Achieving Transparency in the Public
Reporting
|
Unique States |
Participation |
Performance |
American Samoa |
No |
No |
Bureau of Indian Affairs |
No |
No |
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands |
No |
No |
Department of Defense Education Activity |
No |
No |
District of Columbia |
Yesa |
Yesa |
Federated States of Micronesia |
No |
No |
Guam |
No |
No |
Palau |
Nob |
Nob |
Puerto Rico |
No |
No |
Republic of the Marshall Islands |
No |
No |
Virgin Islands |
No |
No |
a The District of Columbia reported data
by grade ranges.
b Palau sent data, But they appeared to
be APR tables, which were not counted
for this analysis.
States That Reported Disaggregated Alternate Assessment Data for Students with Disabilities
All 50 regular states indicated using at least one alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards. Some states had additional alternate assessments, including alternate assessments based on modified achievement standards (Kansas, North Carolina, and Oklahoma) and those based on grade level achievement standards (Louisiana, North Carolina, and Virginia). As the criteria for various alternate assessments became clearer, some alternate assessments were reclassified (e.g., Louisiana’s LAA2 alternate was later considered an alternate based on modified achievement standards). One alternate assessment (Washington) was classified as “other” because it was unclear as to what type of achievement standards were used. All alternate assessments, except Washington’s, were categorized as used within NCLB accountability systems. The state with the highest number of alternate assessments was North Carolina (N=4); this is consistent with the findings for 2005-2006. Also, the eight states using two alternate assessments remained the same as for 2005-2006 (Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Oklahoma, Oregon, Virginia, and Washington). All of the remaining 41 states had one alternate assessment.
Figure 6 shows the number and percent of states that disaggregated participation and performance data for students with disabilities on alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards. There was an increase in 2006-2007 compared to 2005-2006 in the number of states reporting both participation and performance, from 24 (48%) to 36 (72%) of regular states. The number of states with no information decreased from 13 to 7, or from 26% to 14%.
Figure 6. Disaggregated Alternate Assessment Based on Alternate Achievement Standards Results for Students with Disabilities in 2006-2007 for Regular 50 States*
*The figure does not include state APR or SSP data.
For unique states, the total number with an alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards in 2006-2007 was unclear due to the lack of information on state Web sites. In previous years, three unique states indicated using an alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards for NCLB accountability purposes. In 2006-2007, no state posted data for participation and performance on an alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards. One state (Palau) did provide disaggregated participation and performance data on a state AA-AAS to NCEO directly; however, those data appeared to be from an APR report (see Table 2).
Table 2. Unique States Reporting Disaggregated Participation or Performance Data for Students with Disabilities on Alternate Assessments
Unique States |
Participation |
Performance |
American Samoa |
No |
No |
Bureau of Indian Affairs |
No |
No |
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands |
No |
No |
Department of Defense Education Activity |
No |
No |
District of Columbia |
No |
No |
Federated States of Micronesia |
No |
No |
Guam |
No |
No |
Palau |
Noa |
Noa |
Puerto Rico |
No |
No |
Republic of the Marshall Islands |
No |
No |
Virgin Islands |
No |
No |
a Palau provided data directly to NCEO staff, but they appeared to be in an APR report.
Figure 7 maps the number of regular states that reported disaggregated participation and performance data for alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards. The number of states reporting participation and performance data for all alternate assessments for 2006-2007 was 36, an increase from 28 in the previous year. Five reported performance only (Illinois, Montana, Texas, Wisconsin, and Wyoming), two reported participation only (North Dakota and Rhode Island), and seven reported no information.
Figure 7. States Reporting 2006-2007 Disaggregated Participation or Performance Data for Students with Disabilities on Alternate Assessments based on Alternate Achievement Standards*
*The figure does not include state APR or SPP data. A broad definition was used to determine whether a state had data – states were included if they had data in any form for each assessment; these data could be presented for the state as a whole, by grade ranges, or by grade.
The decline observed in the number of states reporting alternate assessment data from 42 states in 2004-2005, to 28 in 2005-2006, was due in part to a shift in 2005-2006 to not include as public reporting “in the same way and with the same frequency” as reported for other students, those data only presented in APRs or SPPs. Further, for the 2006-2007 analysis, there is greater clarity in the types of alternate assessments based on alternate, modified, and grade level achievement standards, because of clarifications in federal regulations and technical assistance efforts. This clarity is evident in our maps and figures, which include only the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS). Compared to 2005-2006, this decision may have resulted in a slight increase in states counted as reporting all participation and performance data because other types of alternates were not included with the AA-AAS in maps and figures. The small number of alternate assessments based on other types of achievement standards (grade-level or modified) were described earlier in this report; the participation and performance data for these other alternate assessments are noted in Appendix D.
None of the 11 unique states reported data on an alternate assessment. As mentioned previously, Palau did send participation and performance data to NCEO staff directly, but these data appeared to be from an APR, and was not a document prepared for the public.
Top of page | Table of Contents
Communicating Participation in 2006-2007
Regular Assessment Participation Approaches and Select Results
In this section we show the ways in which states reported participation data for regular assessments. More specifically, we describe the participation information presented to a reader of a state’s assessment report, without doing any calculations. Figure 8 focuses on the approaches taken by the 50 regular states in presenting participation data. Figure 9 shows the same approaches as Figure 8, but is based on the total number (N=78) of regular assessments in NCLB accountability systems. This information is presented by state in Appendix E.
Figure 8. Number of States Reporting Participation by Various Approaches for Regular Assessments in NCLB Accountability Systems in 2006-2007
Figure 9. Number of All Regular Assessments (N=78) Reported by Various Approaches in NCLB Accountability Systems in 2006-2007 (Regular States)
The most common way that states reported participation was number of students assessed (n=34). This was followed by reporting the percent of students assessed (n=16) and information about exempted or excluded students (n=11). Only a small number of states reported the percent of students not assessed (n=5). These data show that the same general pattern holds with most assessments having participation reported by number assessed (n=49), percent of students assessed (n=23), and information about exemption and exclusion (n=14).
Participation data for the unique states are not graphed due to the small amount of data. The one state (District of Columbia) that publicly reported participation and performance data reported the number and percent of students assessed. The remaining 10 unique states reported no disaggregated participation data publicly (see Appendix E).
Figure 10 shows the participation rates reported for 8th grade math in states where this information was reported, or the data could be derived. The grade and content area (middle school math) were chosen to maintain consistency with previous reports. States that aggregated middle school grades together were not included. For the 2006-2007 academic year, participation rates ranged from 79% to 100%, compared to a range of 89% to 99% in 2005-2006. More states are graphed in the current year (N=22) compared to the previous two years, with 14 states in 2005-2006 and 20 states in 2004-2005. Fifty-nine percent (13 of 22 states) had participation rates of 95%, compared to sixty-nine percent in 2005-2006 and fifty percent in 2004-2005.
Figure 10. Percentages of Students with Disabilities Participating in Middle School Regular Math Assessments in Those States with Clear Reporting of Participation Rates*
*Note: States graphed here include those with percentages derived from presented data, so some may not be counted as reporting a rate in Appendix E.
Alternate Assessment Disaggregated Participation Results for Students with Disabilities
We examined the ways in which states reported participation data for their alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (see Appendix F). Figure 11 shows how the 50 regular states approached reporting participation data for AA-AAS. Figure 12 shows the same data as Figure 11, but for the total number of AA-AAS (n=52). As shown in Figure 11, states most commonly reported by number of students assessed (n=29), followed by percent of students assessed (n=8), and percent of students by assessment (n=7). This is a slightly different pattern from the ways in which participation data were reported for regular assessments. The category “percent of students by assessment” appears more common for AA-AAS only because there are fewer states reporting exemption and exclusion information, number of students not assessed, and number absent for the AA-AAS compared to regular assessments. The number of states that reported the percent of students by assessment (e.g., 1% taking the AA-AAS) is the same across the AA-AAS and the regular assessment.
Figure 11. Number of Regular States Reporting Participation by Various Approaches for AA-AAS in the NCLB Accountability System in 2006-2007
Figure 12. Number of All AA-AAS’ (N=52) Participation Reported by Various Approaches in the NCLB Accountability System in 2006-2007 (Regular States)
Top of page | Table of Contents
Communicating Performance in 2006-2007
Regular Assessment Performance and Select Results
States also report performance data in a variety of ways, such as the number or percent in each achievement level, percent proficient or not proficient, and scaled scores. The details for the figures in this section are presented by state and assessment in Appendix G. Figure 13 shows how the 50 states reported performance on regular assessments. Figure 14 reports the same information, but by the total number of regular assessments within NCLB accountability systems (N=78).
The most common way states reported performance data was by percent in each achievement level (n=34), followed by percent proficient (n=27) and other score (n=15). The “other score” category reflects the fact that many states reported scaled scores or other types of scores that did not fit into the other categories we used in the past. The same basic pattern was seen when looking at the data by the 78 total regular assessments (see Figure 14).
Figure 13. Number of States Reporting Performance by Various Approaches for Regular Assessments in the NCLB Accountability Systems in 2006-2007
Figure 14. Number of All Regular Assessments’ (N=78) Performance Reported by Various Approaches in NCLB Accountability Systems in 2006-2007 (Regular States)
Top of page | Table of Contents
Selected Disaggregated Results of Regular Assessment Performance
This section compares the performance of general education students and students with disabilities for those states reporting disaggregated data. It is important to keep in mind that each state determines the specific content of its assessments and establishes its own proficiency levels. Thus it is unwise to compare proficiency rates focusing on individual states, or to similarly compare gaps between general education versus special education across states. Regular assessments in this section include predominantly state CRTs, though Exit assessments were also used when states had no other assessment for 10th grade for NCLB accountability. One state, Iowa, used an NRT.
As noted in the method, the comparison group of general education students may include all students assessed or all students without disabilities assessed, due to the variety in how states report. This can influence how gap comparisons are interpreted, slightly, depending on the percentage of students with disabilities in the assessment.
Reading Performance
For 2006-07 we note that more states had data available for gap analyses than in 2005-06. Figures 15-17 show the reading performance of students by state for those reporting data in 2006-07. As in previous years, the performance of students with disabilities in reading was considerably lower in most states than the performance of general education students. However, there are smaller average gaps between the two groups for the data sets available in 2006-2007 compared to 2005-2006 at each representative grade level in both Reading and Math (Table 3a). Similarly, the data set for the current year showed slightly more states with gaps of 25 points or less in both Reading and Math (Table 3b).
