![](media/image1.png){width="2.2583333333333333in"
height="0.9986111111111111in"}

Standards and Assessments

**Peer Review Guidance:**

**Information and Examples for**

######## Meeting Requirements of the

**No Child Left Behind Act of 2001**

![](media/image2.png)

**Revised December 21, 2007 to include**

**Modified academic achievement standards**

**(Revised with technical edits January 12, 2009)**

**U. S. Department of Education**

**Office of Elementary and Secondary Education**

**Washington, D.C. 20202**

TABLE OF CONTENTS

## I. INTRODUCTION {#i.-introduction .List-Roman-Numeral}

Statutory and regulatory requirements for nclb assessment systems 2

State assessment system design 6

the peer review process 7

role of peer reviewers 8

review process 8

review teams 8

State's role 9

## II. Section 1 {#ii.-section-1 .List-Roman-Numeral}

a single statewide system of challenging academic content standards
applied to all public schools and leas 10

## III. Section 2 {#iii.-section-2 .List-Roman-Numeral}

a single statewide system of challenging academic achievement standards
apllied to all public schools and leas 16

## Iv. Section 3 {#iv.-section-3 .List-Roman-Numeral}

a single statewide system of annual high-quality assessments 29

## v. Section 4 {#v.-section-4 .List-Roman-Numeral}

a system of assessments with high technical quality 39

## VI. Section 5 {#vi.-section-5 .List-Roman-Numeral}

alignment of academic content standards, academic achievement standards,
and assessments 50

## VII. Section 6 {#vii.-section-6 .List-Roman-Numeral}

inclusion of all students in the assessment system 60

## vIIi. Section 7 {#viii.-section-7 .List-Roman-Numeral}

an effective system of assessment reports 68

INTRODUCTION

Raising academic standards for all students and measuring student
achievement to hold schools accountable for educational progress are
central strategies for promoting educational excellence and equity in
our schools. The *No Child Left Behind Act of 2001* (NCLB) reformed
Federal educational programs to support State efforts to establish
challenging standards, to develop aligned assessments, and to build
accountability systems for districts and schools that are based on
educational results. In particular, NCLB includes explicit requirements
to ensure that students served by Title I are given the same opportunity
achieve to high standards and are held to the same high expectations as
all other students in each State.

Building on the foundation of standards and assessments required of
States by the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 (IASA), NCLB
requires high-quality academic assessments, accountability systems, and
teacher preparation and training aligned with challenging State academic
standards so that students, teachers, parents, and administrators can
measure progress against common expectations for students' academic
achievement. NCLB extends IASA's assessment requirements to include, by
school year 2005-06, annual assessments in reading/ language arts and
mathematics in all grades 3 through 8 and assessments administered at
least once in grades 10 through 12. In addition, NCLB requires States to
develop academic content standards in science by 2005-06 and aligned
assessments based on those standards by 2007-08. The science assessments
must be administered at least once in each of three grade spans: 3-5,
6-9, and 10-12.

The Office of Elementary and Secondary Education issues this guidance
(1) to inform States about what would be useful evidence to demonstrate
that they have met NCLB standards and assessments requirements; and (2)
to guide teams of peer reviewers who will examine the evidence submitted
by States and advise the Department as to whether a State has met the
requirements. The intent is to help States develop comprehensive
assessment systems that provide accurate and valid information for
holding districts and schools accountable for student achievement
against State standards. Although this document addresses each
requirement separately, reviewers and States should recognize that the
requirements are interrelated and that decisions about whether a State
has met the requirements will be based on a comprehensive examination of
the evidence submitted.

This draft guidance represents the Department's current thinking on this
topic. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person.
This guidance does not impose any requirements beyond those required
under applicable law and regulations.

This draft guidance revises the Department's guidance, entitled
**"**Standards and Assessments Peer Review Guidance: Information and
Examples for Meeting Requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of
2001," issued on April 28, 2004. The only substantive changes made are
in the language added to reflect the State's option to develop modified
academic achievement standards and an alternate assessment aligned with
those standards, now permitted under regulation.

If you are interested in commenting on this guidance, please email us
your comment at oese@ed.gov.

[]{.mark}

### [Purpose of Guidance]{.underline}

The Office of Elementary and Secondary Education issues this guidance to
provide States with information to prepare for the Department's peer
review of compliance with the State assessment systems requirements
under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended,
and implementing regulations.

This guidance represents the Department's current thinking on this
topic. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person.
This guidance does not impose any requirements beyond those required
under applicable law and regulations.

This guidance supersedes the Department's guidance, entitled Standards
and Assessments Peer Review Guidance: Information and Examples for
Meeting Requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, issued on
April 28, 2004.

## **Statutory and Regulatory Requirements for NCLB State Assessment Systems**

Under NCLB, States must develop challenging academic standards that have
the following characteristics:

-   Be the same academic standards that the State applies to all public
    schools and public school students in the State;

-   Include the same knowledge, skills, and levels of achievement
    expected of all students; and

-   Include at least mathematics, reading/language arts, and, beginning
    in the 2005-2006 school year, science.

Academic **[content]{.underline}** standards must specify what all
students are expected to know and be able to do; contain coherent and
rigorous content; and encourage the teaching of advanced skills. A
State\'s academic content standards may either be grade-specific or may
cover more than one grade if grade-level content expectations are
provided for each of grades 3 through 8. At the high school level, the
academic content standards must define the knowledge and skills that all
high school students are expected to have in at least reading/language
arts, mathematics, and, beginning in the 2005-06 school year, science,
irrespective of course titles or years completed.

Academic **[achievement]{.underline}** standards must be aligned with
the State\'s academic content standards. For each content area, a
State's academic achievement standards must include at least two levels
of achievement (proficient and advanced) that reflect mastery of the
material in the State\'s academic content standards, and a third level
of achievement (basic) to provide information about the progress of
lower-achieving students toward mastering the proficient and advanced
levels of achievement.

For each achievement level, a State must provide descriptions of the
competencies associated with that achievement level and must determine
the assessment scores (\"cut scores\") that differentiate among the
achievement levels. The State must also provide a description of the
rationale and procedures used to determine each achievement level.
Unlike content standards, which may address a cluster of grade levels,
academic achievement standards must be developed for each grade and
subject assessed, even if the State\'s academic content standards cover
more than one grade.

For certain students with disabilities, the Department's regulations
afford a State the option to develop alternate and modified academic
achievement standards as follows:

For students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, a State
may develop, through a documented and validated standards-setting
process, alternate academic achievement standards that---

-   Are aligned with the State's academic content standards;

-   Promote access to the general curriculum; and

-   Reflect professional judgment of the highest achievement standards
    possible.

For students with disabilities whose progress in response to appropriate
instruction, including special education and related services designed
to address the students' individual needs, is such that, even if
significant growth occurs, the students' IEP Teams are reasonably
certain that the students will not achieve grade-level proficiency
within the year covered by their IEPs, a State may develop modified
academic achievement standards that---

-   Are aligned with the State's academic content standards for the
    grade in which the student is enrolled;

-   Are challenging for eligible students, but may be less difficult
    than the grade-level academic achievement standards;

-   Include at least three achievement levels; and

-   Are developed through a documented and validated standards-setting
    process that includes broad stakeholder input, including persons
    knowledgeable about the State's academic content standards and
    experienced in standards setting and special educators who are most
    knowledgeable about students with disabilities.

Under NCLB, the State assessment system must have the following
characteristics:

-   Assessments must be aligned with State academic content and
    achievement standards, and they must provide coherent information
    about student attainment of State standards in at least mathematics
    and reading/language arts. Beginning in 2007-08, the system must
    also include assessments in science.

-   The same assessment system must be used to measure the achievement
    of all students.

-   The assessment system must be designed to be valid and accessible
    for use by the widest possible range of students, including students
    with disabilities and students with limited English proficiency
    (LEP).

-   Initially, assessments had to be administered annually to students
    in at least one grade in each of three grade ranges\--grades 3
    through 5, grades 6 through 9, and grades 10 through 12. Beginning
    in 2005-06, the mathematics and reading/language arts assessments
    must be administered annually to students in each of grades 3
    through 8 in addition to one of the grades 10 through 12. Beginning
    in 2007-08, science assessments must be administered annually to
    students in at least one grade in each of three grade
    ranges---grades 3 through 5, grades 6 through 9, and grades 10
    through 12.

-   The assessment system must provide for\--

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Participation of all students in the grades being assessed;

-   Reasonable adaptations and appropriate accommodations for students
    with diverse learning needs, where such adaptations or
    accommodations are necessary to measure the achievement of those
    students relative to State standards; and

-   Inclusion of LEP students, who must be assessed in a valid and
    reliable manner and provided reasonable accommodations including, to
    the extent practicable, assessments in the language and form most
    likely to yield accurate and reliable information on what they know
    and can do in academic content areas, until such students have
    achieved English language proficiency; except that the
    reading/language arts achievement of any student who has attended
    school in the United States for three consecutive years must be
    tested in English.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The assessment system must involve multiple approaches with
    up-to-date measures of student achievement, including measures that
    assess higher-order thinking skills and understanding of challenging
    content.

-   Assessments must be valid and reliable for the purposes for which
    the assessment system is used and be consistent with relevant,
    nationally recognized professional and technical standards.

-   The assessment system must be supported by evidence from test
    publishers or other relevant sources that the assessment system is
    of adequate technical quality for each purpose required under the
    Act.

-   The assessment system must objectively measure academic achievement,
    knowledge, and skills without evaluating or assessing personal or
    family beliefs and attitudes, except that this provision does not
    preclude the use of constructed-response, short answer, or essay
    questions, or items that require a student to analyze a passage of
    text or to express opinions.

-   Assessment results must be disaggregated within each school and
    district by gender, major racial and ethnic groups, English
    proficiency status, migrant status, students with disabilities as
    compared to students without disabilities, and economically
    disadvantaged students as compared to students who are not
    economically disadvantaged. Such disaggregation is not required when
    the number of students in a category is insufficient to yield
    statistically reliable information or if the results would reveal
    personally identifiable information about an individual student.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The assessment system must provide individual student interpretive,
    descriptive, and diagnostic reports that include individual scores
    or other information on the attainment of student achievement
    standards and help parents, teachers, and principals to understand
    and address the specific academic needs of students. These reports
    must be provided as soon as practicable after the assessment is
    given and in an understandable and uniform format.

A State's assessment system must provide for one or more alternate
assessments for a child with a disability who cannot participate in all
or part of the State assessments, even with appropriate accommodations.
A State's alternate assessment must---

-   Yield results for the grade in which the student is enrolled in at
    least reading/language arts, mathematics, and, beginning in 2007-08,
    science; **or**

-   If a State develops alternate academic achievement standards for
    students with the most cognitive disabilities, yield results that
    measure the achievement of those students relative to the alternate
    achievement standards; **or**

-   If a State develops modified academic achievement standards for
    eligible students with disabilities,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Be aligned with the State's grade-level academic content standards;

-   Yield results that measure the achievement of those students
    separately in reading/language arts and mathematics relative to the
    modified achievement standards;

-   Meet the requirements of the State's regular assessments, including
    those relating to validity, reliability, and high technical quality;
    and

-   Fit coherently in the State's overall assessment system.

> Students may be assessed based on modified academic achievement
> standards in one or more subjects for which assessments are
> administered. A State may develop a new alternate assessment or adapt
> an assessment based on grade-level academic achievement standards.

Under NCLB, the statewide assessment system is the primary means for
determining whether schools and school districts are making adequate
yearly progress (AYP) toward educating students to high standards. In
determining the progress of schools, States must include scores of all
students enrolled in the school for at least a full academic year. In
determining the progress of school districts, States must include scores
of all students enrolled in schools in the district for a full academic
year, even if they have attended several different schools.

Because NCLB makes the State assessment system central to holding
schools and districts accountable, this document focuses on the uses of
the State assessment system at the school and district levels.
Nevertheless, peer reviewers should note that the State assessment
system is also required to report results at the level of individual
students.

### **State Assessment System Design**

A State may include in its academic assessment system either (or both)
criterion-referenced assessments and assessments that yield national
norms, provided that, if the State uses only assessments referenced
against national norms at a particular grade, those assessments are
augmented with additional items as necessary to measure accurately the
depth and breadth of the State's student academic achievement standards.

A State that includes a combination of criterion and norm-referenced
assessments in its assessment system must demonstrate that the system
has a rational and coherent design that:

-   Identifies the assessments to be used;

-   Indicates the relative contribution of each assessment towards
    ensuring alignment with the State\'s academic content standards and
    toward determining the adequate yearly progress of each school and
    local educational agency (LEA); and

-   Provides information regarding the progress of students relative to
    the State\'s academic standards.

A State\'s assessment system may employ either a uniform set of
assessments statewide or a combination of State and local assessments.
States using a combination of State and local tests must address issues
of comparability and equivalency. For example, will proficiency on one
local assessment be comparable to proficiency on another local
assessment? Additionally, States must consider how they will aggregate
to the State level the results from local assessments, as is required by
NCLB.

States that choose to include a combination of State and local
assessments will need to demonstrate that their system has a rational
and coherent design that\--

-   Identifies the assessments to be used at the State and local levels;

-   Indicates the relative contribution of each assessment toward
    ensuring alignment with the State\'s academic content standards and
    toward determining the adequate yearly progress of each school and
    LEA; and

-   Provides information regarding the progress of students relative to
    the State\'s academic standards.

Further, a State that includes local assessments must also\--

-   Establish technical criteria to ensure that each local assessment
    addresses the depth and breadth of the State\'s academic standards;
    is valid, reliable, and of high technical quality; expresses student
    results in terms of the State\'s academic achievement standards; and
    is designed to provide a coherent system across grades and subjects.

-   Demonstrate that all local assessments are equivalent in their
    content coverage, difficulty, and quality to one another and to
    State assessments; have comparable validity and reliability with
    respect to groups of students described in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v);
    and provide unbiased, rational, and consistent determinations of the
    annual progress of schools and LEAs within the State.

-   Review and approve each local assessment to ensure that it meets or
    exceeds the State\'s technical quality for assessments.

-   Be able to aggregate, with confidence, data from local assessments
    to determine whether the State has made adequate yearly progress.

In implementing their assessment system, States have two main
responsibilities: (1) they must develop, score, and report findings from
State assessments, and (2) they must promulgate rules and procedures for
local assessment systems if the State has such systems, as well as
monitor them, to ensure technical quality and compliance with Title I
requirements. The second function is particularly significant in
assessment systems with strong local responsibility.

### **The Peer Review Process**

To determine whether States have met NCLB standards and assessments
requirements, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) will use a peer
review process involving experts in the fields of standards and
assessments. The review will evaluate States\' assessment systems only
against NCLB requirements. In other words, reviewers will examine
characteristics of a State\'s assessment system that will be used to
hold schools and school districts accountable under NCLB. They will not
assess compliance of States\' assessment systems with other Federal laws
such as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, or provisions of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The fact that an assessment system
meets NCLB assessment requirements does not necessarily mean that it
complies with other laws. For guidance on compliance with Federal civil
rights laws, States may consult with the Department of Education's
Office for Civil Rights. For guidance on compliance with the IDEA,
States may consult with the Office of Special Education Programs.

