Characteristics of States' Alternate
Assessments Based on Modified Academic
Achievement Standards in 2008
Synthesis Report 72
Deb Albus, Sheryl S. Lazarus, Martha L. Thurlow,
& Damien Cormier
September 2009
All rights reserved.
Any or all portions of this document may
be reproduced and distributed without
prior permission, provided the source is
cited as:
Albus, D., Lazarus, S.
S., Thurlow, M. L., & Cormier, D.
(2009). Characteristics of states'
alternate assessments based on modified
academic achievement standards in 2008
(Synthesis Report 72). Minneapolis, MN:
University of Minnesota, National Center
on Educational Outcomes.
Table of
Contents
Executive Summary
In April 2007, Federal
No Child Left Behind regulations were
finalized that provided states with
additional flexibility for assessing
some students with disabilities. The
regulations allowed states to offer
another assessment option, alternate
assessments based on modified academic
achievement standards (AA-MAS). States
are not required to have this
assessment. According to the
regulations, this option is for a small
number of students with Individual
Education Programs (IEPs) who even with
appropriate grade level academic
instruction are unlikely to reach
grade-level proficiency within the year
covered by an IEP.
The National Center on
Educational Outcomes (NCEO) has been
tracking and analyzing the
characteristics of states’ AA-MAS since
2007. This is the second annual update.
The previous NCEO report on test design
for AA-MAS (Lazarus, Thurlow,
Christensen & Cormier, 2007) indicated
that five states offered an assessment
they considered to be an AA-MAS in 2007:
Kansas, Louisiana, North Carolina, North
Dakota, and Oklahoma. In addition,
Maryland indicated it was in process of
developing an AA-MAS. In 2008, there
were three more states that had an
assessment they considered to be an
AA-MAS: California, Connecticut, and
Texas. As of March 2009, none of the
states had successfully completed the
U.S. Department of Education’s peer
review process. As of the publication
date, one state (Texas) had received
approval.
States’ AA-MAS’s
differed in a number of ways from their
regular assessments. In 2008, the AA-MAS
of all nine states used a
multiple-choice format. Some states’
assessments also included constructed
response or writing prompts. And in
2008, two states included
performance-based tasks. Design elements
differentiating the AA-MAS from a
state’s regular assessment included
fewer items on the test, removing a
distractor, shorter passages, fewer
passages, and simplified language. More
than half of the states had fewer items
per page on the AA-MAS than on the
regular assessment. Analysis of states’
regular assessment blueprints compared
to those of AA-MAS showed some
differences in the patterns of emphasis
across grade levels.
Top of page
Overview
Federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
regulations finalized in April 2007
provided states another assessment
option to consider in meeting the goal
of including all students in the federal
accountability system. In addition to
the previously-available assessment
options for students with disabilities
(e.g., taking the regular assessments
with or without accommodations, or
alternates based on grade level or
alternate achievement standards), the
regulation gave states the flexibility
to offer an alternate assessment based
on modified academic achievement
standards (AA-MAS). States may count up
to 2% of all students as proficient who
met proficiency standards with an AA-MAS
(U.S. Department of Education, 2007,
April 9). States are not required to
offer an AA-MAS.
According to the 2007 regulations,
students participating in an AA-MAS must
have an IEP; and even with appropriate
grade level content instruction, the
student must be unlikely to achieve
proficiency in the year covered by an
IEP. Further, the students participating
in an AA-MAS may be from any disability
category (U.S. Department of Education,
2007, April 9). As of the publication
date, only one state (Texas) that had an
assessment it considered to be an AA-MAS
successfully completed the peer review
process used by the U.S. Department of
Education to determine whether the
assessment satisfies federal
requirements. The purpose of this report
is to compare the characteristics of
assessments states identified as AA-MAS
in 2007 with those assessments
identified in 2008.
In 2007, the National Center on
Educational Outcomes (NCEO) tracked and
analyzed states’ participation
guidelines for the AA-MAS and the
characteristics of states’ AA-MAS
(Lazarus, Thurlow, Christensen, &
Cormier, 2007). Because more information
is now publicly available, NCEO is
publishing two separate updates—this
report on the characteristics on states’
AA-MAS (including assessment design
changes) and another synthesis report on
participation guidelines (Lazarus,
Rogers, Cormier, & Thurlow, 2008). This
report builds on the work done in the
NCEO report, States’ Alternate
Assessments Based on Modified
Achievement Standards (AA-MAS) in 2007
(Synthesis Report 67) (Lazarus et al.).
The current report covers assessment
design changes, as did the previous
report, but with additional analyses
including a blueprint comparison between
regular assessments and AA-MAS.
Questions guiding the current study
were:
1. In August 2008, which states had
an assessment that they considered to be
AA-MAS?
2. What were the characteristics of
these assessments and how had they
changed since 2007?
3. What differences, if any, were
there between the assessment blueprints
of states’ regular and AA-MAS
assessments regarding number of items
and the percentage that specific
components (e.g., strands) were covered
in subject areas by grade?
Process Used to Find Information
about States’ AA-MAS
This report summarizes publicly
available information about the
characteristics of the AA-MAS for states
that either had an assessment they
considered to be this type of alternate
assessment in place in August 2008, or
had information about an AA-MAS in
development on the state Web site in
August 2008.
Data were gathered from state
department of education Web sites by
locating all available information on
AA-MAS and regular assessments,
including general information,
frameworks, test specifications, and
accommodation policies. Data were
gathered on assessment design changes
(e.g., AA-MAS question types and
characteristic changes) that had been
included in the previous year’s report
(Lazarus et al., 2007) to compare
changes between 2007 and 2008. This
report includes information on
accommodations that have been
incorporated into the design of states’
AA-MAS. For this report we define
embedded accommodations as
AA-MAS features that would be considered
an accommodation on a state’s regular
assessment. In other words, if a tool or
procedure that is usually considered an
accommodation is provided on the AA-MAS
(and is available to students
participating in the assessment without
any IEP documentation), it is considered
an embedded accommodation. We looked at
accommodations that were allowed on each
state’s regular assessment, as well as
regular test features that are sometimes
considered accommodations—and then
looked to see whether any of these
accommodations had been integrated into
the design of the state’s
AA-MAS. Examples of embedded
accommodations are listed below:
- If a state’s AA-MAS
used 16-point font size
and its regular
assessment had 12-point
font, the large print
accommodation would be
considered to be an
embedded accommodation.
- If the calculator
was allowed on all
sections of a state’s
AA-MAS but allowed only
on certain portions of
the regular test, the
calculator accommodation
would be considered an
embedded accommodation.
- If a state’s AA-MAS
design included the
reading of test
questions and items to
all participating
students (and the
regular assessment does
not include this
feature), the read aloud
accommodation would be
considered an embedded
accommodation.
Note that this report only includes
information on embedded accommodations
that have been incorporated into the
design of the AA-MAS. Detailed
information on state’s accommodations
policies for the AA-MAS will be included
in a forthcoming report.
A comparison was also made between
blueprints for states’ AA-MAS and the
general state assessments found on state
Web sites. The areas of comparison
included content area changes by grade
ranges, elementary to high school. For
this analysis, we used samples taken for
elementary (4th), middle (8th) and high
school (10th) grades for all subjects
reported. We limited our analysis to
multiple choice items because only two
states had constructed response items
(other than for writing). If information
for any of these grades was not
available, the grade below it was used.
If there were no assessments in the
grade below, information was gathered
for the grade above. A complete list of
state documents used to compile
information for this report is in
Appendix A.
The AA-MAS information collected for
each state was placed into a state
profile in the form of summary tables.
The profiles were then e-mailed to each
state in September 2008. States were
asked to verify the information; if the
profile contained inaccurate
information, states were permitted to
revise their profiles, providing we
could confirm their corrections with
posted state information. Five states
responded to the request; they either
confirmed the accuracy of the
information, suggested one document over
another, or filled in other information.
The verified information was then
compiled and summarized in this report.
Top of page
Results
In July 2007, there were five states
that offered an assessment that the
state considered to be an AA-MAS
(Lazarus et al., 2007). These were
Kansas, Louisiana, North Carolina, North
Dakota, and Oklahoma. At that time,
Maryland had publicly available
information indicating that it was
developing an AA-MAS so it was also
included in the 2007 report (Lazarus et
al., 2007). In 2008, there were three
additional states either implementing or
in the process of developing an AA-MAS.
The states were California, Connecticut,
and Texas. Table 1 lists all nine of the
states that either were developing or
had what they considered to be an AA-MAS
in 2008, and provides brief details
about each assessment (e.g., content
areas and grades assessed).
Figure 1 shows the number of states
employing different types of question
and assessment approaches between 2007
and 2008. The total number of states for
each category graphed takes into account
all subject areas. For example, if a
state used multiple choice and
constructed response questions in one
subject area, the state would be counted
in both categories. But a category such
as multiple choice would not be counted
twice if it was used for both reading
and mathematics. Four states used a
combination of question types within a
content area assessment.
There were also some observed
differences in assessment design
characteristics from the preceding year.
North Dakota had a performance-based
portfolio assessment in 2007 (Lazarus et
al., 2007). In 2008, this assessment had
evolved into a teacher mediated computer
delivered performance-based assessment
that used a multiple choice format.
Specific information on assessment types
and question characteristics for each
subject area are provided in Table B1 in
Appendix B.
Table 1. AA-MAS Name, Content Areas,
and Grade Described by State
State
|
Assessment
Name
|
Content
Areas/Grades |
California
|
California
Modified
Assessment
(CMA) |
ELA
(3-8);
Math
(3-7);
Science
(5,8) |
Connecticut1
|
CMT/CAPT
Modified
Achievement
Standards
(CAPT-MAS)
|
ELA and
Math
(3-8,10-11) |
Kansas
|
Kansas
Assessment
of
Multiple
Measures
(KAMM) |
Reading
and Math
(3-8;
once in
HS),
Writing
(5,8,
once in
HS);
History/Gov
(6,8,
once in
HS);
Science
(4,7,
once in
HS) |
Louisiana
|
LEAP
Alternate
Assessment,
Level 2
(LAA2) |
English
and Math
(Grades
4-10);
Science
and
Social
Studies
(4, 8,
11) |
Maryland2
|
Modified
Maryland
School
Assessment
(Mod-MSA)
and
Modified
High
School
Assessment
(Mod-HSA)
|
Reading/ELA
and Math
(3-8,
HS)
(Information
in
report
and
appendices
is for
Mod-HSA
only.) |
North
Carolina
|
NCEXTEND2
|
Reading
and Math
(3-8);
Science
(4,8,11) |
North
Dakota
|
North
Dakota
Alternate
Assessment
Aligned
to North
Dakota
Content
Standards
for
Students
with
Persistent
Cognitive
Disabilities
(NDAA2) |
Reading
and Math
(3-8);
Science
(4,8,11) |
Oklahoma
|
Oklahoma
Modified
Alternate
Assessment
Program
(OMAAP) |
ELA/Reading
and Math
(3-8,
HS);
Science
(5,8) |
Texas
|
Texas
Assessment
of
Knowledge
and
Skills,
Modified
(TAKS-M) |
English
and Math
(3-11);
Science
(5,8,10-11);
Writing
(4,7,10);
Social
Studies
(8,10-11)
|
1 Under development,
Connecticut plans to implement in
2008-09.