Table 3a. Gaps for Regular Assessments From Two Different Data Sets: Comparison of Mean Gaps for 2005-06 to Mean Gaps in 2006-07
|
Mean Gap for 2005-06 |
Mean Gap for 2006-07 |
Gap Change for All |
Gap Change Common States Across Years |
|
Elementary Reading |
34.5 (45 states) |
31.4 (47 states) |
3.1 |
3.1 |
(45 states) |
Middle School Reading |
42.5 (45 states) |
40.5 (47 states) |
2.1 |
2.1 |
(45 states) |
High School Reading |
42.5 (41 states) |
39.8 (46 states) |
2.7 |
1.7 |
(40 states) |
Elementary Math |
29.3 (45 states) |
28.9 (47 states) |
.4 |
.6 |
(45 states) |
Middle School Math |
40.9 (45 states) |
39.7 (47 states) |
1.2 |
1.3 |
(45 states) |
High School Math |
38.5 (42 states) |
38.2 (44 states) |
.3 |
.4 |
(41 states) |
Table 3b. Gaps for Regular Assessments: Comparison of Total Number of States with Gaps of 25 or Less in 2005-06 and 2006-07
Number (Percent) of States with Gaps of 25 Points or Less | ||
2005-06 | 2006-07 | |
ELementary Reading | 8 of 45 (18%) | 16 of
47 (34%) |
Middle School Reading | 4 of 45 (9%) | 5 of 47 (11%) |
High School Reading | 4 of 41 (10%) | 7 of 46 (15%) |
Elementary Math | 12 of 45 (27%) | 13 of 47
(28%) |
Middle School Math | 3 of 45 (7%) | 4 of 47 (9%) |
High School Math | 4 of 42 (10%) | 6 of 44 (13%) |
Figures 15-17 show the graphed reading performance of students for states that reported data. In most states the reading performance of students with disabilities was considerably lower than the performance of general education students. Middle school and high school average scores were lower than elementary scores, in general.
At the elementary level (see Figure 15), gaps ranged from 9 to 48 percent. The following states had gaps of 25 percentage points or less: Arizona, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. This total of 16 states is twice as large as the 8 states in this category in 2005-2006. A review of the previous year’s states show that only one of these states was newly added as reporting elementary reading data in 2006-2007 (Tennessee), and that two other states had notes on technical documentation to caution against longitudinal comparisons across these years (Arizona and Louisiana).
At the middle school level (see Figure 16), gaps ranged from 12 to 56 percent. States with gaps of 25 percentage points or less were: Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Texas. These five states compare to 4 last year. However, Louisiana indicated changes for 2006-2007 that might affect year to year comparisons. Nine states had gaps of 50 points or more: Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Indiana, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Utah. Compared to 2005-2006, two states left this list and two new ones joined it, for the same total number.
At the high school level (see Figure 17), gaps ranged from 11 to 73 percent. Seven states had gaps of 25 percentage points or less: Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Tennessee, and Virginia. Last year, just four states were in this category. However, Louisiana had cautionary information on direct comparisons across years, and Tennessee was not reported last year so is not able to be compared. For 2006-2007, 10 states had gaps of 50 points or more: Alabama, Colorado, Delaware, Indiana, Iowa, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Last year there were 13 states in this category. We caution against comparing gaps across states, but are encouraged by what might be a trend toward smaller gaps at the elementary and high school level in reading.
Figure 15. Elementary School Reading Performance on the Regular Assessment
Legend:
Heavy Solid Bar = Students with
disabilities percent proficient
Dashed Line= Gap between students with
disabilities and regular students. For
some states our “regular students”
comparison group may include students
with disabilities, because states report
data differently.
Figure 16. Middle School Reading Performance on the Regular Assessment
Legend:
Heavy Solid Bar = Students with
disabilities percent proficient
Dashed Line= Gap between students with
disabilities and regular students. For
some states our “regular students”
comparison group may include students
with disabilities, because states report
data differently.
Figure 17. High School Reading Performance on the Regular Assessment
Legend:
Heavy Solid Bar = Students with
disabilities percent proficient
Dashed Line= Gap between students with
disabilities and regular students. For
some states our “regular students”
comparison group may include students
with disabilities, because states report
data differently.
Mathematics Performance
Figures 18-20 show the performance of general education students and students with disabilities on states’ 2006-2007 regular math assessments. It appears, as with reading, that there are smaller gaps in math performance across grade levels.
At the elementary school level, gaps in math achievement on regular assessments were smaller than for either middle school or high school. The gaps (see Figure 18) ranged from a low of 7 to a high of 42. Thirteen states (Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Texas, and Virginia) had gaps of 25 percentage points or less, compared to twelve states in 2005-2006. In 2006-2007, states with the largest gaps of 40 and above were Alabama, Colorado, Delaware, and Mississippi, compared to six in the previous year.
At the middle school level (see Figure 19), gaps in achievement on regular math assessments ranged from a low of 10 to a high of 50. States with gaps of 25 percentage points or less were Louisiana, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Texas. States with gaps of 50 or more were Utah and Wisconsin. The respective numbers in 2005-2006 were three states with gaps of 25 points or less, and five states with gaps of 50 points or more.
Gaps in math achievement on regular high school math assessments (see Figure 20) ranged from a low of 7 percentage points to a high of 56 percentage points. States with a gap of 25 percentage points or less were California, Louisiana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Tennessee, and Virginia. These six states compare to four in 2005-2006. States with a gap of 50 points or more in 2006-2007 were Alabama, Indiana, Montana, New Jersey, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. These seven states compare to six states last year.
By these measures, there was only a slight reduction in gaps observed here across years for mathematics at the elementary and middle school levels. For reading, the observed gap differences suggested more improvement across elementary and high school levels.
Figure 18. Elementary Mathematics Performance on the Regular Assessment
Legend:
Heavy Solid Bar = Students with
disabilities percent proficient
Dashed Line= Gap between students with
disabilities and regular students. For
some states our “regular students”
comparison group may include students
with disabilities, because states report
data differently.
Figure 19. Middle School Mathematics Performance on the Regular Assessment
Legend:
Heavy Solid Bar = Students with
disabilities percent proficient
Dashed Line= Gap between students with
disabilities and regular students. For
some states our “regular students”
comparison group may include students
with disabilities, because states report
data differently.
Figure 20. High School Mathematics Performance on the Regular Assessment
Legend:
Heavy Solid Bar = Students with
disabilities percent proficient
Dashed Line= Gap between students with
disabilities and regular students. For
some states our “regular students”
comparison group may include students
with disabilities, because states report
data differently.
Top of page | Table of Contents
Alternate Assessment Performance Results
Figure 21 displays the approaches that the 50 states used to report performance data for alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards. Examining the approaches in terms of the number of assessments showed the same pattern due to the fact that the number of AA-AAS is nearly identical to the number of states. The only difference was that there were 52 assessments counted as AA-AAS in the 50 states. One was a separate high school version of a state’s AA-AAS, and the other was a separate assessment complementing a state’s regular NRT component. Figure 21 shows the same basic pattern as the reporting for regular assessments, with the most common performance reporting categories being percent in each achievement level (n=28), followed by percent proficient (n=15), and Percent not proficient (n=6). In comparison, percent not proficient was the fourth most common category for regular assessment reporting because more states reported “other scores” on regular assessments than they did for AA-AAS. Only two states reported “other scores” for AA-AAS. For more detailed information by state and assessment see Appendix H.
Figure 21. Number of States Reporting AA-AAS Performance by Various Approaches in the NCLB Accountability System in 2006-2007*
* Graph for Performance Data by all AA-AAS was the same as by state, so is not presented here.
Top of page | Table of Contents
Other Information Collected for 2006-2007
Accommodations
Sixteen states reported participation or performance data for students taking state assessments with or without accommodations. This number was up from 10 in 2005-06, and equaled the number of states reporting this information in 2004-05.
In this year, of sixteen states with data on accommodated participation, 14 states reported accommodated students’ participation, performance, or both, disaggregating by grade. Four states reported participation and performance by specific type of accommodation used by students (Colorado, Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas). Three states reported participation and performance for accommodations based on levels of approval for their use: nonapproved/modification (Colorado), standard and conditional accommodation (Georgia), and standard and non-standard accommodation (Michigan). Although these three reported the performance for those with nonstandard accommodations, the numbers were too low to report for privacy considerations. One state reported accommodation use by whether a student was “significantly cognitively disabled (SCD)” (Mississippi), and another state reported accommodation use disaggregated by its assessment based on modified achievement standards (Oklahoma). Another state reported linguistically accommodated testing (LAT) administration for students with disabilities, as well as a “bundled” set of accommodations for students with dyslexia (Texas).
Of all 16 states reporting data on accommodated administrations of a state assessment, 6 states reported participation only (either the number or percent participating) with accommodations (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nebraska, and Tennessee). For actual participation and performance data for accommodated administration of assessments, see the summary in Table 4 and Appendix I.
Table 4. 2006-2007 Summary of States that Reported State-Level Information about Accommodations
Statea |
Assessments |
Terminology Used |
By |
Participation |
Performance |
Population Comments |
Colorado |
CSAP, CSAPA |
With Accommodations and by specific accommodation |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
All students with a documented need |
Connecticut |
CMT |
With and without accommodations |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
No |
Students with disabilities |
Florida |
FCAT CRT |
With and without accommodations |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Students with disabilities |
Georgia |
Does not specify |
Without, Standard, and Conditional accommodations (and specific) |
Yes/Aggregated grades 1-8 and 11 |
Yes |
Yes |
Students with disabilities |
Indiana |
ISTEP+ |
With and without accommodations |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Students with disabilities, non-ESL, and ESL/LEP. |
Iowa |
ITBS/ITED |
With and without accommodations |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
No |
Students with disabilities |
Kentucky |
KCCT |
With and without accommodations |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Students with disabilities |
Massachusetts |
MCAS |
Accommodated and regular test administration |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
No |
Students with disabilities |
Michigan |
MEAP and Access-Functional Independence Test |
Standard all, Nonstandard all, Standard ELL only and Nonstandard ELL only |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Access test has students with disabilities, MEAP unclear group. |
Mississippi |
MCT |
With and without accommodations |
Yes, Grades 3-8 together and high school level |
Yes |
No |
Students with disabilities |
Nebraska |
Writing |
Students receiving accommodation |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
No |
Students with disabilities |
North Carolina |
EOG and EOC |
By specific accommodation |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
N/A |
Oklahoma |
OCCT and OMAAP |
With and without accommodations |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Students with disabilities Note: The OAAP Portfolio facilitates all appropriate accommodations |
South Dakota |
Dakota STEP |
With and without accommodations |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
General population (not students with disabilities only) |
Tennessee |
TCAP-AT |
With and without accommodations |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
No |
Students in Special Education |
Texas |
TAKS |
Students tested with bundled dyslexia accommodations and LAT (Linguistically Accommodated Testing). |
Yes/Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Bundled and LAT: Total using, African American, Hispanic and white students, economically disadvantaged, limited English proficient, and special education students. |
a Wisconsin noted that schools and districts have access to data on whether the WKCE was taken with test accommodations in their download files. The scores are not flagged or reported separately for students with disabilities with or without accommodations.
“Click” Analysis of Web-based Reporting
Publicly reported data are not functionally public unless provided in an easily accessible manner. To examine ease of access, we analyzed the number of clicks it takes to locate disaggregated data on students with disabilities on states’ Department of Education Web sites (see Figures 22 and 23). This analysis is similar to previous analyses we have conducted, and presents click summary figures for all regular states with data on regular assessments and AA-AAS.