Furthermore, the peer review process will not directly examine a State's
academic standards, assessment instruments, or specific test items.
Rather, it will examine *evidence* compiled and submitted by each State
that is intended to show that its assessment system meets NCLB
requirements. Such evidence may include, but is not limited to, results
from alignment studies; results from validation studies; written
policies, if appropriate, on providing accommodations for students with
disabilities and LEP students; written policies on native-language
testing of LEP students (if applicable); and score reports showing
disaggregation of student achievement data by the statutorily specified
student subgroups. Peer reviewers will advise the Department on whether
a State assessment system meets a particular requirement based on the
totality of evidence submitted. Peer reviewers will also provide
constructive feedback to help States strengthen their assessment
systems.

# **Role of Peer Reviewers**

Using this *Guidance* as a framework, the peer reviewers will provide
their expert professional judgment, based on evidence supplied by the
State, of the degree to which the State's final assessment system
complies with the requirements of Title I. Their evaluation of the final
assessment system will serve two purposes. First, the peer reviewers'
comments will be sent to the State as a technical assistance tool to
support improvements in the system. Second, the peer reviewers' comments
will inform the decision of the Assistant Secretary for Elementary and
Secondary Education regarding approval of each State assessment system.

# **Review Process**

The materials submitted to the Department by the State are sent to each
member of the peer review team in advance of a review meeting to allow
for a thorough independent review based on the *Guidance*. At the review
meeting, the team of at least three peer reviewers discusses a State's
system, as represented by the evidence provided by the State, and
records their opinions.

For the Final Assessment Review, evidence means documents such as actual
State statutes, State regulations, test administration manuals, board
resolutions, or assessment reports. Sufficient evidence must be provided
to convince an experienced professional that the assessment system is
being implemented in a manner that meets NCLB requirements.

This *Guidance* is a framework used to make a series of analytic
judgments. Reviewers will address each of the peer reviewer questions in
the *Guidance*, evaluating the status of each component of the system on
the basis of the documentation provided by the State. A brief statement
of the degree to which the assessment system meets the NCLB requirements
and the changes needed, if any, summarizes this analytic examination of
the assessment system.

### **Review Teams**

The peer review team prepares a report based on its examination of the
materials submitted by the State. In each team, one person will be
designated team leader; this person is responsible for seeing that peer
notes are clear, complete, and delivered to ED staff at the end of the
review meeting. The peer reviewers are responsible for providing
feedback to each State that is informative and is consistent with
professional standards and best practice. Generally, if changes in a
State assessment system are required in order to meet Title I
requirements, peer reviewers will present options rather than
prescriptive instructions.

An ED staff person, assigned as a resource to each team, is responsible
for assisting the review team in obtaining adequate and appropriate
information from the State prior to the review meeting; contacting the
State during the review meeting to obtain clarification or additional
information needed by the reviewers; securing resources needed to
support the team during the meeting; and accurately reporting the review
team's deliberations as ED determines the State's compliance status. ED
staff may question, or even challenge, the peer reviewers in order to
promote clarity and consistency with the *Guidance*; they will not,
however, impose their views or require substantive changes in the peer
reviewers' report.

States are invited to submit evidence of NCLB compliance consistent with
the peer review schedule announced by the Department.

**State's Role**

To facilitate the peer review process, a State should organize its
evidence with a brief narrative response to each of the "peer reviewer
questions" in the *Guidance*. The Department will provide a template to
the State to help organize supporting documents that constitute evidence
of meeting the assessment requirements. The State will be asked to
designate staff who can be contacted by phone during the review to
provide clarification.

+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| # **Section 1**: *     |                      |                      |
| *A single statewide sy |                      |                      |
| stem of challenging ac |                      |                      |
| ademic content standar |                      |                      |
| ds applied to all publ |                      |                      |
| ic schools and LEAs**. |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in NCLB      | Sec. 1111(b)(1)      |                      |
| legislation:           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in final     | Sec. 200.1           |                      |
| regulations:           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

**Overview**

As the starting point for establishing a high quality assessment and
accountability system under NCLB, States must develop a set of
challenging academic content standards that define what all public
school students in the State are expected to know and be able to do. A
State's academic content standards are to be applied to all public
elementary and secondary school students.

The table below provides a summary of the content, grade level, and
timeline requirements for the academic content standards.

+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------------+
| **Content     | **Grade        | *      | **Notes**                |
| Area**        | levels**       | *Due** |                          |
+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------------+
| Rea           | -    Each      | May    | -   If a State's         |
| ding/language |     grade: 3 - | 2003   |     standards cover      |
| arts          |     8;         |        |     grade ranges (e.g.,  |
|               |                |        |     3 - 5 and 6 - 8)     |
| Mathematics   | and            |        |     rather than the      |
|               |                |        |     specific grades, 3 - |
|               | -   Grade      |        |     8, the State must    |
|               |     range:     |        |     develop              |
|               |     10 - 12    |        |     grade-specific       |
|               |                |        |     expectations in      |
|               | -   Each       |        |     addition to its      |
|               |     grade:     |        |     standards.           |
|               |     3-8;       |        |                          |
|               |                |        | -   At the high school   |
|               | and            |        |     level, standards     |
|               |                |        |     must define the      |
|               | -    Grade     |        |     knowledge and skills |
|               |     range:     |        |     that are expected of |
|               |     10-12      |        |     all students prior   |
|               |                |        |     to graduation. They  |
|               |                |        |     may be linked to     |
|               |                |        |     specific courses if  |
|               |                |        |     all students must    |
|               |                |        |     take these courses   |
|               |                |        |     in order to          |
|               |                |        |     graduate.            |
+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------------+
| Science       | -   Grade      | By the | -   At the high school   |
|               |     ranges:    | 2005 - |     level, standards     |
|               |                | 2006   |     must define the      |
|               | 3 - 5; 6 - 9;  | school |     knowledge and skills |
|               | 10 - 12        | year   |     that are expected of |
|               |                |        |     all students prior   |
|               |                |        |     to graduation. They  |
|               |                |        |     may be linked to     |
|               |                |        |     specific courses if  |
|               |                |        |     all students must    |
|               |                |        |     take these courses   |
|               |                |        |     in order to          |
|               |                |        |     graduate.            |
+---------------+----------------+--------+--------------------------+

These standards must be rigorous and encourage the teaching of advanced
skills. This means that a State should not adopt "minimum competency"
standards or otherwise encourage low expectations for any students.
Further, these standards must be coherent. That is, they must include
only content that is meaningful with regard to the "domain", that is
appropriate for the grade level specified, and that reflects clearly
articulated progressions across grade levels.

**SECTION 1: CONTENT STANDARDS**

+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of        | **Examples of        |
|                       | Acceptable           | Incomplete           |
|                       | Evidence**           | Evidence**           |
+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 1.                    | The State has        | The State has        |
|                       | formally             | developed academic   |
| ```{=html}            | approved/adopted     | content standards    |
| <!-- -->              | academic content     | but these standards  |
| ```                   | standards for all    | have not been        |
| (a) Has the State     | students in reading/ | formally             |
|     formally          | language arts and    | approved/adopted by  |
|     approved/adopted, | mathematics that are | the State.           |
|     by May 2003,      | specific to each     |                      |
|     challenging       | grade level 3        | The State has        |
|     academic content  | through 8 and for    | formally             |
|     standards in      | the 10-12 grade      | approved/adopted     |
|     reading/language  | range, and represent | academic content     |
|     arts and          | the full range of    | standards in         |
|     mathematics that  | knowledge and skills | reading/language     |
|     --                | that students should | arts but not in      |
|                       | be expected to know  | mathematics.         |
| -   cover each of     | and be able to do by |                      |
|     grades 3-8 and    | the time they        | The State has        |
|     the 10-12 grade   | graduate.            | formally             |
|     range,            |                      | approved/adopted     |
|                       | The State has        | academic content     |
|    *[or]{.underline}* | formally             | standards in both    |
|                       | approved/adopted     | reading/language     |
| -   if the academic   | academic content     | arts and mathematics |
|     content standards | standards or         | but these standards  |
|     relate to grade   | frameworks in        | do not include       |
|     ranges, include   | reading/language     | grade-specific       |
|     specific content  | arts and mathematics | content              |
|     expectations for  | for the 3-5, 6-9,    | expectations.        |
|     each grade level? | and 10-12 grade      |                      |
|                       | ranges. These        | At the high school   |
| > AND                 | standards or         | level, the State's   |
|                       | frameworks include   | formally             |
| (b) Are these         | grade-specific       | approved/adopted     |
|     academic content  | content expectations | standards provide    |
|     standards applied | for all students in  | only course          |
|     to *all* public   | each grade level     | descriptions for     |
|     schools and       | between 3 and 8 and  | courses that some,   |
|     students in the   | for specific         | but not all,         |
|     State?            | reading/language     | students take in the |
|                       | arts and mathematics | 10-12 grade range.   |
|                       | courses, or          | These descriptions   |
|                       | combinations of      | do not represent the |
|                       | courses that all     | full range of        |
|                       | students must take   | knowledge and skills |
|                       | in the 10-12 grade   | that students should |
|                       | range.               | be expected to know  |
|                       |                      | and be able to do by |
|                       | ####                 | the time they        |
|                       | ## Possible Evidence | graduate.            |
|                       |                      |                      |
|                       | -   Written          | The State does not   |
|                       |     documentation in | clearly state how    |
|                       |     the form of      | its academic content |
|                       |     State Board of   | standards are to be  |
|                       |     Education        | applied to charter   |
|                       |     minutes,         | schools and other    |
|                       |     regulations,     | special purpose      |
|                       |     official         | schools, such as     |
|                       |     reports, letters | detention centers,   |
|                       |     or memoranda     | residential centers, |
|                       |     from the State   | and schools that     |
|                       |     to the LEAs, or  | serve students with  |
|                       |     other existing   | special needs such   |
|                       |     documents (i.e., | as students with     |
|                       |     not written by   | disabilities or      |
|                       |     the State only   | students with        |
|                       |     to fulfill the   | limited English      |
|                       |     requirements of  | proficiency.         |
|                       |     the peer review  |                      |
|                       |     process). Or, in | The State's          |
|                       |     States where the | statutes, policies,  |
|                       |     Chief State      | and guidance         |
|                       |     School Officer   | documents do not     |
|                       |     has the power to | specifically state   |
|                       |     approve          | that its academic    |
|                       |     standards,       | content standards    |
|                       |     written          | apply to all public  |
|                       |     documentation of | school students,     |
|                       |     the formal       | including students   |
|                       |     approval of the  | with disabilities    |
|                       |     final form of    | and students who are |
|                       |     the              | not proficient in    |
|                       |     reading/language | English.             |
|                       |     arts and         |                      |
|                       |     mathematics      |                      |
|                       |     standards.       |                      |
|                       |                      |                      |
|                       | -   Letter from ED   |                      |
|                       |     approving the    |                      |
|                       |     content          |                      |
|                       |     standards for    |                      |
|                       |     grades 3 through |                      |
|                       |     8 and high       |                      |
|                       |     school if these  |                      |
|                       |     content          |                      |
|                       |     standards have   |                      |
|                       |     not been changed |                      |
|                       |     in any way since |                      |
|                       |     approval.        |                      |
|                       |                      |                      |
|                       | -   Documents that   |                      |
|                       |     include or are   |                      |
|                       |     based on the     |                      |
|                       |     academic content |                      |
|                       |     standards        |                      |
|                       |     explicitly       |                      |
|                       |     address the      |                      |
|                       |     needs of         |                      |
|                       |     students with    |                      |
|                       |     disabilities and |                      |
|                       |     limited English  |                      |
|                       |     proficient       |                      |
|                       |     students.        |                      |
+-----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

**SECTION 1: CONTENT STANDARDS**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **1.2**               | The State has         | The State has         |
|                       | formally              | developed academic    |
| Has the State         | approved/adopted      | content standards in  |
| formally              | academic content      | science but these     |
| approved/adopted,     | standards in science  | standards have not    |
| academic content      | for the 3-5, 6-9, and | been formally         |
| standards in science  | 10-12 grade ranges.   | approved/adopted by   |
| for elementary        |                       | the State.            |
| (grades 3-5), middle  | The State has         |                       |
| (grades 6-9), and     | formally              | The State has defined |
| high school (grades   | approved/adopted      | a process and         |
| 10-12)? This must be  | academic content      | timeline for          |
| completed by school   | standards or          | developing and        |
| year 2005-2006.       | frameworks in science | formally              |
|                       | for the 3-5 and 6-9   | approving/adopting    |
|                       | grade ranges and for  | academic content      |
|                       | a specific science    | standards in science  |
|                       | course or combination | but has not completed |
|                       | of courses that all   | this process.         |
|                       | students must take in |                       |
|                       | the 10-12 grade range | At the high school    |
|                       | in order to graduate  | level, the State's    |
|                       | from high school.     | formally              |
|                       |                       | approved/adopted      |
|                       | #### [Poss            | standards provide     |
|                       | ible Evidence]{.mark} | only course           |
|                       |                       | descriptions that do  |
|                       | -   Written           | not represent the     |
|                       |     documentation in  | full range of         |
|                       |     the form of State | knowledge and skills  |
|                       |     Board of          | that students should  |
|                       |     Education         | be expected to know   |
|                       |     minutes,          | and be able to do by  |
|                       |     regulations,      | the time they         |
|                       |     official reports, | graduate.             |
|                       |     letters or        |                       |
|                       |     memoranda from    | At the high school    |
|                       |     the State to the  | level, the State's    |
|                       |     LEAs, or other    | formally              |
|                       |     existing          | approved/adopted      |
|                       |     documents (i.e.,  | standards provide     |
|                       |     not written by    | only course           |
|                       |     the State only to | descriptions for      |
|                       |     fulfill the       | courses that are not  |
|                       |     requirements of   | required for high     |
|                       |     the peer review   | school graduation.    |
|                       |     process). Or, in  |                       |
|                       |     States where the  |                       |
|                       |     Chief State       |                       |
|                       |     School Officer    |                       |
|                       |     has the power to  |                       |
|                       |     approve           |                       |
|                       |     standards,        |                       |
|                       |     written           |                       |
|                       |     documentation of  |                       |
|                       |     the formal        |                       |
|                       |     approval of the   |                       |
|                       |     final form of the |                       |
|                       |     science           |                       |
|                       |     standards.        |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

