Education and alternate assessment for students with significant cognitive disabilities: Iplications for educators

Education Policy Analysis Archives

Volumn 12, Issue , 2004, Pages

  Zatta, Mary C ^a,b,c,d   Pullin, Diana C ^b,e  

^a Perkins School for the Blind   (United States)

^b BOSTON COLLEGE   (United States)

^c Perkins School   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS BOSTON   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 3042517483     PISSN: 10682341     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (63)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council for Measurement in Education (1999) . Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing: Washington, D.C.: American Research Association.
2. Board of Education v. Ambach, 458 N.Y.S. 2d 680 (1982).
3. Brookhart v. Illinois State Board of Education, 697 F2d 179, 182 (7th Circuit, 1983).
4. Carpenter, C. D., Ray, M., & Bloom, L. (1995). Portfolio assessment: Opportunities and challenges. Intervention in School and Clinic, 31(1), 34-41.
5. Chapman v. California Department of Education, 229 F. Supp. 981 (N.D. Calif., 2002)
6. Cheong, J. (1993). Portfolios: A window on student achievement. Thrust for Educational Leadership(November/December), 27-29.
7. Choate, J., & Evans, S. (1992). Authentic assessment of special learners: Problem or promise? Preventing School Failure, 37(1), 6-9.
8. Coutinho, M., & Malouf, D. (1993). Performance assessment and children with disabilities: Issues and possibilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 25(4), 63-67.
9. Debra P. v. Turlington, 644 F2d 397 (5th Cir. 1981), also F2d. (11th Cir. 1984).
10. DeStefano, L, J. Shriner, and C. Lloyd (2001, Fall). Teacher decision-making in participation of students with disabilities in large-scale assessment. Exceptional Children 68:1, pp. 7-22.
11. Donovan, M.S. & Cross, C. (eds.) (2002). Minority Students in Gifted and Special Education. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
12. Elliott, J. (1997). Invited commentary. TASH, 22(2), 104-106.
13. Erickson, R., & Thurlow, M. (1997). State special education outcomes, 1997: A report on state activities during educational reform. Minneapolis: National Center for Educational Outcomes.
14. French, D. (1998). The state's role in shaping a progressive vision of public education. Phi Delta Kappan(November), 185-195.
15. Geenen, K., Thurlow, M., & Ysseldyke, J. (1995). A disability perspective on five years of education reform. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
16. Goals 2000: Educate America Act, P.L. 103-227 (1994).
17. Guy, B., Shin, H., Lee, S.-Y., & Thurlow, M. (1999). State graduation requirements for students with and without disabilities (Technical Report 24). Minneapolis: National Center for Educational Outcomes.
18. Harris, M., & Curran, C. (1998). Knowledge, attitudes, and concerns about portfolio assessment: An exploratory study. Teacher Education and Special Education, 21(2), 83-94.
19. Heaney, K. & D. Pullin (1998). Accommodations, Flags, and Other Dilemmas: Disability Rights and Admissions Testing: Educational Assessment, 5 (2), 71-93.
20. Kampfer, S., L. Horvath, H. Kleinert, and J. Kearns (2001, Spring). Teachers' perceptions of one state's alternate assessment: Implications for practice and preparation. Exceptional Children 67:1, pp. 361-374.
21. Kleinert, H., Haig, J., Kearns, J. F., & Kennedy, S. (2000). Alternate assessments: Lessons learned and roads to be taken. Exceptional Children, 67(1), 51-66.
22. Kleinert, H., & Kearns, J. F. (1999). A validation study of the performance and learner outcomes of Kentucky alternate assessment for students with significant disabilities. The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24(2), 100-110.
23. 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 355). Los Angeles: University of California.
24. Maurer, R. (1996). Designing alternative assessments for interdisciplinary curriculum in middle and secondary schools. Needham, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
25. Massachusetts Department of Education (2003). MCAS Alternate Assessment Summary of 2001 and 2002 Results. Malden, MA: The Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
26. Massachusetts Department of Education (2004). MCAS Alternate Assessment (MCAS-Alt): Summary of 2003 State Results. Malden, MA: The Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
27. Massachusetts Department of Education, (2003). MCAS Alternate Assessment 2004 Administrator's Training, Framingham, MA.
28. Massachusetts Department of Education, (2002). 2003 MCAS Alternate Assessment Educators' Training, Brookline, MA..
29. Massachusetts Department of Education (2002, August). Spring 2002 MCAS Tests: Summary of State Results. Malden, MA: The Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
30. Massachusetts Department of Education (2002). Requirements for the Participation of Students with Disabilities in MCAS - Including Test Accommodations and Alternate Assessment, Malden, MA: The Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
31. Massachusetts Department of Education (2001). Educator's Manual for the MCAS Alternate Assessment, Malden, MA: The Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
32. The Massachusetts Education Reform Act of 1993: Research and Evaluation Mapping Project (1999). Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Amherst School of Education.
33. McDonnell, L., McLaughlin, M., & Morison, P. (1997). Educating one and all. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
