An Analysis of the Learning Characteristics of Students Taking Alternate Assessments Based on Alternate Achievement Standards

Abstract

This study examined the learner characteristics of students in alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards in three geographically and demographically different states. On the basis of the results, it can be argued that students in alternate assessments fall into at least two distinct subgroups. The first set of learners have either symbolic or emerging symbolic levels of communication, evidence social engagement, and possess at least some level of functional reading and math skills. The second set of students have not yet acquired formal, symbolic communication systems; may not initiate, maintain, or respond to social interactions consistently; and have no awareness of print, Braille, or numbers. The authors provide implications and considerations of the findings of the Learner Characteristics Inventory for states and practitioners in developing alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards.

Documenting Reading Achievement and Growth for Students Taking Alternate Assessments

“…Probably the most significant contribution of the present study is the interpretation of growth, an issue that has not previously been documented with empirical results along with information on test development, administration, and technical adequacy, extending the findings of previous research on this population, particularly its definition (Kearns, TowlesReeves, Kleinert, Kleinert, & Thomas, 2009;Quenemoen, 2009;Towles-Reeves, Kearns, Kleinert, & Kleinert, 2008). The real question about growth is consideration of the context of that growth.…”

Why IEP Teams Assign Low Performers With Mild Disabilities to the Alternate Assessment Based on Alternate Achievement Standards

“…Recently, Towles-Reeves, Kearns, Kleinert, and Kleinert (2009; see also Kearns et al, 2011) found that a significant subset of SSCD taking AA-AAS had not yet acquired the use of fully symbolic modes of communication (i.e., the use of words, signs, or other means of formal language) but were still in the emerging symbolic (e.g., communication supported by picture and/or augmentative devices or gestural prompts) or presymbolic (e.g., communication primarily through facial expressions and changes in muscle tone) stages. In addition, SSCD had very inconsistent expressive and receptive communication, had low-level engagement, and required assistance with motor skills.…”

Examining Teachers’ Decisions on Test-Type Assignment for Statewide Assessments

“…For example, several studies have reported that students with the most significant cognitive disabilities participating in the AA-AAS experience notable difficulties in expressive and receptive communication and often require augmentative/ alternative communication systems (Almond & Bechard, 2005;Kearns et al, 2011;Towles-Reeves, Kearns, Kleinert, & Kleinert, 2009). However, these indicators also accurately describe some students with orthopedic impairments; expressive and receptive language disorders are commonly observed among individuals with cerebral palsy who do not have intellectual disabilities (Pellegrino, 2002).…”