List State Evidence Here

**SECTION 1: CONTENT STANDARDS**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **1.3**               | The State has a       | The State has         |
|                       | process for the       | developed a process   |
| Are these academic    | development of        | and begun a plan for  |
| content standards     | academic content      | the development of    |
| challenging? Do they  | standards that        | academic content      |
| contain coherent and  | includes expectations | standards, but has    |
| rigorous content and  | for higher grade      | not completed the     |
| encourage the         | levels that build     | process.              |
| teaching of advanced  | upon and extend       |                       |
| skills?               | beyond the            |                       |
|                       | expectations for      |                       |
|                       | lower grade levels    |                       |
|                       | and incorporate       |                       |
|                       | higher-order thinking |                       |
|                       | skills and            |                       |
|                       | understanding.        |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | **[Possible           |                       |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   A detailed        |                       |
|                       |     description of    |                       |
|                       |     the process the   |                       |
|                       |     State used in     |                       |
|                       |     developing its    |                       |
|                       |     standards to      |                       |
|                       |     review their      |                       |
|                       |     rigor, such as    |                       |
|                       |     its participation |                       |
|                       |     in a process to   |                       |
|                       |     benchmark them to |                       |
|                       |     nationally        |                       |
|                       |     recognized        |                       |
|                       |     standards. This   |                       |
|                       |     process should    |                       |
|                       |     include           |                       |
|                       |     substantive input |                       |
|                       |     from relevant     |                       |
|                       |     stakeholders and  |                       |
|                       |     individuals or    |                       |
|                       |     organizations     |                       |
|                       |     with expertise in |                       |
|                       |     standards         |                       |
|                       |     development.      |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

**SECTION 1:** **CONTENT STANDARDS**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **1.4**               | The State's process   | The State's process   |
|                       | for developing its    | for developing its    |
| Did the State involve | academic content      | academic content      |
| education             | standards involved    | standards involved    |
| stakeholders in the   | diverse panels of     | only K-12 educators   |
| development of its    | educators, higher     | and staff from the    |
| academic content      | education             | State Department of   |
| standards?            | representatives,      | Education.            |
|                       | parents, and          |                       |
|                       | community members     | The make-up of the    |
|                       | familiar with the     | State's academic      |
|                       | instructional needs   | content standards'    |
|                       | of students with      | panels did not        |
|                       | disabilities and      | include               |
|                       | students with limited | representatives of    |
|                       | English proficiency,  | students with special |
|                       | as well as public     | needs, such as        |
|                       | hearings and          | students with         |
|                       | consideration of      | disabilities or       |
|                       | public commentary on  | students with limited |
|                       | the standards.        | English proficiency,  |
|                       |                       | or otherwise reflect  |
|                       | **[Possible           | the diversity of the  |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    | State's population.   |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Descriptions of   | The State's process   |
|                       |     the composition   | for developing its    |
|                       |     of groups         | academic content      |
|                       |     involved in the   | standards did not     |
|                       |     development of    | include an            |
|                       |     the academic      | opportunity for       |
|                       |     content standards | public review and     |
|                       |     indicate that,    | feedback.             |
|                       |     relative to all   |                       |
|                       |     stakeholders in   |                       |
|                       |     the population in |                       |
|                       |     general, a broad  |                       |
|                       |     range of          |                       |
|                       |     stakeholders was  |                       |
|                       |     represented in    |                       |
|                       |     the development   |                       |
|                       |     process.          |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -    A description of |                       |
|                       |     how the standards |                       |
|                       |     were developed    |                       |
|                       |     with input from   |                       |
|                       |     many people in    |                       |
|                       |     and outside of    |                       |
|                       |     education. Such   |                       |
|                       |     input might come  |                       |
|                       |     through           |                       |
|                       |     committees of     |                       |
|                       |     curriculum,       |                       |
|                       |     instruction, and  |                       |
|                       |     content           |                       |
|                       |     specialists       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       |   *[and]{.underline}* |                       |
|                       |     also from public  |                       |
|                       |     hearings, public  |                       |
|                       |     comment, or       |                       |
|                       |     public review.    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   An assurance of   |                       |
|                       |     sufficient        |                       |
|                       |     diversity in the  |                       |
|                       |     composition of    |                       |
|                       |     groups involved   |                       |
|                       |     in the            |                       |
|                       |     development of    |                       |
|                       |     the standards,    |                       |
|                       |     including         |                       |
|                       |     individuals       |                       |
|                       |     knowledgeable of  |                       |
|                       |     and concerned     |                       |
|                       |     about the various |                       |
|                       |     categories of     |                       |
|                       |     students with     |                       |
|                       |     special needs,    |                       |
|                       |     such as students  |                       |
|                       |     with disabilities |                       |
|                       |     or students with  |                       |
|                       |     limited English   |                       |
|                       |     proficiency.      |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### 

##### List State Evidence Here

+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| # **Section 2:** **A s |                      |                      |
| ingle statewide system |                      |                      |
|  of challenging academ |                      |                      |
| ic achievement standar |                      |                      |
| ds applied to all publ |                      |                      |
| ic schools and LEAs.** |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in NCLB      | Sec. 1111(b)(1)      |                      |
| legislation:           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in final     | Sec. 200.1           |                      |
| regulations:           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

**Overview**

To establish the level of achievement a State expects of all public
schools and LEAs, the NCLB requires States to develop a set of
challenging academic achievement standards for every grade and content
area assessed. These standards are to be applied to all public schools
and LEAs and ensure inclusion of those students with disabilities and
students who are not yet proficient in English.

####### Achievement Levels

Academic achievement standards for each grade-and-content area
combination must include at least three achievement levels, which the
State may label 'proficient,' 'advanced,' and 'basic.' Of these levels,
proficient and advanced must represent high achievement and basic must
represent achievement that is not yet proficient. These labels may vary
from State to State, such as "meeting and mastering" the State standards
that would equate to the proficient and advanced labels as described in
the statute. A State may use more than three levels, but must clearly
indicate which level represents the proficient performance expected of
all students.

####### Descriptors and Cut Scores

In addition to these levels, the State's academic achievement standards
must include descriptions of the content-based competencies associated
with each level. The State must also determine which specific scores on
its assessments distinguish one level from another. These "cut scores"
must be established through a process that involves both expert
judgments and consideration of assessment results.

####### Alignment

As a set, the academic achievement standards must be aligned with the
State's academic content standards in that they capture the full range
and depth of knowledge and skills defined in the State's challenging,
coherent, and rigorous academic content standards.

####### Timeline

Academic achievement standards in reading/language arts and mathematics
for each of grades 3 through 8 and the 10-12 grade range must be in
place by the 2005-06 school year. Academic achievement descriptors for
science in grade spans 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12 must be in place by the
2005-06 school year and cut scores for science by the 2007-08 school
year. States can develop the level and description components of the
standards prior to the availability of assessment data that will be
necessary to set the cut score components of these standards.

[Modified academic achievement standards]{.underline}

A State may define modified academic achievement standards and use those
standards to evaluate the achievement of students with disabilities
whose progress in response to appropriate instruction, including special
education and related services designed to address the students'
individual needs, is such that, even if significant growth occurs, the
students' IEP Teams are reasonably certain that the students will not
achieve grade-level proficiency within the year covered by their IEPs.
Modified academic achievement standards must---

-   Be aligned with the State's academic content standards for the grade
    in which the student is enrolled;

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Be challenging for eligible students, but may be less difficult than
    the grade-level academic achievement standards;

-   Include at least three achievement levels; and

-   Be developed through a documented and validated standards-setting
    process that includes broad stakeholder input, including persons
    knowledgeable about the State's academic content standards and
    experienced in standards setting and special educators who are most
    knowledgeable about students with disabilities.

The State may choose to develop modified academic achievement standards
in selected subjects and grades. The State defines modified academic
achievement standards through a documented and validated
standards-setting process similar to the process used to establish
achievement standards on the general assessment. In addition, the State
may, but is not required to, link results based on modified academic
achievement standards to the distribution of results from the general
test. It is not acceptable, however, for a State to define modified
academic achievement standards as simply a lower cut score on the
general test because this procedure alone does nothing to provide a test
that is more accessible or understandable for eligible students.

[Alternate academic achievement standards]{.underline}

A State is permitted to define alternate achievement standards to
evaluate the achievement of students with the most significant cognitive
disabilities. Alternate academic achievement standards must---

-   Be aligned with the State's academic content standards (i.e.,
    include knowledge and skills that link to grade-level expectations);

-   Promote access to the general curriculum; and

-   Reflect professional judgment of the highest learning standards
    possible. The State defines alternate academic achievement standards
    through a documented and validated standards-setting process similar
    to the process used to establish academic achievement standards on
    the general assessments.

For students with the most significant cognitive disabilities who are
mainstreamed, the concept of alternate academic achievement standards
related to a specific grade level may be ambiguous. For practitioners,
the question is whether the alternate academic achievement standards for
this group of students must be clearly different from grade to grade.
The alternate academic achievement standards should be defined in a way
that supports individual growth because of their linkage to different
content across grades. When examined across grades, however, the
alternate academic achievement standards are not likely to show the same
clearly defined advances in cognitive complexity as the academic
achievement standards set for the general test or an alternate
assessment based on modified or grade-level achievement standards.
States are expected to rely on the judgment of experienced special
educators and administrators, higher education representatives, and
parents of students with disabilities as they define alternate academic
achievement standards and to define alternate academic achievement
standards in a manner that provides an appropriate challenge for
students with the most significant cognitive disabilities as they move
through their schooling.

**SECTION 2: ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT STANDARDS**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **2.1**               | The State has         | The State has         |
|                       | formally              | developed academic    |
| Has the State         | approved/adopted      | achievement standards |
| formally              | academic achievement  | in reading/language   |
| approved/adopted      | standards in          | arts and mathematics  |
| challenging academic  | reading/language arts | that are specific to  |
| achievement standards | and mathematics that  | each grade level      |
| in reading/language   | are specific to each  | between 3 and 8 and   |
| arts and mathematics  | grade level between 3 | for the 10-12 grade   |
| for each of grades 3  | through 8 and for the | range, but these      |
| through 8 and for the | 10-12 grade span.     | standards have not    |
| 10-12 grade range?    |                       | been formally         |
| These standards were  | The State has         | approved/adopted by   |
| to be completed by    | formally              | the State.            |
| school year           | approved/adopted      |                       |
| 2005-2006.            | alternate academic    | The State has         |
|                       | achievement standards | formally              |
| Has the State,        | or modified academic  | approved/adopted      |
| through a documented  | achievement standards | academic achievement  |
| and validated         | in reading/language   | standards in          |
| standards-setting     | arts and mathematics  | reading/language arts |
| process,              | (and beginning in     | but not in            |
| approved/adopted      | 2007-08, science) and | mathematics.          |
| [                     | specifies in what     |                       |
| modified]{.underline} | subjects and for what | The State has not     |
| academic achievement  | grades.               | approved/adopted      |
| standards for         |                       | grade-specific        |
| eligible students     | **[Possible           | academic achievement  |
| with disabilities? If | Evidence]{.mark}**    | standards in          |
| so, in what subjects  |                       | reading/language arts |
| and for which grades? | -   Written           | and mathematics.      |
|                       |     documentation in  |                       |
| Has the State         |     the form of State | The State has adopted |
| approved/adopted      |     Board of          | a single modified     |
| [a                    |     Education         | achievement standard  |
| lternate]{.underline} |     minutes,          | in reading for the    |
| academic achievement  |     regulations,      | grade cluster 6-8,    |
| standards for         |     official reports, | rather than modified  |
| students with the     |     letters or        | academic achievement  |
| most significant      |     memoranda from    | standards for each    |
| cognitive             |     the State to the  | grade 6-8.            |
| disabilities? If so,  |     LEAs, or other    |                       |
| in what subjects and  |     existing          |                       |
| for which grades?     |     documents (i.e.,  |                       |
|                       |     not written by    |                       |
| Note: If alternate or |     the State only to |                       |
| modified academic     |     fulfill the       |                       |
| achievement standards |     requirements of   |                       |
| in reading/language   |     the peer review   |                       |
| arts or mathematics   |     process). Or, in  |                       |
| have not been         |     States where the  |                       |
| develop/adopted and   |     Chief State       |                       |
| approved, then the    |     School Officer    |                       |
| alternate assessments |     has the power to  |                       |
| for all students with |     approve           |                       |
| disabilities must be  |     standards,        |                       |
| held to grade-level   |     written           |                       |
| academic achievement  |     documentation of  |                       |
| standards.            |     the formal        |                       |
|                       |     approval of the   |                       |
|                       |     final form of the |                       |
|                       |     reading/language  |                       |
|                       |     arts and          |                       |
|                       |     mathematics       |                       |
|                       |     standards.        |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | ```{=html}            |                       |
|                       | <!-- -->              |                       |
|                       | ```                   |                       |
|                       | -   Documentation     |                       |
|                       |     that describes    |                       |
|                       |     how modified      |                       |
|                       |     academic          |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards were    |                       |
|                       |     defined and       |                       |
|                       |     explains how they |                       |
|                       |     are aligned with  |                       |
|                       |     grade-level       |                       |
|                       |     content           |                       |
|                       |     standards.        |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Documentation     |                       |
|                       |     that illustrates  |                       |
|                       |     how alternate     |                       |
|                       |     academic          |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards were    |                       |
|                       |     defined and       |                       |
|                       |     explains how they |                       |
|                       |     are linked to     |                       |
|                       |     grade-level       |                       |
|                       |     content.          |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | ```{=html}            |                       |
|                       | <!-- -->              |                       |
|                       | ```                   |                       |
|                       | -   A description of  |                       |
|                       |     the process for   |                       |
|                       |     revising cut      |                       |
|                       |     scores and        |                       |
|                       |     subsequent        |                       |
|                       |     academic          |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards         |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       |   *[and]{.underline}* |                       |
|                       |     documentation     |                       |
|                       |     that these        |                       |
|                       |     revisions have    |                       |
|                       |     been approved or  |                       |
|                       |     formally          |                       |
|                       |     submitted for     |                       |
|                       |     approval by ED.   |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