Figure 22 presents the number of clicks between Web pages required to arrive at the disaggregated data for states’ regular assessments. Figure 23 presents the same information for states’ AA-AAS. For states with a Web page that generates reports, we did not count the additional clicks needed to choose specific demographic or assessment characteristics. For those sites, we only counted the number of clicks needed to arrive at the generator site and a final “submit” click. Web page search engines were not used and “false starts” were not counted.
For 2006-2007, most state Web sites in the analysis required three or four clicks to access data, with 34 states for regular assessments and 44 states for AA-AAS data. Only two states required seven or more clicks for regular and AA-AAS assessments. This is somewhat comparable to the report on 2005-2006 assessments, which found 22 states with 3-4 clicks and 3 states with 7 clicks or more for regular assessments. However, because Web sites change frequently, and because analysis of 2006-2007 data included nine more states reporting regular assessment data than the previous report, one should not assume a clear year-to-year comparison is possible.
Figure 22. Number of States in Each “Click” Category for States Reporting Regular Assessments (Total N=49)
Figure 23. Number of States in Each Click Category for states Reporting Alternate Assessments (Total N=44)
Top of page | Table of Contents
Summary and Discussion
For 2006-2007, 49 out of 50 regular states were counted as having reported disaggregated data for students with disabilities in a manner comparable to that of general education or all students. Further, there were more states reporting complete disaggregated data for students with disabilities for regular assessments and alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) during 2006-2007, both within and outside NCLB accountability systems. Those states reporting both participation and performance for all regular assessments increased from 39 states in 2005-2006 to 46 states in 2006-2007. States reported disaggregated participation and performance data online for 92% of all regular assessments within NCLB systems. Two states reported only performance. One reported participation and performance for some assessments, and one state was not counted as reporting because the format was not in a manner similar to that for other students. Unfortunately, the number of unique states, including special territories, reporting disaggregated data publicly for regular assessments decreased slightly from two to one state. One additional unique state e-mailed disaggregated data for its regular assessment, but this was not counted because the data appeared to be in APR tables, which were not counted for this report.
The number of states reporting participation and performance also increased for regular states reporting data for AA-AAS. There were 12 more regular states reporting these data in 2006-2007 compared to 2005-2006, from 24 states to 36. The number of states that did not report any data for AA-AAS declined across the two years from 13 states to 7. Other states reported partial information for either participation or performance, with five states that reported only performance, and two states that reported only participation. Unlike for 2005-2006, there were no unique states that publicly reported data for AA-AAS online in 2006-2007. One unique state did e-mail data for its AA-AAS, but similarly to its regular assessment data, the data appeared to be APR data, so thus were not counted.
The most common approaches used by states to communicate participation and performance on regular assessments and AA-AAS remained the same as for 2005-2006, with some changes within the less common categories. Across assessments, the most common way to report participation was by number assessed (34 states for regular and 29 states for AA-AAS). The most common way of reporting performance was by the percent of students in each achievement level (34 states for regular and 28 states for AA-AAS).
In summarizing performance, as in previous years, data for reading and mathematics showed that performance for students with disabilities was lower in most states compared to general education students. However, we observed slightly smaller average gaps between the two groups for the data sets available in 2006-2007 compared to 2005-2006 at each representative grade level. Similarly, the data set for the current year showed slightly more states with gaps of 25 points or less in both reading and mathematics. Although we caution against comparing gaps across states, we are encouraged by what might be a trend toward smaller average gaps at the elementary and high school levels in reading. By similar measures, there were only slight reductions in average gaps observed for mathematics, more noticeably in elementary and middle school levels.
The number of states reporting disaggregated data for students who used accommodations on state assessments increased to16 states in 2006-2007, over 10 states in 2005-2006. This information on accommodations spanned across different state assessments including AA-AAS (n=1), norm and criterion referenced regular assessments (n=16), and an alternate assessment based on modified achievement standards. One state did not identify the assessment(s) included in the data.
Recommendations for Reporting
Based on findings in previous reports and in this current analysis, recommendations are made for reporting data:
Report participation and performance results for each assessment, content area and grade level. States’ annual performance reports (APRs) and state performance plans (SPPs) are now often posted on state education Web sites. However, these reports are not always presented in a way that is accessible to public audiences as are regular public reports. A few states do incorporate these data into regular reports that are designed to consider a public audience, but most do not. States doing so should consider whether the data for students with disabilities are being presented in a manner comparable to regular reporting for students without disabilities, and are geared to a public audience. States should report data for each content area by grade level assessed. Although NCLB does not require states to report data by grade, many states have done so in previous public reports and the data are useful for analysis. We noted in the appendices where reporting was unclear (e.g., reported by grade ranges rather than individual grades), and these data could not be used in most of our analyses. For example, although these data were used for generally describing the number of states that reported participation and performance, they could not be used for the gap analyses.
As mentioned in previous reports, the confidentiality issue is often a factor for reporting participation for alternate assessments. Yet, our practice remained the same; we counted states as reporting this information if they used a symbol such as a dash or asterisk due to the minimum N privacy policy. We recommend that states report the total participation and performance of students with disabilities by grade and content area, because when a state only reports data by further categorical breakdowns (e.g., alternate assessment participation by disability category), often the number is too small to report the data.
Clearly label preliminary and final data with dates posted. It continues to be important for the public to be able to clearly identify what the most recent and reliable data are for a given year. Many states do note when data posted are preliminary, whether the reports are PDF files or other formats. But, this needs to be done consistently across states. Also, sometimes a state will post data in two different final reports that were created for different purposes. In these cases the purpose should be clearly indicated as well. The documents we collect to analyze for this and similar reports are regular state reports usually located on one Web page or accessible through one page for report generators. Thus, documents not located together or in similar format to the regular assessment report for general education students are not considered. For this reason, and for the benefit of general users, states should present disaggregated data for students with disabilities in a similar manner, and that are located near or integrated with data for general students.
Report participation with accommodations. The number of states that reported participation of students with accommodations increased from the previous report, from 10 states to 16. We encourage this practice because it helps to understand how students are participating overall, and how accommodations may figure into their participation in either regular or alternate assessments. It is also important to report these data in order to see the extent that there may be students excluded from the performance data being reported. Thus, states that report these data by grade and content area should continue to do so because it provides useful information for interpreting participation and performance more clearly.
Percentage reporting. States should consider reporting participation rates, disaggregated by grade. This information is useful for interpreting data such as achievement gaps between students with and without disabilities. In addition to reporting these general participation rates, reporting the percentage of students with disabilities in each type of state assessment by grade level would also be beneficial for interpreting performance data. For example, one state may have more students with disabilities in its regular assessment with or without accommodations compared to another state that may have a higher percentage of its students with disabilities in alternate assessments based on grade level or modified achievement standards. Being able to clearly compare percentages by assessment type and by participation within each grade level would be useful for interpretation and analysis.
Make data accessible. From our analysis of the number of mouse clicks it took to reach state assessment reports from a state education home page, almost half of the states’ data could be reasonably found in four clicks or less. We encourage more states to make the path to assessment data clear for users. Other factors related to accessibility, already mentioned, are clear labeling of the status and purpose of data and ensuring public accessibility in how data are presented.
We conclude by recognizing the increase
in numbers of regular states reporting
disaggregated assessment data for
students with disabilities, particularly
online. This reflects greater
transparency for regular states than in
the previous year. We encourage more
states to report by grade level. Not
only will this allow us to include more
data in a wider range of analyses, but
it will also make the data even more
transparent for the public. Although the
public reporting of disaggregated data
for students with disabilities in unique
states decreased this year, we hope to
see increased public reporting practices
among these states in subsequent years.
Top of page | Table of Contents
Klein, J.A., Wiley, H.I., & Thurlow, M.L. (2006). Uneven transparency: NCLB tests take precedence in public assessment reporting for students with disabilities (Technical Report 43). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Thurlow, M.L., & Bremer, C., Albus, D. (2008). Good news bad news in disaggregated subgroup reporting to the public on 2005-2006 assessment results (Technical Report 52). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Thurlow, M.L., & Wiley, H.I. (2004). Almost there is public reporting of assessment results for students with disabilities (Technical Report 39). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Thurlow, M.L., Wiley, H.I., & Bielinski, J. (2003). Going public: What 2000-2001 reports tell us about the performance of students with disabilities (Technical Report 35). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
VanGetson, G.R., & Thurlow, M.L. (2007). Nearing the target in disaggregated subgroup reporting to the public on 2004-2005 assessment results (Technical Report 46). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Wiley, H.I., Thurlow, M.L., & Klein, J.A. (2005). Steady progress: State public reporting practices for students with disabilities after the first year of NCLB (2002-2003) (Technical Report 40). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Top of page | Table of Contents
Sample Letter Sent to Assessment Directors
February 22, 2008
The National Center on Educational Outcomes is examining states’ public reports on 2006-2007 school year assessment results. Our goal is to (a) identify all components of each state’s testing system (with the exception of tests specific to English language learners), (b) determine whether each state reports disaggregated test results for students with disabilities, (c) describe the way participation and performance information is presented, and (d) describe how states report results for students who took the test with accommodations or modifications.
We have reviewed your Web site for test information, including both participation and performance data on your statewide assessments. Enclosed are tables highlighting our findings from that review. Please verify all included information. Specifically, please return the tables that we have attached, noting your changes to them. Also, if there is additional publicly reported information available for your state, please provide us with the public document and/or website that contains the accurate information. Address your responses to Deb Albus via fax at (612) 624-0879 or via mail to the above address.
If you have any questions about our request, please call Deb Albus at (612) 626-0323 or email: albus001@umn.edu. If we do not hear from you by March 14, 2008, we will assume there is no additional publicly available information.
Thank you for taking the time to provide this information.
Sincerely,
Martha Thurlow
Director
Deb Albus
Research Fellow
(Tables 1- 4)
Table 1: Tests Administered and Results Found on Your State’s Regular Report(s)
Please review this table for its accuracy, make any changes (if necessary), and fill in any blank fields.
Test | Grades Tested | Subject Areas | Is
Disaggregated Info for Students with
Disabilities Reported? (Yes/No) |
Is this test part of the state
accountability system? (Yes/No) |
|
Participation | Performance | ||||
Direct Assessment of Writing (DAW) [CRT] | 5, 7, 10 | Writing | No | No | No Was test dropped? |
Alabama High School Graduation Exam (AHSGE) [EXIT] | 11, 12 | Reading, Language, Math, Science, Social Studies | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Stanford Achievement Test, 10th ed. (SAT-10) [NRT] | 3 - 8 | Reading, Language, Math, Science (5,7), Social Studies (6) | Yes | Yes | No |
Alabama Reading and Mathematics Test (ARMT) [CRT] | 3 - 8 | Reading, Math | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Alabama Alternate Assessment (AAA) AAS* |
1 - 12 | Reading, Math | Yes | Yes | Yes |
*AAS=based on alternate achievement standards; GLAS=based on grade level achievement standards
Table 2: Participation Information for Students with Disabilities
Please review this table. A “Y” indicates we found data reported this way in your state’s regular report(s). Please add a “Y” if your state uses additional categories in your regular report(s), and please provide us with the information (either a hard copy or a Web-link). A regular report is a public report summarizing data for students with disabilities in a manner equivalent to that used for state data reporting for students without disabilities or for all students.
