Alternate Assessment: Early Highlights and Pitfalls of Reporting

Assessment for Effective Intervention

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 61-66

  Burdette, Paula ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84992812886     PISSN: 15345084     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/073724770102600210     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. Haertel, E.H. (1999). Validity arguments for high-stakes testing: In search of the evidence. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18(4), 5–9.
2. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C.-§ 1400 et.seq.
3. Kearns, J.F. (in press). Accessing standards and the general curriculum: A framework for students with significant disabilities. In H. J. Kleinert & J. F. Kearns (Eds.), Alternate assessment: Measuring outcomes and supports for students with disabilities. Baltimore: Paul Brookes.
4. Office of Special Education Programs. (2000, August). Questions and Answers about Provisions in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997 Related to Students with Disabilities and State and District-wide Assessments (Memorandum No. 00–24). Washington, DC: Author.
5. Olsen, K. (1998). Alternate assessment issues and practices. (Mid-South Regional Resource Center Monograph). Lexington: University of Kentucky.
6. Thurlow, M.L., & Thompson, S.J. (1999). District and state standards and assessments: Building an inclusive accountability system. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 12(2), 3–10.
7. United States Department of Education, 34 C. F. R. §300 - 302 (1999).