U.S. Department of Education: Promoting Educational Excellence for all Americans - Link to ED.gov Home Page
OSEP Ideas tha Work-U.S. Office of Special Education Programs
Ideas that work logo
  Home  Contact us
Technical Assistance Products: Assessment
TOOL KIT HOME
OVERVIEW
MODELS FOR LARGE-SCALE ASSESSMENT
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PRODUCTS
Assessment
Instructional Practices
Behavior
Accommodations
RESOURCES
 
 
 Information About PDF
 
 

 Printer Friendly Version (pdf, 4.1M)

Designing from the Ground Floor: Alternate Assessment on Alternate Achievement Standards

Science

Review of Science

  • Least frequently addressed area
  • Only found 10 studies; all single subject
  • Total N=42 participants
  • All in separate special education contexts; one in a summer program
  • Nearly all were Science for Personal and Social Perspective (First aid and safety research)

Literature Review Categories for Science

This graphic depicts a bar graph representing literature review categories for science where ten articles and ten studies were reviewed.  The X axis has seven categories, science as inquiry, physical science, life science, earth and space science, science and technology, personal and social perspectives, and history and nature, and is labeled 'components of science.'  The Y axis represents the frequency.  It begins at zero and ends at ten in increments of one.  The bars for science as inquiry, physical science, life science, science and technology, and history and nature all reach zero.  The bar for earth and space science reaches one and the bar for personal and social perspectives reaches nine.


We have the most evidence for…

  • Teaching science using real life activity
    • Specifically First Aid and Safety
  • Using systematic prompting and fading

What we have the least of…

  • Not a great deal for any category of science

The one study for Earth and space science dealt with teaching the students about weather sight words. Most of the personal and social perspectives dealt with making correct responses or choices in safety situations (i.e., cooking, crossing the street). Information in the area of science is limited. Clearly there is a need for research in this area as the assessment of students in science is approaching. There will continue to be a need for extensive curriculum work to create appropriate, meaningful content standards for students with significant disabilities as well as a need for alignment of those standards to instruction and assessments.

Reasons for the problem

  • Lack of literature defining academic outcomes for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities
  • Variety of curricular philosophies in place across states

The reason for this lack of definition in academic content is the lack of literature and the separate curricular philosophies encompassed within the developmental and functional eras.

Checkpoint

Checkpoint

  • Does your alternate assessment on alternate achievement standards include:
    • Clear assessment content targets based on a theory of learning for the intended population in the content domains of reading and mathematics?

Trainer's Note: We will be continuing the discussion about the curricular philosophies with a planned activity in Part III. If you would like to continue the discussion of the learning characteristics of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, go to Part II: Who are the Students who take Alternate Assessments on Alternate Achievement Standards.

Notes

References

Browder, D.M., Wakeman, S., Spooner, F., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., & Algozzine, B. (manuscript submitted for publication). Research on reading for students with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children.

Center for Applied Special Technology. (CAST). (2002). www.cast.org.

Education Week analysis of data from the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Data Analysis System, 2002-03.

Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Compton, D., Coyne, M., Greenwood, C., & Innocenti, M. (2005). Quality indicators for group experimental and quasi-experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 149-165.

Giangreco, M., Cloninger, C., Iverson, (1999). COACH: Choosing options and accommodations for children. Baltimore: Paul Brookes.

Grisham-Brown, J. & Kearns, J.F. (2001). Creating standards-based individualized education programs. In Kleinert, H. K., and Kearns, J.F. Alternate Assessments Measuring Outcomes and Supports. Baltimore: Paul Brookes.

Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165- 180.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Amendments of 1997, PL 105-117, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.

Joseph, L.M., & Seery, M.E. (2004). Where is the phonics. Remedial and Special Education, 25(2), 88-95.

Kleinert, H. L., & Kearns, J. F. (1999). A validation of the performance indicators and learner outcomes of Kentucky's alternate assessment for students with significant disabilities. The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24(2), 100-110.

