Suchergebnisse

In this brief response to Agran et al., I provide data on the extent to which students with the most significant cognitive disabilities (i.e., those students participating in alternate assessments on alternate achievement standards) are separated educationally from their peers without disabilities. I further discuss additional factors that may be contributing to separate placements for students with the most significant disabilities. Finally, I provide some promising resources that may help to address these persistent issues.

The purpose of this study was to conduct an expert validation of Kentucky's alternate assessment for students with significant disabilities. Since 1992, this has been the only fully operational, statewide alternate assessment system in the nation. A total of 44 national authorities in best practices for students with moderate and severe cognitive disabilities responded to this validation. This study revealed a high degree of professional congruence on the core of best practices embodied in the performance criteria for Kentucky's alternate assessment. However, respondents raised concerns about the extent to which more limited learner outcomes had been identified for students with significant disabilities, and whether the alternate assessment was sufficiently aligned to the general curricular expectations for all students. Finally, we present considerations for other states and local school districts in the design of alternate assessments, as well as the specific revisions in content and scoring standards Kentucky has made to more clearly address the relationship of its alternate assessment to the state's learning outcomes for all students.

One of the keys to ensuring high expectations for all students is the requirement for inclusive measures of educational accountability. Recognizing this need, Congress enacted Title II, National Education Reform Leadership, Standards, and Assessments, calling for the development of state assessment systems that fully include all students, as a major component of the 1994 Goals 2000: Educate America Act. At present, Kentucky is the only state in the nation that fully includes all students within a statewide educational assessment and accountability system. Students with moderate and severe cognitive disabilities participate in Kentucky's assessment system via the Alternate Portfolio. This article describes the development of Kentucky's alternate assessment, including the content and scoring standards for the Alternate Portfolio. Specific examples of entries at each grade level (4th, 8th, and 12th) are given as well. Initial implementation data, including reliability, validity, and instructional impact measures, are presented. Finally, critical issues in the development of alternate statewide assessments are discussed, with recommendations for future research efforts in this area.

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) flexibility requires states to develop and implement teacher effectiveness measures that consider student assessment results, including assessment results for students with disabilities participating in general and alternate assessments. We describe how alternate assessment results for students with significant cognitive disabilities could appropriately be used in teacher effectiveness measures. In addition, we discuss the unique parameters faced by teachers serving students with significant cognitive disabilities that may warrant a multiple measures approach to evaluating teacher effectiveness. Using one of the two national initiatives presently developing alternate assessments based on the Common Core State Standards as an example, we describe how these new assessments might be applied in measuring teacher effectiveness. Finally, we offer implications for both policy makers and practitioners in measuring teacher effectiveness for teachers serving students with significant cognitive disabilities participating in alternate assessments.

ABSTRACTAn interactive, virtual‐patient module was produced on compact disc (CD‐ROM) in response to the critical need to increase dental students' clinical exposure to patients with developmental disabilities. A content development team consisting of dental faculty members, parents of children with developmental disabilities, an individual with a developmental disability, and educational specialists developed the interactive, virtual‐patient module. The module focused on a young man with congenital deafblindness presenting as a new patient with a painful molar. Students were required to make decisions regarding clinical interactions throughout the module. Differences in both comfort and knowledge level were measured pre‐ and post‐module completion, as well as the dental students' overall satisfaction with the learning experience. Significant results were obtained in students' perceived comfort and knowledge base. Participants reported overall satisfaction using the modules. This study demonstrated that an interactive, multi‐media (CD‐ROM), virtual patient learning module for dental students could be an effective tool in providing students needed clinical exposure to patients with developmental disabilities.