ABSTRACTThe literature reports controversy among teachers about the value of an alternate assessment for students with significant cognitive disabilities (SCD) (Kampfer, Horvath, Kleinert, & Kearns, 2001). The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceptions of special education teachers about the value and implementation of the Arizona Alternate Assessment (AIMS-A) for instructional planning. Twelve elementary special education teachers from three school districts in Southern Arizona were placed in one of two focus groups. They were asked questions about the value of the alternate assessment, the impact on instructional planning, the allocation of time to complete the assessment, and the usefulness of the data collected for the alternate assessment. Later, in-depth interviews were held with three of the 12 teachers representing each of the districts. The teachers' responses to the questions asked in the focus group and interview sessions were tape-recorded, transcribed, and organized into themes. Results revealed four major themes and 11 sub-themes. Most teachers valued the AIMS-A information in guiding their teaching. Some teachers, however, believed the instrument did not accurately assess students with the most severe disabilities. Teachers reported the assessment helped guide their instructional planning. The limited time allocated during the school day to complete the assessment resulted in an additional burden on teachers' personal time. Teachers found documenting and collection data throughout the school year was necessary to be able to accurately assess students during the spring testing period. Most of the teachers found the progress data useful. Six recommendations for State (SEAs) and Local Education Agencies (LEAs) resulted from the implications. The first recommendation is to acquire positive teacher perceptions and support for the AIMS-A by providing teachers with a thorough understanding of the benefits of the assessment. A second recommendation is for LEA administrators to assist teachers in finding time to administer the AIMS-A. The third recommendation is that the LEA's must provide in-service training. The fourth recommendation requires modification of existing policies when needed. The fifth recommendation is to create a state-wide data base that articulates student progress on the AIMS-A. The final recommendation is to modify existing policies where needed.

Author's abstract: The purpose of this study was to examine the experience of Georgia Teachers with administering the Georgia Alternate Assessment (GAA) to elementary students with significant cognitive disabilities and determine how those experiences informed their perception of the Georgia Alternate Assessment. The GAA was designed to assess students with significant cognitive disabilities on grade level standards. The goal of including students with significant cognitive disabilities in standardized testing and statewide accountability systems is to positively impact the curriculum and instruction, and the teaching and learning process for these students. Georgia's special education teachers experience the GAA from within and are in an insightful position to share their perspectives of whether the GAA is meeting this goal. Experiences and perceptions for this study were provided by Georgia teachers who had experienced administering the GAA to elementary students with significant cognitive disabilities. A grounded theory analysis revealed common experiences and perceptions among the participants. Findings from the participants revealed the participants experienced the administration of the GAA as a balancing act in which they had to balance often conflicting aspects of meeting state and federal guidelines and meeting the daily instructional needs of their students with significant cognitive disabilities. Continued analysis revealed that these participants perceived the GAA to be a meaningless tool for teaching and a meaningless measure of assessment for elementary students with significant cognitive disabilities. Finally, continued grounded theory analysis resulted in the emergence of a theory. The participants of this study found the GAA to be an ineffective tool for measuring the teaching and learning of elementary students with significant cognitive disabilities. While not completely abandoning grade level standards, these participants advocated that teaching and high stakes assessment of elementary students with significant cognitive disabilities be based on a curriculum that has a more pivotal impact on their quality of life outcomes. They advocated teaching and assessment of daily living and functional life skills.

Since the reauthorization of IDEA (1997), educators have faced the challenges of creating access to the general curriculum and participation in statewide assessment systems for all students, including those with significant cognitive disabilities unable to participate in typical statewide assessments. The results of reviewed literature indicate that in order to improve the practices of alternate assessments, it is important to understand teachers' perspectives about alternate assessments because teachers' beliefs directly influence their implementation of alternate assessments in their classrooms. The purposes of this study were to examine (a) perspectives, self-reported classroom practices, and concerns of special education teachers who implement the alternate portfolio assessment (APA) system; (b) special education teachers perceived benefits of the APA system; and (c) special education teachers' specific suggestions for improving the APA system. In addition, (d) an analysis between Kentucky and Mississippi was performed using independent t-tests to see if any statistical difference existed between the states on four specific survey items. A survey instrument was used to gather these data from a sample of special educators who had experience with this alternate assessment system. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviations) were used to analyze the survey data. In addition, answers to specific open-ended questions were presented to further enrich the quantitative data provided by teachers. Lastly, independent t-tests were performed to investigate if any statistically significant differences existed between Mississippi and the state of Kentucky on four specific survey items (see Table 11). Overall results revealed that teachers hold a negative perspective of the APA system, Findings suggested that the APA is not fully meeting the complex needs of their students, and highlighted the curricular tensions between academics and functional life skills. The teachers tended to agree that students should be included in the state accountability system, but were not fully convinced of the educational benefits to their students. Results from the independent t-test revealed a statistically significant difference between means of two survey items (t = 5.0356, p

Discover what really works in alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards. This book gathers cutting-edge knowledge and best practices in seven states to help readers work toward accurate assessment of students with severe disabilities.

Despite the pressure special educators are under to ensure that their students with significant cognitive disabilities learn the important skills necessary to live a productive life, the recent educational path in Ohio has been geared towards a standards-based curriculum to prepare them for the state assessment. The purpose of this qualitative study is to explore special educators' lived experiences and perceptions of the Alternate Assessment for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities (AASCD) as a measure of student progress and growth for students with significant disabilities in Ohio. It also seeks to understand factors that special educators believe are appropriate for assessing students with significant cognitive disabilities. With the conceptual framework being guided by Critical Disability Theory, Dis/ability Complex, and Experiential Learning Theory, this research is guided by the following questions: 1. How do Ohio special educators perceive the AASCD as a measure of student progress and growth for students with significant disabilities? 2. How do special educators in Ohio describe experiences using the data produced by the AASCD? 3. What factors do special educators in Ohio describe as appropriate for assessing students with significant cognitive disabilities? Data was collected from eight semi-structured interviews, notes from the researcher's reflective journal, and member checking interviews. The transcriptions were analyzed, and the researcher used affective and elemental coding methods to create themes and subthemes. The themes and subthemes assisted the researcher in reporting her findings and answering the research questions. This study has the potential to provide information regarding special educators' concerns about the current AASCD and the modifications that special educators feel are necessary to deem the obtained scores usable for lesson planning and writing IEP goals that focus on the needs of individual students with significant cognitive disabilities.