2 Under development. Maryland
plans to implement its AA-MAS in 2008-09
at the earliest.
Figure 1. Number of States by
Assessment Type and Question
Characteristics Across Study Years
* North Dakota used a portfolio
assessment for its AA-MAS at the time of
the 2007 report. Over time it has
evolved into a teacher-mediated multiple
choice and performance task assessment.
Assessment Design Changes
Figure 2 shows the number of states
with specified design changes across the
two years. Most states noted using fewer
items (n=8), followed by removing a
distractor (n=6), shorter passages
(n=5), and simplified language (n=5).
Segmentation of passages was noted by
one state in 2007 and by three states in
2008. See Tables B2 and B3 in Appendix B
for more detailed information about
design changes, including other changes
made by only one state that are not
included in the figure.
Figure 2. Selected Design Changes in
States’ AA-MAS Across Study Years
Embedded Accommodations
States often embedded accommodations
into their AA-MAS assessments features
that typically appear as accommodations
in states’ policies. In Figure 3, five
states were using fewer items per page
and four used larger font sizes. One
state embedded the calculator
accommodation. See Tables B4 and B5 for
additional information about embedded
accommodations and for more detailed
specifications.
Other accommodations found in state
policies were incorporated into the
AA-MAS of a single state only for this
year’s study (see Table B-3 of Appendix
B). Accommodations incorporated into the
AA-MAS design by only one state included
having a scribe for all students (North
Dakota), reading aloud questions and
answers for all students (Texas), and
incorporating manipulatives into the
assessment (North Dakota).
Figure 3. Accommodations
Incorporated into AA-MAS Across Study
Years1
1 Two of the nine states
tracked in 2009 (e.g., Connecticut and
Maryland) were still in the process of
developing their AA-MAS. Therefore,
there was minimal information available
regarding embedded accommodations for
those two states.
One state made an interesting change
between our 2007 and 2008 analyses. The
official Kansas policy regarding
calculators did not change—for both
years there were the same allowable
accommodations for the regular test and
the KAMM (the AA-MAS in Kansas)—and
calculators were not allowed on the
non-calculator portion of a test.
However, the Kansas documents used for
the analysis in 2007 went on the say:
Calculator use on
non-calculator portions of the
assessment is not allowed for any
student. However, at this time there are
no non-calculator portions on the KAMM
assessment. Therefore, because of the
current KAMM test design, calculators
and calculation devices such as math
tables are allowed on the entire KAMM.
But by 2008, Kansas was in the
process of changing their KAMM, and 2008
Kansas documents indicated that:
KAMM Math Assessment
will be reorganized this year based on
the April 2007 release of the final NCLB
2% Regulations. The revised KAMM Math
assessment will mirror the organization
of the current Kansas General Math
Assessment in the following way.
- The KAMM Math
Assessment will be
organized into three
sections.
- The use of
calculators will be
allowed in two sections.
- The third section
will not allow
calculator use.
- In the
non-calculator portion,
there are numerous
items, approximately 50%
(depending on the grade
level), for which a
calculator is not
necessary
(e.g., recognizing
shapes, charts and
graphs, time,
transformations, etc.).
Therefore, in 2007 the results of our
analysis showed that Kansas incorporated
the calculator accommodation into their
AA-MAS test design (since it was allowed
on all sections of the AA-MAS), but that
in 2008 the state did not incorporate
the accommodation since it was allowed
on two out of three sections of both
assessments.
Assessment Blueprints Comparison
Information was also gathered from
state blueprints for regular assessments
and AA-MAS to compare the number of test
items and the percentage of coverage for
components of subject area assessments.
These data are presented in full—for
representative elementary, middle
school, and high school grades—in
Appendix C. Appendix C also includes
more specific assessment information
such as when a state has indicated that
certain items for an assessment are
drawn from multiple grade levels. For
example, California in its elementary
science assessment for 5th grade uses a
certain number of items from 4th and 5th
grade content in both its regular
assessment and AA-MAS.
Table 2 displays the differences in
the number of total multiple choice
items on states’ AA-MAS compared to the
regular assessment. This table is based
on detailed information in Appendix C
(Tables C1-C3 provide information on
elementary reading, math, and science,
respectively; Tables C4-C6 are middle
school reading, math, and science;
Tables C7-C9 are high school reading,
math, and science. Table C10 provides
information on the number of items for
social studies). Differences in numbers
of items do not address content or
difficulty of items, nor do they address
the rich information found in
performance level descriptors. A
separate report that provides
information on performance level
descriptors used by states with an
AA-MAS is forthcoming.
Table 2. Total Numbers of Multiple
Choice Items1 on AA-MAS and Regular
Assessment, and Percentage of Regular
Items Represented on AA-MAS
State
|
Elementary
|
|
Middle
School
|
|
High
School
|
Reading/ELA2
|
AA-MAS
|
Reg
|
% of Reg
|
|
AA-MAS
|
Reg
|
% of Reg
|
|
AA-MAS
|
Reg
|
% of Reg
|
California
|
27
|
42
|
64%
|
|
30
|
42
|
71%
|
|
|
|
|
Kansas
|
36
|
743
|
49%
|
|
48
|
843
|
57%
|
|
48
|
64
|
75%
|
Louisiana
|
21
|
33
|
64%
|
|
21
|
33
|
64%
|
|
21
|
33
|
64%
|
North
Carolina
|
40
|
58
|
69%
|
|
40
|
53
|
75%
|
|
40
|
56
|
71%
|
Oklahoma
|
404
|
50
|
80%
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
324
|
484
|
67%
|
Texas
|
32
|
40
|
80%
|
|
38
|
48
|
79%
|
|
22
|
28
|
79%
|
Math
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California
|
48
|
65
|
74%
|
|
54
|
65
|
83%
|
|
|
|
|
Kansas
|
40
|
723
|
56%
|
|
40
|
884
|
45%
|
|
40
|
104
|
38%
|
Louisiana
|
42
|
60
|
70%
|
|
42
|
60
|
70%
|
|
42
|
60
|
70%
|
North
Carolina
|
40
|
823
|
49%
|
|
40
|
803
|
50%
|
|
40
|
804
|
50%
|
Oklahoma
|
404
|
45
|
89%
|
|
403
|
45
|
89%
|
|
40
|
55
|
73%
|
Texas
|
34
|
42
|
81%
|
|
40
|
50
|
80%
|
|
45
|
56
|
80%
|
Science
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California
|
48
|
60
|
80%
|
|
54
|
60
|
90%
|
|
|
|
|
Louisiana
|
35
|
40
|
85%
|
|
|
|
|
|
35
|
40
|
88%
|
North
Carolina
|
60
|
803
|
75%
|
|
60
|
803
|
75%
|
|
40
|
804
|
50%
|
Oklahoma
|
414
|
45
|
91%
|
|
404
|
45
|
88%
|
|
464
|
60
|
76%
|
Texas
|
32
|
40
|
80%
|
|
40
|
50
|
80%
|
|
44
|
55
|
80%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Social
Studies
(HS)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kansas
|
|
|
|
|
49
|
60
|
82%
|
|
52
|
60
|
87%
|
Louisiana
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
60
|
53%
|
Texas
|
|
|
|
|
38
|
48
|
79%
|
|
44
|
55
|
80%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Writing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California
|
21
|
33
|
64%
|
|
24
|
33
|
73%
|
|
|
|
|
Texas
|
24
|
28
|
86%
|
|
32
|
40
|
80%
|
|
14
|
20
|
70%
|
1 Multipe choice items
only. Does not include constructed
responses items or essays.
2 This table does not
include any writing multiple choice
items in Reading/ELA. See separate
listing for writing.
3 Documents noted that the
regular assessment included field test
items. Field test items could not be
disaggregated from other test items for
the regular assessment.
4 Median number of
questions.
Note: The matrix cells are shaded if
the number of items on the AA-MAS is
less than 60% of the items on the
regular assessment.
Table 2 presents a detailed
comparison of the number of multiple
choice items on states’ AA-MAS and the
regular assessment for states that have
publicly available information. The
greatest difference in number of items
between the AA-MAS and regular
assessment are shaded in Table 2 (i.e.,
if a state’s AA-MAS has less than 60% of
the number of items on its regular
assessment). Shading indicates greater
difference in coverage between the two
assessments. States with the largest
number of multiple choice items on the
regular assessment tended to have the
largest difference in percentage of
total items between the AA-MAS and the
regular assessment. In some cases,
however, we observed a comparable
percentage difference even with a
relatively modest number of items on the
regular assessment. An example of a
state that had a relatively large number
of multiple choice items on its regular
assessments is Kansas. The 4th grade
level KAMM reading assessment had 58
items. This compared to 36 questions on
its 4th grade AA-MAS for reading. As
shown in Appendix Table C1, an
additional 16 multiple choice questions
are used for the 4th grade AA-MAS in
reading, but some of these are field
test items for future use. Thus, the
AA-MAS had 62% as many items as the
regular assessment, assuming the regular
assessment items were all operational.
For most content areas and at most grade
levels Oklahoma and Texas had the
smallest percentage difference in the
total number of AA-MAS items compared to
the regular assessment. See Tables
C1–C10 in Appendix C for detailed
information about the number of items.
Top of page
Example of State with Differences
Across Component Areas
Not all states with AA-MAS reported the
number of items or percentage of
components for various “strands” within
a content area for its regular
assessment and its AA-MAS. Among those
that did, some differences were
observed. An example of the type of
differences between the regular
assessment and the AA-MAS across strands
in one state is provided here. It shows
changes in the pattern of coverage
within mathematical components across
grades 4, 8, and 10.
As shown in Figure 4, at the elementary
level there is a difference in the
pattern of the percentage of items for
strands on the AA-MAS compared to the
regular assessment, with a 20%
difference in number and number
relations on the AA-MAS compared to the
regular assessment. Geometry had the
smallest percentage difference of 4%.
For other strands the difference in
percentage of items ranged from 2-11%.
The state’s AA-MAS appears to be
designed to include a range of 15-20% of
the total questions for each strand
assessed, but this pattern does not
match the emphasis for the regular
assessment, which varies between 5% and
40% of the total questions across
strands.
Figure 4. State Example: Elementary Math
Percentage of Total Number of Questions
Devoted to Each Strand for AA-MAS and
Regular Assessment
Note: This figure reports percentages
rather than number of items. At the
elementary level, the state’s AA-MAS had
42 multiple choice items and 2
constructed response items. The state’s
regular assessment had 60 multiple
choice items and 3 constructed response
items.
Figure 5 presents the middle school
percentages for the same state. The
percentage of the state’s assessment
questions for each strand at the middle
school level was similar to percentages
for the AA-MAS at the elementary
level—and also quite similar to the
state’s regular assessment at this
level.
Figure 5. State Example: Middle School
Math Percentage of Total Number of
Questions Devoted to Each Strand for
AA-MAS and Regular Assessment
Note: This figure reports percentages
rather than number of items. At the
middle school level, the state’s AA-MAS
had 42 multiple choice items and 2
constructed response items. This state’s
regular assessment had 60 multiple
choice items and 4 constructed response
items.
