Alternate Assessment Data Summary/Interview

Data to be Collected in Document Analysis and Survey Instrument

Section A: Overview

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section A: Overview
A1a through A4 will be repeated depending on the number of alternate assessments in a state. For the general/regular assessment only A1a through A1d will be asked.
	A1a	Assessment title (and commonly used acronym)?
	A1b	Assessment developer(s)?
	A1c	Content Areas?
	A1e	Purpose(s) of assessment?
	A3	Grades in which each assessment is used in 2005-06…..
	A4	Assessment approach (structure/types of items used)…..
	A5	Describe the role of student work (videos, photographs, work sheets/products) in the alternate assessment.
	A6	Describe the role of teacher judgment in the alternate assessment.
	A7a	How many state content standards are there for English language arts?
	A7b	How many state content standards are there for mathematics?
	A7c	Have the state’s content standards been extended or further clarified to provide access for students with significant cognitive disabilities?
If yes, ask A7d, else go to A7f
	A7d	What is the name of the extended content standards?
	A7e	How do the extended content standards map to the state content standards?
	A7f	On how many content standards in English language arts and in mathematics is an individual student with significant cognitive disabilities assessed in the alternate assessment?
	A11	For each of the languages arts standards addressed, how many tasks or products are required?
	A12	For each of the mathematics standards addressed, how many tasks or products are required?

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section A: Overview
	A14	What is the time frame within which the alternate assessment occurs (specify dates in comments field)?
		* One day to two weeks
		* More than 2 weeks to 1 month
		* More than 1 month to 2 months
		* More than 2 months to the full school year
	A15	To what degree does the assessment of student work (tasks or products) take place as part of the day to day instructional activities?
	A16	To what degree is the assessment of student work (tasks or products) conducted “on-demand”?

Section C: Academic Achievement Standards

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section C: Academic Achievement Standards
2.1	C11a	Who was involved in creating the alternate achievement standards for students with significant cognitive disabilities for language arts grades 3 through 8?
	Response choice	* General educators
	Response choice	* Parents
	Response choice	* Test vendor
	Response choice	* State special education staff
	Response choice	* State assessment staff
	Response choice	* State instruction and curriculum staff
	Response choice	* Outside experts
	Response choice	* Special educators
	Response choice	* Content specialist
	Response choice	* Other
2.1	C12a	Who was involved in creating the alternate achievement standards for students with significant cognitive disabilities for language arts grades 10 through 12?
	Response choice	* General educators
	Response choice	* Parents
	Response choice	* Test vendor
	Response choice	* State special education staff
	Response choice	* State assessment staff
	Response choice	* State instruction and curriculum staff
	Response choice	* Outside experts
	Response choice	* Special educators
	Response choice	* Content specialist
	Response choice	* Other

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section C: Academic Achievement Standards
2.1	C13a	Who was involved in creating the alternate achievement standards for students with significant cognitive disabilities for mathematics grades 3 through 8?
	Response choice	* General educators
	Response choice	* Parents
	Response choice	* Test vendor
	Response choice	* State special education staff
	Response choice	* State assessment staff
	Response choice	* State instruction and curriculum staff
	Response choice	* Outside experts
	Response choice	* Special educators
	Response choice	* Content specialist
	Response choice	* Other
2.1	C14a	Who was involved in creating the alternate achievement standards for students with significant cognitive disabilities for mathematics grades 10 through 12?
	Response choice	* General educators
	Response choice	* Parents
	Response choice	* Test vendor
	Response choice	* State special education staff
	Response choice	* State assessment staff
	Response choice	* State instruction and curriculum staff
	Response choice	* Outside experts
	Response choice	* Special educators
	Response choice	* Content specialist
	Response choice	* Other
2.5	C30b	What was the process by which alternate achievement descriptors for students with significant cognitive disabilities for language arts grades 3 through 8 were determined?