**SECTION 2: ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT STANDARDS**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **2.2**               | The State has         | The State has         |
|                       | formally              | developed academic    |
| Has the State         | approved/adopted      | achievement standards |
| formally              | academic achievement  | in science for each   |
| approved/adopted      | standards in science  | of the grade spans    |
| academic achievement  | for each of the grade | 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12   |
| descriptors in        | spans 3-5, 6-9, and   | but these standards   |
| science for each of   | 10-12.                | have not been         |
| the grade spans 3-5,  |                       | formally              |
| 6-9, and 10-12 as     | The State has         | approved/adopted by   |
| required by school    | formally              | the State.            |
| year 2005-06?         | approved/adopted      |                       |
|                       | alternate academic    | The State has         |
| Has the State         | achievement standards | developed alternate   |
| formally              | in science for        | academic achievement  |
| approved/adopted      | students with the     | standards in science, |
| academic achievement  | most significant      | but the alternate     |
| cut scores in science | cognitive             | achievement standards |
| for each of the grade | disabilities.         | are not linked to the |
| spans 3-5, 6-9, and   |                       | State's content       |
| 10-12 as required by  | The State has         | standards in science  |
| school year 2007-08?  | formally              | for the grade span    |
|                       | approved/adopted      | tested.               |
| Has the State         | modified academic     |                       |
| formally              | achievement standards |                       |
| approved/adopted      | in science in one or  |                       |
| modified academic     | more grade spans      |                       |
| achievement standards | (e.g., grades 10-12). |                       |
| in science? If so,    |                       |                       |
| for which grades?     | **[Possible           |                       |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
| Has the State         |                       |                       |
| formally              | -   Written           |                       |
| approved/adopted      |     documentation in  |                       |
| alternate academic    |     the form of State |                       |
| achievement standards |     Board of          |                       |
| for students with the |     Education         |                       |
| most significant      |     minutes,          |                       |
| cognitive             |     regulations,      |                       |
| disabilities in       |     official reports, |                       |
| science? If so, for   |     letters or        |                       |
| which grades?         |     memoranda from    |                       |
|                       |     the State to the  |                       |
| Note: If alternate or |     LEAs, or other    |                       |
| modified academic     |     existing          |                       |
| achievement standards |     documents (i.e.,  |                       |
| in science have not   |     not written by    |                       |
| been adopted and      |     the State only to |                       |
| approved, then all    |     fulfill the       |                       |
| students with         |     requirements of   |                       |
| disabilities must be  |     the peer review   |                       |
| held to grade-level   |     process). Or, in  |                       |
| academic achievement  |     States where the  |                       |
| standards.            |     Chief State       |                       |
|                       |     School Officer    |                       |
|                       |     has the power to  |                       |
|                       |     approve           |                       |
|                       |     standards,        |                       |
|                       |     written           |                       |
|                       |     documentation of  |                       |
|                       |     the formal        |                       |
|                       |     approval of the   |                       |
|                       |     final form of the |                       |
|                       |     science           |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards.        |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### 

##### List State Evidence Here

**SECTION 2: ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT STANDARDS**

+--------------------------+--------------------+---------------------+
| **Critical Element**     | **Examples of      | **Examples of       |
|                          | Acceptable         | Incomplete          |
|                          | Evidence**         | Evidence**          |
+--------------------------+--------------------+---------------------+
| **2.3**                  | The State has      | The State has       |
|                          | formally           | developed academic  |
| 1\. Do these academic    | approved/adopted   | achievement         |
| achievement standards    | academic           | standards that      |
| (including modified and  | achievement        | comprise three (or  |
| alternate academic       | standards that     | more) levels of     |
| achievement standards,   | comprise three (or | achievement but     |
| if applicable) include   | more) levels of    | these standards     |
| for each content area -- | achievement, each  | have not been       |
|                          | of which is        | formally            |
| (a) at least three       | associated with a  | approved/adopted.   |
|     levels of            | description of the |                     |
|     achievement,         | competencies       | The State has       |
|     including two levels | expected of each   | formally            |
|     of high achievement  | required grade or  | approved/adopted    |
|     (proficient and      | grade range in     | academic            |
|     advanced) that       | high school and    | achievement         |
|     determine how well   | delineated by      | standards that      |
|     students are         | specific scores on | comprise only two   |
|     mastering a State's  | the aligned        | levels of           |
|     academic content     | assessment.        | achievement.        |
|     standards and a      | Rationale and      |                     |
|     third level of       | procedures for     | The State's         |
|     achievement (basic)  | setting cut scores | academic            |
|     to provide           | includes the       | achievement         |
|     information about    | consideration of   | standards do not    |
|     the progress of      | impact data but is | reflect the full    |
|     lower-achieving      | based primarily on | range of the        |
|     students toward      | expert judgments   | content             |
|     mastering the        | about              | expectations for    |
|     proficient and       | content-based      | each grade level,   |
|     advanced levels of   | expectations.      | as specified in the |
|     achievement;         | (*See elements 2.1 | State's academic    |
|     *[and]{.underline}*  | and 2.2 for        | content standards.  |
|                          | required grades    |                     |
| (b) descriptions of the  | and grade          | Rationale and       |
|     competencies         | ranges.)*          | procedures for      |
|     associated with each |                    | setting cut scores  |
|     achievement level;   | The State has      | were based solely   |
|     *[and]{.underline}*  | adopted academic   | or substantially on |
|                          | achievement        | impact data rather  |
| (c) assessment scores    | standards for      | than on             |
|     ("cut scores") that  | every grade        | content-based       |
|     differentiate among  | assessed, even if  | expectations.       |
|     the achievement      | the State's        |                     |
|     levels and a         | academic content   | The State has used  |
|     rationale and        | standards cover    | national norms as   |
|     procedure used to    | more than one      | the sole basis for  |
|     determine each       | grade.             | setting cut scores. |
|     achievement level?   |                    |                     |
|                          | **Possible         | The State has       |
| 2\. If the State has     | Evidence**         | relied on           |
| adopted either modified  |                    | "instructional      |
| or alternate achievement | -   Documentation  | level" as the basis |
| standards, has it        |     in the form of | for interpreting    |
| developed guidelines for |     State Board of | scores rather than  |
| IEP teams to use in      |     Education      | the academic        |
| deciding when an         |     minutes,       | achievement         |
| individual student       |     official       | standard, modified  |
| should be assessed on    |     reports,       | achievement         |
| the basis of modified    |     letters or     | standard or         |
| academic achievement     |     memoranda to   | alternate           |
| standards in one or more |     the LEAs,      | achievement         |
| subject areas, or        |     (i.e., not     | standard for the    |
| assessed on the basis of |     written by the | grade in which the  |
| alternate achievement    |     State only to  | student is          |
| standards?               |     fulfill the    | enrolled.           |
|                          |     requirements   |                     |
|                          |     of the peer    |                     |
|                          |     review         |                     |
|                          |     process) that  |                     |
|                          |     refers to the  |                     |
|                          |     levels,        |                     |
|                          |     descriptions,  |                     |
|                          |     and cut scores |                     |
|                          |     that make up   |                     |
|                          |     the State's    |                     |
|                          |     academic       |                     |
|                          |     achievement    |                     |
|                          |     standards, and |                     |
|                          |     alternate and  |                     |
|                          |     modified       |                     |
|                          |     academic       |                     |
|                          |     achievement    |                     |
|                          |     standards (if  |                     |
|                          |     applicable).   |                     |
|                          |                    |                     |
|                          | -   Training       |                     |
|                          |     materials or   |                     |
|                          |     guidelines for |                     |
|                          |     IEP Teams to   |                     |
|                          |     apply when     |                     |
|                          |     deciding       |                     |
|                          |     whether an     |                     |
|                          |     individual     |                     |
|                          |     student should |                     |
|                          |     be assessed on |                     |
|                          |     the basis of   |                     |
|                          |     alternate or   |                     |
|                          |     modified       |                     |
|                          |     academic       |                     |
|                          |     achievement    |                     |
|                          |     standards.     |                     |
+--------------------------+--------------------+---------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

**SECTION 2: ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT STANDARDS**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **2.4**               | The State's statutes, | The State's statutes, |
|                       | policies, and         | policy, and guidance  |
| With the exception of | guidance documents    | documents do not      |
| students with         | specifically state    | specifically state    |
| disabilities to whom  | that its grade-level  | that its grade-level  |
| modified or alternate | academic achievement  | academic achievement  |
| academic achievement  | standards apply to    | standards apply to    |
| standards apply, are  | all public elementary | all public elementary |
| the grade-level       | and secondary school  | and secondary school  |
| academic achievement  | students, including   | students, including   |
| standards applied to  | students with         | students with         |
| *all* public          | disabilities for whom | disabilities who are  |
| elementary and        | modified or alternate | not eligible for      |
| secondary schools and | academic achievement  | modified or alternate |
| *all* public school   | standards do not      | academic achievement  |
| students in the       | apply and students    | standards and         |
| State?\*\*            | who are not           | students who are not  |
|                       | proficient in         | proficient in         |
|                       | English.              | English.              |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | **[Possible           |                       |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Written           |                       |
|                       |     documentation in  |                       |
|                       |     the form of State |                       |
|                       |     Board of          |                       |
|                       |     Education minutes |                       |
|                       |     or                |                       |
|                       |     letters/memoranda |                       |
|                       |     from the Chief    |                       |
|                       |     State School      |                       |
|                       |     Officer to local  |                       |
|                       |     superintendents   |                       |
|                       |     stating the       |                       |
|                       |     policy that the   |                       |
|                       |     State's academic  |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards apply   |                       |
|                       |     to all students.  |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Documentation and |                       |
|                       |     prefacing text    |                       |
|                       |     for the standards |                       |
|                       |     use the word      |                       |
|                       |     "all"             |                       |
|                       |     consistently and  |                       |
|                       |     inclusively and   |                       |
|                       |     reflect other     |                       |
|                       |     inclusive         |                       |
|                       |     terminology.      |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

\*\*OSEP guidance and NCLB requirements indicate that a student placed
in a private school by a public agency for the purpose of receiving
special education services must be included in the State assessment and
their results attributed to the public school or LEA responsible for the
placement.

**List State Evidence Here**

**SECTION 2: ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT STANDARDS**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **2.5**               | The State's academic  | The State's academic  |
|                       | achievement standards | achievement standards |
| How has the State     | fully reflect its     | do not fully reflect  |
| ensured alignment     | academic content      | its academic content  |
| between challenging   | standards for each    | standards for each    |
| academic content      | required grade and    | required grade nor    |
| standards and the     | describe what         | describe what         |
| academic achievement  | content-based         | content-based         |
| standards?            | expectations each     | expectations each     |
|                       | achievement level     | achievement level     |
| If the State has      | represents. The       | represents.           |
| adopted modified      | 'proficient'          |                       |
| academic achievement  | achievement level     | The achievement level |
| standards, how has    | represents attainment | that represents       |
| the State ensured     | of grade-level        | 'Proficient' defines  |
| alignment between its | expectations for that | performance that does |
| grade-level academic  | academic content      | not represent grade-  |
| content standards and | area. The descriptors | level attainment of   |
| the modified academic | clearly define the    | the content           |
| achievement           | skills for the        | standards.            |
| standards?            | attainment of that    |                       |
|                       | level.                | The State has         |
| If the State has      |                       | developed modified    |
| adopted alternate     | The State's modified  | academic achievement  |
| academic achievement  | academic achievement  | standards, but the    |
| standards, how has    | standards, if any,    | alternate assessment  |
| the State ensured     | are aligned to the    | on which they are     |
| alignment between its | State's grade-level   | based is not aligned  |
| academic content      | academic content      | with the academic     |
| standards and the     | standards and are     | content standards for |
| alternate academic    | challenging for       | the grade tested.     |
| achievement           | eligible students but |                       |
| standards?            | may be less difficult | The State has         |
|                       | than grade-level      | developed modified    |
|                       | achievement           | academic achievement  |
|                       | standards.            | standards, but the    |
|                       |                       | alternate assessment  |
|                       | The State's alternate | on which they are     |
|                       | academic achievement  | based addresses only  |
|                       | standards, if any,    | a small portion of    |
|                       | are aligned with the  | the grade-level       |
|                       | State's academic      | content standards     |
|                       | content standards     | represented on the    |
|                       | (i.e., include        | general test.         |
|                       | knowledge and skills  |                       |
|                       | that link to          | The State has         |
|                       | grade-level           | developed alternate   |
|                       | expectations).        | academic achievement  |
|                       |                       | standards, but they   |
|                       | **[Possible           | are restricted to     |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    | functional life       |
|                       |                       | skills and are not    |
|                       | -   A description of  | linked in a           |
|                       |     the process used  | meaningful way to     |
|                       |     to develop each   | academic              |
|                       |     component         | knowledge/skills      |
|                       |     (levels,          | specified in the      |
|                       |     descriptions, and | State's content       |
|                       |     cut scores) of    | standards.            |
|                       |     the academic      |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards that    |                       |
|                       |     indicates that    |                       |
|                       |     these standards   |                       |
|                       |     were developed    |                       |
|                       |     specifically to   |                       |
|                       |     reflect the       |                       |
|                       |     knowledge and     |                       |
|                       |     skills in the     |                       |
|                       |     academic content  |                       |
|                       |     standards for     |                       |
|                       |     each grade and    |                       |
|                       |     content area      |                       |
|                       |     combination. For  |                       |
|                       |     alternate         |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards, the    |                       |
|                       |     State             |                       |
|                       |     demonstrates that |                       |
|                       |     they reflect      |                       |
|                       |     knowledge and     |                       |
|                       |     skills that could |                       |
|                       |     lead to the       |                       |
|                       |     content           |                       |
|                       |     appropriate for   |                       |
|                       |     the grade in      |                       |
|                       |     which a student   |                       |
|                       |     is enrolled.      |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   A comparison of   |                       |
|                       |     test blueprints   |                       |
|                       |     indicates that    |                       |
|                       |     the general       |                       |
|                       |     assessment and    |                       |
|                       |     the assessment    |                       |
|                       |     based on modified |                       |
|                       |     academic          |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards were    |                       |
|                       |     designed to       |                       |
|                       |     address the same  |                       |
|                       |     grade-level       |                       |
|                       |     content standards |                       |
|                       |     although the item |                       |
|                       |     specifications    |                       |
|                       |     differ.           |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Written           |                       |
|                       |     documentation     |                       |
|                       |     designed to       |                       |
|                       |     accompany or      |                       |
|                       |     explain the       |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards that    |                       |
|                       |     delineates the    |                       |
|                       |     content-based     |                       |
|                       |     relationships     |                       |
|                       |     between the       |                       |
|                       |     academic          |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards         |                       |
|                       |     (including, if    |                       |
|                       |     appropriate, any  |                       |
|                       |     modified or       |                       |
|                       |     alternate         |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards) and    |                       |
|                       |     the State's       |                       |
|                       |     academic content  |                       |
|                       |     standards.        |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

