This article describes the development of an alternate assessment system for students with moderate to severe disabilities. The system integrates what is known about effective feedback in classroom assessment with broader requirements for system accountability under the 1997 Amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (Public Law 105-17). The alternate assessment provides teachers with customized computer software and documentation tools that are used to collect meaningful student performance data from multiple sources on an ongoing basis. The assessment system evolved through an extensive committee process during which input from a variety of stakeholders was sought. The development process is summarized and the computer-based rating and documentation system is described, including the technical adequacy of the resulting alternate assessment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures and student motivation . Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
2.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning, strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267.
3.
Arvidson, H., Cunningham, J., Davis, M., & Bennett, D.E. (1999-2000). Indiana assessment system of educational proficiencies: Program manual. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University, Purdue Research Foundation.
4.
Bennett, D.E., Davis, M.A., Arvidson, H., & Cunningham, J. (1999a). Meaningful assessment of successful educational outcomes: IASEP training video # 1. South Bend, IN: Golden Dome Productions.
5.
Bennett, D.E., Davis, M.A., Arvidson, H., & Cunningham, J. (1999b). Protecting your students' data: IASEP training video #2. South Bend, IN: Golden Dome Productions.
6.
Bennett, D.E. & Lukens, D.A. (2000). The application of the Indiana assessment system of educational proficiencies (IASEP) in middle school alternative education settings, Unpublished manuscript, Purdue University.
7.
Bennett, D.E. (1999a). The development of a comprehensive accountability system for the state of Indiana (project report submitted to the Indiana Department of Education, Division of Special Education). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University, Purdue Research Foundation.
8.
Bennett, D.E. (1999b). The development and dissemination of policy and procedures for managing electronic educational data for the state of Indiana (project report). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University, Center for Education and Research in Information Assurance and Security.
9.
Bennett, D.E., Davis, M.A., Cunningham, J.N., & Stafford, S. (1999). Indiana assessment of educational proficiencies . Paper presented at the Forum on Alternate Assessment and "Gray Area" Assessment, Snowbird, UT.
10.
Bennett, D.E., & Miller, S. (2000-2001). Electronic educational data security: System analysis and teacher training. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 29, 3-20.
11.
Blumenfeld, P.C. (1992). Classroom learning and motivation: Clarifying and expanding goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology , 84, 272-281.
12.
Blumenfeld, P.C., & Marx, R.W. (1997). Motivation and cognition. In H. J. Walberg & G. D. Haertel (Eds.), Psychology and educational practice (pp.79-106). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
13.
Brophy, J. (1997). Effective teaching. In H. J. Walberg & G. D. Haertel (Eds.), Psychology and educational practice (pp. 212-232). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
Burgess, P., & Kennedy, S. (1998). What gets tested, gets taught. Who gets tested, gets taught. Lexington: University of Kentucky, Mid-South Regional Resource Center.
18.
Cunningham, J. (1998-2001). Indiana assessment system of educational proficiencies (IASEP): Documentation and rating software. W. Lafayette, IN: Purdue University, Purdue Research Foundation.
19.
Cunningham, J. (1999-2001). Assessment and instructional management system (AIMS): Documentation and rating software. W. Lafayette, IN: Purdue University, Purdue Research Foundation.
20.
Davis, M.A. (1999). The concurrent validity of the Indiana assessment system of educational proficiencies, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University.
Dykes, M.K. (1980). Developmental assessment for the severely handicapped . Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
23.
Elliott, J., Thurlow, M., & Ysseldyke, J. (1996). Assessment guidelines that maximize the participation of students with disabilities in large-scale assessments; Characteristics and considerations (synthesis report 25). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes .
24.
Elliott, S.N. (1994). Creating meaningful performance assessments: Fundamental concepts. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
25.
Elliott, S.N., & Kratochwill, T.R. (1998). Experimental analysis of the effects of testing accommodations on the scores of students with disabilities . Madison: Wisconsin Center for Education Research, U. S. Department of Education.
26.