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section C: Academic Achievement Standards
2.2	C31b	What was the process by which alternate achievement descriptors for students with significant cognitive disabilities for language arts grades 10 through 12 were determined?
2.5	C32b	What was the process by which alternate achievement descriptors for students with significant cognitive disabilities for mathematics grades 3 through 8 were determined?
2.2	C33b	What was the process by which alternate achievement descriptors for students with significant cognitive disabilities for mathematics grades 10 through 12 were determined?
2.3	C42b	What was the process by which alternate achievement cut scores for students with significant cognitive disabilities for language arts grades 3 through 8 were determined?
2.3	C43b	What was the process by which alternate achievement cut scores for students with significant cognitive disabilities for language arts grades 10 through 12 were determined?
2.3	C44b	What was the process by which alternate achievement cut scores for students with significant cognitive disabilities for mathematics grades 3 through 8 were determined?
2.2	C45b	What was the process by which alternate achievement cut scores for students with significant cognitive disabilities for mathematics grades 10 through 12 were determined?
2.3	C65a	What is the names(s) and cut score(s) for Advanced achievement level for students being assessed based on alternate achievement standards for language arts (For example, Name = ##, separate multiple items with a hard return)?
2.3	C65b	What is the name and cut score for Proficient achievement level for students being assessed based on alternate achievement standards for language arts (For example, Name = ##)?
2.3	C65c	What is the names(s) and cut score(s) for Basic achievement level for students being assessed based on alternate achievement standards for language arts (For example, Name = ##, separate multiple items with a hard return)?
2.3	C66	What is the descriptor for each achievement level for students being assessed based on alternate achievement standards for language arts?
2.3	C68a	What is the names(s) and cut score(s) for Advanced achievement level for students being assessed based on alternate achievement standards for mathematics (For example, Name = ##, separate multiple items with a hard return)?
2.3	C68b	What is the name and cut score for Proficient achievement level for students being assessed based on alternate achievement standards for mathematics (For example, Name = ##)?

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section C: Academic Achievement Standards
2.3	C68c	What is the names(s) and cut score(s) for Basic achievement level for students being assessed based on alternate achievement standards for mathematics (For example, Name = ##, separate multiple items with a hard return)?
2.3	C69	What is the descriptor for each achievement level for students being assessed based on alternate achievement standards for mathematics?
2.1/6.2	C75	How does the state ensure that the alternate achievement standards promote access to the general curriculum?
2.1	C76	Do the alternate achievement standards reflect professional judgment of the highest standards possible?
2.3/6.2	C85	What procedures are in place for informing parents when a child is assessed using an alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?

Section D: Statewide Assessment System

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section D: Statewide Assessment System
3.2	D1 Yes/No option	Does the assessment system include assessments developed or adopted at both the local and state levels?
	D2 Yes/No option	Does the assessment system include alternate assessments developed or adopted at both the local and state levels?
If yes, ask D3, else go to Section E.
3.2	D3	How has the state ensured that these local alternate assessments meet the same technical requirements as the statewide alternate assessments?
	D4b Yes/No option	What is the process for ensuring that all local alternate assessments are aligned with the academic content and alternate achievement standards?
3.2	D5	What is the process for ensuring that all local alternate assessments are equivalent to one another in terms of content coverage, difficulty, and quality?
3.2	D6	What is the process for ensuring that all local alternate assessments yield comparable results for all subgroups?
3.2	D7	What is the process for ensuring that all local alternate assessments yield results that can be aggregated with those from other local alternate assessments and with any statewide alternate assessments?
3.2	D8	What is the process for ensuring that all local alternate assessments provide unbiased, rational, and consistent determinations of the annual progress of schools and LEAs within the state?
3.2	D9	Have criteria been selected for evaluating local alternate assessments?
3.2	D10	Are there plans to rectify deficiencies if any are displayed through evaluation studies?