List State Evidence

SECTION 2: ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT STANDARDS

+----------------------+-----------------------+----------------------+
| ##                   | **Examples of         | **Examples of        |
| ### Critical Element | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete           |
|                      |                       | Evidence**           |
+----------------------+-----------------------+----------------------+
| **2.6**              | The State's process   | The State's process  |
|                      | for developing its    | for developing its   |
| For each assessment, | grade-level academic  | academic achievement |
| including alternate  | achievement standards | standards involved   |
| assessments, provide | involved              | only K-12 educators  |
| documentation of the | knowledgeable         | and staff from the   |
| standard setting     | participants, such as | State Department of  |
| process. Describe    | educators, higher     | Education.           |
| the selection of     | education             |                      |
| panelists,           | representatives,      | The make-up of the   |
| methodology          | parents, and          | State's academic     |
| employed, and final  | community members, as | achievement          |
| results.             | well as public        | standards panels did |
|                      | hearings and          | not include          |
| How did the State    | consideration of      | representatives of   |
| document involvement | public commentary on  | students with        |
| of diverse           | the standards, if     | special needs, such  |
| stakeholders in the  | appropriate.          | as students with     |
| development of its   |                       | disabilities or      |
| academic achievement | The State's process   | students with        |
| standards and its    | for developing        | limited English      |
| modified and/or      | alternate or modified | proficiency or       |
| alternate            | academic achievement  | otherwise reflect    |
| achievement          | standards, if any,    | the diversity of the |
| standards, if any?   | included persons      | State's population.  |
|                      | knowledgeable about   |                      |
| If the State has     | the State's content   | The State's process  |
| adopted alternate or | standards and         | for developing its   |
| modified academic    | standards setting as  | academic achievement |
| achievement          | well as special       | standards did not    |
| standards, did the   | educators             | include an           |
| State's              | knowledgeable about   | opportunity for      |
| standards-setting    | students with         | public review and    |
| process include      | disabilities.         | feedback.            |
| persons              |                       |                      |
| knowledgeable about  | **[Possible           | The State adopted    |
| the State's academic | Evidence]{.mark}**    | modified academic    |
| content standards    |                       | achievement          |
| and special          | -   Descriptions of   | standards without    |
| educators who are    |     the composition   | input from content   |
| knowledgeable about  |     of groups         | specialists or       |
| students with        |     involved in the   | special educators.   |
| disabilities?        |     development of    |                      |
|                      |     the academic      |                      |
|                      |     achievement       |                      |
|                      |     standards         |                      |
|                      |     indicate that,    |                      |
|                      |     relative to all   |                      |
|                      |     stakeholders in   |                      |
|                      |     the population in |                      |
|                      |     general, a broad  |                      |
|                      |     range of          |                      |
|                      |     stakeholders was  |                      |
|                      |     represented in    |                      |
|                      |     the development   |                      |
|                      |     process. For      |                      |
|                      |     development of    |                      |
|                      |     its alternate     |                      |
|                      |     and/or modified   |                      |
|                      |     academic          |                      |
|                      |     achievement       |                      |
|                      |     standards,        |                      |
|                      |     experienced       |                      |
|                      |     special education |                      |
|                      |     teachers and      |                      |
|                      |     administrators,   |                      |
|                      |     general classroom |                      |
|                      |     teachers and      |                      |
|                      |     parents of        |                      |
|                      |     students with     |                      |
|                      |     disabilities were |                      |
|                      |     included.         |                      |
|                      |                       |                      |
|                      | -   Modified academic |                      |
|                      |     achievement       |                      |
|                      |     standards were    |                      |
|                      |     planned and       |                      |
|                      |     defined by groups |                      |
|                      |     that included     |                      |
|                      |     content           |                      |
|                      |     specialists,      |                      |
|                      |     special           |                      |
|                      |     educators,        |                      |
|                      |     general education |                      |
|                      |     teachers, and     |                      |
|                      |     parents.          |                      |
|                      |                       |                      |
|                      | -   A description of  |                      |
|                      |     how the           |                      |
|                      |     standards,        |                      |
|                      |     including         |                      |
|                      |     modified and/or   |                      |
|                      |     alternate         |                      |
|                      |     achievement       |                      |
|                      |     standards, if     |                      |
|                      |     any, were         |                      |
|                      |     developed with    |                      |
|                      |     input from many   |                      |
|                      |     people in and     |                      |
|                      |     outside of        |                      |
|                      |     education. Such   |                      |
|                      |     input might come  |                      |
|                      |     through           |                      |
|                      |     committees of     |                      |
|                      |     curriculum,       |                      |
|                      |     instruction, and  |                      |
|                      |     content           |                      |
|                      |     specialists       |                      |
|                      |                       |                      |
|                      |   *[and]{.underline}* |                      |
|                      |     also from public  |                      |
|                      |     hearings, public  |                      |
|                      |     comment, or       |                      |
|                      |     public review.    |                      |
|                      |                       |                      |
|                      | -   Evidence of       |                      |
|                      |     diversity in the  |                      |
|                      |     composition of    |                      |
|                      |     groups involved   |                      |
|                      |     in the            |                      |
|                      |     development of    |                      |
|                      |     the standards,    |                      |
|                      |     including         |                      |
|                      |     individuals       |                      |
|                      |     knowledgeable of  |                      |
|                      |     and concerned     |                      |
|                      |     about the various |                      |
|                      |     categories of     |                      |
|                      |     special needs     |                      |
|                      |     students, e.g.    |                      |
|                      |     students with     |                      |
|                      |     disabilities and  |                      |
|                      |     limited English   |                      |
|                      |     proficient        |                      |
|                      |     students.         |                      |
+----------------------+-----------------------+----------------------+

**List State Evidence**

+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| #  **Section 3:*       |                      |                      |
| * **A single statewide |                      |                      |
|  system of annual high |                      |                      |
| -quality assessments** |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in NCLB      | Sec. 1111(b)(3)      |                      |
| legislation:           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in final     | Sec. 200.2, 200.3,   |                      |
| regulations:           | 200.5, 200.6         |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

**Overview**

To ensure that States are able to evaluate whether all students are
achieving to high levels, NCLB requires States to develop a single
statewide system of high quality assessments. *[All]{.underline}* public
school students must participate in this assessment system, including
those with disabilities and those who are not yet proficient in English,
so States must make their assessment system fully accessible to all
students (see Section 6 for more information about inclusion). States
must employ the same assessment system for all their public elementary
and secondary schools and students.

States were to have the reading/language arts and mathematics components
of their assessment systems in place by the 2005-06 school year. These
assessments must be administered annually to all students in each of
grades 3 - 8 and at least once to students in the 10 - 12 grade range.
By the 2007-08 school year, States must also have in place their science
assessments, which must be administered, annually, at least once in each
of the 3 - 5, 6 - 9, and 10 - 12 grade spans. Assessments administered
in the 10 - 12 grade span in reading/language arts, mathematics, and
science may be end-of-course tests so long as the associated courses, or
combinations of courses, are ones that *[all]{.underline}* students must
take.

States must also have in place one or more alternate assessments at
grades 3 through 8 and high school designed for those students with
disabilities who are unable to participate meaningfully in all or part
of the State's general assessment, even with appropriate accommodations.
These alternate assessments must\--

-   Be aligned with the State's grade-level academic content standards;

-   Yield results that measure the achievement of those students
    separately in reading/language arts and mathematics relative to the
    modified achievement standards;

-   Meet the requirements of the State's regular assessments, including
    those relating to validity, reliability, and high technical quality;
    and

-   Fit coherently in the State's overall assessment system.

Alternate assessments may take several forms: they may be based on
grade-level academic achievement standards, modified academic
achievement standards, or alternate academic achievement standards. If a
State's alternate assessments are based on [grade-level academic
achievement standards]{.underline}, they must include the same
grade-level content as the test for which they are an alternate. The
assessment procedures may differ from the general assessment (e.g., body
of work or performance tasks instead of multiple choice) but proficiency
on these alternates must be comparable to proficient performance on the
general assessments for the same grade. The State must provide evidence
of comparability and be able to aggregate the results with results from
the general assessment. A few States have developed alternate
assessments for use with LEP students, and results from those
assessments must be judged against the same grade-level standards as the
general tests.

If a State has adopted alternate academic achievement standards for
students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, the State may
create an alternate assessment aligned with those standards. For such
alternate assessments, the assessment materials should show a clear link
to the content standards for the grade in which the student is enrolled
although the grade-level content may be reduced in complexity or
modified to reflect pre-requisite academic skills.

The State may also create an alternate assessment based on modified
academic achievement standards for a small group of students. Alternate
assessments based on modified achievement standards may be developed in
one or more subjects or grade levels for which assessments are
administered.

The assessments that make up the State's assessment system may either be
criterion-referenced or an augmented form of a norm-referenced test. If
the State uses only assessments referenced against national norms at a
particular grade, those assessments must be augmented with additional
items as necessary to measure accurately the depth and breadth of the
State's academic content standards and express student results in terms
of the State's student academic achievement standards.

A State's assessment system may include only statewide assessments, a
combination of statewide and local assessments, or only local
assessments.[^1] However, if the State includes local assessments in its
system, the State is responsible for ensuring that each of these
assessments meets the rigorous criteria for technical quality and
alignment specified in this document. The State must ensure that results
from all local assessments can be aggregated meaningfully at the State
level with one another and with scores from any statewide assessments.

In building its assessment system, a State must ensure that the
information its assessments yield is coherent across grades and content
areas. For example, information gained from the reading/language arts
assessment at grade 3 should be clearly and appropriately relevant to
information gained from the reading/language arts assessment at grade 4
and subsequent grades. This does not require use of tests that are
vertically scaled, but does imply the articulation of the standards from
grade to grade. The content of the assessments and the achievement
standards should be articulated across grades.

**OVERVIEW OF THE STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM**

**Section 3.1.** In the chart below indicate your State's current
assessment system in reading /language arts and mathematics in grades 3
through 8 and for the 10-12 grade range using the abbreviations to show
what type of assessments the State's assessment system is composed of:
(a) criterion-referenced assessments (**CRT**); or (b) augmented
norm-referenced assessments **(ANRT**) (augmented as necessary to
measure accurately the depth and breadth of the State's academic content
standards and yield criterion-referenced scores); or (c) a combination
of both across grade levels and/or content areas. Also indicate your
current assessment system in science[^2] that is aligned with the
State's challenging academic content and achievement standards at least
once in each of the grade spans 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12. A State may have
assessments in reading or language arts depending on the alignment to
the State's content standards; both are not required. Please indicate,
using the abbreviations shown, the grades and subject areas with
availability of native language assessment **(NLA**) or various
alternate assessments (**AA-GLAS** for an alternate assessment for
students with disabilities based on grade-level standards; **AA-LEP**
for an alternate assessment for students with limited English
proficiency based on grade-level standards, **AA-MAS** for an alternate
assessment for eligible students with disabilities based on modified
academic achievement standards; and/or **AA-AAS** for an alternate
assessment for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities
based on alternate achievement standards).

**Chart of State Assessment System Aligned to Content Standards for
school year \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ by Subject, Grade, and Type of Assessment**

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 12%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Grades</strong></td>
<td><strong>3</strong></td>
<td><strong>4</strong></td>
<td><strong>5</strong></td>
<td><strong>6</strong></td>
<td><strong>7</strong></td>
<td><strong>8</strong></td>
<td><strong>9</strong></td>
<td><strong>10</strong></td>
<td><strong>11</strong></td>
<td><strong>12</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>Math</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><h5 id="alternate"> Alternate</h5></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>Native Lang.</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Reading</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>Alternate</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Native Lang.</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>Language arts</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Alternate</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>Native Lang.</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Science</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>Alternate</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Native Lang.</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

**Section 3: Statewide Assessment System**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **3.2**               | The State has         | The State's           |
|                       | determined that the   | assessment system     |
| If the State's        | proficiency-level     | includes local        |
| assessment system     | judgments yielded by  | assessments but the   |
| includes assessments  | each of the local     | State does not        |
| developed or adopted  | assessments have      | certify that they     |
| at both the local and | comparable validity   | meet the requirements |
| State level, how has  | and reliability, are  | specified in this     |
| the State ensured     | aligned with the      | document.             |
| that these local      | State's academic      |                       |
| assessments meet the  | content standards,    | Results from one or   |
| same technical        | are equivalent to one | more local            |
| requirements as the   | another in content,   | assessments do not    |
| statewide             | coverage, difficulty  | yield comparable and  |
| assessments?          | and quality, provide  | equivalent results    |
|                       | unbiased, rational,   | for one or more       |
| (a) How has the State | and consistent        | subgroups.            |
|     ensured that all  | determinations of AYP |                       |
|     local assessments | for schools and LEAs, | Results from one or   |
|     are aligned with  | and may be aggregated | more local            |
|     the State's       | at the State level to | assessments cannot be |
|     academic content  | determine whether the | meaningfully          |
|     and achievement   | State has made        | aggregated with       |
|     standards?        | adequate yearly       | results from the      |
|                       | progress.             | other local           |
| (b) How has the State |                       | assessments for one   |
|     ensured that all  | **[Possible           | or more subgroups.    |
|     local assessments | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
|     are equivalent to |                       | The State has not     |
|     one another in    | -   The State's       | ensured that locally  |
|     terms of content  |     assessment system | developed assessments |
|     coverage,         |     includes local    | based on modified     |
|     difficulty, and   |     assessments,      | and/or alternate      |
|     quality?          |     written           | achievement standards |
|                       |     documentation of  | meet all technical    |
| (c) How has the State |     the State's       | and statutory         |
|     ensured that all  |     criteria for      | requirements.         |
|     local assessments |     these assessments |                       |
|     yield comparable  |     and the State's   |                       |
|     results for all   |     processes for     |                       |
|     subgroups?        |     ensuring their    |                       |
|                       |     quality and       |                       |
| (d) How has the State |     comparability.    |                       |
|     ensured that all  |                       |                       |
|     local assessments | -   Documentation of  |                       |
|     yield results     |     studies conducted |                       |
|     that can be       |     by the State or   |                       |
|     aggregated with   |     by independent    |                       |
|     those from other  |     evaluators on the |                       |
|     local assessments |     quality and       |                       |
|     and with any      |     comparability of  |                       |
|     statewide         |     each of the local |                       |
|     assessments?      |     assessments as    |                       |
|                       |     well as follow-up |                       |
| (e) How has the State |     plans for the     |                       |
|     ensured that all  |     State to address  |                       |
|     local assessments |     any deficiencies  |                       |
|     provide unbiased, |     in these local    |                       |
|     rational, and     |     assessments or    |                       |
|     consistent        |     their             |                       |
|     determinations of |     comparability,    |                       |
|     the annual        |     equivalence, and  |                       |
|     progress of       |     ability to        |                       |
|     schools and LEAs  |     produce results   |                       |
|     within the State? |     that can be       |                       |
|                       |     aggregated.       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here

**SECTION 3: STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **3.3**               | **[Possible           | The State does not    |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    | document the quality, |
| If the State's        |                       | equivalence and       |
| assessment system     | -   Documentation     | comparability of the  |
| employs a matrix      |     such as technical | forms of the          |
| design---that is,     |     manuals and       | assessments.          |
| multiple forms within |     studies conducted |                       |
| a content area and    |     by the State or   |                       |
| grade level\-- how    |     by independent    |                       |
| has the State ensured |     evaluators on the |                       |
| that:                 |     quality,          |                       |
|                       |     equivalence, and  |                       |
| (a) All forms are     |     comparability of  |                       |
|     aligned with the  |     the forms.        |                       |
|     State's academic  |                       |                       |
|     content and       |                       |                       |
|     achievement       |                       |                       |
|     standards and     |                       |                       |
|     yield comparable  |                       |                       |
|     results?          |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| (b) All forms are     |                       |                       |
|     equivalent to one |                       |                       |
|     another in terms  |                       |                       |
|     of content        |                       |                       |
|     coverage,         |                       |                       |
|     difficulty, and   |                       |                       |
|     quality?          |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| (c) All assessments   |                       |                       |
|     yield comparable  |                       |                       |
|     results for all   |                       |                       |
|     subgroups?        |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here 