Kleinert, H. K. & Thurlow, M. (2001). An introduction to alternate assessment. Alternate Assessments Measuring Outcomes and Supports. Baltimore: Paul Brookes.

Kliewer, C. & Biklen, D. (2001). "School's not really a place for reading: A research synthesis of the literate lives of students with severe disabilities. Journal of the Association of Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26(1), 1-12.

National Alternate Assessment Center (NAAC). (2005). www.naacpartners.org. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub L. No 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002)

Pellegrino, J., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, P. (2001) Knowing what students know. National Research Council: National Academy Press.

United States Department of Education. (2004). Standards and Assessments Peer Review Guidance: Information and examples for meeting requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Washington D.C.: US Department of Education Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.

References and Annotated Bibliographies for Part 1: Overview, Terminology, Theory, and Research

Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2002). www.cast.org.

Grisham-Brown, J., & Kearns, J. (2001). Can performance goals be set for all students?

Creating standards-based individualized education. In H. L. Kleinert & J. F. Kearns, Alternate assessment: Measuring outcomes and supports for students with disabilities (pp. 17-28). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Joseph, L. M., & Seery, M. E. (2004). Where is the phonics?: A review of the literatureon the use of phonetic analysis with students with mental retardation. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 88-94.

Kleinert, H., & Browder, D. (2005). Implications of the "Assessment Triangle" for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities: The First Vertex – Models of Student Cognition. Unpublished manuscript.

Kleinert, H. L., & Kearns, J. F. (1999). A validation of the performance indicators and learner outcomes of Kentucky's alternate assessment for students with significant disabilities. The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24(2), 100-110.

Kliewer, C., & Bilken, D. (2001). "School's not really a place for reading": A research synthesis of the literate lives of students with severe disabilities. The Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26, 1-12.

Pellegrino, J, Chudowsky, N., & Galser, R. (Eds.) (2001). Advances in the sciences of thinking and learning. Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment (pp. 59-109). Washington, DC: Committee on the Foundations of Assessment, National Academy Press.

U. S. Department of Education. (2004). Standards and assessments: Peer review guidance: Information and examples for meeting requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Office of Elementary and Secondary Education Washington, D.C.

United States Department of Education. (2002-2003).Education Week analysis of data from the Office of Special Education Programs, Data Analysis System.


Ref. Type: Book

Notes: Book chapter

Title: Creating standards-based individualized education programs

Authors: Grisham-Brown, J. & Kearns, J. F.

Pub. Date: 2001

Source: Alternate assessment: Measuring outcomes and supports for students with disabilities

Vol, Issue:

Publisher: Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing

Page #: 17-28

Keywords: alternate assessment, outcomes, disabilities

Abstract:

Participants:

Test Design:

Findings: This chapter provides an outline of a process for developing Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) that articulates the relationship of these individualized programs to the standards set for all students. The authors argue that the determination of the critical function or outcome of a particular standard represents a crucial understanding for IEP teams as they develop an IEP that moves the student within the framework of a general curriculum. Identifying supports, adaptations, and modifications increase the chances to learn because the teacher can determine appropriate opportunities for instruction and the students can respond appropriately in learning activities.


Ref. Type: Journal

Notes: Journal Article

Title: Where is the phonics? A review of the literacture on the use of phonetic analysis with students with mental retardation

Authors: Joseph, L.M., & Seery, M.E.

Pub. Date: 2004

Source: Remedial and Special Education

Vol, Issue: 25, 2

Publisher:

Page #: 88-94

Keywords: Phonics, Students with Mental Retardation

Abstract:

Participants:

Test Design: This is a review of studies conducted over the past 12 years on the use of phonetic analysis strategies and/or phonetics instruction with students with mild or moderate mental retardation. Seven studies were found to consist of the use of phonetic analysis (making letter-sound correspondence). No studies were found that examined the use of phonetics instruction. The purpose of the review was to examine the existing literature in this area over the past 12 years.

