|
...with disabilities in accountability systems.
IDEA 1997 also required that all students have access to the general curriculum. At that same time, the U.S. Department of Education's Title I Guidance on Standards, Assessments, and Accountability (1997) emphasized that assessments for students with disabilities, referred to as alternate assessments, should relate to the same standards used for all students: "It is important that standards for students with disabilities be included in these assessments because they are expected to meet the same standards as other students" (II. Assessments' Question #42, p. 10 of 16, as cited in Thompson, Quenemoen, Thurlow, & Ysseldyke, 2001, p. 21). Even more recently, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2001) created reporting requirements in math, language arts, and science for all students, including those with significant disabilities. Alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards must be aligned with a state's academic content standards, promote access to the general curriculum, and reflect professional judgment of the highest achievement standards possible (Title I--Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged, 2003, 200.1(d)).
Methods for determining the degree of alignment between assessments and state content standards have become a priority since the passage of NCLB. Many methods of alignment are available and range from low to high complexity. An example of a low-complexity method is asking content experts to examine assessment items and match them to content standards using a Likert scale. Moderate-complexity alignment methods not only examine the alignment of an item to a standard, but also examine the item for another dimension, such as level of cognitive demand. More complex methods examine the alignment plus many other criteria, such as breadth of knowledge, balance of representation, and congruence between emphasis in standard and number of items used on the assessment. Bhola, Impara, and Buckendahl (2003) provide a detailed review of these methods.
Previous research on the alignment of alternate assessments to academic content standards used low-complexity methods to assess the degree of alignment (Browder, Flowers et al., 2004; Browder, Spooner, Ahlgrim-Delzeil et al., 2003). In Browder, Flowers et al., 31 states' performance indicators (i.e., the most detailed statement of state expectations for students with severe cognitive disabilities) were aligned to national reading and math content standards. The findings indicated that some state expectations had strong degree of alignment to reading and math, some state expectations had weak alignment, and other states had a combination of both weak and strong degrees of alignment. In another research study, state performance indicators were classified as functional, academic, social, or early childhood (Browder, Spooner, Ahlgrim-Delzell et al.). The findings suggested that states that had exemplary alternate assessments had significantly more academic content reflected in their performance indicators.
These earlier alignment studies had two limitations. First, the research focus was on the alignment between state alternate assessment performance indicators and national academic standards, and not alternate assessment items and state academic content standards. Second, the experts were instructed to make a holistic judgment of alignment rather than to evaluate specific numeric criteria. Given the importance of improving the technical quality of alternate assessments for inclusion in school and district adequate yearly progress (AYP) calculations under NCLB, the need exists for research that provides a more comprehensive view of the alignment between state alternate assessments and state academic content standards.
This study applied and evaluated a high-complexity alignment method to measure the degree of alignment of alternate assessment to state academic content standards. Three states that used performance-based and portfolio assessment formats were selected to participate in this study. The results of this study inform educators of how well alternate assessments capture language arts and mathematics constructs.
METHOD
An approach recommended by Webb (1997) was used to examine the alignment of alternate assessments to state general education expectations. The procedure combines qualitative expert judgments and quantified coding for evaluating the alignment of standards and assessments. The product of the analysis is a set of statistics that describes the degree of intersection, or alignment, between the content embedded in state content Standards and the content in state assessments. The procedure was used to examine alternate assessments from three states in two academic areas.
SELECTION OF STATE ALTERNATE ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS
The first step in this research identified three states that had exemplary alternate assessments with a clear focus on academics. Exemplary alternate assessments were selected to ensure that reviewers could successfully align at least some of the general education standards to the assessments, and to provide practitioners with a reference for evaluating degree of alignment for other alternate assessments. To identify these states, four researchers in the area of alternate assessments were sent a questionnaire that asked them to (a) list five states with the best alternate assessments and (b) list five states with the strongest link between the alternate assessment and general education curriculum. Three states were identified that were consistent across the researchers. A state department of education representative for each state agreed to participate in this study; each representative selected one typical alternate assessment for both language arts and mathematics.
THE THREE STATES' ALTERNATE A SSESSMENTS
State A used a performance-based alternate assessment. The reading and writing performance assessments included attending to a story and answering questions about the content, gaining information from a variety of other sources, and creating a written product with a specific purpose. The math performance assessment included demonstrating number sense and computational skills using physical models; applying simple calculation strategies to basic addition problems; recognizing and creating patterns using simple geometric shapes; and demonstrating an understanding of data collection, data display, and estimation. Although the tasks were the same for all students, the presentation of the tasks and response styles of the students were individualized. This study included State A's fourth-grade language arts and fifth-grade mathematics assessments.
State B's alternate assessment was a portfolio of evidence collected over the course of an academic year of an individual student's performance and achievement on the established State Academic Expectations. Each portfolio included five entries from the six possible content...
NOTE: All illustrations and photos
have been removed from this article.
More articles from Exceptional Children
Mathematics instructional practices and assessment accommodations by s..., January 01, 2006
Explaining physical activity in children with visual impairments: a fa..., January 01, 2006
Looking for additional articles?
Search our database of over 3 million articles.
Looking for more in-depth information on this industry?
Search our complete database of Industry & Market reports by text, subject, publication
name or publication date.
About Goliath
Whether you're looking for sales prospects, competitive information, company
analysis or best practices in managing your organization,
Goliath can help you meet your business needs.
Our extensive business information databases empower business
professionals with both the breadth and depth of credible,
authoritative information they need to support their business
goals. Whether it be strategic planning, sales prospecting,
company research or defining management best practices -
Goliath is your leading source for accurate information.
|