Note: “Y” marks indicate categories the state uses descriptively (e.g., we do not add percentages of students across achievement levels to get total percent proficient for this table).
Test
|
Data reported by grade and individual test |
||||||
Percent of Students by Assessment (e.g.,4% in alternate on AAS) |
Number of Students Tested |
Number of Students Not Tested |
Percent of Students (participation rate e.g., 98% gr. 4) |
Percent of Students Not Tested |
Number and/or Percent Exempt or Excluded |
Number and/or Percent Absent |
|
AHSGE |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
SAT-10 |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
ARMT |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
AAA |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Table 3: Performance Information for Students with Disabilities
Please review this table. A “Y” indicates we found data reported this way in your state’s regular report(s). Please add a “Y” if your state uses additional categories in your regular report(s), and please provide us with the information (either a hard copy or a Web-link). A regular report is a public report summarizing data for students with disabilities in a manner equivalent to that used for state data reporting for students without disabilities or for all students.
Note: “Y” marks indicate categories the state uses descriptively (e.g., we do not add percentages of students across achievement levels to get total percent proficient for this table).
Test |
Data reported by grade and individual test |
|||||||
Percent in Each Achievement Level |
Percent in Each PR* Group |
Percent Proficient |
Percent Not Proficient |
Number in Each Achievement Level |
Number Proficient |
Number Not Proficient |
Average Percentile Rank |
|
AHSGE |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
SAT-10 |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
ARMT |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
AAA |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
*=Percentile Rank
Table 4: Accommodations
We are interested in examining if and how states report information about students who take assessments using accommodations. Please change our responses (if necessary) to reflect information that is reported for your state. If you do make changes, please provide us with the information (either a hard-copy or a Web-link).
Tests Reporting Data on Accommodations |
Accommodation Categories |
Is Disaggregated Info for Students Using Accommodations Reported? (Yes/No) |
For Whom? |
|
|
Participation |
Performance |
|
|
None |
|
|
|
|
Top of page | Table of Contents
Sample Letter Sent to Special Education Directors
April 28, 2008
The National Center on Educational
Outcomes is examining states’ public
reports on 2006-2007
school year assessment results. Our goal
is to (a) identify all components of
each state’s testing system (with the
exception of tests specific to English
language learners), (b) determine
whether each state reports
disaggregated test results for
students with disabilities, (c) describe
the way participation and performance
information is presented, and (d)
describe how states report results for
students who took the test with
accommodations or modifications.
We have reviewed your Web site for test information, including both participation and performance data on your statewide assessments in regular state reports. Enclosed are tables highlighting our findings from that review. Please verify all included information. Specifically, please return the tables that we have attached, noting your changes to them. Also, if there is additional publicly reported information in regular reports available for your state, please provide us with the public document and/or website that contains the accurate information. Address your responses to Deb Albus via fax at (612) 624-0879 or via mail to the above address.
If you have any questions about our request, please call Deb Albus at (612) 626-0323 or email: albus001@umn.edu. If we do not hear from you by May 26, 2008, we will assume there is no additional publicly available information.
Thank you for taking the time to provide this information.
Sincerely,
Martha Thurlow
Director
Deb Albus
Research Fellow
ALABAMA, 2006-2007
(Tables 1- 4)
Table 1: Tests Administered and Results Found on Your State’s Regular Report(s)
Please review this table for its accuracy, make any changes (if necessary), and fill in any blank fields.
Test |
Grades Tested |
Subject Areas |
Is Disaggregated Info for Students with Disabilities Reported? (Yes/No) |
Is this test part of the state accountability system? (Yes/No) |
|
|
Participation |
Performance |
|
||
Direct Assessment of Writing (DAW) [CRT] |
5, 7, 10 |
Writing |
No |
No |
No Was test dropped? |
Alabama High School Graduation Exam (AHSGE) [EXIT] |
11, 12 |
Reading, Language, Math, Science, Social Studies |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Stanford Achievement Test, 10th ed. (SAT-10) [NRT] |
3 - 8 |
Reading, Language, Math, Science (5,7), Social Studies (6) |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Alabama Reading and Mathematics Test (ARMT) [CRT] |
3 - 8 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Alabama Alternate Assessment (AAA) AAS* |
1 - 12 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
*AAS=based on alternate achievement standards; GLAS=based on grade level achievement standards
Table 2: Participation Information for Students with Disabilities
Please review this table. A “Y” indicates we found data reported this way in your state’s regular report(s). Please add a “Y” if your state are uses additional categories in your regular report(s), and please provide us with the information (either a hard copy or a Web-link). A regular report is a public report summarizing data for students with disabilities in a manner equivalent to that used for state data reporting for students without disabilities or for all students.
Note: “Y” marks indicate categories the state uses descriptively (e.g., we do not add percentages of students across achievement levels to get total percent proficient for this table).
Test |
Data reported by grade and individual test |
||||||
Percent of Students by Assessment (e.g.,4% in alternate on AAS) |
Number of Students Tested |
Number of Students Not Tested |
Percent of Students (participation rate e.g., 98% gr. 4) |
Percent of Students Not Tested |
Number and/or Percent Exempt or Excluded |
Number and/or Percent Absent |
|
AHSGE |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
SAT-10 |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
ARMT |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
AAA |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Table 3: Performance Information for Students with Disabilities
Please review this table. A “Y” indicates we found data reported this way in your state’s regular report(s). Please add a “Y” if your state uses additional categories in your regular report(s), and please provide us with the information (either a hard copy or a Web-link). A regular report is a public report summarizing data for students with disabilities in a manner equivalent to that used for state data reporting for students without disabilities or for all students.
Note: “Y” marks indicate categories the state uses descriptively (e.g., we do not add percentages of students across achievement levels to get total percent proficient for this table).
Test |
Data reported by grade and individual test |
|||||||
Percent in Each Achievement Level |
Percent in Each PR* Group |
Percent Proficient |
Percent Not Proficient |
Number in Each Achievement Level |
Number Proficient |
Number Not Proficient |
Average Percentile Rank |
|
AHSGE |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
SAT-10 |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
ARMT |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
AAA |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
*=Percentile Rank
Table 4: Accommodations
We are interested in examining if and how states report information about students who take assessments using accommodations. Please change our responses (if necessary) to reflect information that is reported for your state. If you do make changes, please provide us with the information (either a hard-copy or a Web-link).
Tests Reporting Data on Accommodations |
Accommodation Categories |
Is Disaggregated Info for Students Using Accommodations Reported? (Yes/No) |
For Whom? |
|
|
Participation |
Performance |
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
Top of page | Table of Contents
Status of Disaggregated Data (Participation and Performance) for Students with Disabilities on Regular State Tests in the Fifty States and Unique States for 2006-2007
Note: Asterisks (*) indicate there is a state note at left.
State |
Assessment Component
|
Grades
|
Subject
|
Disaggregated Special Education Data |
Test Used for NCLB Accountability Purposes |
|
Part. |
Perf. |
|||||
Alabama |
Direct Assessment of Writing (DAW) [CRT] |
5,7,10 |
Writing |
No |
No |
No |
Alabama High School Graduation Exam (AHSGE) [EXIT] |
11,12 |
Reading, Language, Math, Science, Social Studies |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Stanford Achievement Test, 10th ed. (SAT-10) [NRT] |
3-8 |
Reading, Language, Math (3-8), Science (5,7), Social Studies (6) |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Alabama Reading and Mathematics Test (ARMT) [CRT] |
3-8 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Alaska
|
Standards Based Assessment (SBA) [CRT] |
3-10 |
Reading, Math, Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
High School Graduation Qualifying Exam (HSGQE) [EXIT] |
10-12 |
Reading, Math, Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
TerraNova/CAT-6 [NRT] |
5, 7 |
Reading, Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies, Spelling |
No |
Yes
|
No |
|
Arizona |
TerraNova [NRT] |
2-9 |
Reading/Language Arts, Math |
No |
No |
No |
Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS) [NRT/CRT] |
3-8 |
Reading, Math, Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
AIMS High School (AIMS HS) [EXIT] |
10 -12 |
Reading, Math, Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Arkansas
|
Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS) [NRT] |
K-9 |
Reading, Language, Math |
No |
No |
No |
Arkansas Benchmark Exams [CRT] |
3-8 |
Literacy(Reading), Math |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
End of Course (EOC) [CRT] |
HS |
EOC-Algebra I, EOC-Geometry, Literacy |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
California |
California Standards Tests (CSTs) [CRT] |
2-11 |
English Language Arts (2-11), Math (2-8), Science (5,8,10), Math End-of-Course (8-11), History-Social Science (8,10,11), Science End-of-Course (9-11) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
California Achievement Test, 6th ed. (CAT-6) [NRT] |
3,7 |
Reading, Language, Math, Spelling |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Colorado |
Colorado Student Assessment Program (CSAP) [CRT] |
3-10 |
Reading, Math, Writing (3-10); Spanish Reading, Spanish Writing (3,4); Science (5,8,10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Connecticut |
Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT) [CRT] |
3-8 |
Reading, Math, Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Connecticut Academic Performance Test (CAPT) [CRT] |
10 |
Reading, Math, Writing, Science |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Delaware |
Delaware Student Testing Program (DSTP) [NRT/CRT] |
2-11 |
Reading, Math (2-10), Writing (3-10), Science, Social Studies (4,6,8,11) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Florida |
Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT), includes SAT-9 [NRT/CRT] (no NRT reported for participation or performance) |
3-11 |
Reading (3-10), Math (3-10), Writing (4,8,10), Science (5,8,11) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
FCAT NRT (SAT 10) |
3-10 |
Reading (3-10) Math (3-10) |
No |
No |
No |
Georgia |
End of Course Tests (EOCT) [CRT] |
9-12 |
English Literature and Composition (9), American Literature and Composition, Algebra, Geometry, Biology, Physical Science, US History, Economics/Business/Free Enterprise |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Georgia High School Graduation Test (GHSGT) [EXIT] |
11 |
English/Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Criterion-Referenced Competency Tests (CRCT) [CRT] |
1-8 |
Reading, English/Language Arts, Math, Science (3-8), Social Studies (3-8) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Eighth Grade Writing Assessment [CRT] |
8 |
Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Hawaii
|
Hawaii State Assessment (HSA) [CRT]
|
3-8,10 |
Reading, Math, Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Idaho
|
Idaho Direct Assessments (DMA/DWA) [CRT] |
4-9 |
Math (4,6,8), Writing (5,7,9) |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Idaho Standards Achievement Tests (ISAT) [CRT] |
3-8, 10 |
Reading, Language Usage, Math, Science (5,7,10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Idaho Reading Indicator (IRI) [CRT] |
K-3 |
Reading |
Yes
|
Yes
|
No |
|
Illinois |
Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT) [CRT] *7th grade science not reported |
3,4,5,7,8 |
Reading (3,5,8), Math (3,5,8), Science (4,7) |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Prairie State Achievement Exam (PSAE) [CRT] |
11 |
Reading, Math, Science |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Indiana |
Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational Progress (ISTEP+) [NRT/CRT] |
3-10 |
English Language Arts, Math, (3-10), Science (5,7) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Graduation Qualifying Exam (GQE) [EXIT] |
10 |
English Language Arts, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Core 40 End-of-Course Assessments (ECAs) [EXIT] |
Varies |
English 11, Algebra 1 |
No |
No |
No |
|
Iowa |
Iowa Tests of Basic Skills/Iowa Tests of Educational Development (ITBS/ITED) [NRT] |
3-8, 11 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Kansas |
Kansas Assessment System (KAS) [CRT] *Combines all tests |
3-8, 10, 11 |
Reading (3-8,11), Math (3-8,10) |
Yes* |
Yes* |
Yes |
Kentucky |
Explore (8th)[NRT] and Plan (10th)[NRT] |
6, 9 |
Reading, Language, Math |
No |
No |
No |
Kentucky Core Content Test (KCCT)[CRT] |
3 – 8, 10-12 |
Reading (3-8,10), Math (3-8,11), Writing Portfolio and On-Demand (5,8,12), Science (4,7,11), Social Studies (5,8,11), Arts & Humanities (5,8,11), Practical Living & Vocational Studies (4,7, 10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Louisiana
|
Louisiana Educational Assessment Program (LEAP 21) [CRT] |
4,8 |
English Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies |
Yes
|
Yes |
Yes |
iLEAP [NRT/CRT] |
3, 5-7, 9 |
English Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Graduation Exit Exam (GEE 21) [EXIT]
|
10, 11 |
English Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Maine |
Maine Educational Assessment (MEA) [CRT] |
3-8 |
Reading, Math (3-8); Science (4, 8) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes
|
Maine High School Assessment (MHSA), which consists of two components: the SAT (NRT) and an augmented mathematics component (CRT) |
HS |
Reading, Math, and Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Maryland |
Maryland School Assessment (MSA) [CRT] |
3-8 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
High School Assessment (HSA) [CRT]
|
9-12 |
English 2, Geometry, Biology, Government, Algebra (had for English 2 and Algebra but not other three subjects) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Massachusetts |
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) [CRT] |
3-8,10 |
Reading (3, 5-6, 8), English Language Arts (4,7,10), Math (3-8,10), Science (5,8, 9/10) [had for sci &tech and engineering tests) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Michigan |
Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) [CRT] |
3-9 |
Reading, Math, English Language Arts, Writing (3-8); Science (5,8), Social Studies (6,9) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Minnesota |
Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment (MCA) [CRT] |
3-8, 11 |
Reading (3-8,10), Math (3-8, 11), Writing (5) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
BST (phasing out) [Exit] |
10 |
Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
GRAD [Exit] |
11 |
Reading, Writing, and Math |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Mississippi |
Mississippi Curriculum Test (MCT) [CRT] *Not by grade |
2-8 |
Reading, Language, Math |
Yes*
|
Yes |
Yes |
Writing Assessment (WA) [CRT] |
4,7 |
Writing |
No |
Yes |
No |
|
Subject Area Testing Program (SATP) [CRT] |
H S |
Algebra I, US History, Biology, English II |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Missouri |
Missouri Assessment Program (MAP) (TerraNova survey) [NRT/CRT] |
3-8,10, 11 |
Communication Arts (3-8, 11), Math (3-8,10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Montana |
Iowa Tests of Basic Skills/ Iowa Tests of Educational Development (ITBS/ITED) [NRT] |
4,8,11 |
Reading, Math, Language Arts, Science, Social Studies |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Montana CRT [CRT] |
3-8,10 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Nebraska |
Nebraska Statewide Writing Assessment (NSWA) [CRT] |
4,8,11 |
Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
School-based Teacher-led Assessment and Reporting System (STARS) [CRT] |
4,8,11 |
Math, Reading |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Nevada |
Iowa Tests of Basic Skills/ Iowa Tests of Educational Development (ITBS/ITED) [NRT] |
4,7,10 |
Reading, Math, Science, Language |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Nevada Criterion Referenced Test (NCRT) [CRT] |
3-8 |
Reading, Math (3-8); Science (5,8) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
High School Proficiency Exam (HSPE) [EXIT] |
10-11 |
Reading, Math (10-11); Writing (11) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Nevada Analytic Writing Examination (NAWE) [CRT] |
5, 8 |
Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
New Hampshire |
New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP) [CRT] |
3-8, 11 |
Reading, Math (3-8, 11); Writing (5,8) (Grade 11 not disaggregated for students with disabilities) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
New Jersey |
New Jersey Assessment of Skills and Knowledge (NJ-ASK) [CRT] |
3-7 |
Language Arts Literacy, Math (3-7); Science (4) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Grade Eight Proficiency Assessment (GEPA) [CRT] |
8 |
Language Arts Literacy, Math, Science |
Yes |
Yes
|
Yes |
|
High School Proficiency Assessment (HSPA) [EXIT] |
11 |
Language Arts Literacy, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
New Mexico |
New Mexico Standards Based Assessment (NMSBA) [CRT] |
3-9, 11 |
Reading/Writing, Math, Science |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
New Mexico High School Competency Exam (NMHSCE) [EXIT] |
10-12+ |
Reading, Language Arts, Math, Science, High School competency, Social Studies, Writing |
No |
No |
No |
|
New York |
Regents Comprehensive Exams (RCE) [EXIT]
|
9-12 |
English, Foreign Languages, Math, Global History & Geography, US History & Government, Living Environment, Earth Science, Chemistry, Physics |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Regents Competency Test (RCT) [EXIT] |
99-12
|
Reading, Math, Science, Writing, Global Studies, US Hist & Gov’t |
Yes/font> |
Yes |
Yes |
|
New York State Assessment Program (NYSAP) [CRT] |
3-8 |
English Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
North Carolina |
End-of-Grade (EOG) [CRT] (includes gr. 3 pretest) |
3-8, 10 5 and 8 |
Reading, Math Science (5 and 8) |
Yes No (Science pilot) |
Yes No (Science pilot) |
Yes |
End-of-Course (EOC) [CRT] |
HS |
Biology, Chemistry, Physics, English I, Physical Science, Algebra I & II, Geometry, Civics & Economics |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Computer Skills Test (reporting includes alternate version) [EXIT] |
8-12 |
Computer Skills (test version matches curriculum for year) [Exit] |
Yes |
Yes |
No
|
|
North Dakota |
North Dakota State Assessment (NDSA) [NRT/CRT] |
3-8, 11 |
Reading/Language, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Ohio |
Ohio Achievement Tests (OAT) [CRT] *combined with alternate |
3-8 |
Reading, Math (3-8); Writing (4) |
Yes* |
Yes* |
Yes |
Ohio Graduation Tests (OGT) [EXIT] *combined with alternate |
10, 11 |
Reading, Writing, Math, Science, Social Studies |
Yes* |
Yes* |
Yes |
|
Oklahoma |
Oklahoma Core Curriculum Tests (OCCT) [CRT]
|
3-8 |
Reading, Math (3-8), Science (5,8); Social Studies (5), History/Government (8), Geography (7) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
End-of-Instruction Tests (EOI) [CRT] |
HS |
English II, U.S. History, Algebra I, Biology I |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Oregon |
Oregon Statewide Assessment (OSA) [CRT] |
3-8,10 |
Reading/Literature, Math (3-8,10), Writing (4,7,10), Science (5,8,10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Pennsylvania |
Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) [CRT] |
3-8,11 |
Reading, Math (3-8, 11); Writing (5, 8, 11) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Rhode Island |
New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP)[CRT] |
3-8 |
Reading, Math (3-8); Writing (5,8) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
NSRE [CRT] |
HS |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) *Grade 2 used for grade 3 NECAP for some schools in reporting. [CRT] |
K-2 |
Reading |
No |
No |
No* |
|
South Carolina |
Palmetto Achievement Challenge Tests (PACT) [CRT] |
3-8 |
English/Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
High School Assessment Program (HSAP) [EXIT] |
10 |
English/Language Arts, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
South Dakota |
Dakota STEP Test (STEP) [NRT/CRT] |
3-8, 11 5, 8-11 |
Reading, Math Science |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Stanford Writing Assessment [CRT] |
5,7,10 |
Writing |
No |
No |
No |
|
Tennessee |
Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program Achievement Test (TCAP-AT) [CRT] |
3-8 |
Reading/Language Arts, Math |
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes |
TCAP Gateways (TCAP-SA) [CRT] |
99-12 |
Algebra I, Biology, English I & II, Math Foundations, Physical Science, US HIstory |
Yes/p>
|
Yes (grade 10) |
Yes |
|
Texas
|
Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) [CRT] |
3-11 |
Reading (3-9), Math, English Language Arts (10,11), Writing (4,7), Science (5,10,11), Social Studies (8,10,11); Spanish version administered in grades 3-6. |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
End of Course Assessment [EXIT] |
HS |
Algebra I |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Utah |
Iowa Tests of Basic Skills/ Iowa Tests of Educational Development (ITBS/ITED) [NRT] |
3,5,8,11 |
Reading, Language, Math, Science, Social Studies |
No |
No |
No |
Core Criterion-Referenced Tests (CCRT) [CRT] |
1-11 |
Language Arts, Math (1-11), Science (1-11) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Direct Writing Assessment (DWA) [NRT] |
6,9 |
Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Reading on Grade Level (ROGL)[Undetermined] |
1-11 |
Reading |
No |
No |
No |
|
Utah Basic Skills Competency Test (UBSCT) [EXIT] |
HS |
Reading, Writing, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Vermont |
New Standards Reference Exam (NSRE) [CRT] |
10 |
English/ Language Arts, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Vermont Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) [CRT] |
2 |
Reading |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP) [CRT] |
3-8 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Virginia |
Standards of Learning (SOL) [CRT] *reports combined grades |
3-8, High School |
English Language Arts, Math (3-8, HS); History/Social Science, Science (3, 5, 8, HS) Content Specific History (HS) |
Yes* |
Yes |
Yes |
Washington |
Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) [CRT] |
3-8, 10 |
Reading, Math (3-8, 10); Writing (4,7,10); Science (5,8,10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
West Virginia
|
West Virginia Educational Standards Test (WESTEST) [CRT]
|
3-8, 10 |
Reading/Language, Math, Science (3-8,10); Social Studies (3-8) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Wisconsin |
Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Exam (WKCE) [CRT] |
3-8,10 |
Reading, Math (3-8, 10); Language Arts, Science, Social Studies (4,8,10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Wyoming |
Proficiency Assessment for Wyoming Students (PAWS) [CRT] *Excel document posted on Web site was not determined to be data presented in a similar manner as data for all students. |
3-8,11 |
Reading, Writing, Math |
No* |
No* |
Yes |
Unique States
State |
Assessment Component |
Grades |
Subject |
Disaggregated Special Education Data |
Test Used for State Accountability Purposes |
|
Part |
Perf |
|||||
American Samoa |
Stanford Achievement Test – 10th Edition (SAT-10) [NRT] |
3-8,10 |
Complete battery |
No |
No |
Yes |
Bureau of Indian Affairs |
Students take the assessment of the state in which they live |
|
|
No |
No |
Unknown |
Common-wealth of the Northern Mariana Islands |
Stanford Achievement Test- 10th Edition (SAT-10) [NRT] |
3, 5 |
Reading, Language, Math, Social Science, Science |
No |
No |
Yes |
Standards Based Assessment (SBA) [CRT] |
3,4,5 |
Math, Social Science (Gr.3), Reading, Science (Gr. 4), Writing (Gr. 5) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Department of Defense Education Activity |
TerraNova [NRT] |
3-11 |
Reading, Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies |
No |
No |
Unknown |
District of Columbia |
Stanford Achievement Test- 9th Edition (SAT-9) [NRT] *By grade range |
1-12 |
Reading, Math |
Yes* |
Yes* |
Yes |
Federated States of Micronesia |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
No |
No |
Unknown |
Guam |
Stanford Achievement Test- 10th Edition (SAT-10) [NRT] |
1-12 |
Reading, Math, Language |
No |
No |
Yes |
Palau |
Palau Achievement Test (PAT)[NRT] *State sent filled in tables with actual data but did not provide data publicly. |
4,6,8,10, 12 |
Reading, Math |
No* |
No* |
Yes |
Puerto Rico |
Pruebas Puertorriquenas de Aprovechamiento Academico (PPAA) |
3-8, 11 |
Spanish, math, and English as a second language |
No |
No |
Yes |
Republic of the Marshall Islands |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
No |
No |
Unknown |
Virgin Islands |
Virgin Island Territorial Assessments of Learning (VITAL) |
5, 7, 11 |
Reading, Math |
No |
No |
Unknown |
Top of page | Table of Contents
Status of Disaggregated Data (Participation and Performance) for Students with Disabilities on Alternate State Tests in the Fifty States and Unique States for 2006-2007
AAS is alternate achievement standards and GLAS is grade level achievement
standards
Note: Asterisks (*) indicate there is a state note at left.
