- Publications
- Research Programs
- Search Funded Research Grants and Contracts for NCSER National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) Pre-Elementary Education Longitudinal Study (PEELS) Autism Spectrum Disorders Cognition and Student Learning in Special Education Early Intervention and Early Learning Families of Children with Disabilities Low-Cost, Short-Duration Evaluation of Special Education Interventions Mathematics and Science Education: Special Education Research Methods Training Using Single-Case Designs Educators and School-Based Service Providers
- Reading, Writing, and Language Research Training Program in Special Education: Early Career Development and Mentoring Research Training Program in Special Education: Postdoctoral Research Training Small Business Innovation Research in Special Education Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Competence Systems, Policy, and Finance Special Education Research and Development Centers Technology for Special Education Transition to Postsecondary Education, Career, and/or Independent Living Unsolicited and Other Awards: Special Education Research
- Research and Development Centers
- Accelerating the Academic Achievement of Students with Learning Disabilities Research Initiative Center for Response to Intervention in Early Childhood National Research and Development Center on Serious Behavior Disorders at the Secondary Level National Research and Development Center on Improving Mathematics Instruction for Students with Mathematics Difficulties National Research and Development Center on Assessment and Accountability for Special Education Center on Secondary Education for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders (CSESA) Special Education Research and Development Center on Reading Instruction for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students
-
Special Education Research and Development Centers
- Funding Opportunities
- News & Events
- About Us
Table B2. Standard-setting methodologies used to develop alternate achievement standards
| State |
1. Modified Angoff |
2. Extended Angoff |
3. Yes/No Method |
4. Bookmark or Item Mapping |
5. Performance Profile Method |
6. Reasoned Judgment |
7. Judgmental Policy Capturing |
8. Body of Work |
9. Contrasting Groups |
10. Item-Descriptor Matching |
11. Dominant Profile Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | 5 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 16 | 4 | 2 | 1 |
| Percent | 9.8 | 0 | 0 | 23.53 | 7.84 | 11.76 | 9.8 | 31.37 | 7.84 | 3.92 | 1.96 |
| Alabama | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | X | — | — |
| Alaska | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — |
| Arizona | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Arkansas | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| California | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Colorado | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — |
| Connecticut | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| Florida | † | † | † | † | † | † | † | † | † | † | † |
| Georgia | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | X | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Illinois | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M |
| Indiana | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Iowa | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | X | X | — | — |
| Kansas | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| Kentucky | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| Louisiana | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M |
| Maine | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| Maryland | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| Massachusetts | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — |
| Michigan1 | — / — | — / — | — / — | X / X | — / — | — / — | — / — | — / — | — / — | — / — | — / — |
| Minnesota | X | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Mississippi | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Missouri | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Nebraska | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Nevada | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| New Jersey | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — |
| New York | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| North Carolina | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | X | — | — |
| North Dakota | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Ohio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| Oklahoma | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — |
| Oregon | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Pennsylvania | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — | — | X | X | — | — | — | — | — |
| South Carolina | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — |
| South Dakota | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tennessee | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M |
| Texas | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| Utah | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | M |
| Vermont | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X |
| Virginia | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
| Washington | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| West Virginia | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | X | — | — |
| Wisconsin | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — | — |
| Wyoming | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | X | — | — | — |
|
— No.
X Yes. 1 More than one assessment used. See explanation in introductory text of this appendix. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Special Education Research, National Study on Alternate Assessments (NSAA), state data summaries for school year 2006–07. |
|||||||||||