Brad: Alternate Assessments, Alternate Ideas

Shortly behind its roll-out of the newly purchased Web-based curriculum comes our district’s revised training on alternate assessment protocol.

Chances are, if you’re living in a state other than Alaska, the alternate assessment you’ll deliver to your students this year looks different from the one I’ll deliver to mine. On top of that, the appearance, delivery protocol, participation guidelines, and scoring procedures of your state’s assessment have likely changed since last year.

It can be a frustrating but important realization that our field is prone to more procedural limbo, revision, and flux than any other in the realm of education. It’s enough to make you stop and think for a moment: How did we get here . . . and where are we going?
 
As I understand it, long before I entered the profession, students receiving special education services were excluded from statewide assessments. However, since 1997’s amended IDEA law, not only have students with significant cognitive disabilities been required to participate in testing, but schools have been required to develop alternate means of assessment for those students.

Each state’s Department of Education set to work on designing, producing, implementing, and reporting the scores of its own alternate assessment. By 2001’s No Child Left Behind Act, each state had begun accumulating student test data. In Alaska, the advent of each school year meant revisions to the teacher trainings, participation, and scoring procedures—such that evolving policy was no longer printed, as it was almost universally acknowledged that change was on the way.
 
By now, each of our states has slightly different policy, procedure, content, and scoring with respect to alternate assessments. The good news is that we’re learning more and more about what our students with significant cognitive disabilities do and don’t know. In some cases it’s even guiding our instruction and informing our curriculums.

The bad news is that it’s become very apparent that we still have a long way to go in developing reliable and valid assessments to guarantee students with significant cognitive disabilities are participating in and receiving the education to which they’re entitled. There’s also the matter of what happens to the small contingency of students whose disabilities may not make them eligible for the alternate assessment.
 
In Alaska, particularly in the rural regions, the social, cultural, and geographic challenges to developing and delivering an equitable alternate assessment are even greater. Tracking migrant families, adjusting for language differences, and developing test questions that minimize cultural assumptions are only a few of the issues.

One attribute I would ascribe to a good special educator would be resiliency. As classroom teachers, we’re often asked to change the way we do our jobs with little to no input into the process. Most of us are used to making team decisions for the benefit of the student, not the system. When implementing our respective alternate assessments, it’s useful to remember that the system needs accountability as much as the student. Even if the test doesn’t provide data as meaningful as that observed and documented on a day-to-day basis, it may give research professionals the knowledge to create better alternate assessments in the future.

The very idea of students with significant disabilities participating in statewide assessments is progressive. It’s a good one. Along with it comes the process of feeling our way in the dark. It’s trusting that today’s questionably reliable alternate assessment will lead to a better one tomorrow.

For those who’ve been teaching since the very beginning of this process, I truly respect your resiliency. Veteran educators have unique perspectives on this issue. I would value your comments on how the implementation of alternate assessments has impacted your curriculums and classrooms. Let us know your perspective on where we’ve been and where we’re going. . . .

Read more about alternate assessments:

Common Misperceptions and Research-based Recommendations for Alternate Assessment based on Alternate Achievement Standards (National Center on Educational Outcomes)

Alternate assessment: Have we learned anything new? (Exceptional Children 75-2; CEC members-only content)

 

Comments

[Janna Lilly]

I would love to hear from teachers from a state or states that feel like their alt. assessment #1 provides a valid measurement of the achievement of students with significant cognitive disabilities AND #2 has a test administration process that is manageable for the teacher. Thank you!

[Ashley]

Alternate Assessments in my state are very frustrating. I am in a self-contained unit with k-5th graders. The assessments that I give are basically graded by how well I can word our activity/lesson. Assessments for students with severe-profound needs, needs to change! Some of my students are not physically able to complete some of the objectives but I still have to write a lesson to be turned into the state to be graded. Very disheartening. Some districts in my state did not make AYP because of special education students. Hopefully AYP changes and NCLB changes will happen sooner than later. I love my class and my students. I hate having to write INDIVIDUALIZED education plans with impossible goals set by the state.

[Bradley]

That's a great point Meghan and Spec. ED -- there's evidence that shows the validity/reliability of some alternate assessments are compromised as a result of well-intended, but uneven delivery/scoring protocol. While most teachers are capable and/or willing to administer and the assessments, at times I wonder whether it's reasonable to add yet another extremely important academic and legal responsibility (scoring a federally mandated test) to a special educator's workload -- often with scant support in terms of time and/or human resources to aid them. Thanks for addressing this key issue in your comments.

