Alternate Assessments for English Language Learners with Disabilities

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why provide alternate assessments?
2.  When were alternate assessments developed?
3.  How are alternate assessments incorporated into the accountability system?
4.  Who should participate in alternate assessments?
5.  What are some sample participation guidelines for alternate assessments?
6.  What should be included in an alternate assessment?
7.  What do alternate assessments look like?
8.  What about assessments available in other languages for ELLs?

 

1. Why provide alternate assessments?

Alternate assessments are used to ensure educational accountability for all students with disabilities. When students are excluded from the state assessments, the reporting of test results is incomplete and cannot be considered when decisions are made about how to improve programs. Also, they may be denied educational opportunities available to other students.

 

2. When were alternate assessments developed?

Alternate assessments are relatively new in most states. They were developed for students who were not included in most large-scale assessments until Federal law mandated their participation. The requirement for states to develop these assessments first appeared in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997 (IDEA 97). The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) included the results of alternate assessments in its accountability requirements, assuming them to be based on grade level achievement standards like the general assessment, even though they had a different format that improved accessibility. ESEA regulations clarified that more than one type of alternate assessment may be used by a state, and that students with significant cognitive disabilities participating in alternate assessments could be held to alternate achievement standards different from the general assessment and proficiency on those could be counted for accountability purposes (December 2003 Title I Regulations).

On April 9, 2007, an additional option was defined in both Title I and IDEA regulations. States were allowed to develop assessments based on modified academic achievement standards that are challenging for eligible students and measure a student's mastery of grade-level content, but are less difficult than grade-level achievement standards.

 

3. How are alternate assessments incorporated into the accountability system?

States typically report accountability assessment results by achievement levels, also known as proficiency or performance levels. Terms such as "novice," "basic," "proficient," "meeting the standard," "advanced," or "exceeding the standard" may be used to describe the achievement level of each student. Achievement standards include labels for the various achievement levels, descriptions of competencies associated with each achievement level, and assessment scores ("cut scores") that differentiate among the achievement levels. Achievement standards must be defined using a rigorous process and must be aligned with academic content standards.

The December 9, 2003 ESEA regulations expanded the existing option of developing alternate assessments based on grade-level achievement standards (AA-GLAS) to also permit alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities. The April 9, 2007 ESEA and IDEA regulations also gave states the option of developing alternate assessments based on modified academic achievement standards (AA-MAS).

The process of setting achievement standards (i.e., describing various levels of proficiency and identifying cut-scores) is required for the three ESEA and IDEA assessment options.

• The achievement standards for alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) must be linked to grade-level content, but may cover a different depth, breadth, and complexity than the general assessment achievement standards.
• The achievement standards for alternate assessments based on modified academic achievement standards (AA-MAS) are less difficult than the standards for the general assessment, but aligned to grade-level content.
• Achievement standards for alternate assessments based on grade-level achievement standards (AA-GLAS) must be equivalent to those on the general assessment.

Setting alternate achievement standards is a challenging but rewarding process, and requires the active participation of test company partners, measurement experts, curriculum and special education state leadership, as well as educators, parents, and higher education standard-setting panelists. Because these are applied to ELLs with disabilities also, it is important for individuals involved in the education of these students to be involved in standards-setting processes.

 

4. Who should participate in alternate assessments?

In general, alternate assessment participants are those students with disabilities who are unable to participate in regular assessments even with accommodations. Some ELLs with disabilities are among these students. They may need an alternate assessment for either a content assessment (such as reading or mathematics) or for an [English language proficiency assessment].

Some alternate assessment participants may require alternate assessments aligned to grade-level content that is based on grade-level achievement standards, or the same definition of proficiency with academic content as the general assessment.

Other students may have significant cognitive disabilities and can be assessed using alternate formats aligned to the grade-level content, but based on alternate achievement standards that define content proficiency differently from the general assessment.

ESEA and IDEA regulations in April 2007 added an additional option, alternate assessments based on modified achievement standards (AA-MAS). According to the U.S. Department of Education, "Modified achievement standards are intended for a small group of students whose disability has prevented them from achieving grade-level proficiency and who likely will not reach grade-level achievement in the same timeframe as other students. Currently, these students must take either the grade-level assessment, which may be too difficult, or an alternate assessment for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, which may be too easy. Neither of these options provides an accurate assessment of what these students know and can do. Alternate assessments based on modified academic achievement standards may provide a more appropriate measure of these students' achievement of grade-level content, and give teachers and parents information that can be used to better inform instruction."