34. McLaughlin, M., Artiles, A. & Pullin, D. (2001). Challenges for transformation of special education in the 21st century: Rethinking culture in school reform. Journal of Special Education Leadership.
35. Miller, M. D., & Legg, S. M. (1993). Alternative assessment in a high-stakes environment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice(2), 9-15.
36. Moss, P. (1992). Shifting conceptions of validity in educational measurement: Implications for performance assessment. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 229-258.
37. National Center on Educational Outcomes. (1999). 1999 state special education outcomes: A report on state activities at the end of the century. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
38. National Center on Educational Outcomes. (2000). IEP's and standards: What they say for students with disabilities. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
39. National Center on Educational Outcomes, (2000). Special topic area: Accountability for students with disabilities. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
40. National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for education reform. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
41. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. 107-110.
42. Nolet, V. (1992). Clasroom-based measurement and portfolio assessment. Diagnostique, 18(1), 5-24.
43. Olsen, K. (1998). What principles are driving development of state alternate assessments?: Mid-South Regional Resource Center.
44. Quenemoen, R., Thompson, S. and Thurlow, M. (2003). Measuring academic achievement of students with significant cognitive disabilities: Building understanding of alternate assessment scoring criteria (Synthesis Report 50). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
45. Rouse, M., Shriner, J., & Danielson, L. (2000). National assessment and special education in the United States and England and Wales: Towards a common system for all? In M. McLaughlin & M. Rouse (Eds.), Special Education and School Reform in the United States and Britain (pp. 67-97). London and New York: Routledge.
46. Sailor, W. (1997). Invited Commentary. TASH, 22(2), 102-114.
47. Sebba, J., Thurlow, M., & Goertz, M. (2000). Educational accountabiloity and Students with Disabilities in the United States and Canada. In M. McLaughlin & M. Rouse (Eds.), Special Education and School Reform in the United States and Britain. New York: Routledge.
48. Shepard, L. (1992). Will national tests improve student learning? (CSE Technical Report 342). Los Angeles: University of California.
49. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing(1999). Washinton, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
50. Thompson, S., Quenemoen, R., Thurlow, M., & Ysseldyke, J. (2001). Alternate Assessments for Students with Disabilities. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.
51. Turner, M., Baldwin, L., Kleinert, H., & Kearns, J. F. (2000). The relation of statewide alternate assessment for students with severe disabilities to other measures of instructional effectiveness. The Journal of Special Education, 34(2), 69-76.
52. Warlick, K. (2000, June 23-24, 2000). Proceedings Report. Paper presented at the Alternate Assessment Forum: Connecting into a Whole, Salt Lake City, Utah.
53. Warlick, K., & Olsen, K. (1998). Who to assess? State practices in determining eligibility for alternate assessment.: Mid-South Regional Resource Center.
54. Weiner, D. (2002a, February). Personal interview with M. Zatta.
55. Wiener, D. (2002b). Massachusetts: One state's approach to setting performance levels on the alternate assessment(Synthesis Report 48). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved July 14, 2003, from the World Wide Web: http://education. umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Synthesis48.html
56. Worthen, B. (1993). Critical issues that will determine the future of alternative assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 444-456.
57. Ysseldyke, J., Olsen, K., & Thurlow, M. (1997). Issues and considerations in alternate assessments (Synthesis Report No. 27). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota: National Center on Educational Outcomes.
58. Ysseldyke, J., & Olson, K. (1997). Putting alternate assessments into practice: What to measure and possible sources of data. Minneapolis: National Center for Educational Outcomes.
59. Ysseldyke, J., & Thurlow, M. (1999). Assessment and accountability for student with disabilities: 1999 status update and emergin issues. Minneapolis: National Center for Educational Outcomes.
60. Ysseldyke, J., Thurlow, M., & Geenen, K. (1994). Educational accountability for students with disabilities. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
61. Ysseldyke, J., Thurlow, M., Kozleski, E., & Reachly, D. (1998). Accountability for the results of educating students with disabilities: Assessment provisions of the 1997 Ammendments to the Individuals wiht Disabilities Education Act. Minneapolis: National Center for Educational Outcomes.
62. Ysseldyke, J., Thurlow, M., & Shriner, J. (1994). Students with disabilities & educational standards: Recommendations for policy & practice. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
63. Zatta, M. (2003). Is there a relationship between teacher experience and training and student scores on the MCAS Alernate Assessment? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts).