1. Alternate Assessment: State of the States 2004 Martha Thurlow NCEO Betsy Case Harcourt Assessment June 2004

2. Important Survey Enclosed Jan – Pilot Feb - Modify and Send Out March - Survey April - Analyze Results May - Summarize Findings Interested in Alternate Assessment?

4. 2000 – 2004 Comparison 2000 30% of states had an alternate assessment in place 30% had selected portfolios, performance assessments, or direct observation 70% said alternate assessments would be based on state standards 2004 60% had an alternate assessment in place 75% had selected portfolios 50% said state standards 25% said had alternate standards

5. Benefits/Negative Consequences 2000 80% No real pressure felt by teachers 60% did not understand why have to participate in alternate assessments 55% students will never be proficient 2004 70% of elementary teachers felt pressured 30% high school teachers felt pressured 40% still not wanting to be accountable 40% students will never be proficient

6. Alignment 2000 90% did not know if tests aligned with state standards 25% had descriptors for proficiency 2004 86% of elementary teachers knew there were state standards and alignment 60% used same achievement level descriptors

7. Training Needs 2000 90% of special ed teachers not familiar with standards 2004 50% familiar with state standards

8. 2000 60% said not worth time and resources OK 40% wanted training. 2004 20% said not worth time and effort 80% preferred multiple measures 80% wanted more training on all aspects

9. Conclusion 2000 30% had alternate assessment in place 30% wanted more training 2004 75% of states made or making changes in alternate assessment 80% clamoring for more training.