##### SECTION 3: STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **3.4**               | For each grade and    | The State has not     |
|                       | subject assessed, the | considered or         |
| How has the State     | State's academic      | accounted for         |
| ensured that its      | assessment system is  | inconsistencies in    |
| assessment system     | designed to provide a | the academic          |
| will provide coherent | coherent system       | achievement standards |
| information for       | across grades and     | across grade levels   |
| students across       | subjects.             | or content areas.     |
| grades and subjects?  |                       |                       |
|                       | The State's           | The State has not     |
| (a) Has it indicated  | assessments are       | considered or         |
|     the relative      | aligned with the      | accounted for the     |
|     contribution of   | State's academic      | appropriate           |
|     each assessment   | achievement standards | progression of        |
|     to ensure         | and reflect           | content across grade  |
|     alignment to the  | articulation of       | levels within each    |
|     content standards | knowledge and skills  | content area.         |
|     and determining   | across grades and     |                       |
|     adequate yearly   | subjects.             | The State has not     |
|     progress?         |                       | provided a plan that  |
|                       | []{.mark}             | indicates the         |
| (b) Has the State     |                       | relative contribution |
|     provided a        | **[Possible           | of each of its        |
|     rational and      | Evidence]{.mark}**    | assessments.          |
|     coherent design   |                       |                       |
|     that identifies   | -   Existing written  |                       |
|     all assessments,  |     documentation     |                       |
|     including those   |     describing the    |                       |
|     based on          |     processes used to |                       |
|     alternate         |     develop the       |                       |
|     achievement       |     academic content  |                       |
|     standards and     |     and achievement   |                       |
|     modified          |     standards to      |                       |
|     achievement       |     align the         |                       |
|     standards if any, |     assessments with  |                       |
|     to be used for    |     these standards.  |                       |
|     AYP?              |                       |                       |
|                       | ```{=html}            |                       |
| (c) If the State      | <!-- -->              |                       |
|     assessment system | ```                   |                       |
|     includes          | -   Documentation of  |                       |
|     alternate         |     the studies used  |                       |
|     assessments based |     to establish      |                       |
|     on alternate or   |     vertical scales   |                       |
|     modified          |     that span grade   |                       |
|     achievement       |     levels within a   |                       |
|     standards, has    |     given content     |                       |
|     the State         |     area.             |                       |
|     provided IEP      |                       |                       |
|     Teams with a      | -   The State         |                       |
|     clear description |     identifies the    |                       |
|     of the            |     assessments to be |                       |
|     differences       |     used, indicates   |                       |
|     between           |     the relative      |                       |
|     assessments based |     contribution of   |                       |
|     on grade-level    |     each assessment   |                       |
|     achievement       |     and provides      |                       |
|     standards,        |     information       |                       |
|     assessments based |     regarding the     |                       |
|     on modified       |     progress of       |                       |
|     academic          |     students relative |                       |
|     achievement       |     to the State's    |                       |
|     standards and     |     academic          |                       |
|     assessments based |     standards in      |                       |
|     on alternate      |     order to inform   |                       |
|     achievement       |     instruction.      |                       |
|     standards, if     |                       |                       |
|     applicable,       | ```{=html}            |                       |
|     including any     | <!-- -->              |                       |
|     effects of State  | ```                   |                       |
|     and local         | -   Documentation     |                       |
|     policies on the   |     that indicates    |                       |
|     student's         |     how each of the   |                       |
|     education         |     assessments       |                       |
|     resulting from    |     contributes to    |                       |
|     taking an         |     the alignment to  |                       |
|     alternate         |     the content       |                       |
|     assessment based  |     standards.        |                       |
|     on alternate or   |                       |                       |
|     modified academic | -   A plan that       |                       |
|     achievement       |     identifies each   |                       |
|     standards?        |     of the            |                       |
|                       |     assessments,      |                       |
|                       |     their             |                       |
|                       |     similarities and  |                       |
|                       |     differences, and  |                       |
|                       |     their             |                       |
|                       |     contribution to   |                       |
|                       |     determining       |                       |
|                       |     adequate yearly   |                       |
|                       |     progress.         |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### 

##### List State Evidence Here

**SECTION 3: STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **3.5**               | []{.mark}             | For the State's       |
|                       |                       | various instruments,  |
| If its assessment     | **[Possible           | the State has not     |
| system includes       | Evidence]{.mark}**    | demonstrated that     |
| various instruments   |                       | these assessments are |
| (e.g., the general    | -   Documentation of  | comparable and are    |
| assessment in English |     alignment of the  | aligned with the      |
| and either a          |     assessments with  | content standards.    |
| native-language       |     the academic      |                       |
| version or simplified |     content and       |                       |
| English version of    |     achievement       |                       |
| the assessment), how  |     standards.        |                       |
| does the State        |                       |                       |
| demonstrate           | -   Statistical or    |                       |
| comparable results    |     judgment-based    |                       |
| and alignment with    |     analyses designed |                       |
| the academic content  |     to demonstrate    |                       |
| and achievement       |     comparable        |                       |
| standards?            |     evidence of       |                       |
|                       |     proficiency       |                       |
|                       |     across different  |                       |
|                       |     versions of the   |                       |
|                       |     test.             |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here

**SECTION 3: STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **3.6**               | The State's           | The State's           |
|                       | assessment system     | assessment system     |
| How does the State's  | ensures coverage of   | covers only basic     |
| assessment system     | the depth and breadth | skill items.          |
| involve multiple      | of its academic       |                       |
| measures, that is,    | content standards and |                       |
| measures that assess  | employs multiple      |                       |
| higher-order thinking | approaches within     |                       |
| skills and            | specific grade and    |                       |
| understanding of      | content combinations  |                       |
| challenging content?  | as needed to meet     |                       |
|                       | this goal.            |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | **[Possible           |                       |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Test blueprints   |                       |
|                       |     or item           |                       |
|                       |     specifications    |                       |
|                       |     that describe the |                       |
|                       |     structure of each |                       |
|                       |     assessment and    |                       |
|                       |     the items on each |                       |
|                       |     form.             |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Description of    |                       |
|                       |     the process used  |                       |
|                       |     to determine and  |                       |
|                       |     judge the         |                       |
|                       |     inclusion of      |                       |
|                       |     challenging       |                       |
|                       |     content.          |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Statistical       |                       |
|                       |     evidence that     |                       |
|                       |     documents         |                       |
|                       |     coverage of       |                       |
|                       |     higher-order      |                       |
|                       |     thinking skills   |                       |
|                       |     consistent with   |                       |
|                       |     the standards.    |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

##### SECTION 3: STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **3.7**               | The State's           | The State has not yet |
|                       | assessment system     | implemented an        |
| Has the State         | includes an alternate | alternate assessment. |
| included alternate    | assessment based on   |                       |
| assessment(s) for     | alternate achievement | The State has adopted |
| students whose        | standards and an      | an existing           |
| disabilities do not   | alternate assessment  | standardized test as  |
| permit them to        | based on modified     | the alternate         |
| participate in the    | academic achievement  | assessment with no    |
| general assessment    | standards; the system | explanation of how it |
| even with             | as a whole provides a | reflects appropriate  |
| accommodations?       | suitable assessment   | standards and         |
|                       | for all students with | procedures for        |
|                       | disabilities in all   | students whose        |
|                       | grades and subjects.  | disabilities prevent  |
|                       |                       | participation in the  |
|                       | **Possible Evidence** | general test.         |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Existing written  | The State has not     |
|                       |     documentation     | implemented alternate |
|                       |     describing the    | assessments that meet |
|                       |     processes used to | the requirements      |
|                       |     develop the       | under NCLB.           |
|                       |     alternate         |                       |
|                       |     assessment(s) and |                       |
|                       |     the associated    |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards.        |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here

+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| #  **Se                |                      |                      |
| ction 4:** **A system  |                      |                      |
| of assessments with hi |                      |                      |
| gh technical quality** |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in NCLB      | Sec. 1111(b)(3)      |                      |
| legislation:           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in final     | Sec. 200.2           |                      |
| regulations:           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

**Overview**

The *Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing* (1999)
delineates the characteristics of high-quality assessments and describes
the processes that a State can employ to ensure that its assessments and
use of results are appropriate, credible and technically defensible. The
*Standards*, developed jointly by the American Psychological
Association, the American Educational Research Association, and the
National Council of Measurement in Education, has a history of 30 years
of use by test developers and the courts.

**Validity**

As reflected in the *Standards*, the primary consideration in
determining validity is whether the State has evidence that the
assessment results can be interpreted in a manner consistent with their
intended purpose(s).

The *Standards* speaks of four broad categories of evidence used to
determine construct validity: (1) evidence based on test content, (2)
evidence based on the assessment\'s relation to other variables, (3)
evidence based on student response processes, and (4) evidence from
internal structure.

> *1) Using evidence based on test content (content validity)*. Content
> validity, that is, alignment of the standards and the assessment, is
> important but not sufficient. States must document not only the
> surface aspects of validity illustrated by a good content match, but
> also the more substantive aspects of validity that clarify the
> \"real\" meaning of a score.
>
> *2) Using evidence of the assessment\'s relationship with other
> variables.* This means documenting the validity of an assessment by
> confirming its positive relationship with other assessments or
> evidence that is known or assumed to be valid. For example, if
> students who do well on the assessment in question also do well on
> some trusted assessment or rating, such as teachers\' judgments, it
> might be said to be valid. It is also useful to gather evidence about
> what a test does *not* measure. For example, a test of mathematical
> reasoning should be more highly correlated with another math test, or
> perhaps with grades in math, than with a test of scientific reasoning
> or a reading comprehension test.
>
> *3) Using evidence based on student response processes.* The best
> opportunity for detecting and eliminating sources of test invalidity
> occurs during the test development process. Items obviously need to be
> reviewed for ambiguity, irrelevant clues, and inaccuracy. More direct
> evidence bearing on the meaning of the scores can be gathered during
> the development process by asking students to \"think-aloud\" and
> describe the processes they "think" they are using as they struggle
> with the task. Many States now use this \"assessment lab\" approach to
> validating and refining assessment items and tasks.
>
> *4) Using evidence based on internal structure.* A variety of
> statistical techniques have been developed to study the structure of a
> test. These are used to study both the validity and the reliability of
> an assessment. The well-known technique of item analysis used during
> test development is actually a measure of how well a given item
> correlates with the other items on the test. Newer technologies
> including generalizability analyses are variations on the theme of
> item similarity and homogeneity. A combination of several of these
> statistical techniques can help to ensure a balanced assessment,
> avoiding, on the one hand, the assessment of a narrow range of
> knowledge and skills but one that shows very high reliability, and on
> the other hand, the assessment of a very wide range of content and
> skills, triggering a decrease in the consistency of the results.

In validating an assessment, the State must also consider the
consequences of its interpretation and use. Messick (1989) points out
that these are different functions, and that the impact of an assessment
can be traced either to an interpretation or to how it is used.
Furthermore, as in all evaluative endeavors, States must attend not only
to the intended effects, but also to unintended effects. The
disproportional placement of certain categories of students in special
education as a result of accountability considerations rather than
appropriate diagnosis is an example of an unintended\--and
negative\--consequence of what had been considered proper use of
instruments that were considered valid.

**Reliability**

The term "reliability" is usually defined with synonyms such as
consistency, stability, and accuracy. These terms all relate to the
problem of uncertainty in making an inference about a score. As
reflected in the *Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing*,
the field now treats reliability as a study of the many sources of
unwanted variation in assessment results. Those responsible for
developing and operating State assessment systems are obliged to (1)
make a reasonable effort to determine the types of error that may
(unwittingly) distort interpretations of the findings, (2) estimate
their magnitude, and (3) make every possible effort to alert the users
to this lack of certainty.

The traditional methods of portraying the consistency of test results,
including reliability coefficients and standard errors of measurement,
should be augmented by techniques that more accurately and visibly
portray the actual level of accuracy (Rogosa, 1995, Young and Yoon,
1999). Most of these methods focus on error in terms of the probability
that a student with a given score, or pattern of scores, is properly
classified at a given performance level, such as \"proficient.\" For
school-level or district-level results, the report should indicate the
estimated amount of error associated with the percent of students
classified at each achievement level. For example, if a school reported
that 47% of its students were proficient, the report might say that the
reader could be confident at the 95% level that the school\'s true
percent of students at the proficient level is between 33% and 61%.
Furthermore, since the focus on results in a Title I context is on
improvement over time, the report should also indicate the accuracy of
the year-to-year changes in scores.

######### Other dimensions of technical quality

There are several other characteristics of State assessments that
support valid interpretation and use of results.

[Fairness/Accessibility]{.underline} The *Standards* identifies several
sources of unfairness, including bias or unequal treatment of students
in the assessment process or in the processes of reporting,
interpretation, or use; and the lack of opportunity to learn to the
standards. Unfairness most often appears at four points in the
assessment process:

-   The items or tasks do not provide an equal opportunity for all
    students to fully demonstrate their knowledge and skills.

-   The assessments are not administered in ways that ensure fairness.

-   The results are not reported in ways that ensure fairness.

-   The results are not interpreted or used in ways that leads to equal
    treatment.

[Comparability of results]{.underline} Many uses of State assessment
results assume comparability of different types: comparability from year
to year, from student to student, and from school to school. Although
this is difficult to implement and to document, States have an
obligation to show that they have made a reasonable effort to attain
comparability, especially where locally selected assessments are part of
the system.

[Procedures for test administration, scoring, data analysis, and
reporting]{.underline} Most States take great pains to ensure that the
assessments are properly administered, that directions are followed, and
that test security requirements are clearly specified and followed.
Nevertheless, it is important they document the ways in which they
ensure that their system does not omit any of these basics.

[Interpretation and use of results]{.underline} Although this topic is
closely related to that of validity, and is discussed in most of the
other topics in this section, it is mentioned here because of its
importance. Even if an assessment is carefully designed, constructed and
implemented, it all can come to naught if users are not helped to draw
the most appropriate interpretations and to use the results in the most
valid ways.

Validation efforts continue throughout the life of the assessment.
Evidence should continually be sought that the results truly reflect the
goals of instruction, especially those related to higher-order thinking
and understanding. Accurate data about the consequences of an assessment
will, obviously, not be available until they have been implemented for a
year or more. Research questions might ask: Are more students meeting
the standards because the results led to the creation of a dynamic
statewide after-school program? Are more students being retained in
grade as a result of the assessment results? Are more teachers part of a
long-term professional development program that improves the teaching of
reading to low-achieving students?