Section E: Technical Quality

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section E: Technical Quality
4.1	E75	Who was involved in evaluating the technical characteristics of validity of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
	Response choice	* General educators
	Response choice	* Parents
	Response choice	* Test vendor
	Response choice	* State special education staff
	Response choice	* State assessment staff
	Response choice	* State instruction and curriculum staff
	Response choice	* Outside experts
	Response choice	* Special educators
	Response choice	* Content specialist
	Response choice	* Other
	E76 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the validity of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of scoring and reporting structures consistent with the subdomain structures of its content standards?
If yes, ask E76b, else go to E77
	E76b	What evidence is there to support the validity argument in terms of scoring and reporting structures consistent with the subdomain structures of its content standards?
	E77 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the validity of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of test and item scores related to internal or external variables as intended?
If yes, ask E77b, else go to E78
	E77b	What evidence is there to support the validity argument in terms of test and item scores related to internal or external variables as intended?
	E78 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the validity of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of purposes of the assessments, delineating the types of uses and decisions most appropriate?
If yes, ask E78b, else go to E79
	E78b	What evidence is there to support the validity argument in terms of purposes of the assessments, delineating the types of uses and decisions most appropriate?
Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section E: Technical Quality
	E79 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the validity of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of decisions based on the assessment results consistent with the purposes?
If yes, ask E79b, else go to E80
	E79b	What evidence is there to support the validity argument in terms of decisions based on the assessment results consistent with the purposes?
	E80 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the validity of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of implementation processes?
If yes, ask E80b, else go to E81
	E80b	What evidence is there to support the validity argument in terms of implementation processes?
	E81 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the validity of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of the assessment system producing intended and unintended consequences?
If yes, ask E81b, else go to E82
	E81b	What evidence is there to support the validity argument in terms of the assessment system producing intended and unintended consequences?
	E82 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the validity of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of measurement of construct relevance?
If yes, ask E82b, else go to E83
	E82b	What evidence is there to support the validity argument in terms of measurement of construct relevance?
	E83 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the validity of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of grade level equating?
If yes, ask E83b, else go to E84
	E83b	What evidence is there to support the validity argument in terms of grade level equating?
4.1	E84	What additional technical qualities were used to determine validity of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
If yes, ask E84b, else go to E86
	E84b	What evidence is there to support the validity argument in terms of additional technical qualities used?

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section E: Technical Quality
4.2	E86	Who was involved in evaluating the technical characteristics of reliability for the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
	Response choice	* General educators
	Response choice	* Parents
	Response choice	* Test vendor
	Response choice	* State special education staff
	Response choice	* State assessment staff
	Response choice	* State instruction and curriculum staff
	Response choice	* Outside experts
	Response choice	* Special educators
	Response choice	* Content specialist
	Response choice	* Other
4.2	E87 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the reliability of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of variability of groups?
If yes, ask E87b, else go to E88
	E87b	What evidence is there to support the reliability argument in terms of variability of groups?
	E88 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the reliability of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of internal consistency of item responses?
If yes, ask E88b, else go to E89
	E88b	What evidence is there to support the reliability argument in terms of internal consistency of item responses?
	E89 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the reliability of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of variability among schools?
If yes, ask E89b, else go to E90
	E89b	What evidence is there to support the reliability argument in terms of variability among schools?
	E90 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the reliability of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of consistency from one test form from another?
If yes, ask E90b, else go to E91
	E90b	What evidence is there to support the reliability argument in terms of consistency from one test to another?
Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice		Question Section E: Technical Quality
	E91 Yes/No option	Has the state documented the reliability of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in terms of interrater consistency in scoring?
If yes, ask E91b, else go to E92
	E91b	What evidence is there to support the reliability argument in terms of interrater consistency in scoring?
4.2	E92	What additional technical qualities were used to determined reliability of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
If yes, ask E92b, else go to E93
	E92b	What evidence is there to support the reliability argument in terms of additional technical qualities?
4.3	E93 Yes/No option	Have conditional standard errors of measurement been reported for the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
If yes, ask E93b, else go to E94
	E93a	What reliability estimate was used to calculate the SEM?
	E93b	Were SEMs provided for all cut-points along the score continuum?
4.3	E94	Who was involved in ensuring fairness in the development of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
	Response choice	* General educators
	Response choice	* Parents
	Response choice	* Test vendor
	Response choice	* State special education staff
	Response choice	* State assessment staff
	Response choice	* State instruction and curriculum staff
	Response choice	* Outside experts
	Response choice	* Special educators
	Response choice	* Content specialist
	Response choice	* Other
4.3	E95	What was the process of ensuring fairness in the development of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
	Response options	* DIF analysis
	Response options	* Bias review of items
	E95a	What evidence is there to support the process of ensuring fairness in the development?
Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section E: Technical Quality
4.5	E102	Who was involved in establishing criteria for the administration, scoring, analysis, and reporting of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
	Response choice	* General educators
	Response choice	* Parents
	Response choice	* Test vendor
	Response choice	* State special education staff
	Response choice	* State assessment staff
	Response choice	* State instruction and curriculum staff
	Response choice	* Outside experts
	Response choice	* Special educators
	Response choice	* Content specialist
	Response choice	* Other
4.5	E102b Yes/No option	Have criteria been established for the administration of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
If yes, ask E102b1, else go to E102c
	E102b1	Describe the criteria established for the administration of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
4.5	E102c Yes/No option	Have criteria been established for the scoring of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
If yes, ask E102c1, else go to E102d
	E102c1	Describe the criteria established for the scoring of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
4.5	E102e Yes/No option	Have criteria been established for the reporting of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
If yes, ask E102e1, else go to E103
	E102e1	Describe the criteria established for the reporting of the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section E: Technical Quality
4.5	E103	On which of the following topics does the state provide information to districts about conducting the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
	Response option	* Implementation procedures and requirements
	Response option	* Criteria of selecting students to be assessed by different types of alternate assessments
	Response option	* Procedures for monitoring assessment administration
	Response option	* Criteria on which scores will be based
	Response option	* Other
4.5	E105	What procedures are in place to monitor quality control and the consistency with which the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards is administered?
4.6	E107	Describe any plans the state has for maintaining and improving the technical adequacy of its alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards.
4.5	E108	Who scores the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
	Response option	* General education content area specialist
	Response option	* Special educator
	Response option	* Special education department staff
	Response option	* Paraprofessional
	Response option	* Test contractors
	E108a	Is each alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards scored by more than one scorer?
	E108b	Is the scorer(s) trained for scoring the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
	E108c	Can the scorer be familiar with the student whose alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards he/she is scoring?

