How States Implement Alternate Assessments for Students with Disabilities

The IDEA Amendments of 1997 mandate inclusion of students with disabilities in accountability systems. By 2001 professionals in many states had begun to develop alternate assessments to focus on students' performance relative to general education performance criteria. The purpose of this study was to examine how alternate assessments have been defined and aligned with state general education standards and to identify the methods that have been used to score the assessments. An analysis of states' documents revealed a variety of alignment and scoring methods. In most states, either assessments were linked to state general education standards or those standards were extended to include alternate assessments. Academic domains were measured in most states, but some states measured only functional skills. Most states used some form of rubric to score the alternate assessments, typically measuring mastery, progress, or level of independence. The article concludes with recommendations for enhancing national policy on alternate assessment.

[1]  M. Snell.  Teaching Children and Young Adults with Mental Retardation in School Programs: Current Research , 1997, Behaviour Change.

[2]  M. Falvey.  Community-Based Curriculum: Instructional Strategies for Students With Severe Handicaps , 1986 .

[3]  Sandra J. Thompson,et al.  State Alternate Assessments: Status as IDEA Alternate Assessment Requirements Take Effect (NCEO Synthesis Report) , 2000 .

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

[5]  J. Nietupski,et al.  A Review of Curricular Research in Severe Disabilities from 1976 to 1995 in Six Selected Journals , 1997 .

[6]  S. Glasson.  The Activities Catalog: An Alternative Curriculum for Youth and Adults with Severe Disabilities , 1989 .

[7]  P. Wehman,et al.  Functional Curriculum for Elementary, Middle, and Secondary Age Students with Special Needs. Second Edition. , 2004 .

[8]  Alison Ford,et al.  Learners with Significant Disabilities , 2001 .

[9]  M. F. Giangreco.  Choosing Options and Accommodations for Children: A Guide to Planning Inclusive Education. , 1993 .

[10]  Matthew D. Turner,et al.  The Relation of a Statewide Alternate Assessment for Students with Severe Disabilities to Other Measures of Instructional Effectiveness , 2000 .

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

[12]  Yan Ping Xin,et al.  A Meta-Analysis and Review of Sight Word Research and Its Implications for Teaching Functional Reading to Individuals with Moderate and Severe Disabilities , 1998 .

[13]  M. Muhlenhaupt.  Choosing Options and Accommodations for Children (COACH) – A Guide to Planning Inclusive Education , 1993 .

[14]  Michael L. Wehmeyer,et al.  Achieving Access to the General Curriculum for Students with Mental Retardation: A Curriculum Decision-Making Model , 2001 .

[15]  Diane M. Browder,et al.  Teaching Money Skills to Individuals with Mental Retardation , 1999 .

[16]  E. Knowlton.  Considerations in the Design of Personalized Curricular Supports for Students with Developmental Disabilities. , 1998 .

[17]  Martha Thurlow,et al.  Alternate Assessments for Students With Disabilities , 2001 .

[18]  The Syracuse community-referenced curriculum guide for students with moderate and severe disabilities , 1989 .

[19]  Sandra J. Thompson,et al.  State Special Education Outcomes, 1999: A Report on State Activities at the End of the Century. , 1999 .