Section 281.62.3. Tools for evaluating and reevaluating reading proficiency.

 The department identifies the following attributes of tools that may be used in evaluating and reevaluating reading proficiency.

         62.3(1) Locally determined or statewide assessments. In evaluating and reevaluating students who are or may be at risk or persistently at risk in reading, school districts shall use assessments that meet the standards referenced in subrule 62.2(5).

         62.3(2) Alternative assessments. If a school district determines, based on the clear and unique facts of a particular student’s case, that a particular student requires an alternative assessment to determine proficiency in reading, in addition to the assessments referred to in rule 281—62.2(256,279) and subrule 62.3(1), the alternative assessment shall be founded on scientifically based research and shall be reasonably calculated to provide equivalent information about the student’s reading, in addition to information provided by the assessments referred to in rule 281—62.2(256,279) and subrule 62.3(1).

         62.3(3) Portfolio reviews. School districts may review a portfolio of a student’s work to determine reading proficiency. Portfolio reviews must be conducted using standard review criteria that are founded on scientifically based research. A portfolio review may be used along with assessments required in rule 281—62.2(256,279) and subrule 62.3(1) but shall not be used in lieu of such assessments. The department shall maintain a list of portfolio review criteria that are adequate under this subrule.

         62.3(4) Teacher observation. A student may initially be identified as being persistently at risk in reading proficiency based on teacher observation. A teacher observation under this subrule shall be based on department-approved observation criteria. Teacher observation shall not be used to determine that a student continues to be persistently at risk in reading.

         62.3(5) Other tools. The department may identify additional tools for use in evaluating and reevaluating reading proficiency, so long as those tools are founded on scientifically based research.

         62.3(6) Alternate assessment. If an individual with a disability has been determined to require an alternate assessment aligned to alternate academic achievement standards in reading, pursuant to rule 281—41.320(256B,34CFR300), that individual shall receive such alternate assessment. The progress monitoring required by the alternate assessment in reading required for such an individual shall be deemed to satisfy the universal screening and progress monitoring requirements of rule 281—62.2(256,279).

         62.3(7) Noncompliant tools. Tools that do not meet the requirements of this rule shall not be used by any school district to implement this chapter.

[ ARC 1331C , IAB 2/19/14, effective 3/26/14;    ARC 2862C , IAB 12/7/16, effective 1/11/17]