Figure 6 shows the comparison at the
high school level. This comparison also
shows little variation between the
regular assessment and the AA-MAS, with
a range of 1-10% of total questions
across strands. The AA-MAS, again, has
the same percentage for each strand as
at the elementary and middle school
levels. Most noticeable here is the
difference between number and number
relations with 10% more items in this
area on the AA-MAS than on the regular
assessment (i.e., 20% of the questions
on the AA-MAS were “number sense”
questions but only 10% of the questions
on the regular assessment were devoted
to this strand).
Figure 6. State Example: High School
Math Percentage of Total Number of
Questions Devoted to Each Strand for
AA-MAS and Regular Assessment
Note: This figure reports percentages
rather than number of items. At the high
school level, the state’s AA-MAS had 42
multiple choice items and 2 constructed
response items. This state’s regular
assessment had 60 multiple choice items
and 4 constructed response items.
States’ blueprints for the regular
assessment and the AA-MAS for all
content areas that were publicly
available were compared for elementary,
middle, and high school assessments.
Summary information and examples are
provided here, with details presented in
Appendix C. We examined all content
areas for which blueprints were
available (e.g., reading, writing, math,
science).
Top of page
Discussion
In 2007, six states either had or
were in the process of developing an
assessment they considered to be an
AA-MAS. In 2008, there were nine states,
and as of the publication date only one
of the states has successfully completed
the federal peer review process. Similar
to 2007, multiple choice items were the
predominant type of item on states’
AA-MAS in 2008. Only two states used
constructed response items, other than
in writing where some states used
prompts. Two states used performance
tasks, one for the entirety of the
AA-MAS (North Dakota) and one only for a
science portion (Kansas). The three
states added in this report showed
similar designs in their AA-MAS to the
six states that had this assessment
option in 2007—for example, fewer items,
simplified language, removal of a
distractor, and shorter and fewer
passages. States had other unique design
features in both years, but many of
these were difficult to categorize
because they focused on the presentation
of specific item content.
Several features that were considered
accommodations for the state’s regular
assessment were embedded into the design
of some states’ AA-MAS. In 2008, the
most frequently embedded accommodations
were fewer items per page and larger
font size. Both of these accommodations
generally are categorized as
presentation accommodations for regular
assessments.
In this analysis of AA-MAS, we found
for the first time that a state
incorporated the use of scribes into the
AA-MAS design. In contrast, other states
considered a scribe a separate
accommodation available for students on
the AA-MAS or regular assessments if
they individually required one.
The different characteristics
observed in these AA-MAS seem to show
that assessments across states are
targeting different students. This
observation agrees with Filbin (2008),
who noted that states either appeared to
be targeting students right below the
regular assessment or right above the
alternate assessment based on alternate
achievement standards. In our analysis,
some states appeared to have fewer
changes to blueprints, suggesting these
states’ AA-MAS may be geared toward
those students just below the regular
assessment.
Comparing blueprints can yield useful
information on how content coverage may
differ across the assessments (Marion,
2007). The April 2007 Federal Register
Rules and Regulations, in describing
assessment design compared to regular
content standards, said that an AA-MAS
“reflects the same degree and pattern of
emphasis as the content standards
(balance)” (Section 200.6(a)(3)(i)), p.
2). But, in the Standards and
Assessments Peer Review Guidance revised
December 21, 2007, possible examples of
acceptable evidence included a
comparison of blueprints that “indicates
that the general assessment and the
assessment based on modified academic
achievement standards were designed to
address the same grade level content
standards although the item
specifications differ” (p. 26). The
example showing the comparison of
strands for the AA-MAS and regular
assessment in one state reflects that
state’s interpretation of “balance.” In
that example, the state maintained the
same percentage of items across
components at all grades, even though
this sometimes was divergent from the
percentage assessed in those grades on
its regular assessments. It appears that
states may have very different
interpretations of what is meant by
“same degree and pattern of emphasis.”
In summary, it is important to
continue to track the changes and
decisions made by states as they develop
their AA-MAS for students who qualify to
participate. As states pursue the AA-MAS
option, all aspects of the assessments
should be analyzed and documented,
toward the goal of ensuring quality
grade level assessment and academic
instruction for all students.
Top of page
References
Filbin, J. (2008). Lessons from
the initial peer review of alternate
assessments based on modified
achievement standards. U.S.
Department of Education, Office of
Elementary and Secondary Education
Student Achievement and School
Accountability Program.
Lazarus, S. S., Rogers, C., Cormier,
D., & Thurlow, M. L. (2008). States’
participation guidelines for alternate
assessments based on modified academic
achievement standards (AA-MAS) in 2008
(Synthesis Report 71). Minneapolis, MN:
University of Minnesota, National Center
on Educational Outcomes.
Lazarus, S. S., Thurlow, M. L.,
Christensen, L. L., & Cormier, D.
(2007). States’ alternate
assessments based on modified
achievement standards (AA-MAS) in 2007
(Synthesis Report 67). Minneapolis, MN:
University of Minnesota, National Center
on Educational Outcomes.
Marion, S. (2007, July 26). A
technical design and documentation
workbook for assessments based on
modified achievement standards.
Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota, National Center on
Educational Outcomes.
U.S. Department of Education (2007,
April 9). Final Rule 34 CFR Parts
200 and 300: Title I-Improving the
Academic Achievement of the
Disadvantaged; Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
Federal Register. 72(67), Washington DC:
Author. Retrieved September 12, 2007,
from the World Wide Web:
http://cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/2percentReg/FederalRegApril9TwoPercent.pdf
U.S. Department of Education (2007,
December 21). Standards and
assessments peer review guidance:
information and examples for meeting
requirements of the No Child Left Behind
Act of 2001. Washington DC: Office
of Elementary and Secondary Education
(OESE). Retrieved from the World Wide
Web on August 17, 2008, at
http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/saaprguidance.pdf.
Top of page
Appendix A
State Documents Used in Analysis
State Documents and Presentations
Used in the Analysis of States’ AA-MAS
California
|
California
Department
of
Education
(n.d.).
cma37math.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/cmablueprints.asp
California
Department
of
Education
(n.d.).
cma38ela.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/cmablueprints.asp
California
Department
of
Education
(n.d.).
cmasciblueprints.
Retrieved
from on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/cmablueprints.asp
California
Department
of
Education
(n.d.).
Differences
between
CST and
CMA,
downloaded
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/cmastar.asp
California
Department
of
Education
(January,
2008).
Appropriate
test
variations
and
accommodations
for the
2008
administration
of the
California
Modified
Assessment
(CMA)
based on
the
study of
item
format
and
delivery
mode
from the
CMA.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/cmastar.asp
California
Department
of
Education.
(2007).
2008
standardized
testing
and
reporting
item and
estimated
time
charts.
Retrieved
on
September
18,
2008.from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/documents/itemtimecharts08.pdf
California
Department
of
Education
(n.d.).
California
STAR CST
blueprints.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/blueprints.asp
|
Connecticut
|
Connecticut State
Department of Education (n.d.).
Connecticut State Department of
Education: Test accommodations form
special education, modified assessment
system (MAS) retrieved on August 7, 2008
from
http://www.csde.state.ct.us/public/cedar/assessment/mas/index.htm
|
Kansas
|
Kansas Department of Education (n.d).
KAMM math studies test specifications.
Retrieved on August 7, 2008 from
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2371#KAMMitemandtest
Kansas Department of Education (n.d).
KAMM
reading
test
specifications.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2371#KAMMitemandtest
Kansas Department of Education (n.d.).
KAMM
science
test
item
Specifications.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2371#KAMMitemandtest
Kansas Department of Education (n.d).
KAMM social studies test specifications.
Retrieved from
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2371#KAMMitemandtest
on August 7, 2008.
Kansas Department of Education (n.d.).
KAMM
modified
writing
assessment
manual.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.kansped.org/ksde/assmts/kamm/kamm.html
Kansas Department of Education (n.d).
Kansas
alternate
assessment
& Kansas
assessment
of
modified
measures
(KAMM),
fact
sheet
2008-2009.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2371#KAMMitemandtest
Kansas
Department
of
Education
(2007,
November).
Kansas
State
Department
of
Education
accommodations
manual:
How to
select,
administer,
and
evaluate
accommodations
for
instruction
and
assessment.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2371#Accommodations
Kansas State Department of Education
(2007, May). Make a musical instrument.
Retrieved on August 7, 2008. from
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2371
.
Kansas State Department of Education (n.d.).
Sample
problems
illustrative
of items
based on
modified
academic
achievement
standards.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2371
Kansas State Department of Education
(2006, August 4). Act on cut scores for
Kansas assessments. Press release letter
from Bob Corkins to Kansas State Board
of
Education.
Retrieved
on
August
7,
2008.from
http://www.ksde.org/Portals/0/Special%20Education%20Services/assmts/kamm/PerfLevCutScores.pdf
Kansas State Department of Education
(2007, February). Kansas assessments in
reading and mathematics, 2006 technical
manual for the Kansas general
assessments, Kansas Assessments of
multiple measures (KAMM), Kansas
alternate assessment. Retrieved on
August 7, 2008 from
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2371
Kansas
State
Department
of
Education.
(2008,
July).
Questions
about
the
2008-2009
Kansas
assessment
of
modified
measures-KAMM.
Topeka:
Author.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008
from
www.kansped.org/ksde/assmts/kamm/kammfaq.pdf
Kansas State Department of Education (n.d.).
Kansas
fact
sheets
on
regular
assessments.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=420
and
http://www.ksde.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=P3OIVwqiJZg%3d&tabid=420&mid=5207
Kansas
State
Department
of
Education.
(2007,
October
24).
Kansas
reading
education
test
specifications.
Topeka:
Author.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=159
|
Louisiana
|
Louisiana Department of
Education (n.d.). LAA2 accommodations
2008.
Retrieved
on
August
29, 2008
from
http://www.doe.state.la.us/lde/saa/785.html
Louisiana Department of Education (n.d.).
LAA2
test
design.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.doe.state.la.us/lde/saa/2221.html
Louisiana Department of Education (n.d.).
Special
populations
and
accommodations
for LEAP
and GEE.
Retrieved
on
August
29, 2008
from
http://www.doe.state.la.us/lde/saa/785.html
Louisiana Department of Education (n.d.).
Chapter 1 LEAP English language arts,
grade 4 [Assessment guides for other
grades and content areas on same page].
Retrieved on September 18, 2008 from
http://www.doe.state.la.us/lde/saa/1341.html
Louisiana
Department
of
Education
(2007).
LAA2
2006-2007
annual
report.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.doe.state.la.us/lde/saa/2221.html
Louisiana
Department
of
Education
(2007).
2006
LAA2
technical
report
summary.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.doe.state.la.us/lde/saa/2221.html
Louisiana
Department
of
Education
(February,
2008).
LAA2
LEAP
alternate
assessment,
level 2,
assessment
guide:
English
language
arts and
mathematics,
Grades
4, 8,
11.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.doe.state.la.us/lde/saa/2221.html
|
Maryland
|
Maryland State Department of
Education (n.d.) School improvement in
Maryland: HSA: high school assessment
program, what is Mod-HSA? Baltimore:
Author. Retrieved on October 30, 2008,
from http://mdk12.org/assessments/high_school/index_d2.html
Maryland State Department of Education (n.d.).
