Accounting for Special Evaluations

Realities of Alternate Assessments The information contained in the readings in Module/Week 7 pertains to some of the realities of alternate assessments. Specifically, these readings indicate that it is not infrequent, particularly when working with a student population with special needs, to employ such assessments to gauge a student's proficiency in a particular task or area of study. What is critical to note about these alternate assessments is that they are necessary for students with "the most significant cognitive disabilities" (Towles-Reeves et al., 2009, p.

233) and are not necessarily needed for students who do not fit into this category. In terms of viewing the pros and cons of alternative assessments through my Biblical worldview, it is critical to note that the differences between these two stratifications largely depends on one's perspective. For instance, one of the positives of alternative assessments is that they provide a means for assessing students who otherwise would not be able to be assessed utilizing traditional assessment measures -- including timed tests and writing assessments.

Nonetheless, it is hard to dispute the fact that such alternative assessments do not provide a uniform way of assessing children in environments in which parity of treatment is usually the idea. Viewed from this perspective, the differentiated assessments that alternative assessments provide are somewhat of a negative. Still, when I consider my Biblical worldview perspective, I believe that the positives associated with alternative assessments exceeds the negatives. This belief might not be shared with teachers with a more secular worldview.

Some might think that providing alternative assessments is a means of relaxing standards for certain students, and that variations of these alternative assessments (such as the AA-GLAS) (Towles-Reeves et al., 2009, p. 235) are given for some students who should be able to utilize traditional assessments. Regardless, I believe that alternative assessments are merely a way of providing equity in the assessment capabilities of students with different cognitive capabilities. John is a fifth grade student who was diagnosed with Autism when he was three years old.

Although he can read fairly well, it takes him a considerable amount of time to read passages which his peers can read much more quickly. This fact is attributed to a prolonged processing time for the little boy, which takes longer than his peers without this order. The time constraints of typical assessments are much too strict to gauge whether or not John can both read and understood what he has read. I would recommend a checklist approach as the alternative assessment to determine John's reading proficiency.

The content areas that I would recommend for John include reading comprehension, grade level vocabulary, and both grammar and punctuation skills. Additionally, it is important for autistic children to learn to read -- and talk -- with feeling, so I'd certainly incorporate the former as a content area as well. Naturally, the comprehension content area is included to determine how well the student actually understands what he reads. Additionally, the vocabulary content area is required because it is important to.