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section E: Technical Quality
	E108e	Which of the following criteria – definitions of what assessment scores mean and how studentsۥ scores are evaluated – has been adopted for scoring the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement?
	Response option	* The state is in the process of developing/revising the scoring criteria
	Response option	* Student criteria
		---- Accuracy of student response
		---- Ability to generalize across settings
		---- Amount of independence
		---- Amount of progress
	Response option	* System criteria
		---- Instruction in multiple settings
		---- Opportunities to plan, monitor, and evaluate their work
		---- Work with nondisabled peers
		---- Appropriate human and technological supports
4.6	E109a	Are accommodations allowed for students with significant cognitive disabilities to participate on the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?
If yes, ask E109b, else ask F19.
4.6	E109b	What accommodations are allowed?

Section F: Alignment

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section F: Alignment
5.1	F19	Who was involved in the alignment of the alternate assessment with the State content standards and alternate achievement standards?
	Response choice	* General educators
	Response choice	* Parents
	Response choice	* Test vendor
	Response choice	* State special education staff
	Response choice	* State assessment staff
	Response choice	* State instruction and curriculum staff
	Response choice	* Outside experts
	Response choice	* Special educators
	Response choice	* Content specialist
	Response choice	* Other
5.2	F21	How did the state align its alternate achievement standards with the State content standards?
5.2	F22	How was the process of aligning alternate achievement standards with the State content standards validated?
5.3	F23	Is the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards aligned to content (what students should know) and to process (how students do it)?
5.5	F25	How does the assessment yield scores that reflect the full range of achievement implied by the alternate achievement standards?
5.7	F26	What ongoing procedures are used to maintain and improve alignment between the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards and state content standards over time?
	Response choice	* Internal Alignment studies
	Response choice	* External Alignment studies
	Response choice	* Other

Section G: Inclusion

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section G: Inclusion
	G14	What are the guidelines for IEP teams to apply in determining when a childۥs significant cognitive disability justifies alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards?