Mod-HSA example items. Retrieved on
October 30, 2008, from
http://mdk12.org/assessments/high_school/index_d2.html
Maryland State Department of Education.
(2006, October 1). 2006-2007 Maryland
accommodations manual: A guide to
selecting, administering, and evaluating
the use of accommodations for
instruction and assessment. Retrieved on
August 7, 2008 from
http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/NR/rdonlyres/840EFBB6-CD7D-404E-8A77-E978F6D508AA/11347/MDAccommodationsManual.pdf
Maryland State Department of Education
(2007). Technical documentation for the
Maryland high school assessment program:
Algebra/data analysis, biology, English,
and government end-of-course
assessments. Retrieved November 3, 2008
from
http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/divisions/planningresultstest/2006+HSA+Technical+Report.htm
Maryland State Department of Education
(2008). 2007-2008 Maryland
accommodations manual: A guide to
selecting, administering, and evaluating
the use of accommodations for
instruction and assessment. Retrieved
October 30, 2008 from:
http://mdk12.org/share/pdf/AccommodationsManual.pdf
|
North
Carolina
|
North
Carolina
Department
of
Public
Instruction
(2006,
August
21). The
North
Carolina
testing
program,
2006-2007.
Retrieved
on
September
3, 2008
from
http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/docs/accountability/NORTHCgeneralpolicies.pdf
North
Carolina
Department
of
Public
Instruction
(2007,
July).
Understanding
the
individual
student
report
for the
NCEXTEND2
EOG
grades
3-8.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/policies/briefs/
North
Carolina
Department
of
Public
Instruction
(2008,
July).
North
Carolina
testing
program
assessment
options,
2008-2009.
Retrieved
on
August
7,
2008.from
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/accountability/policyoperations/nctpassessmentoptions.pdf
North
Carolina
Department
of
Public
Instruction
(2007,
February).
School
test
coordinator’s
handbook.
Retrieved
on
September
3, 2008,
from
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/accountability/policyoperations/stcHandbook.pdf
North
Carolina
Department
of
Public
Instruction
(2007,
October).
Test
information
sheets.
Retrieved
on
October
17,
2008,
from
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing/eog/reading
North
Carolina
Department
of
Public
Instruction
(2006,
May).
Test
information
sheets.
Retrieved
on
October
17,
2008,
from
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing/eog/math
North
Carolina
Department
of
Public
Instruction
(2007,
November).
Test
information
sheets.
Retrieved
on
October
17,
2008,
from
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing/eog/science
North
Carolina
Department
of
Public
Instruction
(2006,
December).
North
Carolina
end-of-course
test of
English
I.
Retrieved
on
October
17,
2008,
from:
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/accountability/testing/eoc/English1/20071201englishtestinformationsheet.pdf
North
Carolina
Department
of
Public
Instruction
(2007,
October).
Test
information:
End-of-course
(EOC)
mathematics
tests.
Retrieved
October
17,
2008,
from
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/accountability/testing/eoc/Algebra1/MPGHW121EOCItemsbyGoal.pdf
North
Carolina
Department
of
Public
Instruction
(2007,
October).
North
Carolina
end-of-course
test of
biology.
Retrieved
October
17,
2008,
from
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/accountability/testing/eoc/scienceeocbiology.pdf
|
North
Dakota
|
North Dakota Department of
Public Instruction (n.d.). North Dakota
alternate assessments 2007-08
(PowerPoint presentation). Retrieved on
August 7, 2008, from
http://64.233.167.104/u/NDDPI?q=cache:JwKYLdw8SqMJ:www.dpi.state.nd.us/speced/resource/alternate/AA2ppt.pdf+NDAA&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us&ie=UTF-8
North Dakota Department of Public
Instruction (n.d.). Comparison of NDAAI
and
NDAAII.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.dpi.state.nd.us/speced/resource/alternate/index.shtm
North
Dakota
Department
of
Public
Instruction
(September,
2008).
Revised-
students
with
disabilities
and the
North
Dakota
state
assessments:
Information
for
parents
and
educators
(2008
NDAA
Parent
Brochure).
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.dpi.state.nd.us/speced/resource/alternate/index.shtm
|
Oklahoma
|
Garrett, S. (2007). Oklahoma
school testing program (OSTP) Oklahoma
modified alternate assessment program
(OMAAP), test preparation manual.
Retrieved on September 17, 2008, from
http://www.sde.state.ok.us/AcctAssess/pdf/forms/OMAAP_TPM.pdf
Oklahoma
Department
of
Education.
(2008).
Curriculum
access
resource
guide-
modified
(CARG-M)
modified
priority
academic
student
skills
(PASS),
reading,
gr.3-5.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.sde.state.ok.us/AcctAssess/OMAAP.html
Oklahoma Department of Education.
(2008). Curriculum access resource
guide- modified (CARG-M) modified
priority academic student skills (PASS),
reading and English II, gr 6-8. Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.sde.state.ok.us/AcctAssess/OMAAP.html
Oklahoma Department of Education.
(2008). Curriculum access resource
guide- modified (CARG-M) modified
priority academic student skills (PASS),
math, gr.3-5. Retrieved on August 7,
2008, from
http://www.sde.state.ok.us/AcctAssess/OMAAP.html
Oklahoma Department of Education.
(2008). Curriculum access resource
guide- modified (CARG-M) modified
priority academic student skills (PASS),
math and algebra I, gr 6-8. Retrieved on
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.sde.state.ok.us/AcctAssess/OMAAP.html
Oklahoma
Department
of
Education.
(2008).
Curriculum
access
resource
guide-
modified
(CARG-M)
modified
priority
academic
student
skills
(PASS),
science
and
biology
I, gr.5
and 8.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.sde.state.ok.us/AcctAssess/OMAAP.html
Oklahoma
Department
of
Education.
(2008).
Oklahoma
modified
alternate
assessment
program
(OMAAP)
mathematics
&
reading
grade 3,
parent,
student,
and
teacher
guide.[also
grades
4-8]
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.sde.state.ok.us/AcctAssess/OMAAP.html
Oklahoma
Department
of
Education.
(2008).
Test
administration
manuals.
(reading
grades
3-5,
reading
grades
6-8,
math
grades
3-5,
math
grades
6-8,
science
grades 5
and 8,
English
II,
biology
I and
algebra
I.)
Retrieved
on
September
17,
2008,
from
http://www.sde.state.ok.us/AcctAssess/testadmin.html
Oklahoma
Department
of
Education.
(2008).
Test
blueprints.
[grades
3-8,
EOI].
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.sde.state.ok.us/AcctAssess/OMAAP.html
Oklahoma Department of Education (n.d.).
Test blueprints. Retrieved on August 7,
2008, from http://sde.state.ok.us/AcctAssess/core.html
|
Texas
|
Texas Education Agency (n.d.).
Blueprints
math
TAKS-M.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/taksm/index.html
Texas Education Agency (n.d.).
Blueprints
reading
TAKS-M.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/taksm/index.html
Texas Education Agency (n.d.).
Blueprints
science
TAKS-M.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/taksm/index.html
Texas Education Agency (n.d.).
Blueprints
social
studies
TAKS-M.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/taksm/index.html
Texas Education Agency (n.d.).
Blueprints
writing
TAKS-M.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/taksm/index.html
Texas
Education
Agency
(2008,
February).
Modification
guidelines
for
reading/ELA.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/taksm/index.html
Texas
Education
Agency
(2008,
February).
Modification
guidelines
for
mathematics.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/taksm/index.html
Texas
Education
Agency
(2008,
February).
Modification
guidelines
for
science.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/taksm/index.html
Texas
Education
Agency
(2008,
February).
Modification
guidelines
for
social
studies.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/taksm/index.html
Texas
Education
Agency
(2008,
February).
Modification
guidelines
for
writing
(revising
and
editing).
Retrieved
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/taksm/index.html
Texas
Education
Agency
(2008,
March).
Spring
2008
TAKS-M
information
brochure
(English).
Retrieved
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/taksm/index.html
Texas
Education
Agency
(2008).
TAKS-M
Grades
3-5 test
administration
manual
2008:
Writing,
mathematics,
reading,
science,
social
studies.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/guides/test_admin/2008/TAKSM08_3to5_TAM.pdf#xml=http://www.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/texis/webinator/search/xml.txt?query=administration+manual&db=db&id=c8e062206095b2b5
Texas
Education
Agency
(2008).
TAKS-M
grades
6-8 test
administration
manual
2008:
Writing,
mathematics,
reading,
science,
social
studies.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/guides/test_admin/2008/TAKSM08_6to8_TAM.pdf#xml=http://www.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/texis/webinator/search/xml.txt?query=administration+manual&db=db&id=e0617822e4f5949f
Texas
Education
Agency
(2008).
TAKS-M
grades
9-12
test
administration
manual
2008:
Writing,
mathematics,
reading,
science,
social
studies.
Retrieved
on
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/guides/test_admin/2008/TAKSM08_9to11_TAM.pdf#xml=http://www.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/texis/webinator/search/xml.txt?query=administration+manual&db=db&id=90e938497cb95e10
Texas
Education
Agency
(2008).
TAKS
blueprints.
Retrieved
August
7, 2008,
from
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/taks/booklets/index.html
Texas Education Agency (2008). Texas
student assessment program: 2008-2009
accommodations manual: Guidelines for
selecting, administering, and evaluating
the use of accommodations. Retrieved on
August 7, 2008 from
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/admin/AccommManual_2007_08_tagged.pdf.
|
Top of page
Appendix B
AA-MAS Characteristics by State
Table B1. Assessment Type and Question
Characteristic by Content Area for
States’ AA-MAS, 2008
State
|
Reading
|
Writing
|
Math
|
Science
|
Social
Studies
|
Multiple
Choice
|
Constructed
Response
|
Performance
Task
|
Multiple
Choice
|
Constructed
Response
|
Performance
Task
|
Writing
Prompt
|
Multiple
Choice
|
Constructed
Response
|
Performance
Task
|
Multiple
Choice
|
Constructed
Response
|
Performance
Task
|
Multiple
Choice
|
Constructed
Response
|
Performance
Task
|
California
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
Connecticut1
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kansas
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
Louisiana
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
Maryland2
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
North
Carolina3
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
North
Dakota4
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oklahoma
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
Texas
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
Shading indicates a state does not have
a separate assessment for that content
area.
1 Connecticut will implement in 2008-09.
2 Maryland will implement in 2008-09 at
the earliest.
3 North Carolina also has occupational
version that includes Occupational
English I, Occupational Mathematics I,
and Life Skills Science I and II.
4 The North Dakota assessment is done on
computer with the student and teacher
together. The test requires the teacher
to enter the answer choice given by the
student. Each question is presented on a
single screen. Most questions are
multiple choice with several teacher
initiated questions (involves printing a
screen shot of item, providing student
with supplies to answer the item, give
verbal instructions to student. The
instructions are provided with the item
and the teacher rates the student’s
response from several options.)