Elliott, S.N., Kratochwill, T.R., & Gilbertson, A. (1998). The testing accommodation checklist. Monterey, CA: CTB/McGraw-Hill .
27.
Frey, W., Burke, D., Jakworth, P., Lynch, L., & Sumpter, M.L. (1996). Addressing unique educational needs of individuals with disabilities: Educational performance expectations for achieving supported independence in major life roles: AUEN 3.0. Lansing, MI: Disability Research Systems.
28.
Giangreco, M.F., Cloninger, C.J., & Iverson, V.S. (1993). Choosing options and for children: A guide to planning inclusive education. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H. Brooks Publishing Co.
29.
Greshem, F.M., & Elliott, S.N. (1990). Social skills rating system. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
30.
Kentucky State Department of Education. (1997 ). Alternate portfolio: Scoring consistency, accuracy, and recommended changes. Lexington: Author.
31.
Kleinert, H., & Kearns, J. (Eds.), (2001). Putting alternate educational assessments into practice. Baltimore: Paul H. Brooks.
Lambert, N.M., Nihira, K., & Leland, H. (1993). AAMR adaptive behavior scale-school (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
34.
Landau, J.K., Vohs, J.R., & Romano, C.A. (1998). All kids count. Boston: Federation for Children with Special Needs.
35.
Maehr, M.L. (1984). Meaning and motivation: Toward a theory of personal investment. In R. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 1. pp. 39-73). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
36.
Maryland State Department of Education. (1996 ). Independence mastery assessment program. Baltimore: Author.
37.
McDonnell, L. M., McLaughlin, M. J., & Morison, P. (Eds.), (1997). Educating one and all: Students with disabilities and standards-based reform. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
38.
McGrew, K.S., Spiegel, A.N., Thurlow, M.L., Shriner, J.G., & Ysseldyke, J.E. (1994). Secondary analysis of state assessment data: Why we can't say much about students with disabilities (technical report 10). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
39.
Miller, S.A. (1999). Using the techniques of a security assessment to guide technology development in education (Technical Report 99-12). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University, Center for Education and Research in Information Assurance and Security.
40.
Molenaar, I.W., Debets, P., Sijtsma, K., & Hemker, B.T. (1994). MSP - A program for Mokken scale analysis for polytomous items: User's manual. Groningen, The Netherlands: ProGAMMA.
41.
National Center on Educational Outcomes. ( 1993). IEPs and standards: What they say for students with disabilities? (Technical Report5). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
42.
National Center on Educational Outcomes. ( 1997). State accountability reports: What do they say about students with disabilities?Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
43.
National Center on Educational Outcomes. ( 1999). Forum on alternate assessment and "gray area" assessment . Proceedings from June, 1999 conference in Snowbird, UT. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
New York State Department of Education. (1997 ). The Learning standards and alternate performance indicators for students with severe disabilities. Albany: Author.
46.
Pintrich, P.R., & Schunk, D.H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.
47.
Public Law 105-17 (1997). Individuals with disabilities education reauthorization amendments of 1997. Washington, DC: U.S. Congress.
48.
Rosenshine, B., & Stevens, R. (1986). Teaching functions. In M. C. Wittrock (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 376-391). New York: Macmillan.
49.
Sparrow, S., Balla, D., & Cicchetti, D. (1984). Vineland adaptive behavior scales. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
50.
Thurlow, M.L., Elliott, J.L., & Ysseldyke, J.E. (1998). Testing students with disabilities: Practical strategies for complying with district and state requirements . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
51.
Ysseldyke, J.E., & Olsen, K. (1997). Putting alternate assessments into practice: What to measure and possible sources of data (Synthesis Report 28). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
52.
Ysseldkye, J.E., Thurlow, M.L., Langenfeld, K.L., Nelson, J.R., Teelucksingh, E., & Seyfarth, A. (1998). Educational results for students with disabilities: What do the data tell us? (Technical Report23). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
53.
Ysseldyke, J.E., Thurlow, M.L., McGrew, K.S., & Shriner, J.G. (1994). Recommendations for making decisions about the participation of students with disabilities in statewide assessment programs (Synthesis Report15). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