State |
Assessment Component |
Standards-Based |
Grades |
Subject |
Disaggregated Special Education Data |
Test Used for State Accountability Purposes |
|
Part. |
Perf. |
||||||
Alabama |
Alabama Alternate Assessment (AAA) |
AAS |
1-12 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Alaska |
Alternate Assessment |
AAS |
3-10 |
English/Language Arts, Math, Skills for a Healthy Life |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Arizona |
AIMS-Alternate (AIMS-A) |
AAS |
3-8 |
Reading, Math, Writing, Listening, Speaking |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
AIMS-A HS |
AAS |
10 11,12 |
Reading, Math, Writing, Listening (Level 1), Speaking (Level 1) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Arkansas |
Alternate Portfolio Assessment System (APAS) |
AAS |
3-8,11 |
Literacy (3-8,11), Math (3-8), EOC-Algebra 1 HS), EOC-Geometry (HS) |
No |
No |
Yes |
California |
California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA) |
AAS |
2-11 |
English Language Arts (2-11), Math (2-11) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Colorado |
Colorado Student Assessment Program Alternate (CSAPA) |
AAS |
3-10 |
Reading, Math (3-10), Writing, Science (5,8) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Connecticut |
Alternate Assessment |
AAS |
3-8,10 |
Reading, Math, Writing (communication) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Delaware |
Delaware Alternate Portfolio Assessment (DAPA) |
AAS |
2-10 |
Reading, Math, Writing (2-10), Science (4,6), Social Studies (4,6,8,11) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Florida |
Florida Alternate Assessment Report (FAAR) |
AAS |
3-10 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Georgia |
Georgia
Alternate
Assessment
(GAA)
|
AAS |
K-11 |
English Language Arts and mathematics (K-2), English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies (Gr. 3-8 and 11) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Hawaii |
Alternate
Assessment
|
AAS |
3-8,10 |
Reading, Math |
Yes* |
Yes* |
Yes |
Idaho |
Idaho
Alternate
Assessment
(IAA)
|
AAS |
K-3 |
Reading |
Yes* |
Yes* |
Yes |
Illinois |
Illinois Alternate Assessment (IAA) |
AAS |
3,4,5,7,8, 11 |
Reading (3,5,8,11), Math (3,5,8,11), Science (4,7,11) |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Indiana |
Indiana Standards Tool for Alternate Reporting (ISTAR) |
AAS |
3-10 |
English Language Arts, Math |
No |
No |
Yes |
Iowa |
Alternate Assessment |
AAS |
3-8,11 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Kansas |
Alternate Assessment: KAMM [MAS] *Reported combined with other tests |
MAS |
3-8,10,11 |
Reading (3-8,11) Math (3-8,10) Science (4, 7, HS), History (5, 8, HS) |
Yes* |
Yes* |
Yes |
Portfolio Assessment [AAS] *Reported combined with other tests |
AAS |
3-8,10,11 |
Reading (3-8,11) Math (3-8,10) Science (4, 7, HS), History (5, 8, HS) |
Yes* |
Yes* |
Yes |
|
Kentucky |
Alternate
Portfolio
Assessment
|
AAS |
3-8, 10-12 |
Reading (3-8,10), Math (3-8,11), Writing Portfolio and On-Demand (5,8,12), Science (4,7,11), Social Studies (5,8,11), Arts & Humanities (5,8,11), Practical Living & Vocational Studies (4,7, 10) * |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Louisiana |
Alternate Assessment Levels 1 (LAA-1) |
AAS |
3-12
|
English Language Arts, Math, Social Studies, Science |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Alternate Assessment Level 2 (LAA-2) |
MAS |
4, 8, 10, 11 |
English Language Arts, Math (4, 8, 10); Social Studies, Science (11) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Maine |
Personalized Alternate Assessment Portfolios (PAAP) |
AAS |
4,8,11 |
English Language Arts (Reading & Writing), Math (4,8,11); Science & Technology (4, 8) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Maryland |
Alternate Maryland School Assessment (ALT-MSA) |
AAS |
3-8, 10 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Massachusetts |
MCAS Alternate Assessment (MCAS-Alt) |
AAS |
3-10 |
Reading (3, 5, 6, 8), English Language Arts (4,7,10), Math (3-8,10), Science (5,8,9/10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Michigan |
Alternate Assessment (MI-Access) |
AAS |
3-8 |
5 Performance Expectations/ Language Arts, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Minnesota |
Alternate Assessment (AAS) |
AAS |
3-8, 10, 11 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Mississippi |
Alternate Assessment |
AAS |
3-8 |
Math, Reading/ Language Arts |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Missouri |
MAP-Alternate |
AAS |
4,8,11 |
Communication Arts (11), Math (4,8), |
No |
No |
Yes |
Montana |
Alternate Assessment NRT |
AAS |
4,8,11 |
Reading, Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Alternate Assessment CRT |
AAS |
3-8, 10 |
Reading, Math |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Nebraska |
Alternate Assessment |
AAS |
4,8,12 |
Math, Reading/Writing |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Nevada |
Nevada Alternate Scales of Academic Achievement (NASAA) |
AAS |
3-8 |
Language, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
New Hampshire |
Alternate Assessment (NH-Alt) |
AAS |
10 |
Reading, Writing, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
New Jersey |
Alternate Proficiency Assessment (APA) |
AAS |
3,4,8,11 |
Language Arts Literacy, Math (3,4,8,11,12); Science (4,8,11) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
New Mexico |
Alternate Assessment |
AAS |
3-12 |
Reading/Writing, Math |
No |
No |
Yes |
New York |
New York State Alternate Assessment (NYSSA) *Did not report grade 12 |
AAS |
3-8, 12 |
English Language Arts, Math (3-8,11), Science (4, 8), Social Studies (12) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
North Carolina |
North Carolina Checklist of Academic Standards (NCCLAS) for End-of-Grade *but not writing. |
GLAS |
3-8, 10 |
Reading, Math, Writing (4, 7, 10 only) |
Yes* |
Yes* |
Yes |
North Carolina Checklist of Academic Standards (NCCLAS) for End-of-Course *not by grade. Computer alternate reported with regular computer test. |
GLAS |
9-12 |
Biology, Chemistry, Physics, English I, Physical Science, Algebra I & II, Geometry, US History, Civics & Economics |
Yes* |
Yes* |
Yes |
|
NC EXTEND1 |
AAS |
3-8, 10 |
Reading, Math, Writing (4, 7, 10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
NC EXTEND 2 |
MAS |
3 – 8 4,7 |
Reading, Math, Writing (4,7) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
North Dakota |
North Dakota Alternate Assessment (NDALT) |
AAS |
3-8,11 |
Reading/Language, Math |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Ohio |
Alternate Assessment *Data were combined with regular test so not able to separate. |
AAS |
3-8, 10 |
Reading (3-6,8,10), Math (3,4,6-8,10), Writing (4,10), Science (10), Social Studies (10 |
Yes* |
Yes* |
Yes |
Oklahoma |
Alternate Assessment OAAP |
AAS |
3-8 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
OMAAP |
MAS |
3-8 |
Reading, Math, Writing for Engl II only |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Oregon |
Extended Assessments (EA) |
AAS |
3- 8, 10 |
Reading/Literature (3,5,8,10), Writing (4,7,10), Math (3,5,8,10), Science (5,8,10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Career and Life Role Assessment System (CLRAS) |
AAS |
3-8, 10 |
Reading/Literature, Math (3-8,10); Science (5,8,10); Writing (4,7,10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Pennsylvania |
Pennsylvania Alternate System of Assessment (PASA) |
AAS |
3-8, 11 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Rhode Island |
Alternate Assessment |
AAS |
3-8,11 |
English/Language Arts, Math |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
South Carolina |
SC-ALT |
AAS |
3-8, 10 |
Reading, Math, Science, Social Studies, & Functional and Life Skills |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
South Dakota |
Dakota STEP-A |
AAS |
3-8, 11 |
Reading, Math |
No |
No |
Yes |
Tennessee |
TCAP-Alt |
AAS |
3-12 |
Reading/Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Texas |
State-Developed Alternate Assessment-II (SDAA-II) *Not by grade. |
AAS |
3-10 |
Reading, Math (3-10); Writing (4,7,10); English Language Arts (10) |
No* |
Yes |
Yes |
Utah |
Alternate Assessment |
AAS |
1-12 |
Language Arts, Math (1-12); Science (4-9) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Vermont |
Alternate Assessment
|
AAS |
|
Varies by type of assessment |
No |
No |
Yes |
Virginia |
Virginia Alternate Assessment Program (VAAP) |
AAS |
3, 5, 8, 11 |
Collection of Evidence |
No |
No |
Yes |
Virginia Grade Level Alternative Assessment (VGLA) |
GLAS |
3, 5, 8, 11 |
English Language Arts, Math, Science, History/Social Science, Content Specific History (High School) |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Washington |
Washington Alternate Assessment System (WAAS) Portfolio |
AAS |
3-8, 10-12 |
Reading, Math (3-8, 10); Writing (4,7,10); Science (5,8,10) |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
WASL Basic |
Other |
3-8, 10-12 |
One or more subject areas |
No |
No |
No |
|
West Virginia |
Alternate Performance Task Assessment (APTA) |
AAS |
3-8, 10 |
Reading, Math |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Wisconsin |
Wisconsin Alternate Assessment (WAA) |
AAS |
3-8, 10 |
Reading, Math (3-8, 10); Science, Social Studies, Language Arts (4,8,10) |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Wyoming |
Proficiency Assessment for Wyoming Students, Alternate (PAWS-ALT) |
AAS |
3-8,11 |
Reading, Math, Writing |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Unique States Alternate Assessment Data for 2006-2007
State |
Assessment Component |
Standards Based* |
Grades |
Subject |
Disaggregated Special Education Data |
Test Used for State Accountability Purposes |
|
Part. |
Perf. |
||||||
American Samoa |
Alternate Assessment |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
No |
No |
Unknown |
Bureau of Indian Affairs |
Alternate Assessment |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
No |
No |
Unknown |
Common-wealth of the Northern Mariana Islands |
Alternate Assessment |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
No |
No |
Unknown |
Department of Defense Education Activity |
Alternate Assessment |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
No |
No |
Unknown |
District of Columbia |
Alternate Assessment |
AAS |
Unknown |
Reading, Math |
No |
No |
Yes |
Federated States of Micronesia |
Alternate Assessment |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
No |
No |
Unknown |
Guam |
Alternate Assessment
|
GLAS |
3-8, 10 |
Reading, Math, Language |
No |
No |
Yes |
Palau |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
No |
No |
Unknown |
Puerto Rico |
Pruebas Puertorriquenas de Evaluacion Alterna (PPEA) |
Unknown |
3-8, 11 |
English, Spanish, Math |
No |
No |
Yes |
Republic of the Marshall Islands |
Alternate Assessment |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
No |
No |
Unknown |
Virgin Islands |
Alternate Assessment |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
No |
No |
Unknown |
Top of page | Table of Contents
Disaggregated Participation Information for Students with Disabilities on Regular State Tests for the Fifty States and Unique States for 2006-2007
Note: Shaded cells indicate unclear (e.g., aggregated grade level or subject level) reporting and asterisks, an (*) indicates that the state wanted to note that the information could be derived, and (**) indicates a state note at left under “Test.”