Section H: Reporting

Peer Review Reference	Item Number/ Response Choice	Question Section H: Reporting
7.3	H9	How has the state provided for the production of interpretive, descriptive, and diagnostic reports for individual students that indicate relative strengths and instructional needs?
7.3	H10	How do the individual student reports express results?
	Response option	* State’s achievement standards
	Response option	* Numerical values such as scale scores
	Response option	* Numerical values such as percentiles
7.3	H13	Are the individual student reports accompanied by interpretive guidance for parents, teachers, and principals?
	Yes/No option	* Parents
	Yes/No option	* Teachers
	Yes/No option	* Principals

Data Summary/Interview Example

Instructions for Review of the Data Summary/Interview

Thank you for agreeing to assist the National Study on Alternate Assessments (NSAA) in producing an accurate representation of your state’s alternate assessment(s) for students with significant cognitive disabilities. This NSAA [INSERT STATE NAME] Alternate Assessment Data Summary/Interview reflects our best effort to understand your state’s alternate assessment system by reviewing your state’s peer review submission materials, as well as documents posted on your state’s Department of Education website. We now need your expertise to (1) verify that these data and information accurately reflect the status of your state’s alternate assessment system for 2005-06 and (2) identify where changes will occur for 2006-07.

The development of a complete Data Summary/Interview has two phases. In Phase I, state officials in each state are asked to review and verify the accuracy of the 2005-06 data and information we have collected and to identify where changes have occurred or are to be implemented in the 2006-07 school year. In Phase II, telephone interviews will be conducted to (1) correct inaccurate or incomplete data and information for 2005-06 and (2) discuss any changes that are being implemented in 2006-07.

Phase I

The data and information included in the attached document cover seven topic areas from the study’s document review process: overview of the state’s alternate assessment system, academic achievement standards, statewide assessment system, technical quality of the alternate assessment, alignment of the alternate assessment, inclusion of students with significant cognitive disabilities, and reporting alternate assessment results. In some cases, we have not been able to locate information to answer a question; these items are marked “Unable to locate.” These questions will be addressed in the interview.

Because these questions span many different topic areas, it may be necessary for several individuals to review this document. Please identify the individuals involved in reviewing each section of the document and include their contact information in the space provided under each section heading.

On the Data Summary/Interview, indicate whether the data and information are accurate and complete for the 2005-06 school year (check “Accurate and Complete”) or inaccurate and/or incomplete for the 2005-06 school year (check “Not Accurate and/or Not Complete”). Also indicate whether the data and information have changed or are expected to change for the 2006-07 school year (check “Information has changed for 2006-07 school year”).

You DO NOT need to provide a written explanation for any of the questions. We will get the accurate and complete data and information for 2005-06 and details about the changes in 2006-07 during the interviews in Phase II. We are asking you only to select an answer from the given response choices. However, we have provided space for you to make notes for your convenience in preparation for the interview.

If more than one individual is involved in reviewing the data and information in this Data Summary/Interview, please compile all reviewers’ responses into a single document. Please send a copy of the Data Summary/Interview to SRI International via FedEx, using the enclosed label. We would appreciate receiving it by [DATE]. This information allows us to customize the interview.

Phase II

You will be contacted by [NAME OF INTERVIEWER] ([INTERVIWER’S PHONE NUMBER]) to schedule interviews with individuals involved in reviewing the Data Summary/Interview. The purpose of these interviews is to address any inaccuracies and gather data and information on questions for which we were unable to locate information, and to document changes that are occurring in 2006-07. We must receive your completed review of the Data Summary/Interview 1 week before conducting the telephone interview(s). We will customize the interview questions using the information you provide in the check boxes on the Data Summary/Interview. Retain a copy of the Data Summary/Interview with your responses to refer to during the interview.

If you have any questions about the study, contact Renée Cameto, Project Director for NSAA, at 650-859-6451 or at [email protected].

Thank you again for your time, and we look forward to speaking with you.