Table B2. Comparison of AA-MAS and
Regular Assessment: Design Changes, 2008
State
|
Design
Change
|
Distractor
Removed
|
Fewer
Items
|
Fewer
Passages
|
Segmenting
of
Passage
|
Shorter
Passages
|
Simplified
Language
|
Other
|
California
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X*
|
Connecticut1
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
Kansas
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
X*
|
X
|
X*
|
Louisiana
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
X*
|
X
|
X*
|
Maryland2
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
X*
|
North
Carolina
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
X*
|
North
Dakota
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X*
|
Oklahoma
|
X
|
X
|
|
X*
|
|
|
X*
|
Texas
|
X*
|
X
|
X
|
X*
|
X*
|
X*
|
X*
|
Total
|
6
|
8
|
4
|
3
|
5
|
5
|
8
|
* See Table B3 for specifications and for
descriptions of “other” design changes.
1 Connecticut will implement in 2008-09.
2 Maryland will implement in 2008-09 at
the earliest.
Table B3. Specifications and
Descriptions of Assessment Design
Changes and of “Other” Assessment Design
Changes, 2008
State
|
Specification
Details
and
Other
Design
Changes
|
California
|
Other
Design
Changes
All
Content
Areas:
One
column
for most
items.
Math:
Graphics
for most
items.
Science:
Graphics
for most
items
(stems
and
options).
|
Connecticut1
|
|
Kansas
|
Specification
Details
Shorter
Passages:
Reduced
sentence,
paragraph
and
passage
length.
Other
Design
Changes
Reading/ELA:
Use text
with
familiar/common
topics
to KAMM
students,
creating
clear
literal,
explicit
connections
within
text,
organizing
and
formatting
text to
facilitate
students’
processing
of
information
related
to
overall
purpose/theme
(e.g.,
use of
subheadings,
bulleted
lists,
repetition
of key
words/information).
Math:
Reduced
complexity
of items
in
assessment
(e.g.,
limiting
decimal
places
to
hundredths
vs.
thousandths
on
regular)
and
modifying
other
item
specifications
(e.g.,
provide
graphic
when
appropriate;
focus on
the
mathematical
relationships,
not
solving
for a
missing
part).
|
Louisiana
|
Specification
Details
Shorter
Passages:
Only at
some
grade
levels
(e.g.,
upper
grades).
Other
Design
Changes
Reading/ELA:
No
poetry.
Writing:
Prompt
score
uses two
dimensions
(composing
and
audience
dimensions)
of the
six used
in LEAP
and GEE.
Shorter
response
to
writing
prompt
is
required;
For
information
resources
section,
questions
are
placed
adjacent
to the
related
resources.
Math:
Reading
difficulty
level of
test
questions
is
minimized
except
for
necessary
mathematical
terms.
|
Maryland2
|
Other
Design
Changes
All
Content
Areas:
Administered
as paper
and
pencil
test or
computerized
version.
|
North
Carolina
|
Other
Design
Changes
Writing:
Grades 4
and 7
use the
same
prompts
as
regular
assessment
but are
scored
using
modified
achievement
standards;
Response
booklet
uses
larger
space
between
lines,
with few
lines
overall
on which
to
respond;
Test
booklets
are
modified
with
fewer
printed
lines
(25
instead
of 50),
providing
more
white
space in
between
lines
for
composing
responses.
|
North
Dakota
|
Other
Design
Changes
All
Content
Areas:
Test is
done on
computer
with the
student
and
teacher
together.
The
teacher
enters
the
answer
choice
given by
the
student.
Each
question
is
presented
on a
single
screen.
Most
questions
are
multiple
choice
with
several
teacher
initiated
questions
(involves
printing
a screen
shot of
item,
providing
student
with
supplies
to
answer
the
item,
give
verbal
instructions
to
student.
The
instructions
are
provided
with the
item and
the
teacher
rates
the
student’s
response
from
several
options.)
|
Oklahoma
|
Specification
Details
Segmentation
of
Passages:
Break
apart
passages
into
smaller
portions
and
place
the
specific
questions
that
pertain
to the
smaller
portion
underneath
that
section.
Other
Design
Changes
All
Content
Areas:
Eliminate
questions
that
require
students
to
select
the
better/best
answer;
Eliminate
answers
choices
that
give
students
the
option
to make
"no
change"
to the
item.
Reading:
Display
passages
in
one-column
format.
Writing:
Simplify
the
question;
Simplify
the
writer’s
checklist;
Use a
3-point
holistic
writing
rubric.
Math:
Display
the
number
on all
sides
for
questions
about
perimeter;
Avoid
items
with
negative
and
positive
answer
choice
of the
same
number
(for
example
-4 and
+4) for
lower
grade
levels;
For
lower
grades
use
grids
for area
questions;
Be
consistent
with
qualifiers
in stem
and
answer
choices
(i.e.,
use mL
throughout
or
milliliters
throughout);
Avoid
questions
with
best or
closest,
complicated
art, and
items
that ask
for
students
to
redefine
their
perception
of an
object
(i.e.,
fold
this
item
along
the
dotted
line).
Science:
Emphasize
pictures
over
text;
Simplify
cells
and
other
diagrams;
Optimize
readability;
Highlight,
if
possible;
Put a
box
around
formulas
to make
them
stand
out.
|
Texas
|
Specification
Details
Distractor
Removed:
Delete
one
answer
choice
based on
content
and/or
statistics
of item.
Reading/ELA:
All
other
distracters
must
come
from the
associated
part or
a
previous
part;
Revise
answer
choices
as
necessary
to
reflect
modifications
made to
the
selection.
Segmentation
of
Passages:
Divide
the
selection
into
meaningful
thought
units
(parts)
with
items
associated
with
that
unit
(part)
immediately
following
it.
Shorter
Passages:
Delete
extraneous
information
that
does not
affect
development
of the
selection
or any
context
related
to the
tested
items.
Simplified
Language:
Change
passive
voice to
active
voice
when
appropriate;
Add
precise
language
to
provide
additional
context
for
clarification;
Reading:
Simplify
difficult
to
decode
or
conceptually
difficult
vocabulary,
phrases,
or
sentences
when not
tested;
Break
compound/complex
sentences
into
simpler
sentences;
Separate
contractions
except
in cases
where
this
makes
the
sentence
awkward;
Edit
figurative
language
when not
tested
by using
simpler
sentences,
plain
language,
and
delete
unnecessary
words;
Change
item
from an
open-ended
statement
ending
with a
dash to
a direct
question
or vice
versa,
as
necessary
for
clarification.
Math:
Simplify
complex
sentence
structure
and
vocabulary
in item
and
answer
choices
without
eliminating
math
vocabulary.
|
Texas
(continued)
|
Other
Design
Changes
All
Content
Areas:
Delete
items
that
cannot
be
assessed
due to
passage
modifications;
Simplify
visual
complexity
of
graphics;
Revise
answer
choices
to
reflect
modifications
made to
selection.
Add
precise
language
to
provide
additional
context
for
clarification;
Direct
student
attention
to
graphics;
Other
changes
include
horizontal
item
layout
(full
width),
reduce
the
blueprint
and
delete
all
embedded
field
test
item;
Spanish-TAKS
M tests
are not
currently
available
(no side
by side
versions
with
Spanish
and
English).
Reading:
Test
administrator
reads
the
pre-reading
text to
the
students
that
clarifies
purpose
and
explains
difficult
concepts
and
vocabulary;
Delete
one part
of a
compound
answer
choice
when
possible;
Paired
selections
in
grades
3-8 are
not
tested
as
thematically
linked;
Delete
items
that
cannot
be
modified
based on
guidelines;
Delete
crossover
items,
items
that
test
author’s
organization
of
entire
selection,
and
open-ended
responses
for
reading
selections
in
grades
9-11.
Math:
Reduce
the
number
of
variables
and
simplify
digits
in item
when
appropriate;
Delete
extraneous
information
including
irrelevant
material
and
unnecessary
words in
items or
graphics;
Change
item
from an
open-ended
statement
to a
direct
question
or vice
versa,
as
necessary,
for
clarification;
Use
consistent
language
within
an item
in order
to focus
student
attention
on what
is being
asked;
Revise
text as
necessary
to
maintain
the
authenticity
and
logic of
the item
due to
modification;
Provide
new text
and/or
reorganize
existing
text
within
the
question
to
explain
or
clarify
the
graphic;
Provide
additional
graphics
to
support
text,
emphasize
ideas,
and
facilitate
comprehension;
Reduce
the
number
of
variables
and
simplify
digits
in item
when
appropriate;
Limit
the
number
of steps
and/or
operations
in
multi-step
problems;
Provide
explicit
directions
to
explain
a
process
such as
measuring.
Science:
Delete
one part
of
compound
answer
choices
when
possible;
Delete
cluster
items,
griddable
items,
negative
items,
and
items
that
cannot
be
modified
based on
guidelines;
Delete
extraneous
information
including
irrelevant
material
and
unnecessary
words in
items or
graphics;
Simplify
complex
sentence
structure
and
vocabulary
in item
and
answer
choices
without
eliminating
science
vocabulary;
Change
item
from an
open-ended
statement
to a
direct
question
or vice
versa,
as
necessary,
for
clarification;
Add
precise
language
to
provide
additional
context
for
clarification;
Use
consistent
language
with an
item in
order to
focus
student
attention
on what
is being
asked;
Provide
appropriate
formula
and/or
conversion
from
science
chart
near the
item;
Provide
explicit
directions
to
explain
a
process
such as
measuring;
Limit
the
number
of steps
and/or
operations
in
multi-step
problems;
Provide
new text
and/or
reorganize
existing
text
within
the
question
to
explain
or
clarify
the
graphic;
Provide
additional
graphics
to
support
text,
emphasize
ideas,
and
facilitate
comprehension;
Reduce
the
number
of
variable
and
simplify
digits
in items
when
appropriate;
Limit
the
number
of steps
and/or
operations
in
multi-step
problems;
Provide
appropriate
formula
and/or
conversion
from
science
chart
near
item;
Provide
explicit
directions
to
explain
a
process
such as
measuring.
Social
Studies:
Provide
explanatory
text in
brackets
in
historical
excerpts
(quotations);
Simplify
complex
sentence
structure
and
vocabulary
in item
and
answer
choices
without
eliminating
social
studies
vocabulary;
Change
item
from an
open-ended
statement
to a
direct
question
or vice
versa,
as
necessary,
for
clarification;
Use
consistent
language
with an
item in
order to
focus
student
attention
on what
is being
asked;
Revise
text as
necessary
to
maintain
the
authenticity
of the
item due
to
modifications;
Provide
explanatory
text in
brackets
in
historic
excerpts
(quotations);
Provide
additional
graphics
to
support
text,
emphasize
ideas,
and
facilitate
comprehension;
Provide
new text
and/or
reorganize
existing
text
with the
question
to
explain
or
clarify
the
graphic;
Delete
items
that
cannot
be
modified
based on
guidelines.
|
1 Connecticut will implement in 2008-09.
2 Maryland will implement in 2008-09 at
the earliest.