State |
Test |
Percent of Students by test (e.g.,4% in Alternate) |
Number of Students Tested |
Number of Students Not Tested |
Percent of Students Tested |
Percent of Students Not Tested |
Number and/or Percent Exempt or Excluded |
Number and/or Percent Absent |
Alabama |
DAW |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
AHSGE |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
SAT-10 |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
ARMT |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
Alaska |
SBA |
N |
N* |
N* |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
HSGQE |
N |
N* |
N* |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
TerraNova |
N |
N* |
N* |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Arizona |
TerraNova |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
AIMS |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
AIMS HS |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
Arkansas |
ITBS **state reports participation overall, not by disability status |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
ABE **see note above for AR |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
EOC **see note above for AR |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
California |
CSTs **Reports number with no score |
Y |
Y |
N |
N* |
N |
Y** |
N |
CAT-6 **Reports number with no score |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y** |
N |
|
Colorado |
CSAP **Reports number with no score |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y** |
N |
Connecticut |
CMT |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
CAPT |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
|
Delaware |
DSTP |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Florida |
FCAT**combined with FAAR |
N |
Y |
N** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
FCAT NRT |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Georgia |
EOCT |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
GHSGT |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
CRCT |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
EGWA |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Hawaii |
HSA
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Idaho |
DMA/DWA |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
ISAT |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
|
IRI |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Illinois |
ISAT |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
PSAE |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Indiana |
ISTEP+ |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
ECA |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
GQE |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Iowa |
ITBS/ITED **Also reports enrolled |
N |
Y** |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Kansas |
KAS **Reports data combined with alternates. |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Kentucky |
Plan
(10th) |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
KCCT **Reported by medical, first year LEP and other, but not by disability status |
Y |
Y |
N** |
Y |
N |
N** |
N |
|
Louisiana |
GEE 21 |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
LEAP 21 *8th grade only |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
iLEAP *4-7 |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Maine |
MEA |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
MHSA |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
Maryland |
MSA |
N |
Y
|
Y |
Y |
N**
|
N** |
N** |
HSA |
N |
Y
|
Y |
Y |
N**
|
N** |
N** |
|
Massachusetts |
MCAS **Reports by grade but not by MCAS test. |
Y |
Y
|
N |
Y |
N
|
N |
Y** |
Michigan |
MEAP |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Minnesota |
MCA-II |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
BST |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
GRAD |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Mississippi |
MCT |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Writing |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
SATP |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Missouri |
MAP |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Montana |
ITBS/ITED |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Montana CRT |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
|
Nebraska |
NSWA |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
STARS |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
Nevada |
ITBS/ITED |
N |
N |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
NCRT |
N |
N |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
HSPE |
N |
N |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
NAWE |
N |
N |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
New Hampshire |
NECAP |
N |
Y** |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
New Jersey |
NJ-ASK |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
GEPA |
N |
Y** |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
|
HSPA **with enrolled |
N |
Y** |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
|
New Mexico |
NMSBA |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
NMHSCE |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
New York |
RCE |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
RCT |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
NYSAP |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
North Carolina |
EOG |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
EOC |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
|
Computer Skills |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
North Dakota |
NDSA **Percent tested is based on all in regular and alternate so unclear |
N |
Y
|
N |
N** |
N
|
Y |
N |
Ohio |
OAT |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
OGT |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
Oklahoma |
OCCT |
N |
Y**
|
N |
N |
N
|
N |
N |
EOI |
N |
Y**
|
N |
N |
N
|
N |
N |
|
Oregon |
OSA |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Pennsylvania |
PSSA |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Rhode Island |
NECAP |
N |
Y ** |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
NSRE |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
DRA |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
South Carolina |
PACT |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
HSAP |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
South Dakota |
STEP |
N |
N** |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Stanford Writing |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Tennessee |
TCAP-AT |
Y** |
N
|
N |
N |
N
|
N |
N |
TCAP-Gateways |
Y** |
N
|
N |
N |
N
|
N |
N |
|
Texas |
TAKS |
N** |
Y
|
Y |
N** |
N**
|
Y |
Y |
EoC Algebra I |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Utah |
ITBS/ITED |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
CCRT |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
DWA |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
UBSCT |
N |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
ROGL |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Vermont |
NSRE |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
DRA |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
NECAP |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Virginia |
SOL **Reports data merged with other tests, some not by grade |
N |
N
|
N |
N |
N
|
N |
N |
Washington |
WASL |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
West Virginia |
WESTEST |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Wisconsin |
WKCE |
N |
N**
|
N |
N |
N**
|
N |
N |
Wyoming |
PAWS **State had separate Excel file with data, but this was deemed not to be in manner similar for all students. |
N |
N
|
N |
N |
N
|
N |
N |
Disaggregated Participation Data for Unique States on Regular Tests for 2006-2007
Unique States |
Test |
Percent of Students by test (e.g.,4% in Alternate) |
Number of Students Tested |
Number of Students Not Tested |
Percent of Students Tested |
Percent of Students Not Tested |
Number and/or Percent Exempt or Excluded |
Number and/or Percent Absent |
American Samoa |
SAT-10 |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Bureau of Indian Affairs |
Students take the assessment of the state in which they live |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands |
SAT-10 |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
SBA |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Department of Defense Education Activity |
TerraNova |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
District of Columbia |
SAT-9 |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Federated States of Micronesia |
Unknown |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Guam |
SAT-10 |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Palau |
PAT |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Puerto Rico |
PPAA |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Republic of the Marshall Islands |
Unknown |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Virgin Islands |
VITAL |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Top of page | Table of Contents
Disaggregated Alternate Assessment Participation Information for Students with Disabilities on Regular State Tests for the Fifty States and Unique States for 2006-2007
Note: Shaded cells indicate unclear (e.g., aggregated grade level or subject level) reporting and asterisks, an (*) indicates that the state wanted to note that the information could be derived, and (**) indicates a state note at left under “Test.”
State |
Test |
Percent of Students by test (e.g.,4% in Alternate) |
Number of Students Tested |
Number of Students Not Tested |
Percent of Students Tested |
Percent of Students Not Tested |
Number and/or Percent Exempt or Excluded |
Number and/or Percent Absent |
Alabama |
Alabama Alternate Assessment (AAA) |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Alaska |
Alternate
Assessment
|
N |
N* |
N* |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
Arizona |
AIMS-Alternate (AIMS-A) |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
AIMS-A HS |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Arkansas |
Alternate Portfolio Assessment System (APAS) |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
California |
California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA) |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Colorado |
Colorado Student Assessment Program Alternate (CSAPA) **reports number and percent with no score |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y** |
N |
Connecticut |
Alternate Assessment |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Delaware |
Delaware Alternate Portfolio Assessment (DAPA) **with enrolled |
N |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
Florida |
Florida Alternate Assessment Report (FAAR) **found only percent of all students, not the rate of those expected to take it |
Y |
Y |
N |
N** |
N |
N |
N |
Georgia |
Georgia Alternate Assessment (GAA) |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Hawaii |
Alternate Assessment (GLAS) |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Idaho |
Idaho Alternate Assessment (IAA) *K-3rd grade |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Illinois |
Illinois Alternate Assessment (IAA) |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Indiana |
Indiana Standards Tool for Alternate Reporting (ISTAR) |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Iowa |
Alternate
Assessment |
N |
Y** |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Kansas |
Alternate
Assessment:
KAMM |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Portfolio |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Kentucky |
Alternate Portfolio Assessment |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Louisiana |
Alternate Assessment Levels 1 (LAA-1) *APR has |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Alternate Assessment Level 2 (LAA-2) |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Maine |
Personalized Alternate Assessment Portfolios (PAAP) |
N |
Y
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Maryland |
Alternate Maryland School Assessment (ALT-MSA) **not reported by assessment or by reason not tested |
N |
Y |
N** |
N** |
N** |
N** |
N** |
Massachusetts |
Alternate on AAS **Rate combines MCAs tests |
Y |
Y |
N |
N** |
N |
N |
Y |
Michigan |
Alternate Assessment (MI-Access) |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Minnesota |
Alternate Assessment (AAS) |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Mississippi |
MAAECF |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Missouri |
MAP-Alternate |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Montana |
Alternate Assessment NRT |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Alternate Assessment CRT |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Nebraska |
Alternate Assessment |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Nevada |
Nevada Alternate Scales of Academic Achievement (NASAA) |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
New Hampshire |
Alternate Assessment (NH-Alt) **with enrolled |
Y |
Y** |
Y |
N |
N |
Y
|
N |
New Jersey |
Alternate Proficiency Assessment (APA) |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
New Mexico |
Alternate Assessment |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
New York |
New York State Alternate Assessment (NYSSA) |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
North Carolina |
North Carolina Checklist of Academic Standards (NCCLAS) for End-of-Grade |
N |
Y
|
N
|
N
|
N
|
N
|
N
|
North Carolina Checklist of Academic Standards (NCCLAS) for End-of-Course |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
NC EXTEND1 |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
NC EXTEND2 |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
North Dakota |
North Dakota Alternate Assessment (NDALT) **reported as not tested for regular assessment |
N |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Ohio |
Alternate Assessment GLAS **reported combined with regular tests. |
N |
N |
N |
N** |
N |
N |
N |
Oklahoma |
Alternate Assessment (OAAP) |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Modified
(OMAAP) |
N |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Oregon |
Extended Assessments (EA) |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Career and Life Role Assessment System (CLRAS) *No one took |
N |
Y* |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
Pennsylvania |
Pennsylvania Alternate System of Assessment (PASA) |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Rhode Island |
Alternate
Assessment
|
Y |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
South Carolina |
SC-ALT |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
South Dakota |
Dakota STEP-A |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Tennessee |
TCAP-Alt |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Texas |
State-Developed Alternate Assessment-II (SDAA-II) |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Utah |
Alternate Assessment |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Vermont |
Alternate Assessment |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Virginia |
Virginia Alternate Assessment Program (VAAP) |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Virginia Grade Level Alternative Assessment (VGLAA) |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Washington |
WAAS portfolio |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
WASL Basic |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
West Virginia |
Alternate Performance Task Assessment (APTA) *APR has |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Wisconsin |
Wisconsin Alternate Assessment (WAA) **Reports total enrolled and percent not tested is combined with regular test. |
N |
N** |
N |
N |
N** |
N |
N |
Wyoming |
Proficiency
Assessment
for
Wyoming
Students,
Alternate
(PAWS-ALT)
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Disaggregated Participation Data for Unique States with Identified Alternate Assessments in 2006-2007
Unique States |
Test |
Percent of Students by test (e.g.,4% in Alternate) |
Number of Students Tested |
Number of Students Not Tested |
Percent of Students Tested |
Percent of Students Not Tested |
Number and/or Percent Exempt or Excluded |
Number and/or Percent Absent |
District of Columbia |
Alternate Assessment |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Guam |
Alternate Assessment |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Puerto Rico |
PPEA |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Top of page | Table of Contents
Disaggregated Regular Assessment Performance Information for Students with Disabilities for the Fifty States and Unique States for 2006-2007
Note: Shaded cells indicate unclear (e.g., aggregated grade level or subject level) reporting and asterisks, an (*) indicates that the state wanted to note that the information could be derived, and (**) indicates a state note at left under “Test.”