Findings: All studies found that students with mental retardation can learn and use phonetic-analysis strategies and/or have the potential to benefit from phonetics instruction. Further research is necessary to draw substantial conclusions, particularly regarding the effectiveness of direct/explicit phonics instruction with children with mental retardation.


Ref. Type: Journal

Notes: Journal article

Title: A validation of the performance indicators and leaner outcomes of Kentucky's alternate assessment for students with significant disabilities.

Authors: Kleinert, H. L., & Kearns, J. F.

Pub. Date: 1999

Source: The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps

Vol, Issue: 24, 2

Publisher:

Page #: 100-110

Keywords: validation, alternate assessment, cognitive disabilities

Abstract:

Participants: A total of 44 national authorities in best practices for students with moderate and severe cognitive disabilities participated in this study.

Test Design: The purpose of this study was to conduct an expert validation of Kentucky's approach to alternate assessment for students with significant cognitive disabilities. Participants were asked to fill out a survey that asked questions about performance indicators and academic expectations for the state of Kentucky. All written comments included with the survey were typed and categorized into major themes.

Findings: Results indicated that in terms of the core of best practices embodied in the performance criteria for Kentucky's alternate assessment, there was a high degree of professional congruence. However participants also raised some concerns about the extent to which more limited learner outcomes have been identified for students with significant disabilities and whether the alternate assessment was sufficiently aligned to general curricular expectations for all students.


Ref. Type: Journal

Notes: Journal Article

Title: "School's not really a place for reading": A research synthesis of the literate lives of students with severe disabilities

Authors: Kliewer, C., & Biklen, D.

Pub. Date: 2001

Source: Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps

Vol, Issue: 26, 1

Publisher:

Page #: 1-12

Keywords: severe disabilities, literacy, social relationships, intimacy

Abstract

Participants: The research presented in this article is from 6 in depth case studies as well as biographies and autobiographies of persons with severe disabilities. The 6 individuals ranged in age from 4-16 years and were all professionally defined as severely mentally retarded.

Test Design: Researchers conducted interviews and observations in inclusive and segregated classrooms, at work sites, in homes, and in the community. Observations were focused on the students' interactions, social relationships, use of printed language, and general literacy. Analysis of the observations and interviews was ongoing.

Findings: The research suggests that persons labeled as having severe intellectual disabilities demonstrate the ability to acquire knowledge of symbols and literacy when they are in the presence of people who support them, believe in their abilities, and with whom they share an intimate relationship with. Based on these findings, the researchers suggest that the ladder to literacy be reconstructed into a web of relationships, educators work towards a more local understanding of students with severe disabilities, and that we shed the use of labels altogether for these individuals.


Ref. Type: Book

Notes: Book

Title: Advances in the sciences of thinking and learning

Authors: Pellegrino, J., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R., (Eds)

Pub. Date: 2001

Source: Knowing what students know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessments

Vol, Issue:

Publisher:

Page #: 59-109

Keywords: validation, alternate assessment, cognitive disabilities

Abstract:

Participants:

Test Design:

Findings: Over the past few decades, much research has been conducted in order to gain insight about how people think and learn. Specific areas that have been examined include: how knowledge is organized in the mind; how children develop conceptual understanding; how people acquire expertise in specific areas; how participation in various forms of practice shapes understanding and what happened in the physical structures of the brain during the processes of learning, storing, and retrieving information. This chapter focuses on the findings that are most relevant to assessing school learning. Four perspectives (Differential, Behaviorist, Cognitive, and Situative) are discussed in terms of their views on the process of learning. Specific topics covered in the chapter include: fundamental components of cognition; the nature of subject-matter expertise; the development of expertise; integration of models of cognition and learning with instruction and assessment; and methods of observation and inference. Throughout the chapter, information is integrated with ways of improving assessment of school learning.

 

 Previous  |  Next