Table B4. AA-MAS Embedded
Accommodations, Selected States, 2008
State
|
Accommodation
Incorporated
into
AA-MAS
Assessment
Design
|
Breaks
as
Needed
|
Calculator
|
Fewer
Items/Page
|
Key Text
Underlined/Bolded/
|
Larger
Font
Size
|
Manipulatives
|
Read
Aloud
Questions
and
Answers
|
Scribe
|
Other
|
California
|
|
|
X
|
|
X*
|
|
|
|
|
Connecticut1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kansas
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
X*
|
Louisiana
|
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
Maryland2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North
Carolina
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North
Dakota
|
|
X*
|
|
|
|
X*
|
|
X*
|
|
Oklahoma
|
|
|
X*
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
Texas
|
|
|
X
|
X*
|
X*
|
|
X*
|
|
X*
|
Total
|
1
|
1
|
5
|
3
|
4
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
* See Table B5 for specifications and for
descriptions of design changes.
1 Connecticut will implement in 2008-09.
Unable to determine if assessment will
contain embedded accommodations.
Detailed accommodations and test design
information for this assessment was not
available.
2 Maryland will implement in 2008-09 at
the earliest. Accommodations information
for this assessment is not available.
Table B5. Specifications and
Descriptions of Embedded Accommodations,
2008
State
|
Specification
Details
and
Other
Design
Changes
|
California
|
Specification
Details
Larger
font:
Helvetica
sans
serif.
|
Connecticut1
|
|
Kansas
|
Other
Embedded
Accommodations
Bulleted
List
|
Louisiana
|
|
Maryland2
|
|
North
Carolina
|
|
North
Dakota
|
Specification
Details
Calculator
and
Manipulatives:
Supplies
given to
student
for
assessment
include
pencil
and
paper,
non-permanent
marker,
calculator,
12"
ruler,
number
line
0-10,
concrete
math
manipulatives
(20),
non-math
text;
book,
number
line
from -7
to +7
with .5
intervals
(secondary
only),
and
dictionary.
Scribe:
This
test
will be
done on
the
computer
with the
student
and the
teacher
together.
The test
requires
the
teacher
to enter
the
answer
choice
given by
the
student.
|
Oklahoma
|
Specification
Details
Fewer
items
per page:
Minimize
questions
on the
page
(limit
to 2).
|
Texas
|
Specification
Details
Key Text
Underlined/Bolded:
Science
and
Social
Studies:
Provide
definition
of
non-tested
vocabulary
in a
text box
near
item and
bold the
defined
term in
the
item.
Reading:
Provide
definition
of
literary
terms in
a text
box near
the item
and bold
the
defined
term in
the
item.
Larger
Font
Size:
Larger
point
size,
Verdana
font.
Read
Aloud
Questions
and
Answers:
Oral
administration
is not
available,
but
reading
of test
questions
and
items
are part
of the
design
of the
reading
and math
assessments.
Writing
test:
Pre-reading
test
only
allowed;
Due to
the
design
of the
revising
and
editing
section
of the
writing
test,
orally
reading
the test
questions
and
answers
is not
allowed.
It is
not
possible
to
provide
standard
administration
procedures
that
maintain
the TEKS
objectives
for
items
such as
misspelled
words,
homonym
choice,
irregular
verb
forms,
or
misplaced
modifiers.
Other
Embedded
Accommodations
Bulleted
List:
Math,
Science
and
Social
Studies:
Use
bullets
to
clearly
organize
complex
items
into
smaller,
meaningful
parts.
|
1 Connecticut will implement in 2008-09.
Unable to determine if assessment will
contain embedded accommodations.
Detailed accommodations and test design
information for this assessment not
available.
2 Maryland will implement in 2008-09 at
the earliest. Accommodations information
for this assessment not available.
Top of page
Appendix C
Percentages of Items by Elementary, Middle, and High School Representative Grade
Table C1. Elementary Grade: Reading/ELA AA-MAS Assessments (Grade 4 unless otherwise noted, multiple choice unless otherwise noted)
State
|
ELA
Component
|
AA-MAS
|
Regular
|
Number
of items
|
Percent
|
Number
of items
|
Percent
|
California
|
Reading/ELA
|
Word
analysis,
fluency,
and
systematic
vocabulary
development
|
11
|
23 %
|
18
|
24 %
|
Reading
comprehension
(focus
on
informational
materials)
|
10
|
21 %
|
15
|
20 %
|
Literary
response
and
analysis
|
6
|
12 %
|
9
|
12 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
27
|
|
42
|
|
Writing
|
Written
and oral
English
language
conventions
|
11
|
23 %
|
18
|
24 %
|
Writing
strategies
|
10
|
21 %
|
15
|
20 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
21
|
44 %
|
33
|
44 %
|
Total
Reading/ELA
and
Writing
|
|
100%
|
|
100%
|
Connecticut
|
No
information
available
|
Kansas
|
Reading/ELA
|
Multiple
choice
|
361
|
|
NA
|
|
Multiple
measure
items
(field
test)
|
161
|
|
NA
|
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
521
|
|
741
|
|
Louisiana2
|
Reading/ELA
|
Reading
and
Responding
Multiple
Choice
Constructed
Response
|
8
2
|
|
20
8
|
|
Using
Information
Resources
Multiple
Choice
Constructed
Response
|
5
1
|
|
5
2
|
|
Proofreading
Multiple
Choice
|
8
|
|
8
|
|
Multiple
Choice
Constructed
Response
|
21
3
|
|
33
10
|
|
Writing
Constructed
Response
|
1
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
Maryland
|
No
information
available
|
North
Carolina
|
Reading/ELA1
|
40
|
100 %
|
58
|
100 %
|
North
Dakota
|
Reading/ELA1
|
20-303
|
|
NA
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Reading/ELA
|
Vocabulary
|
9-114
|
25 %
|
12
|
24 %
|
Comprehension/critical
literacy
|
17-194
|
45 %
|
23
|
46 %
|
Literature
|
6-84
|
18 %
|
9
|
18 %
|
Research
and
information
|
4-64
|
13 %
|
6
|
12 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
36-444
|
100 %
|
50
|
100 %
|
Texas
|
Reading/ELA
|
Basic
understanding
|
12
|
38%5
|
15
|
38%5
|
Literary
elements
|
6
|
19%5
|
8
|
20%5
|
Analysis
using
reading
strategies
|
6
|
19%5
|
7
|
18%5
|
Analysis
using
critical/thinking
skills
|
8
|
25%5
|
10
|
25%5
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
32
|
101%
|
40
|
101%
|
Writing2
|
Composition
Constructed
Response
|
1
|
|
1
|
|
Organization
(revising
and
editing)
|
3
|
|
4
|
|
Sentence
structure
(revising
and
editing)
|
7
|
|
8
|
|
Standard
usage/word
choice
(revising
and
editing)
|
7
|
|
8
|
|
Punctuation,
capitalization,
spelling
(revising
and
editing)
|
7
|
|
8
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
Total
Constructed
Response
|
24
1
|
|
28
1
|
|
1 Totals only available. Information not available by strand.
2 Percentages not calculated due to combination of multiple choice and constructed response items.
3 North Dakota included a range of items in their description of items per subject.
4 Oklahoma listed an “ideal number of items” in their test blueprint.
5 Percentage calculated based on number of items.
Note: NA = Not Available
Table C2. Elementary Grade: Mathematics AA-MAS Assessments (Grade 4 unless otherwise noted, multiple choice unless otherwise noted)
State
|
|
AA-MAS
|
Regular
|
Mathematics
Component
|
Number
of items
|
Percent
|
Number of items
|
Percent
|
|
Mathematics
|
California
|
Number
sense
|
23
|
48 %
|
31
|
48 %
|
Algebra
and
functions
|
10
|
21 %
|
18
|
28 %
|
Measurement
and
geometry
|
10
|
21 %
|
12
|
18 %
|
Statistics,
data
analysis,
and
probability
|
5
|
10 %
|
4
|
6 %
|
Mathematical
reasoning
|
Embedded
|
|
Embedded
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
48
|
100 %
|
65
|
100 %
|
Connecticut
|
No
information
available
|
Kansas
|
Mathematics
|
40
|
|
72
|
|
|
Mathematics
|
Louisiana1
|
Number
and
number
relations
|
|
20 %
|
|
40 %
|
Algebra
|
|
16 %
|
|
5 %
|
Measurement
|
|
16 %
|
|
10 %
|
Geometry
|
|
16 %
|
|
20 %
|
Data
analysis,
probability,
and
discrete
math
|
|
15 %
|
|
10 %
|
Patterns,
relations
and
functions
|
|
17 %
|
|
15 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
Total
Constructed
Response
|
42
2
|
|
60
3
|
|
Maryland
|
No
information
available
|
|
Mathematics
|
North
Carolina
|
Calculator
Active
|
27 (all
operational)
|
67 %
|
54
(includes
some
experimental
items)
|
66 %
|
Calculator
Inactive
|
13 (all
operational)
|
33 %
|
28
(includes
some
experimental
items)
|
34 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
40
|
|
82
|
|
North
Dakota
|
Mathematics
|
20-302
|
|
Not available
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Mathematics
|
Algebraic
reasoning
|
6-83
|
18 %
|
8
|
18 %
|
Number
sense
|
8-103
|
22 %
|
10
|
22 %
|
Geometry
|
9-113
|
25 %
|
11
|
24 %
|
Measurement
|
8-103
|
22 %
|
10
|
22 %
|
Data
analysis
and
statistics
|
4-63
|
13 %
|
6
|
13 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
35-453
|
100%
|
45
|
100%
|
Texas
|
Mathematics
|
Numbers,
operations,
and
quantitative
reasoning
|
9
|
26%4
|
11
|
26%4
|
Patterns,
relationships,
and
algebraic
reasoning
|
6
|
18%4
|
7
|
17%4
|
Geometry
and
spatial
reasoning
|
5
|
15%4
|
6
|
14%4
|
Measurement
|
5
|
15%4
|
6
|
14%4
|
Probability
and
statistics
|
3
|
9%4
|
4
|
10%4
|
Mathematical
processes
and
tools
|
6
|
18%4
|
8
|
19%4
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
34
|
100%
|
42
|
100%
|
1 Number of items not calculated for each strand due to combination of multiple choice and constructed response items included in percentages.