**SECTION 4: TECHNICAL QUALITY**

+--------------------------------+------------------+------------------+
| **Critical Element**           | **Examples of    | **Examples of    |
|                                | Acceptable       | Incomplete       |
|                                | Evidence**       | Evidence**       |
+--------------------------------+------------------+------------------+
| **4.1**                        | For each         | The State has    |
|                                | assessment,      | not provided     |
| For each assessment, including | including all    | evidence in all  |
| [all]{.underline} alternate    | alternate        | categories (a)   |
| assessments, has the State     | assessments, the | \-- (g) or has   |
| documented the issue of        | State has        | not taken steps  |
| **validity** (in addition to   | documented the   | to address any   |
| the alignment of the           | existing         | deficiencies     |
| assessment with the content    | validity         | either in        |
| standards), as described in    | evidence in each | validity or in   |
| the *Standards for Educational | of the           | its approach to  |
| and Psychological Testing*     | categories and   | establishing and |
| (AERA/APA/NCME, 1999), with    | has taken steps  | documenting      |
| respect to *[all]{.underline}* | to address any   | validity         |
| of the following categories:   | deficiencies     | evidence.        |
|                                | either in        |                  |
| (a) Has the State specified    | validity or in   | The alternate    |
|     the purposes of the        | its approach to  | assessment based |
|     assessments, delineating   | establishing and | on alternate     |
|     the types of uses and      | documenting      | achievement      |
|     decisions most appropriate | validity         | standards yields |
|     to each?                   | evidence.        | a single score   |
|     *[and]{.underline}*        |                  | that is counted  |
|                                | **[Possible      | for both reading |
| (b) Has the State ascertained  | Ev               | and mathematics  |
|     that the assessments,      | idence]{.mark}** | in AYP           |
|     including alternate        |                  | calculations.    |
|     assessments, are measuring | -   For category |                  |
|     the knowledge and skills   |     (a),         |                  |
|     described in its academic  |     existing     |                  |
|     content standards and not  |     written      |                  |
|     knowledge, skills, or      |                  |                  |
|     other characteristics that |   documentation, |                  |
|     are not specified in the   |     such as      |                  |
|     academic content standards |     minutes or   |                  |
|     or grade-level             |     policies of  |                  |
|     expectations?              |     the State    |                  |
|     *[and]{.underline}*        |     Board of     |                  |
|                                |     Education or |                  |
| (c) Has the State ascertained  |     state        |                  |
|     that its assessment items  |     legislative  |                  |
|     are tapping the intended   |     code, that   |                  |
|     cognitive processes and    |     defines the  |                  |
|     that the items and tasks   |     purpose(s)   |                  |
|     are at the appropriate     |     of the       |                  |
|     grade level?               |     State's      |                  |
|     [a*nd*]{.underline}        |     assessment   |                  |
|                                |     system.      |                  |
| (d) Has the State ascertained  |                  |                  |
|     that the scoring and       | ```{=html}       |                  |
|     reporting structures are   | <!-- -->         |                  |
|     consistent with the        | ```              |                  |
|     sub-domain structures of   | -   For each of  |                  |
|     its academic content       |     the          |                  |
|     standards (i.e., are item  |                  |                  |
|     interrelationships         |   categories (b) |                  |
|     consistent with the        |     -- (g),      |                  |
|     framework from which the   |                  |                  |
|     test arises)?              |    documentation |                  |
|     [a*nd*]{.underline}        |     of the       |                  |
|                                |     studies that |                  |
| (e) Has the State ascertained  |     provide      |                  |
|     that test and item scores  |     evidence in  |                  |
|     are related to outside     |     support of   |                  |
|     variables as intended      |     the validity |                  |
|     (e.g., scores are          |     of using     |                  |
|     correlated strongly with   |     results from |                  |
|     relevant measures of       |     State's      |                  |
|     academic achievement and   |     assessment   |                  |
|     are weakly correlated, if  |     system for   |                  |
|     at all, with irrelevant    |     their stated |                  |
|     characteristics, such as   |     purpose(s).  |                  |
|     demographics)?             |                  |                  |
|     [a*nd*]{.underline}        | -   Existing     |                  |
|                                |     written      |                  |
| (f) Has the State ascertained  |                  |                  |
|     that the decisions based   |    documentation |                  |
|     on the results of its      |     describing   |                  |
|     assessments are consistent |     the form and |                  |
|     with the purposes for      |     content of   |                  |
|     which the assessments were |     alternate    |                  |
|     designed?                  |     assessments  |                  |
|     *[and]{.underline}*        |     for students |                  |
|                                |     with         |                  |
| (g) Has the State ascertained  |                  |                  |
|     whether the assessment     |    disabilities, |                  |
|     produces intended and      |     the process  |                  |
|     unintended consequences?   |     by which     |                  |
|                                |     these        |                  |
|                                |     assessments  |                  |
|                                |     were         |                  |
|                                |     developed,   |                  |
|                                |     and the      |                  |
|                                |     process by   |                  |
|                                |     which the    |                  |
|                                |     State has    |                  |
|                                |     ascertained  |                  |
|                                |     the          |                  |
|                                |     alignment of |                  |
|                                |     these        |                  |
|                                |     assessments  |                  |
|                                |     with its     |                  |
|                                |     academic     |                  |
|                                |     content      |                  |
|                                |     standards    |                  |
|                                |     and academic |                  |
|                                |     achievement  |                  |
|                                |                  |                  |
|                                | standards---both |                  |
|                                |     grade-level  |                  |
|                                |     and          |                  |
|                                |     alternate,   |                  |
|                                |     as           |                  |
|                                |     applicable.  |                  |
+--------------------------------+------------------+------------------+

List State Evidence Here

**SECTION 4: TECHNICAL QUALITY**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **4.2**               | For each assessment,  | The State has not     |
|                       | including all         | provided evidence in  |
| For each assessment,  | alternate             | all categories (a) -  |
| including all         | assessments, the      | (c) or has not taken  |
| alternate             | State has documented  | steps to address any  |
| assessments, has the  | reliability evidence  | deficiencies either   |
| State considered the  | in each of the        | in reliability or in  |
| issue of              | categories and has    | the State's approach  |
| **reliability**, as   | taken steps to        | to establishing and   |
| described in the      | address any           | documenting           |
| *Standards for        | deficiencies either   | reliability evidence. |
| Educational and       | in reliability or in  |                       |
| Psychological         | the State's approach  |                       |
| Testing*              | to establishing and   |                       |
| (AERA/APA/NCME,       | documenting           |                       |
| 1999), with respect   | reliability evidence. |                       |
| to                    |                       |                       |
| *[all]{.underline}*   | **[Possible           |                       |
| of the following      | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
| categories:           |                       |                       |
|                       | -   For each of the   |                       |
| (a) Has the State     |     categories (a) -- |                       |
|     determined the    |     (c),              |                       |
|     reliability of    |     documentation of  |                       |
|     the scores it     |     the studies that  |                       |
|     reports, based on |     support the       |                       |
|     data for its own  |     reliability of    |                       |
|     student           |     each of the       |                       |
|     population and    |     State's           |                       |
|     each reported     |     assessments with  |                       |
|     subpopulation?    |     the State's own   |                       |
|                       |     student           |                       |
|   *[and]{.underline}* |     population.       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| (b) Has the State     | -   Documentation of  |                       |
|     quantified and    |     the precision of  |                       |
|     reported within   |     the assessments   |                       |
|     the technical     |     at cut scores and |                       |
|     documentation for |     evidence of a     |                       |
|     its assessments   |     systematic        |                       |
|     the conditional   |     process for       |                       |
|     standard error of |     addressing any    |                       |
|     measurement and   |     deficiencies      |                       |
|     student           |     identified in     |                       |
|     classification    |     these studies.    |                       |
|     that are          |                       |                       |
|     consistent at     | -   Documentation of  |                       |
|     each cut score    |     consistency of    |                       |
|     specified in its  |     student level     |                       |
|     academic          |     classification    |                       |
|     achievement       |     and evidence of a |                       |
|     standards?        |     systematic        |                       |
|                       |     process for       |                       |
|   *[and]{.underline}* |     addressing any    |                       |
|                       |     deficiencies      |                       |
| (c) Has the State     |     identified in     |                       |
|     reported evidence |     these studies.    |                       |
|     of                |                       |                       |
|     generalizability  |                       |                       |
|     for all relevant  |                       |                       |
|     sources, such as  |                       |                       |
|     variability of    |                       |                       |
|     groups, internal  |                       |                       |
|     consistency of    |                       |                       |
|     item responses,   |                       |                       |
|     variability among |                       |                       |
|     schools,          |                       |                       |
|     consistency from  |                       |                       |
|     form to form of   |                       |                       |
|     the test, and     |                       |                       |
|     inter-rater       |                       |                       |
|     consistency in    |                       |                       |
|     scoring?          |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here 

**SECTION 4: TECHNICAL QUALITY**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **4.3**               | The State has taken   | The State has         |
|                       | appropriate           | conducted data-based  |
| Has the State ensured | judgmental (e.g.,     | bias studies but has  |
| that its assessment   | committee review) and | not convened          |
| system is fair and    | data-based (e.g.,     | committees of         |
| accessible to all     | bias studies) steps   | stakeholders to       |
| students, including   | to ensure that its    | review its assessment |
| students with         | assessment system is  | items.                |
| disabilities and      | fair and accessible   |                       |
| students with limited | to all students.      | The State has         |
| English proficiency,  | Review committees     | convened committees   |
| with respect to each  | have included         | of stakeholders to    |
| of the following      | representation of     | review its assessment |
| issues:               | identified subgroups. | items but these       |
|                       |                       | committees have not   |
| (a) Has the State     | The State assessment  | included              |
|     ensured that the  | system has been must  | representation of     |
|     assessments       | be designed to be     | identified subgroups. |
|     provide an        | valid and accessible  |                       |
|     appropriate       | for use by the widest | The State assessment  |
|     variety of        | possible range of     | system is not         |
|     accommodations    | students.             | designed to be valid  |
|     for students with |                       | and accessible for    |
|     disabilities?     | The State is          | use by the widest     |
|                       | conducting studies to | possible range of     |
|   [*and*]{.underline} | determine the         | students.             |
|                       | appropriateness of    |                       |
| (b) Has the State     | accommodations and    | The State does not    |
|     ensured that the  | the impact on test    | have a policy on the  |
|     assessments       | scores.               | appropriate selection |
|     provide an        |                       | and use of            |
|     appropriate       | **[Possible           | accommodations and    |
|     variety of        | Evidence]{.mark}**    | alternate             |
|     linguistic        |                       | assessments.          |
|     accommodations    | -   Existing written  |                       |
|     for students with |     documents         | The State does not    |
|     limited English   |     describe how the  | train or monitor      |
|     proficiency?      |     principles of     | personnel at the      |
|                       |     universal design  | school, LEA, and      |
|   *[and]{.underline}* |     and/or            | State levels with     |
|                       |     appropriate       | regard to the         |
| (c) Has the State     |     language          | appropriate selection |
|     taken steps to    |     simplification    | and use of            |
|     ensure fairness   |     were incorporated | accommodations and    |
|     in the            |     into each of the  | alternate             |
|     development of    |     State's           | assessments.          |
|     the assessments?  |     assessments.      |                       |
|                       |                       | There are no          |
|   *[and]{.underline}* | -   Evidence that     | appropriate           |
|                       |     students with     | accommodations for    |
| (d) Does the use of   |     disabilities were | students with         |
|     accommodations    |     included in the   | particular            |
|     and/or alternate  |     test development  | disabilities (e.g.,   |
|     assessments yield |     process.          | no allowable          |
|     meaningful        |                       | accommodations on the |
|     scores?           | -   Existing written  | general assessment or |
|                       |     documentation of  | alternate assessments |
|                       |     the State's       | for students who are  |
|                       |     policies and      | visually impaired and |
|                       |     procedures for    | need large print or   |
|                       |     the selection and | Braille or for        |
|                       |     use of            | students who are      |
|                       |     accommodations    | significantly         |
|                       |     and alternate     | physically impaired   |
|                       |     assessments,      | and need assistive    |
|                       |     including         | technology).          |
|                       |     evidence of       |                       |
|                       |     training for      |                       |
|                       |     educators who     |                       |
|                       |     administer these  |                       |
|                       |     assessments.      |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here 

**SECTION 4: TECHNICAL QUALITY**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **4.4**               | The State has         | The State has not     |
|                       | conducted appropriate | conducted or          |
| When different test   | equating or linking   | documented equating   |
| forms or formats are  | studies and has       | studies to establish  |
| used, the State must  | presented data that   | whether test forms    |
| ensure that the       | support the success   | are comparable across |
| meaning and           | of the equating or    | time.                 |
| interpretation of     | linking.              |                       |
| results are           |                       |                       |
| consistent.           | **[Possible           |                       |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
| (a) Has the State     |                       |                       |
|     taken steps to    | -   Documentation     |                       |
|     ensure            |     describing the    |                       |
|     consistency of    |     State's approach  |                       |
|     test forms over   |     to ensuring       |                       |
|     time?             |     comparability of  |                       |
|                       |     assessments and   |                       |
| (b) If the State      |     assessment        |                       |
|     administers both  |     results across    |                       |
|     an online and     |     groups and time.  |                       |
|     paper and pencil  |                       |                       |
|     test, has the     | -   Documentation of  |                       |
|     State documented  |     equating studies  |                       |
|     the comparability |     that confirm the  |                       |
|     of the electronic |     comparability of  |                       |
|     and paper forms   |     the State's       |                       |
|     of the test?      |     assessments and   |                       |
|                       |     assessment        |                       |
|                       |     results across    |                       |
|                       |     groups and across |                       |
|                       |     time, as well as  |                       |
|                       |     follow-up         |                       |
|                       |     documentation     |                       |
|                       |     describing how    |                       |
|                       |     the State has     |                       |
|                       |     addressed any     |                       |
|                       |     deficiencies.     |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