 

5. What are some sample participation guidelines for alternate assessments?

Guidelines for AA-AAS might include the following criteria:

A student with a significant cognitive disability who:

• requires substantial modifications, adaptations, or supports to meaningfully access the grade-level content,
• requires intensive individualized instruction in order to acquire and generalize knowledge, and
• is unable to demonstrate achievement of academic content or English language proficiency standards on a paper and pencil test, even with accommodations.

Guidelines for AA-MAS, based on current information in the Regulations and Guidelines for AA-MAS, might include the following criteria:

A student with a disability who:

• is learning grade-level content, but whose previous performance on multiple measures indicates that the student is unlikely to reach grade level proficiency within the school year covered by the IEP, and
• has standards-based IEP goals based on grade level content standards.

Guidelines for AA-GLAS might include the following criteria:

A student with a disability who:

• requires accommodations that are not available on the general assessment to demonstrate skill and knowledge on the grade-level content and grade-level achievement standards, and
• demonstrates achievement in different formats or contexts than are provided by the general assessment.

 

6. What should be included in an alternate assessment?

All assessments for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) accountability purposes should measure student achievement on the grade-level content. How these assessments reflect the depth and breadth of the grade-level content depends on whether the alternate assessment is based on alternate, modified, or grade-level achievement standards.

Alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) must also assess student achievement on the grade-level content. In states with checklists and performance tasks, stakeholders typically have prioritized content or language skills to be covered for students with significant cognitive disabilities. States that use portfolio or body of evidence approaches may permit IEP teams to select a limited number of grade-level content standards and benchmarks to assess; or the state may require specific content standards or benchmarks for each tested grade. In portfolio or body-of-evidence states that require specific content coverage, stakeholders have generally prioritized specific content for that purpose.

Alternate assessments based on modified achievement standards (AA-MAS) assess student achievement of modified academic achievement standards. Students who participate in this assessment option must have standards-based IEPs and receive instruction based on grade-level content standards. This is an optional assessment that not all states offer. Many states that had earlier identified one set of prioritized content standards across all grade levels for their alternate assessment based on modified achievement standards now require grade-level content alignment. This reflects ESEA regulations and guidance requirements that all assessments must be aligned to the grade-level definitions of content for the enrolled grade of the student being assessed.

For alternate assessments based on grade-level achievement standards (AA-GLAS), the depth and breadth of assessed content should be the same as on the general assessment in order to draw accurate inferences of student proficiency.

 

7. What do alternate assessments look like?

The National Alternate Assessment Center has proposed a typology for AA-AAS that describes current practice, and represents a starting point for building a shared vocabulary for stakeholders to describe and evaluate AA-AAS approaches. The AA-AAS approach types proposed are portfolios, rating scales, and item-based tests:

1. Portfolios are a collection of student work (including, but not limited to, worksheets, student-produced products, videos, pictures, or data sheets) that measure a limited number of benchmarks or objectives (usually two to six per content area). Tasks and activities are teacher-designed or modified. Portfolios may be unstructured, or relatively structured with fixed protocols for the collection of evidence.
2. On rating scales, teachers rate student performance on a relatively long pre-scripted list of skills based on classroom observation. Evidence may or may not be required.
3. Item-based tests consist of pre-scripted test items that students respond to in a one-on-one test administration setting. Items may include one or a combination of the following: performance tasks, writing prompts, constructed-response items, or multiple-choice items.

States that have developed alternate assessments based on modified achievement standards (AA-MAS) have incorporated multiple choice items for at least one content area. Other types of items used by states include prompts for writing, constructed response items, and performance tasks.

There are very few states that have developed alternate assessments based on grade-level achievement standards (AA-GLAS). It is technically challenging to design an alternate format test that is comparable to the general assessment. The examples currently available include performance assessments with both evidence of student achievement and jury review of the evidence, and a collection of evidence submitted to independent scorers.

 

8. What about assessments available in other languages for ELLs?

Some states offer assessments in other languages for their regular or alternate assessments. However, an assessment is not an alternate assessment simply because it is provided in another language. The word "alternate" conveys a legal meaning that separates it from regular assessments. Therefore, we refer to "assessments in other languages" according to whatever type of content assessment is being described: regular or alternate (e.g., AA-MAS, AA-AAS). Further, some states think of content assessments in other languages as an accommodation, so it is important to know how each state views these assessments.

Top of page