Common Misperceptions and Research-Based Recommendations for Alternate Assessment Based on Alternate Achievement Standards (NCEO Synthesis Report)

A report exploring misperceptions about assessments and the students who are assessed using Alternate Assessments based on Alternate Achievement Standards (AA-AAS). The misperceptions have been encountered by the National Alternate Assessment Center (NAAC) and National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) in their collaborative work with states and educators on the AA-AAS. AA-AAS are designed so that students with the most significant cognitive disabilities can be included in large-scale accountability testing, and promote their access to the same interesting and challenging curriculum as their peers. This report explores common misperceptions related to three major themes: (a) the characteristics of students who participate in AA-AAS; (b) the content that should be taught and assessed by teachers; and (c) issues regarding the purpose and the validity of AA-AAS outcomes. For each misperception, it proposes research-based recommendations to address them, and refers to the recent literature on assessment, curriculum, and instruction for students with the most significant disabilities to support its analysis and recommendations.

[1]  D. Browder,et al.  Models of Cognition for Students With Significant Cognitive Disabilities: Implications for Assessment , 2009 .

[2]  Harold L. Kleinert,et al.  An Analysis of the Learning Characteristics of Students Taking Alternate Assessments Based on Alternate Achievement Standards , 2009 .

[3]  Fred Spooner,et al.  A Meta-Analysis on Teaching Mathematics to Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities , 2008 .

[4]  Bree A. Jimenez,et al.  Teaching an Algebraic Equation to High School Students with Moderate Developmental Disabilities , 2008 .

[5]  Sandra J. Thompson,et al.  The Potential for Multi-Modal Approaches to Reading for Students With Disabilities as Found in State Reading Standards , 2008 .

[6]  H. Huynh,et al.  Relationship between IEP Characteristics and Test Scores on an Alternate Assessment for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities , 2007 .

[7]  Meagan Karvonen,et al.  Creating Access to the General Curriculum With Links to Grade-Level Content for Students With Significant Cognitive Disabilities , 2007 .

[8]  F. Spooner,et al.  Review of Studies with Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities Which Link to Science Standards , 2007 .

[9]  G. Tindal,et al.  Scaling Early Reading Alternate Assessments with Statewide Measures , 2007 .

[10]  M. Wagner,et al.  An Overview of Findings from Wave 2 of the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). NCSER 2006-3004. , 2006 .

[11]  Fred Spooner,et al.  Research on Reading Instruction for Individuals with Significant Cognitive Disabilities , 2006 .

[12]  Andrew T. Roach,et al.  The Influence of Access to General Education Curriculum on Alternate Assessment Performance of Students With Significant Cognitive Disabilities , 2006 .

[13]  Paula J. Burdette,et al.  Validation of Large-Scale Alternate Assessment Systems and Their Influence on Instruction —What Are the Consequences? , 2006 .

[14]  D. Wiener.  One State's Story: Access and Alignment to the GRADE-LEVEL Content for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities. Synthesis Report 57. , 2005 .

[15]  Leah S. Horvath,et al.  The Use of Accommodations Among Students with Deafblindness in Large-Scale Assessment Systems , 2005 .

[16]  Norman L. Webb,et al.  Alignment of an Alternate Assessment with State Academic Standards , 2005 .

[17]  Charlotte Hendrick Keefe,et al.  Students With Severe Speech and Physical Impairments , 2004 .

[18]  J. Ysseldyke,et al.  Large-Scale Assessment and Accountability Systems: Positive Consequences for Students with Disabilities (NCEO Synthesis Report) , 2004 .

[19]  B. Algozzine,et al.  A Content Analysis of the Curricular Philosophies Reflected in States' Alternate Assessment Performance Indicators , 2003 .

[20]  G. Tindal,et al.  Alternate Assessments in Reading and Math: Development and Validation for Students with Significant Disabilities , 2003 .

[21]  Martha Thurlow,et al.  Measuring Academic Achievement of Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities: Building Understanding of Alternate Assessment Scoring Criteria. Synthesis Report. , 2003 .

[22]  Ann P. Turnbull,et al.  A Quality of Life Framework for Special Education Outcomes , 2003 .

[23]  Clement A. Stone,et al.  Consequences of a State Accountability Program: Examining Relationships Between School Performance Gains and Teacher, Student, and School Variables , 2003 .

[24]  Rachel F. Quenemoen,et al.  Use of Alternate Assessment Results in Reporting and Accountability Systems: Conditions for Use Based on Research and Practice (NCEO Synthesis Report) , 2002 .

[25]  F. Spooner,et al.  Curricular Implications of Alternate Assessments. , 2002 .

[26]  Martha Thurlow,et al.  Principles and Characteristics of Inclusive Assessment and Accountability Systems (NCEO Synthesis Report) , 2001 .

[27]  James G. Shriner,et al.  Teacher Decision Making in Participation of Students with Disabilities in Large-Scale Assessment , 2001 .

[28]  H. Kleinert,et al.  Teachers Perceptions of One State's Alternate Assessment: Implications for Practice and Preparation , 2001 .

[29]  J. Mcdonnell,et al.  Supporting the Inclusion of Students with Moderate and Severe Disabilities in Junior High School General Education Classes: The Effects of Classwide Peer Tutoring, Multi-Element Curriculum, and Accommodations. , 2001 .

[30]  Harold L. Kleinert,et al.  Alternate Assessment: Measuring Outcomes and Supports for Students With Disabilities , 2001 .

[31]  Diane M. Browder,et al.  Curriculum and Assessment for Students with Moderate and Severe Disabilities , 2001 .

[32]  M. Thurlow,et al.  Where's Waldo? A Third Search for Students with Disabilities in State Accountability Reports. Technical Report 25. , 2000 .

[33]  D. Ryndak,et al.  Literacy before and after Inclusion in General Education Settings: A Case Study , 1999 .

[34]  M. Thurlow,et al.  Neglected Numerators, Drifting Denominators, and Fractured Fractions: Determining Participation Rates for Students With Disabilities , 1996 .

[35]  Stephen B. Dunbar,et al.  Complex, Performance-Based Assessment: Expectations and Validation Criteria , 1991 .

[36]  J. Floyd,et al.  Effect of single setting versus multiple setting training on learning to shop in a department store. , 1990, American journal of mental retardation : AJMR.

[37]  D. Browder,et al.  Utilizing Sight Words in Self-Instruction Training for Employees with Moderate Mental Retardation in Competitive Jobs , 2000 .

[38]  D. Browder,et al.  Teaching Stimulus Classes to Encourage Independent Purchasing by Students with Severe Behavior Disorders. , 1995 .

[39]  L. Shepard.  Evaluating Test Validity , 1993 .