State |
Test |
Percent in Each Achievement Level |
Percent in Each PR* Group |
Percent Proficient |
Percent Not Proficient |
Number in Each Achievement Level |
Number Proficient |
Number Not Proficient |
Other Score |
Alabama |
DAW |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
AHSGE |
Y |
N |
N* |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
SAT-10 |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
|
ARMT |
Y |
N |
N* |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Alaska |
SBA |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
HSGQE |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
|
TerraNova |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Arizona |
TerraNova (none) |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
AIMS |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Mean SS |
|
AIMS HS |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Mean SS |
|
Arkansas |
ITBS |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
ABE |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
EoC (ABE HS) |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
California |
CSTs |
Y |
NA |
N* |
N* |
N |
N |
N |
Mean ss |
CAT-6 |
NA |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Npr for avg score |
|
Colorado |
CSAP |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Connecticut |
CMT |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Avg scaled score |
CAPT |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Delaware |
DSTP |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Avg NCE and N |
Florida |
FCAT **for 10th grade only, other grades marked NA or split by with and without accommodation |
Y |
N |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Mean ss and Mean Dev. ss |
FCAT NRT |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Georgia |
EOCT |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
GHSGT |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
CRCT |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
EGWA |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Hawaii |
HSA
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Idaho |
DMA/DWA |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
ISAT |
Y (had level ranges key) |
N |
Y
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
|
IRI |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
|
Illinois |
ISAT |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
PSAE |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Indiana |
ISTEP+ |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
Mean scaled score, etc. |
GQE |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
Mean scaled score |
|
|
Core 40 ECAs |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Iowa |
ITBS/ITED
|
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Kansas |
KAS **reports combined with alternate tests |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Kentucky |
Plan (10th) |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
KCCT *data can be derived from other reported categories |
Y |
N |
N* |
N* |
N |
N |
N |
Scaled score |
|
Louisiana |
GEE 21 |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
LEAP |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
iLEAP |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Maine |
MEA |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
MHSA |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Maryland |
MSA *data can be derived from other reported categories |
Y |
N* |
Y |
N* |
Y |
N* |
N* |
N |
HSA |
Y |
N* |
N* |
N* |
Y |
N* |
N* |
N |
|
Massachusetts |
MCAS |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Michigan |
MEAP |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Mean scale score |
Minnesota |
MCA-II |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Avg. scores |
BST |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Avg. scores |
|
GRAD |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Avg. scores |
|
Mississippi |
MCT |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
WA |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
SATP |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Missouri |
MAP |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Montana |
ITBS/ITED |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Montana CRT |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Nebraska |
NSWA |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
STARS |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Nevada |
ITBS/ITED |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
NCRT |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
HSPE |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
NAWE |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
New Hampshire |
NECAP |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Mean scale score |
New Jersey |
NJ-ASK |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Scale score mean |
GEPA |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Scale score mean |
|
HSPA |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Scale score mean |
|
New Mexico |
NMSBA |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
NMHSCE |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
New York |
RCE |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
RCT |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
NYSAP |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
North Carolina |
EOG
|
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
EOC
|
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
|
Computer skills |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
North Dakota |
NDSA **Alternate and regular tests reported together |
N** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Ohio |
OAT |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
OGT |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Oklahoma |
OCCT |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
EOI |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
Oregon |
OSA |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
Pennsylvania |
PSSA |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Rhode Island |
NECAP |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
Mean scale score |
NSRE |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
DRA |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
South Carolina |
PACT |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Mean scale score |
HSAP |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
South Dakota |
STEP |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Stanford Writing |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Tennessee |
TCAP-AT |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
TCAP-SA |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Texas |
TAKS **Note: Data reflect the Academic Excellence Indicator System reports only. Other state reports include most results listed in these tables. |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
EoC Algebra I *can be derived |
Y |
N |
N* |
N |
Y |
N* |
N |
Avg. scale score |
|
Utah |
ITBS/ITED |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
CCRT |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
DWA |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
ROGL |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
UBSCT |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Vermont |
NSRE |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
NECAP |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
DRA |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Virginia |
SOL |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Washington |
WASL |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
West Virginia |
WESTEST |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Mean scale score |
Wisconsin |
WKCE |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Wyoming |
PAWS |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Disaggregated Performance Information for Unique States on Regular Tests in 2006-2007
State |
Test |
Percent in Each Achievement Level |
Percent in Each PR* Group |
Percent Proficient |
Percent Not Proficient |
Number in Each Achievement Level |
Number Proficient |
Number Not Proficient |
Other Score |
American Samoa |
SAT-10 |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Bureau of Indian Affairs |
Students take the assessment of the state they live in. |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Confederation of Northern Mariana Islands |
SAT-10 |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
SBA |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Department of Defense Education Activity |
TerraNova |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
District of Columbia |
SAT-9 |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Federated States of Micronesia |
Unknown |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Guam |
SAT-10 |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Palau |
PAT |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Puerto Rico |
PPAA
|
N
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Republic of Marshall Islands |
Unknown |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Virgin Islands |
VITAL |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Top of page | Table of Contents
Disaggregated Alternate Assessment Performance Information for Students with Disabilities for the Fifty States and Unique States for 2006-2007
Note: Shaded cells indicate unclear (e.g., aggregated grade level or subject level) reporting and asterisks, an (*) indicates that the state wanted to note that the information could be derived, and (**) indicates a state note at left under “Test.”
State |
Test |
Percent in Each Achievement Level |
Percent in Each PR* Group |
Percent Proficient |
Percent Not Proficient |
Number in Each Achievement Level |
Number Proficient |
Number Not Proficient |
Other |
Alabama |
Alternate |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Alaska |
Alternate |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
Arizona |
AAP AIMS-A |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
AIMS-A HS |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Arkansas |
APAS |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
California |
CAPA *means data can be derived from other reported categories |
Y
|
NA
|
N*
|
N*
|
N |
N
|
N
|
Mean scale scores |
Colorado |
CSAPA |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Connecticut |
Alternate |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Delaware |
DAPA |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Florida |
FAAR **combined with FCAT |
N** |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Georgia |
GAA *can be derived from other reported categories |
Y |
N |
Y |
N* |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
Hawaii |
Alternate **Reports regular and alternate tests together |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Idaho |
Alternate IAA |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Illinois |
Alternate IAA |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Indiana |
ISTAR |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Iowa |
Alternate |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Kansas
|
KAMM |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Portfolio |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Kentucky |
Alternate *These can be derived from other reported categories |
Y |
N |
N* |
N* |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Louisiana |
LAA-1 |
Y** |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
LAA-2 |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
Maine |
PAAP
|
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Maryland |
ALT-MSA |
Y |
N |
Y |
N** |
Y |
N* |
N** |
N |
Massachusetts |
MCAS-Alt |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Michigan |
MI-Access |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Mean scale score |
Minnesota
|
Alternate (AAS) |
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Mississippi |
MAAECF |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Missouri |
MAP-Alternate
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Montana
|
NRT-ALT |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Avg ss |
CRT-ALT |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Nebraska |
Alternate |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Nevada |
NASAA |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
New Hampshire |
NH-Alt |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
New Jersey |
APA |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
New Mexico |
Alternate |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
New York |
NYSAA |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
North Carolina |
NCCLAS EoC
|
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
NCCLAS EoC
|
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
|
NC EXTEND1 |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
|
NC EXTEND 2
|
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
|
North Dakota |
NDALT |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Ohio
|
Alternate
Assessment |
N |
N |
N** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Oklahoma |
Alternate Assessment (OAAP) |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Modified (OMAAP) |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Oregon |
EA |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
CLRAS |
Y* |
N |
N |
N |
Y* |
N |
N |
N |
|
Pennsylvania |
PASA
|
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Rhode Island |
Alternate Assessment
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
South Carolina |
SC-ALT |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
South Dakota |
STEP-A
|
N |
N |
N* |
N* |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Tennessee |
TCAP-Alt |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Texas |
SDAA-II |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Utah |
Alternate
Assessment |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
N* |
N* |
N |
Vermont |
Alternate Assessment
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Virginia |
Virginia Alternate Assessment Program (VAAP) |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
VGLAA |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Washington
|
WASL Basic |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
WAAS |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
West Virginia |
APTA
|
Y |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
Wisconsin |
WAA
|
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Wyoming |
PAWS-ALT |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Disaggregated Alternate Test Performance Data for Unique States in 2006-2007
State |
Test |
Percent in Each Achievement Level |
Percent in Each PR* Group |
Percent Proficient |
Percent Not Proficient |
Number in Each Achievement Level |
Number Proficient |
Number Not Proficient |
Other |
District of Columbia |
Alternate Assessment |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Guam |
Alternate Assessment |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Puerto Rico |
PPEA |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Top of page | Table of Contents