Examining an Alternate Assessment

Abstract

This study reviewed the alternate assessment results (N = 1,404) from 1 state that uses a portfolio system. It addressed 3 main questions: (a) the extent to which assessment content was linked to the state's general curricular standards, (b) the types of tasks that operationalized the general curricular standards, and (c) the correlation of the completeness of the portfolio with student performance. Although we found connections to the general curriculum on paper, the actual tasks used to represent the standards raised concerns about the strength of those connections. Additionally, we noted serious concerns with construct underrepresentation. Finally, practical issues with portfolio assembly may be contributing to poor student performance. We present implications for practice in the context of federal regulations such as No Child Left Behind and the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, as well as existing research on alternate assessment practices.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Browder, D. , Spooner, F. , Ahlgrim-Delzell, L. , Flowers, C. , Karvonen, M. , & Algozzine, R. (2003). A content analysis of the curricular philosophies reflected in states' alternate assessments. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities. 28, 165—81.

Individuals With Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (1990) (amended 1997).

Johnson, E. , & Arnold, N. (2004). Validating an alternate assessment. Remedial and Special Education., 25, 266—275.

Kleinert, H. , Garrett, B. , Towles, E. , Garrett, M. , Nowak-Drabik, K. , Waddell, C. , et al. (2002). Alternate assessment scores and life outcomes for students with significant disabilities: Are they related? Assessment for Effective Intervention, 28(1), 19—30.

Kleinert, H.L. , Green, P. , Hurte, M. , Clayton, J. , & Oetinger, C. (2002). Creating and using meaningful alternate assessment . Teaching Exceptional Children, 34, 40—47.

Kleinert, H. , Kearns, J. , & Kennedy, S. (1997). Accountability for all students: Kentucky's alternate portfolio assessment for students with moderate and severe cognitive disabilities . Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps , 22, 88—101.

Koretz, D. , McCaffrey, D. , Klein, S. , Bell, R. , & Stecher, B. (1993). The reliability of scores from the 1992 Vermont portfolio assessment program (CSE Technical Report No. 355.) Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.

Messick, S. (1995). Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 14(4), 5—8.

Resnick, L.B. , & Resnick, D.P. (1993). Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform. In B. R. Gifford & M. C. O'Connor (Eds.), Future assessments: Changing views of aptitude, achievement, and instruction (pp. 273—291). Boston: Kluwer .

10.

Thurlow, M. , Olsen, K. , Elliot, J. , Ysseldyke, J. , Erickson, R. , & Ahearn, E. (1996). Alternate assessments for students with disabilities (NCEO Policy Directions No. 5). Retrieved April 1, 2004, from http://www.coled.umn.edu/nceo/OnlinePubs/Policy5.html

11.

Thurlow, M.L. , & Thompson, S.J. (1999). District and state standards and assessments: Building an inclusive accountability system. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 12, 3—10.

12.

Tindal, G. , McDonald, M. , Tedesco, M. , Glasgow, A. , Almond, P. , Crawford, L. , et al. (2003). Alternate assessment in reading and math: Development and validation for students with significant disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69, 481—494.

13.

Ysseldyke, J.E. , & Olsen, K. (1999). Putting alternate assessments into practice: What to measure and possible sources of data. Exceptional Children , 65, 175—186.