelerated instruction (if the parent has not opted out). If an ARD committee feels that the accelerated instruction requirements necessitate a modification to the student’s IEP, the ARD committee may convene a meeting. Modifications to IEPs are only necessary when the provision of accelerated instruction would significantly affect the LEA’s ability to provide a free and appropriate public education, and the ARD committee would need to document how it came to this decision.

If a student who attends school in a homebound or other off-campus instructional arrangement, including at a residential treatment campus or state hospital, is unable to participate in an accelerated instruction program required due to the student ’s condition, the school district may determine that the student be provided the accelerated instruction when the student attends school in an on-campus instructional setting. If the student ’s condition prevents the student from attending school in an on campus instructional setting for the school year during which the accelerated instruction is required to be provided to the student, the district is not required to provide the accelerated instruction to the student for that school year.

If a student requires the development of an IPI due to not performing satisfactorily on STAAR or a STAAR EOC, the expectation to comply with the IPI requirement would be compliance with the accelerated instruction requirements under TEC § 28.0211. Therefore, the documents and processes used to comply with accelerated instruction requirements would also serve as the required IPI in this instance. The ARD committee will address participation and progress of the student in accelerated instruction as required by TEC § 28.0211 but is not expected to act specifically to address the IPI. If a student receiving special education services requires the development of an IPI based on the determination that the student is not likely to receive his or her high school diploma before the fifth school year following the student’s enrollment in grade nine, the expectation to comply is a legally compliant IEP, as the IEP will already address expectations for academic growth of the student. If an IPI is required for a student who was administered the STAAR Alternate 2 assessment under TEC, §39.023(b), the expectation of IPI compliance for either reason (not performing satisfactorily on STAAR or a determination that the student is not likely to receive his or her diploma before the fifth school year following the student’s enrollment in grade 9) is for a student to have a legally compliant IEP, as the IEP will already address expectations for academic growth of the student and the accelerated instruction requirements in TEC § 28.0211, would not apply.