The 2015 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act placed a 1.0% cap on the participation of students with disabilities in the alternate assessment based on alternate academic achievement standards (AA-AAAS). U.S. Department of Education regulations clarified that states must develop participation guidelines and a definition of students with the “most significant cognitive disabilities.” States have developed and refined their guidelines and definitions in the years since these regulations. We present an overview of how participation guidelines and definitions have changed by comparing the results of three analyses of states’ materials related to AA-AAAS participation. We highlight key changes and similarities in participation guidelines across analyses and conclude with a discussion of why changes may have occurred.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.
2.
DeStefanoL.ShrinerJ.LloydC. (2001). Teacher decision making in participation of students with disabilities in large-scale assessment. Exceptional Children, 68, 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290106800101
3.
FordD. (2004). Intelligence testing and cultural diversity: Concerns, cautions, and considerations (RM042040). The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
HinkleA. R.LazarusS. S.FlemingK.ThurlowM. L. (2024). The basics of accommodations and modifications (NCEO Brief #33). National Center on Educational Outcomes.
6.
HoldenL. R.TanenbaumG. J. (2023). Modern assessments of intelligence must be fair and equitable. Journal of Intelligence, 11(6), Article 126. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11060126
7.
LarsonE. D.ThurlowM. L.LazarusS. S.LiuK. K. (2020). Paradigm shifts in states’ assessment accessibility policies: Addressing challenges in implementation. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 30(4), 244–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207319848071
8.
LazarusS. S.ThurlowM. L.LailK. E.ChristensenL. (2009). A longitudinal analysis of state accommodations policies: Twelve years of change 1993–2005. Journal of Special Education, 43(2), 67–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466907313524
9.
McDermottP. A.WatkinsM. W.RhoadA. M. (2014). Whose IQ is it? Assessor bias variance in high-stakes psychological assessment. Psychological Assessment, 26(1), 207–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034832
10.
QuanbeckM.LazarusS. S.ThurlowM. L. (2023). 2021-22 participation guidelines and definitions for alternate assessments based on alternate academic achievement standards (NCEO report 440). National Center on Educational Outcomes.
11.
QuenemoenR. F. (2009). The long and winding road of alternate assessments: Where we started, where we are now, and the road ahead. In SchaferW. D.LissitzR. W. (Eds.), Alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards: Policy, practice, and potential (pp. 127–153). Paul H. Brookes.
12.
SabiaR.ThurlowM. L.LazarusS. S. (2020). The general education curriculum: Not an alternate curriculum! (Brief #5). TIES Center.
13.
ShrinerJ. G.DeStefanoL. (2003). Participation and accommodation in state assessment: The role of individualized education programs. Exceptional Children, 69(2), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290306900202
ThompsonS. J.JohnstoneC. J.ThurlowM. L.AltmanJ. R. (2005). 2005 state special education outcomes: Steps forward in a decade of change. National Center on Educational Outcomes.
16.
ThurlowM. L. (2005). Standards-based reform and students with disabilities: Reflections on a decade of change. In SkrticT. M.HarrisK. R.ShrinerJ. G. (Eds.), Special education policy and practice (pp. 59–82). Love Publishing.
17.
ThurlowM. L. (2014). Instructional and assessment accommodations in the 21st century. In FlorianL. (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of special education (Vol. 2, pp. 597–612). Sage.
ThurlowM. L.LazarusS. S.AlbusD. A.LarsonE. D.LiuK. K. (2019). 2018-19 participation guidelines and definitions for alternate assessments based on alternate academic achievement standards (NCEO report 415). National Center on Educational Outcomes. https://nceo.umn.edu/docs/OnlinePubs/NCEOReport415.pdf.
20.
ThurlowM. L.LazarusS. S.LarsonE. D.AlbusD. A.LiuK. K.KwongE. (2017). Alternate assessments for students with significant cognitive disabilities: Participation guidelines and definitions (NCEO report 406). National Center on Educational Outcomes.
U.S. Department of Education. (2002, December2). Title I-improving the academic achievement of the disadvantaged-academic assessments (Federal Register 67(231)).
23.
U.S. Department of Education. (2003a, March20). Title I-Improving the academic achievement of the disadvantaged-academic assessments (Federal Register 68(54)).
24.
U.S. Department of Education. (2003b, December9). Title I-Improving the academic achievement of the disadvantaged-academic assessments (Federal Register 68(263)).
25.
U.S. Department of Education. (2016, December8). Title I-Improving the academic achievement of the disadvantaged-academic assessments (Federal Register 81(236)).
26.
WuY.-C.ThurlowM. L.AlbusD. A.LiuK. K. (2020). Trends in AA-AAS participation and performance for 2007–08 to 2016–17 (Data analytics #12). National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