2 North Dakota included a range of items in their description of items per subject.
3 Oklahoma listed an “ideal number of items” in their test blueprint.
4 Percentage calculated based on number of items.
Note: NA = Not Available
Table C3. Elementary Grade: Science AA-MAS Assessments (Grade 4 unless otherwise noted)
|
|
AA-MAS
|
Regular
|
State
|
Science
component
|
Number
of items
|
Percent
|
Number of items
|
Percent
|
|
Science
(Grade
5)
|
California
|
Physical
sciences
|
141
|
29 %
|
182
|
30 %
|
Life
science
|
143
|
29 %
|
184
|
30 %
|
Earth
sciences
|
145
|
29 %
|
186
|
30 %
|
Investigation
and
experimentation
|
67
|
13 %
|
68
|
10 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
48
|
100%
|
60
|
100%
|
Connecticut
|
No
information
available
|
Kansas
|
Science
|
NA
|
|
44
|
100%
|
|
Science
|
Louisiana
|
Science
as
inquiry
|
7
|
20%9
|
8
|
20%9
|
Physical
science
|
7
|
20%9
|
8
|
20%9
|
Life
science
|
7
|
20%9
|
8
|
20%9
|
Earth
and
space
science
|
7
|
20%9
|
8
|
20%9
|
Science
and the
environment
|
7
|
20%9
|
8
|
20%9
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
Total
Constructed
Response
|
35
2
|
100%
|
40
4
|
100%
|
Maryland
|
No
information
available
|
North
Carolina
|
Science
|
60 (all
operational)
|
100%
|
80 (includes some experimental items)
|
|
North
Dakota
|
Science
|
20-3010
|
100%
|
NA
|
|
|
Science
(Grade
5)
|
Oklahoma
|
Observe
and
measure
|
8-1011
|
22 %
|
10
|
22 %
|
Classify
|
8-1011
|
22 %
|
10
|
22 %
|
Experiment
|
9-1111
|
25 %
|
11
|
24 %
|
Interpret
and
communicate
|
12-1411
|
32 %
|
14
|
31 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
37-4511
|
101%
|
45
|
99%
|
Texas
|
Science
(Grade
5)
|
Nature
of
science
|
11
|
34%9
|
13
|
33%9
|
Life
science
|
7
|
22%9
|
9
|
22%9
|
Physical
science
|
7
|
22%9
|
9
|
22%9
|
Earth/space
science
|
7
|
22%9
|
9
|
22%9
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
32
|
100%9
|
40
|
101%9
|
1 Of these items, 8 are from grade 5 and 6 are from grade 4.
2 Of these items 11 are from grade 5 and 7 are from grade 4.
3 Of these items, 7 are from grade 5 and 7 are from grade 4.
4 Of these items, 9 are from grade 5 and 9 are from grade 4.
5 Of these items, 8 are from grade 5 and 6 are from grade 4.
6 Of these items, 11 are from grade 5 and 7 are from grade 4.
7 Of these items, 4 are from grade 5 and 2 are from grade 4.
8 Of these items, 4 are from grade 5 and 2 are from grade 4.
9 Percentage calculated based on number of items.
10 North Dakota included a range of items in their description of items per subject.
11 Oklahoma listed an “ideal number of items” in their test blueprint.
Note: NA = Not Available
Table C4. Middle School Grade: Reading/ELA AA-MAS Assessments (Grade 8 unless otherwise noted)
State
|
|
AA-MAS
|
Regular
|
ELA
Component
|
Number
of Items
|
Percent
|
Number
of Items
|
Percent
|
|
Reading/ELA
|
California
|
Word
analysis,
fluency,
and
systematic
vocabulary
development
|
6
|
11 %
|
9
|
12 %
|
Reading
comprehension
(focus
on
informational
materials)
|
13
|
24 %
|
18
|
24 %
|
Literary
response
and
analysis
|
11
|
20 %
|
15
|
20 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
30
|
|
42
|
|
Writing
|
Written
and oral
English
language
conventions
|
11
|
20 %
|
16
|
21 %
|
Writing
strategies
|
13
|
24 %
|
17
|
23%
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
24
|
|
33
|
|
Total
Reading/ELA
and
Writing
|
54
|
99%
|
75
|
100%
|
Connecticut
|
No
information
available
|
Kansas
|
Reading/ELA
|
|
|
|
|
Multiple
choice
items
|
48
|
|
NA
|
|
Multiple
measure
items
(field
test)
|
16
|
|
NA
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
64
|
|
84
|
|
Louisiana1
|
Reading/ELA
|
Reading
and
Responding
items
Constructed
Response
|
8
1
|
|
20
8 and 1
essay
|
|
Using
Information
Resources
Constructed
Response
|
5
1
|
|
5
2
|
|
Proofreading
|
8
|
|
8
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
21
|
|
33
|
|
Writing
(Grade
7)
Constructed
Response
|
1
|
|
1
|
|
Maryland
|
No
information
available
|
|
Reading/ELA
|
North
Carolina
|
Operational
|
40
|
|
53
|
|
Embedded
Experimental
Items
|
0
|
|
9
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
40
|
|
62
|
|
North
Dakota
|
Reading/ELA
|
20-302
|
|
NA
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Reading/ELA
(Grade
7)
|
Vocabulary
|
|
13 %
|
10
|
20 %
|
Comprehension
|
|
43 %
|
20
|
40 %
|
Literature
|
|
30 %
|
12
|
24 %
|
Research
and
information
|
|
15 %
|
8
|
16 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
|
99%
|
50
|
100%
|
Texas3
|
Reading/ELA
|
Basic
understanding
|
10
|
|
12
|
|
Literary
elements
|
8
|
|
10
|
|
Analysis
using
reading
strategies
|
8
|
|
10
|
|
Analysis
using
critical/thinking
skills
|
12
|
|
16
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
38
|
|
48
|
|
Writing
(Grade
7)
|
Composition
Constructed
Response
|
1
|
|
1
|
|
Organization
(revising
and
editing)
|
4
|
|
6
|
|
Sentence
structure
(revising
and
editing)
|
8
|
|
10
|
|
Standard
usage/word
choice
(revising
and
editing)
|
10
|
|
12
|
|
Punctuation,
capitalization,
spelling
(revising
and
editing)
|
10
|
|
12
|
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
Total
Constructed
Response
|
32
1
|
|
40
1
|
|
1 Percentages not calculated due to combination of multiple choice and constructed response items.
2 North Dakota included a range of items in their description of items per subject.
3 Percentages not calculated due to mixture of Grade 8 Reading/ELA items and Grade 7 writing items in list.
Note: NA = Not Available
Table C5. Middle School Grade: Mathematics AA-MAS Assessments (Grade 8 unless otherwise noted, multiple choice unless otherwise noted)
State
|
Mathematics
component
|
AA-MAS
|
Regular
|
Number
of
items,
description
|
Percent
|
Number of items
|
Percent
|
|
Mathematics
|
California
|
Number
sense
|
18
|
34 %
|
22
|
34 %
|
Algebra
and
functions
|
20
|
37 %
|
25
|
38 %
|
Measurement
and
geometry
|
11
|
20 %
|
13
|
20 %
|
Statistics,
data
analysis,
and
probability
|
5
|
9 %
|
5
|
8 %
|
Mathematical
reasoning
|
Embedded
|
|
Embedded
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
54
|
100%
|
65
|
100%
|
Connecticut
|
No
information
available
|
Kansas
|
Mathematics
|
40
|
|
72 -1041
|
|
|
Mathematics
|
Louisiana2
|
Number
and
number
relations
|
|
20 %
|
|
20 %
|
Algebra
|
|
16 %
|
|
15 %
|
Measurement
|
|
16 %
|
|
15 %
|
Geometry
|
|
16 %
|
|
20%
|
Data
analysis,
probability,
and
discrete
math
|
|
15 %
|
|
20 %
|
Patterns,
relations
and
functions
|
|
17 %
|
|
10 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
Total
Constructed
Response
|
42
2
|
100%
|
60
4
|
100%
|
Maryland
|
No
information
available
|
|
Mathematics
|
North
Carolina
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
40 (all operational)
|
100%
|
80 (includes some experimental items)
|
|
North
Dakota
|
Mathematics
|
20-303
|
100%
|
NA
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Mathematics
|
Algebraic
reasoning
|
7-94
|
20 %
|
9
|
20 %
|
Number
sense
|
6-84
|
18 %
|
8
|
18 %
|
Geometry
|
6-84
|
18 %
|
8
|
18 %
|
Measurement
|
10-124
|
27 %
|
12
|
27 %
|
Data
analysis
and
statistics
|
6-84
|
18 %
|
8
|
18 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
Items
|
35-454
|
101%
|
45
|
101%
|
Texas
|
Mathematics
|
Numbers,
operations,
and
quantitative
reasoning
|
8
|
20%5
|
10
|
20%
|
Patterns,
relationships,
and
algebraic
reasoning
|
8
|
20%5
|
10
|
20%
|
Geometry
and
spatial
reasoning
|
6
|
15%5
|
7
|
14%
|
Measurement
|
4
|
10%5
|
5
|
10%
|
Probability
and
statistics
|
6
|
15%5
|
8
|
16%
|
Mathematical
processes
and
tools
|
8
|
20%5
|
10
|
20%
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
40
|
100%
|
50
|
100%
|
1 Kansas used a range to describe number of items.
2 Number of items not calculated for each strand due to inclusion of constructed response items in information reported by state.
3 North Dakota included a range of items in their description of items per subject.
4 Oklahoma listed an “ideal number of items” in their test blueprint.
5 Percentage calculated based on number of items.
Table C6. Middle School Grade: Science AA-MAS Assessments (Grade 8 unless otherwise noted)
State
|
Science
component
|
AA-MAS
|
Regular
|
Number
of Items
|
Percent
|
Number of items
|
Percent
|
|
Science
|
California
|
Motion
|
7
|
13 %
|
8
|
13 %
|
Forces
|
7
|
13 %
|
8
|
13 %
|
Structure
of
matter
|
8
|
15 %
|
9
|
15 %
|
Earth in
the
solar
system
(earth
science)
|
7
|
13 %
|
7
|
12 %
|
Reactions
|
6
|
11 %
|
7
|
12 %
|
Chemistry
of
living
systems
(life
science)
|
3
|
6 %
|
3
|
5 %
|
Periodic
table
|
6
|
11 %
|
7
|
12 %
|
Density
and
buoyancy
|
5
|
9 %
|
5
|
8 %
|
Investigation
and
experimentation
|
5
|
9 %
|
6
|
10 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
54
|
100%
|
60
|
100%
|
Connecticut
|
No
information
available
|
Kansas
|
Science
|
NA
|
|
60 (Grade 7)
|
100%
|
Louisiana
|
No
information
available
|
Maryland
|
No
information
available
|
North
Carolina
|
Science
|
60 (all
operational)
|
|
80 (includes some experimental items)
