Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

In this article, the authors explain the federal requirements for identifying the population of learners who may participate in the alternate assessment based on modified achievement standards. The authors present four approaches to providing the necessary documentation, discussing the advantages and disadvantages of each. The authors then focus entirely on curriculum-based measurement (CBM) as the most promising approach for providing such documentation. The hope is that a CBM decision-making process not only provides a clear and objective means for identifying the population to participate in the alternate assessment based on modified achievement standards but also enhances the quality of special education programming as well as student outcomes.

Keywords

alternate assessments achievement progress monitoring special education student outcomes

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Cortiella, C. (2007). Learning opportunities for your child through alternate assessments: Alternate assessments based on modified academic achievement standards. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Fuchs, L.S. , & Fuchs, D. (in press). On the importance of a unified model of responsiveness-to-intervention . Child Development Perspectives.

Fuchs, L.S. , & Fuchs, D. (1998). Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 13, 204-219.

Fuchs, L.S. , Fuchs, D. , Hosp, M. , & Jenkins, J.R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 239-256.

Fuchs, L.S. , Powell, S.R. , Seethaler, P.M. , Cirino, P.T. , Fletcher, J.M. , Fuchs, D. , Hamlett, C.L. , & Zumeta, R.O. (in press). Remediating number combination and word problem deficits among students with mathematics difficulties: A randomized control trial. Journal of Educational Psychology.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).

No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), 20 U.S.C. 70 § 6301 et seq. (2002).

Stecker, P.M. , Fuchs, L.S. , & Fuchs, D. (2005). Using curriculum-based measurement to improve student achievement: Review of research. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 795-820.

Vaughn, S.R. , & Fuchs, L.S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to treatment: Rationale and assumptions. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 137-146.

Using Curriculum-Based Measurement to Identify the 2% Population

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References