[Meghan W]

In Illinois, we use the Illinois Alternative Assessment, to replace the standardized ISAT testing every year. Last year was my first year giving the test and while I do think it was an accurate measure of my student's ability, I am a little confused with the testing protocol. Why is it that the regular education students take the standardized test and have to follow what I call these "really strict" guidelines, but when I administer the alternative assessment for my students with a severe cognitive disability, I am the one scoring it? I guess I really don't understand the protocol as to why it's done that way.

[C the Special Ed Taecher]

Last year I taught a self-contained class where there majority of the students took alternative assessment instead of the standardized test. When it came to mid-year and end of the year test for reading, math, and science, they took the same test as those students that took the standardized test. I often had students that became upset and frustrated while testing because they felt the test was too long and difficult. I think the students that are taking the alternative assessment should have alternative midyear and end of the year test as well.

[Special ED Teach]

I also teach in a self contained setting where we have to teach to the general education curriculum. However, we have a wonderful special education department that takes grade level content and modifies it for our students abilities. I know that I personally have to use some of that material during our alterinative assessments. The alternative assessment in my state is more for the teachers than the students. I have personally seen cases where one objective is scored poorly by one person and the same objective is scored as passing by another. This type of inconsistancy is frustrating to see as the teacher because it makes us realize the tests are not for the students.

Kristy- I totally agree about making post graduation goals a priority!

[amy]

Special education is a process that keeps changing but I don't see that as a bad thing. We have to keep growing and changing so that we can continue to offer special education students the best education possible.

[Bradley]

Jeannette -- Not sure what state you're from, but it's likely that the alternative testing you write about is a modified/accommodated version of the grade level standards based test that your district administers. In Alaska this test is called the Alternative Assessment Program (which is a modified version of the High School Exit Exam). Incredibly, the State named the test for students with significant cognitive disabilities the Alternate Assessment. This is a different test than the Alternative Assessment since it is a test for students with disabilities on a non-diploma track. In Alaska, student scores from the Alternate Assessment are not taken into consideration for AYP, but are reported. Scores of students with disabilities taking the Alternative Assessment are factored into AYP. I'm not sure whether my response has added to or allayed your confusion, but it's clear you're tuned into the issues -- especially since you teach a grade level not yet subject to standardized testing. Thanks for your perspective, experience and comment.

[Bradley]

Kristy -- I think you're right on about the emphasis on post-graduation goals. Transition goals are vital components for secondary special education students. I also think many parents see the value of vocational preparation as at least equal if not greater than the value of regular educational access for students with disabilities. It seems only a few years ago, transition was highlighted as the major work of secondary special educators for students with significant disabilities. As of late, it seems access to the general curriculum (at least in part to prep students for certain assessments) has been added to the plate. In general, this is a good thing for some, but perhaps not all students with significant learning difficulties. Thanks so much for your perspective and for adding your experience to the conversation.

[Kristy Webb]

Alternate Assessments have had a great impact on the curriculum that is taught and how instruction is presented within the classroom. I teach in a self-contained environment and the students are on a functional curriculum. However the students who will be taking the alternate assessment during his or her junior year, must be tested on 11th grade standards. This is a somewhat tedious task, because not only do we have to test the students on 11th grade standards, we have to develop instruction that will ensure the learning of the content. Our states law has also changed, in stating that certain students will qualify for a reg.ed diploma while not participating in any part of the reg. ed. curriculum. However, it is the special ed. teachers responsibility to make sure that these students have access to reg. ed. curriculum for his or her grade level. I am not complaining so much as to teaching the reg. ed. curriculum, because it is fun to watch the students learn! But I do wonder about the relevancy of the reg.ed. curriculum for a student whom cannot read or is low-level reader and cannot perform basic math! The majority of the students in our program want to work when he or she graduates high school, I think more focus should be put on post-graduation goals, such as employment and not so much on gaining access to a general education curriculum.

[Jeannette Newsome]

I'm confused about what alternative testing means for students taking standardized tests. Students in my county may have tests read to them in grade levels in which they are expected to read the test themselves, placed in small group environments, or given the test one-on-one. I'm sure there are other means in which these students are given the test. Is there a different test that some states may give their students who have IEPs rather than the grade level test? I teach kindergarten and I am not familiar with the alternate means for students to take the standardized tests. I know that my county doesn't take students, who receive extra assistance, scores into consideration when deciding if your school has made the AYP list or not.