|
|
North
Dakota
|
Science
|
20-301
|
|
Not available
|
|
|
Science
|
Oklahoma
|
Observe
and
measure
|
6-82
|
18 %
|
8
|
18 %
|
Classify
|
6-82
|
18 %
|
8
|
18 %
|
Experiment
|
13-152
|
35 %
|
16
|
36 %
|
Interpret
and
communicate
|
11-132
|
30 %
|
13
|
29 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
36-442
|
101%
|
45
|
101%
|
Texas
|
Science
|
Nature
of
science
|
11
|
28%3
|
14
|
28%3
|
Living
systems
and the
environment
|
10
|
25%3
|
12
|
24%3
|
Structures
and
properties
of
matter
|
5
|
13%3
|
6
|
12%3
|
Motion,
forces,
and
energy
|
5
|
13%3
|
6
|
12%3
|
Earth
and
space
systems
|
9
|
22%3
|
12
|
24%3
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
40
|
101%
|
50
|
101%
|
1 North Dakota included a range of items in their description of items per subject.
2 Oklahoma listed an “ideal number of items” in their test blueprint.
3 Percentage calculated based on number of items.
Table C7. High School Grade: ELA AA-MAS Assessments (Grade 10 unless otherwise noted, multiple choice unless otherwise noted)
State
|
ELA
Component
|
AA-MAS
|
Regular
|
Number of Items
|
Percent
|
Number
of Items
|
Percent
|
California
|
Reading/ELA
|
In
development
|
Has
tests
|
Connecticut
|
No
information
available
|
Kansas
|
Reading/ELA
|
|
|
|
|
Multiple
Choice
|
48
|
|
NA
|
|
Multiple
Measures
(field
test)
|
16
|
|
NA
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
48
|
|
64+1
|
|
|
Reading/ELA
|
Louisiana2
|
Reading
and
Responding
items
Constructed
Response
|
8
1
|
|
20
10 and 1 extended essay
|
|
Using
Information
Resources
Constructed
Response
|
5
1
|
|
5
2
|
|
|
Proofreading
|
8
|
|
8
|
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
21
|
|
33
|
|
|
Writing
Constructed
Response
|
1
|
|
1
|
|
Maryland
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
Total
Constructed
Response
|
30-353
|
|
46
4
|
|
|
Reading
|
|
|
|
|
North
Carolina
|
Operational
Items
|
40
|
|
56
|
|
Embedded
Field
Test
Items
|
0
|
|
24
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
40
|
|
80
|
|
North
Dakota
|
Reading
|
20-304
|
|
Not available
|
|
Oklahoma2
|
Reading/ELA
(English
II EOI)
|
|
|
|
|
Vocabulary
|
4-55
|
|
4-85
|
|
Comprehension/critical
literacy
|
9-115
|
|
16-205
|
|
Literature
|
12-145
|
|
17-205
|
|
Research
and
information
|
3-55
|
|
4-65
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
28-355
|
|
41-545
|
|
Writing
component
(English
II EOI)
|
|
|
|
|
Grammar/usage
and
mechanics
|
7-95
|
|
12
|
|
Writing
prompt
|
1
|
|
1
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
Total
Constructed
Response
|
7-94
1
|
|
12
1
|
|
Texas2
|
Reading
|
Basic
understanding
|
7
|
|
8
|
|
Literary
elements
and
techniques
Constructed
Response
|
7
|
|
8
1
|
|
Analysis
and
critical
evaluation
(reading)
|
8
|
|
12
2
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
22
|
|
28
|
|
Writing
|
Composition
Constructed
Response
|
1
|
|
1
|
|
Revising
and
editing
|
14
|
|
20
|
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
Total
Constructed
Response
|
14
1
|
|
20
1
|
|
1 Kansas indicated that the assessment had “at least 64 items.”
2 Percentages not calculated due to combination of multiple choice and constructed response items.
3 Maryland used a range to describe the number of items for each session.
4 North Dakota used a range of items in their description of items per subject.
5 Oklahoma listed an “ideal number of items” in their test blueprint.
Table C8. High School Grade: Mathematics AA-MAS Assessments (Grade 10 unless otherwise noted, multiple choice unless otherwise noted)
State
|
Mathematics
component
|
AA-MAS
|
Regular
|
Number of Items
|
Percent
|
Number of Items
|
Percent
|
California
|
Mathematics
|
In
Development
|
Has
Tests
|
Connecticut
|
No
information
available
|
Kansas
|
Mathematics
|
40
|
100%
|
104 (High School)
|
100%
|
|
Mathematics
|
|
Louisiana1
|
Number
and
number
relations
|
|
20 %
|
|
10 %
|
Algebra
|
|
16 %
|
|
15 %
|
Measurement
|
|
16 %
|
|
15 %
|
Geometry
|
|
16 %
|
|
20 %
|
Data
analysis,
probability,
and
discrete
math
|
|
15 %
|
|
20 %
|
Patterns,
relations
and
functions
|
|
17 %
|
|
20 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
Total
Constructed
Response
|
42
2
|
100%
|
60
4
|
100%
|
Maryland2
|
Algebra
Multiple
Choice
Items
Constructed
Response
|
30-353
|
|
26
12
|
|
North
Carolina
2
|
Mathematics
|
40 (all operational)
|
|
80 (includes some experimental items)
|
|
North
Dakota
2
|
Mathematics
|
20-304
|
|
Not available
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Algebra
EOI (HS)
|
Number
sense
and
algebraic
operations
|
10-125
|
27 %
|
15
|
27 %
|
Relations
and
functions
|
21-235
|
55 %
|
31
|
56 %
|
Data
analysis,
probability
&
statistics
|
6-85
|
18 %
|
9
|
16 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
37-435
|
100%
|
55
|
99%
|
Texas
6
|
Mathematics
|
Functional
relationships
|
4
|
9%6
|
5
|
9%6
|
Properties
and
attributes
of
functions
|
4
|
9%6
|
5
|
9%6
|
Linear
functions
|
4
|
9%6
|
5
|
9%6
|
Linear
functions
and
inequalities
|
4
|
9%6
|
5
|
9%6
|
Quadratic,
other
nonlinear
functions
|
4
|
9%6
|
5
|
9%6
|
Geometric
relationships
and
spatial
reasoning
|
4
|
9%6
|
5
|
9%6
|
2-D and
3-D
representations
|
4
|
9%6
|
5
|
9%6
|
Measurement
|
6
|
13%6
|
7
|
13%
|
Percents,
proportions,
probability,
and
statistics
|
4
|
9%6
|
5
|
9%6
|
Mathematical
processes
and
tools
|
7
|
16%6
|
9
|
16%
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
45
|
101%
|
56
|
101%
|
1 Number of items not calculated for each strand due to combination of multiple choice and constructed response items included in percentages.
2 Totals only available. Information not available by strand.
3 Maryland used a range to describe the number of items for each session.
4 North Dakota used a range of items in their description of items per subject.
5 Oklahoma listed an “ideal number of items” in their test blueprint.
6 Percentage calculated based on number of items.
Table C-9 High School Grade: Science AA-MAS Assessments (Grade 10 unless otherwise noted)
State
|
Science
component
|
AA-MAS
|
Regular
|
Number
of Items
|
Percent
|
Number
of Items
|
Percent
|
California
|
In
development
|
|
|
Has tests
|
|
Connecticut
|
No
information
available
|
Kansas
|
Science
|
|
|
|
|
Physical
Science
|
NA
|
|
30
|
50%1
|
Life
Science
|
NA
|
|
30
|
50%1
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
NA
|
|
60
|
100%1
|
|
Science
|
Louisiana1
|
Science
as
inquiry
|
7
|
|
8
|
|
Physical
science
Constructed
Response
|
7
|
|
10
1
|
|
Life
science
Constructed
Response
|
7
|
|
10
1
|
|
Earth
and
space
science
Constructed
Response
|
7
|
|
6
1
|
|
Science
and the
environment
Constructed
Response
|
7
|
|
6
1
|
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
Items
Total
Constructed
Response
|
35
2
|
|
40
32
|
|
Maryland3
|
Science
(Biology)
Total
Multiple
Choice
Total
Constructed
Response
|
30-354
|
|
48
7
|
|
North
Carolina3
|
Science
|
40 (all operational)
|
|
80 (includes some experimental items)
|
|
North
Dakota3
|
Science
|
20-305
|
|
NA
|
|
Science
Biology
EOI
|
Oklahoma
|
Observe
and
measure
|
5-76
|
13 %
|
8
|
13 %
|
Classify
|
5-76
|
13 %
|
8
|
13 %
|
Experiment
|
11-136
|
26 %
|
16
|
27 %
|
Interpret
and
communicate
|
15-176
|
35 %
|
20
|
34 %
|
Model
|
5-76
|
13 %
|
8
|
13 %
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
41-516
|
100%
|
60
|
100%
|
Texas
|
Science
|
Nature
of
science
|
14
|
32%7
|
17
|
31%1
|
Organization
of
living
systems
|
9
|
20%7
|
11
|
20%1
|
Interdependence
of
organisms
|
9
|
20%7
|
11
|
20%1
|
Structures
and
properties
of
matter
|
6
|
14%7
|
8
|
15%1
|
Motion,
forces,
and
energy
|
6
|
14%7
|
8
|
15%1
|
Total
Multiple
Choice
|
44
|
100%
|
55
|
101%
|
1 Percentages not calculated due to combination of multiple choice and constructed response items.
2 Louisiana’s Science as Inquiry dimensions I and II had three constructed response, and 1 extended constructed response in two of four strands.
3 Detailed information by strand not available on Web site.
4 Maryland used a range to describe the number of items for each session.
5 North Dakota used a range of items in their description of items per subject.
6 Oklahoma listed an “ideal number of items” in their test blueprint.
7 Percentage calculated based on number of items.
Table C10. All Grades: Social Studies AA-MAS Assessments (Grade levels noted in table, multiple choice unless otherwise noted)
State
|
Social Studies component
|
AA-MAS
|
Regular
|
|
|
Number of Items
|
Percent
|
Number of Items
|
Percent
|
California
|
Social Studies
|
In development
|
Has tests
|
Connecticut
|
No information available
|
Kansas
|
Social studies test (Grade 6)
|
421
|
100%
|
48
|
100%
|
Social studies test (Grade 8)
|
492
|
100%
|
60
|
100%
|
Social studies test (High School)
|
US Section
|
30
|
57%
|
30
|
50%
|
World Section
|
22
|
42%
|
30
|
50%
|
Total Multiple Choice
|
52
|
99%
|
60
|
100%
|
Louisiana3
|
Social Studies, Grade 4
|
|
|
|
Total Multiple Choice
Total Constructed Response
|
32
2
|
|
NA
|
Social Studies, Grade 8
|
No information available
|
Social Studies, Grade 11
|
|
Geography
|
8
|
|
9
|
|
Civics
|
8
|
|
15
|
|
Economics
|
8
|
|
12
|
|
History
|
8
|
|
24
|
|
Total Multiple Choice
Total Constructed Response
|
32
2
|
|
60
4
|
|
Maryland
|
Government
Total Multiple Choice
Total Constructed Response
|
30-354
|
|
50
8
|
|
North Carolina
|
No test
|
North Dakota
|
No test
|
Oklahoma
|
No test
|
Texas
|
Social Studies, Grade 8
|
|
|
|
|
History
|
10
|
26%
|
13
|
27%
|
Geography
|
5
|
13%
|
6
|
13%
|
Economics and social influences
|
7
|
18%
|
9
|
19%
|
Political influences
|
10
|
26%
|
12
|
25%
|
Social studies skills
|
6
|
16%
|
8
|
17%
|
Total Multiple Choice
|
38
|
99%
|
48
|
101%
|
Social Studies, Grade 10
|
|
|
|
|
History
|
5
|
13%
|
7
|
14%
|
Geography
|
10
|
25%
|
12
|
24%
|
Economics and social influences
|
6
|
15%
|
7
|
14%
|
Political influences
|
9
|
23%
|
12
|
24%
|
Social studies skills
|
10
|
25%
|
12
|
24%
|
Total Multiple Choice
|
40
|
101%
|
50
|
100%
|
Social Studies, Grade 11
|
|
|
|
|
History
|
10
|
23%
|
13
|
24%
|
Geography
|
7
|
16%
|
9
|
16%
|
Economics and social influences
|
10
|
23%
|
13
|
24%
|
Political influences
|
7
|
16%
|
9
|
16%
|
Social studies skills
|
10
|
23%
|
11
|
20%
|
|
Total Multiple Choice
|
44
|
101%
|
55
|
100%
|
1 Of these items, 18 are grade 5 items and 24 are grade 6.
2 Of these items, 23 are grade 7 items and 26 are grade 8.
3 Percentages not calculated due to combination of multiple choice and constructed response items.
4 Maryland used a range to describe the number of items for each session.
Top of page
|