MARYLAND
Alternate Assessment
Data Summary / Interview

Overview

Completed By: _________________________________

Phone: _______________________

E-mail: ____________________________________________________________

Completed By: _________________________________

Phone: _______________________

E-mail: ____________________________________________________________

1. Assessment Title  (A1a)

Document Analysis Response:
Alternate Maryland School Assessment (ALT-MSA)

____ Accurate and Complete

____ Not Accurate and/or Not Complete

____ Information has changed for 2006-07 school year

Notes (for your convenience):



 

 

(81)

2. Assessment Developer  (A1b)

Document Analysis Response:
Major contributors to ALT-MSA: Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE), Pearson Education Measurement (PEM), Inclusive Large Scale Standards and Assessment (ILSSA), and an Advisory Committee

____ Accurate and Complete

____ Not Accurate and/or Not Complete

____ Information has changed for 2006-07 school year

Notes (for your convenience):



 

 

(82)

3. Content Area  (A1c)

Document Analysis Response:

______Unknown	__X___Language arts	__X___Math
______Science	______Social studies

____ Accurate and Complete

____ Not Accurate and/or Not Complete

____ Information has changed for 2006-07 school year

Notes (for your convenience):



 

 

(83)

4. Type of Assessment  (A1d)

Document Analysis Response:

______Unknown

______Regular assessment

__X___Alternate Assessment

____ Accurate and Complete

____ Not Accurate and/or Not Complete

____ Information has changed for 2006-07 school year

Notes (for your convenience):



 

 

(84)

5. Purpose of Assessment  (A1e)

Document Analysis Response:
To fulfill NCLB testing requirements and IDEA requirements.

____ Accurate and Complete

____ Not Accurate and/or Not Complete

____ Information has changed for 2006-07 school year

Notes (for your convenience):



 

 

(85)

6. Type of achievement standard on which assessment is based  (A2)

Document Analysis Response:

______Unknown	______Grade level	______Modified
__X___Alternate

____ Accurate and Complete

____ Not Accurate and/or Not Complete

____ Information has changed for 2006-07 school year

Notes (for your convenience):



 

 

(86)

7. Grades in which each assessment was used in 2005-06  (A3)

Document Analysis Response:

______Unknown	______Pre-K or K	______1
______2	__X___3	__X___4
__X___5	__X___6	__X___7
__X___8	______9	__X___10
______11	______12	______13
______Ungraded

____ Accurate and Complete

____ Not Accurate and/or Not Complete

____ Information has changed for 2006-07 school year

Notes (for your convenience):



 

 

(87)

8. Code the type of assessment approaches using the list below  (A4)

Document Analysis Response:

______Unknown	______Rating scale/checklist	__X___Portfolio/Body of evidence
__X___Performance task/events	______Multiple choice/constructed response

____ Accurate and Complete

____ Not Accurate and/or Not Complete

____ Information has changed for 2006-07 school year

Notes (for your convenience):



 

 

(88)

9. Assessment 5 Regular or Alternate (A5) Describe the role of student work (videos, photographs, work sheets/products) in the alternate assessment.  (A5)

Document Analysis Response:
100% -- in the portfolio, "[t]here are 4 types of artifacts that may be submitted: videotape (at least two videotaped artifacts, one in reading and one in mathematics are required for each ALT-MSA portfolio); audiotape; student work (original); and data collection chart (original)." The data collection chart is defined as continuous, systematic, and objective quantification of a combination of (a) student responses and (b) student products.

____ Accurate and Complete

____ Not Accurate and/or Not Complete

____ Information has changed for 2006-07 school year

Notes (for your convenience):



 

 

(89)

10. Assessment 5 Regular or Alternate (A6) Describe the role of teacher judgment in the alternate assessment.  (A6)

Document Analysis Response:
0% -- in the portfolio, "[t]here are 4 types of artifacts that may be submitted: videotape (at least two videotaped artifacts, one in reading and one in mathematics are required for each ALT-MSA portfolio); audiotape; student work (original); and data collection chart (original)." The data collection chart is defined as continuous, systematic, and objective quantification of a combination of (a) student responses and (b) student products.

____ Accurate and Complete

____ Not Accurate and/or Not Complete

____ Information has changed for 2006-07 school year

Notes (for your convenience):



 

 

(90)

16

Page 16