**SECTION 4: TECHNICAL QUALITY**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **4.5**               | The State developed a | The State does not    |
|                       | set of management     | have a test security  |
| Has the State         | controls or standards | policy.               |
| established clear     | for each of these     |                       |
| criteria for the      | components and has    | The State does not    |
| administration,       | communicated these    | train or monitor      |
| scoring, analysis,    | criteria to its       | personnel at the      |
| and reporting         | contractor(s), LEAs,  | school, LEA, and      |
| components of its     | and schools. It       | State levels with     |
| assessment system,    | requires its          | regard to its test    |
| including             | contractor(s) to      | administration        |
| [all]{.underline}     | provide specific      | procedures and        |
| alternate             | information on the    | security policy.      |
| assessments, and does | degree to which each  |                       |
| the State have a      | criterion is met.     | The State provides no |
| system for monitoring |                       | criteria to its       |
| and improving the     | The State uses an     | contractor(s)         |
| on-going quality of   | extensive system of   | regarding the quality |
| its assessment        | training and          | control and security  |
| system?               | monitoring to ensure  | measures it requires  |
|                       | that each person who  | for its assessment    |
|                       | is responsible for    | system.               |
|                       | handling or           |                       |
|                       | administering any     | The State provides no |
|                       | portion of its        | criteria to its       |
|                       | assessments does so   | contractor(s) to      |
|                       | in a way that         | ensure that the       |
|                       | protects the security | procedures for        |
|                       | of the assessments    | scoring of open-ended |
|                       | and maintains         | tasks meet industry   |
|                       | equivalence of        | standards for         |
|                       | administration        | accuracy.             |
|                       | conditions across     |                       |
|                       | students and schools. | Assessments are       |
|                       |                       | scored locally with   |
|                       | **[Possible           | no independent        |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    | confirmation of score |
|                       |                       | accuracy.             |
|                       | -   The State's       |                       |
|                       |     criteria for      |                       |
|                       |     administration,   |                       |
|                       |     scoring,          |                       |
|                       |     analysis, and     |                       |
|                       |     reporting are     |                       |
|                       |     communicated to   |                       |
|                       |     its               |                       |
|                       |     contractor(s).    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   The State's test  |                       |
|                       |     security policy   |                       |
|                       |     and consequences  |                       |
|                       |     for violation are |                       |
|                       |     communicated to   |                       |
|                       |     the public and to |                       |
|                       |     local educators.  |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Existing written  |                       |
|                       |     documentation of  |                       |
|                       |     the State's plan  |                       |
|                       |     for training and  |                       |
|                       |     monitoring        |                       |
|                       |     assessment        |                       |
|                       |     administration    |                       |
|                       |     conditions across |                       |
|                       |     the State, even   |                       |
|                       |     when its          |                       |
|                       |     assessment system |                       |
|                       |     is comprised of   |                       |
|                       |     only local        |                       |
|                       |     assessments.      |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | ```{=html}            |                       |
|                       | <!-- -->              |                       |
|                       | ```                   |                       |
|                       | -   Documentation     |                       |
|                       |     that the tests    |                       |
|                       |     clearly delineate |                       |
|                       |     which             |                       |
|                       |     accommodations    |                       |
|                       |     may be used for   |                       |
|                       |     specific sections |                       |
|                       |     of the test       |                       |
|                       |     (e.g., specify    |                       |
|                       |     the               |                       |
|                       |     items/sections    |                       |
|                       |     for which a       |                       |
|                       |     calculator may be |                       |
|                       |     used without      |                       |
|                       |     invalidating the  |                       |
|                       |     test).            |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### 

##### List State Evidence Here 

##### SECTION 4: TECHNICAL QUALITY

+----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element** | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                      | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **4.6**              | The State provides    | No analyses have been |
|                      | for the use of        | carried out to        |
| Has the State        | appropriate           | determine whether     |
| evaluated its use of | accommodations and    | specific              |
| accommodations?      | has conducted studies | accommodations        |
|                      | to ensure that scores | produce the effect    |
| (a) How has the      | based on accommodated | intended.             |
|     State ensured    | administrations can   |                       |
|     that appropriate | be meaningfully       | The State does not    |
|     accommodations   | combined with scores  | require that          |
|     are available to | based on              | decisions about how   |
|     students with    | non-accommodated      | students with         |
|     disabilities and | administrations.      | disabilities will     |
|     students covered |                       | participate in the    |
|     by Section 504,  | **[Possible           | assessment system be  |
|     and that these   | Evidence]{.mark}**    | made on an individual |
|     accommodations   |                       | basis or specify that |
|     are used in a    | -   The State has     | these decisions must  |
|     manner that is   |     analyzed the use  | be consistent with    |
|     consistent with  |     of specific       | the routine           |
|     instructional    |     accommodations    | instructional         |
|     approaches for   |     for different     | approaches as         |
|     each student, as |     groups of         | identified by each    |
|     determined by a  |     students with     | student's IEP or 504  |
|     student's IEP or |     disabilities and  | plan.                 |
|     504 plan?        |     has provided      |                       |
|                      |     training to       | The State uses the    |
| (b) How has the      |     support sound     | same accommodations   |
|     State determined |     decisions by IEP  | for limited English   |
|     that scores for  |     Teams.            | proficient students   |
|     students with    |                       | as it uses for        |
|     disabilities     | -   The State         | students with         |
|     that are based   |     routinely         | disabilities.         |
|     on accommodated  |     monitors the      |                       |
|     administration   |     extent to which   |                       |
|     conditions will  |     test              |                       |
|     allow for valid  |     accommodations    |                       |
|     inferences about |     are consistent    |                       |
|     these students'  |     with those        |                       |
|     knowledge and    |     provided during   |                       |
|     skills and can   |     instruction.      |                       |
|     be combined      |                       |                       |
|     meaningfully     | -   The State has     |                       |
|     with scores from |     analyzed the      |                       |
|     non-accommodated |     effect of         |                       |
|     administration   |     specific          |                       |
|     conditions?      |     accommodations    |                       |
|                      |     for students with |                       |
| (c) How has the      |     limited English   |                       |
|     State ensured    |     proficiency and   |                       |
|     that appropriate |     has shared        |                       |
|     accommodations   |     results with LEAs |                       |
|     are available to |     and schools.      |                       |
|     limited English  |                       |                       |
|     proficient       | -   Documentation of  |                       |
|     students and     |     the quality and   |                       |
|     that these       |     consistency of    |                       |
|     accommodations   |     the               |                       |
|     are used as      |     accommodations it |                       |
|     necessary to     |     offers for        |                       |
|     yield accurate   |     limited English   |                       |
|     and reliable     |     proficient        |                       |
|     information      |     students (e.g.,   |                       |
|     about what       |     training of       |                       |
|     limited English  |     translators,      |                       |
|     proficient       |     simplified        |                       |
|     students know    |     English,          |                       |
|     and can do?      |     standardized      |                       |
|                      |     translation of    |                       |
| (d) How has the      |     instructions for  |                       |
|     State determined |     test              |                       |
|     that scores for  |     administration    |                       |
|     limited English  |     that are          |                       |
|     proficiency      |     comparable to the |                       |
|     students that    |     general           |                       |
|     are based on     |     assessment).      |                       |
|     accommodated     |                       |                       |
|     administration   |                       |                       |
|     circumstances    |                       |                       |
|     will allow for   |                       |                       |
|     valid inferences |                       |                       |
|     about these      |                       |                       |
|     students'        |                       |                       |
|     knowledge and    |                       |                       |
|     skills and can   |                       |                       |
|     be combined      |                       |                       |
|     meaningfully     |                       |                       |
|     with scores from |                       |                       |
|     non-accommodated |                       |                       |
|     administration   |                       |                       |
|     circumstances?   |                       |                       |
+----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| # **Section 5: Al      |                      |                      |
| ignment of Academic Co |                      |                      |
| ntent Standards, Acade |                      |                      |
| mic Achievement Standa |                      |                      |
| rds, and Assessments** |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in NCLB      | Sec. 1111(b)(1) and  |                      |
| legislation:           | 1111(b)(3)           |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in final     | Sec. 200.2 and 200.3 |                      |
| regulations:           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

**Overview**

A State's system of standards and assessments will provide useful
information for valid accountability decisions and educational
improvement only to the extent that all components of this system are
aligned. If a State's assessments do not adequately measure the
knowledge and skills specified in the State's academic content
standards, or if they measure something other than what these standards
specify, it will be difficult to determine whether students have
achieved the intended knowledge and skills. As a result, it will be
difficult to make appropriate policy, program, and instructional
decisions meant to improve students' achievement. Further, if a State's
assessments do not include items that cover the full range of the
State's academic achievement standards, it may be difficult to determine
whether students have reached the level of proficiency these standards
describe.

Alignment encompasses several dimensions; demonstrating that an
assessment system is aligned with a State's standards requires more than
simply determining whether all the items on the assessment can be
matched to one or more standards or whether each of the academic content
standards can be matched to one or more items in the assessments.
*Alignment is more than this two-way process.* To ensure that its
standards and assessments are aligned, a State needs to consider whether
the assessments\--

-   Cover the full range of content specified in the State's academic
    content standards, meaning that all of the standards are represented
    legitimately in the assessments; *[and]{.underline}*

-   Measure both the content (what students know) and the process (what
    students can do) aspects of the academic content standards;
    *[and]{.underline}*

-   Reflect the same degree and pattern of emphasis apparent in the
    academic content standards (e.g., if the academic content standards
    place a lot of emphasis on operations then so should the
    assessments); *[and]{.underline}*

-   Reflect the full range of cognitive complexity and level of
    difficulty of the concepts and processes described, and depth
    represented, in the State's academic content standards, meaning that
    the assessments are as demanding as the standards;
    *[and]{.underline}*

-   Yield results that represent all achievement levels specified in the
    State's academic achievement standards.

In addition to considering each of these aspects of alignment through a
systematic development and review process, the State needs to also
develop strategies for communicating to its education stakeholders how
its standards and assessment are aligned. Parents, educators, and other
stakeholders need to know how assessment results are related to
content-based expectations in order to understand and use test
information effectively.

Each State must present evidence that its assessment system is aligned
to its standards. Some alignment evidence is generated in the test
development process, and documentation of the steps taken to ensure that
items were drafted to reflect the full range of the State standards is
appropriate verification of efforts to attain alignment. In addition,
final alignment of assessments and standards following full
implementation should be confirmed using one of several procedures (for
example, review and comment by external subject-matter experts).
Occasionally, documentation of alignment includes the process of
re-verification if changes in tests were made to improve alignment.

In recent years, several methods of evaluating alignment between
standards and assessments have been developed. A summary and comparison
of alignment models can be found on the Council of Chief State Officers
website at:

<http://www.ccsso.org/Projects/alignment_analysis/models/418.cfm>

When documenting the comprehensive aspects of alignment between
standards and the State assessment system, the State should describe\--

-   The relationships between the structure of the standards and the
    structure of the assessments;

-   The rationale for the overall alignment strategy, including a
    rationale for any standards either not assessed or not reported as
    part of the State assessment;

-   The manner in which each standard is assessed, whether at the State,
    district, school, or classroom level;

-   The manner in which alternate assessments based on alternate
    achievement standards are linked to the State content standards; and

-   The type of information the State collects pertaining to each
    standard, and how the State monitors the quality of the assessment
    data collected at the local level, for all assessments that are part
    of the statewide system.

**SECTION 5: ALIGNMENT**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **5.1**               | The State has         | The State accepts its |
|                       | developed an          | contractor's          |
| Has the State         | assessment system     | assurance as its sole |
| outlined a coherent   | consistent with its   | evidence of           |
| approach to ensuring  | academic content and  | alignment.            |
| alignment between     | achievement standards |                       |
| each of its           | and is implementing   | The State has studied |
| assessments, or       | on-going quality      | whether all of the    |
| combination of        | control reviews to    | items on its          |
| assessments, based on | ensure that the       | assessments match its |
| grade-level           | system remains fully  | academic content      |
| achievement           | aligned over time.    | standards but has not |
| standards, and the    |                       | conducted studies to  |
| academic content      | **[Possible           | ensure that all of    |
| standards and         | Evidence]{.mark}**    | its academic content  |
| academic achievement  |                       | standards are         |
| standards the         | -   Detailed          | reflected by items on |
| assessment is         |     assessment        | its assessments.      |
| designed to measure?  |     specifications    |                       |
|                       |     and a description | The State has         |
| Has the State         |     of the process    | conducted alignment   |
| outlined a coherent   |     used to ensure    | studies for some, but |
| approach to ensuring  |     that full         | not all, of the       |
| alignment between     |     alignment is      | assessments in its    |
| each of its           |     achieved          | system.               |
| assessments, or       |     initially and     |                       |
| combination of        |     maintained over   |                       |
| assessments, based on |     time through      |                       |
| modified achievement  |     quality control   |                       |
| standards and the     |     reviews.          |                       |
| academic content      |                       |                       |
| standards and         | -   Descriptions of   |                       |
| academic achievement  |     the internal and  |                       |
| standards the         |     external groups   |                       |
| assessment is         |     involved in the   |                       |
| designed to measure?  |     State's alignment |                       |
|                       |     process.          |                       |
| Has the State         |                       |                       |
| outlined a coherent   | -   Reports of        |                       |
| approach to ensuring  |     independent       |                       |
| alignment between     |     alignment studies |                       |
| each of its           |     (i.e., conducted  |                       |
| assessments, or       |     by an entity      |                       |
| combination of        |     other than the    |                       |
| assessments, based on |     State or its      |                       |
| alternate achievement |     assessment        |                       |
| standards and the     |     contractor) and   |                       |
| academic content      |     evidence of a     |                       |
| standards and         |     systematic        |                       |
| academic achievement  |     process for       |                       |
| standards the         |     addressing any    |                       |
| assessment is         |     gaps or           |                       |
| designed to measure?  |     weaknesses        |                       |
|                       |     identified in     |                       |
|                       |     these studies.    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   "Extended"        |                       |
|                       |     standards         |                       |
|                       |     communicate the   |                       |
|                       |     relationship      |                       |
|                       |     between the       |                       |
|                       |     State's academic  |                       |
|                       |     content standards |                       |
|                       |     and the content   |                       |
|                       |     of the alternate  |                       |
|                       |     assessment based  |                       |
|                       |     on alternate      |                       |
|                       |     academic          |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards.        |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   If the State has  |                       |
|                       |     multiple          |                       |
|                       |     assessments       |                       |
|                       |     within one grade  |                       |
|                       |     level in          |                       |
|                       |     reading/language  |                       |
|                       |     arts or           |                       |
|                       |     mathematics, the  |                       |
|                       |     State has tapped  |                       |
|                       |     all content       |                       |
|                       |     sub-domains. The  |                       |
|                       |     State is          |                       |
|                       |     implementing a    |                       |
|                       |     series of studies |                       |
|                       |     to ensure that    |                       |
|                       |     this combination  |                       |
|                       |     is aligned to the |                       |
|                       |     full scope of the |                       |
|                       |     domain.           |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

**SECTION 5: ALIGNMENT**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **5.2**               | The State's           | The State makes an    |
|                       | assessment plan,      | assertion of          |
| Are the assessments   | assessment            | comprehensiveness     |
| and the standards     | blueprints, and/or    | without documentation |
| aligned               | item/task             | matching both         |
| **comprehensively**,  | specifications        | assessments to        |
| meaning that the      | describe how all      | standards and         |
| assessments reflect   | content standards are | standards to          |
| the full **range** of | assessed and how the  | assessments.          |
| the State's academic  | domain is sampled to  |                       |
| content standards?    | lead to valid         | The State's           |
| Are the assessments   | inferences about      | assessments do not    |
| as cognitively        | student performance   | appear to measure the |
| challenging as the    | on the standards,     | more challenging      |
| standards? Are the    | individually and in   | aspects of its        |
| assessments and       | the aggregate. The    | standards.            |
| standards aligned to  | State has evidence    |                       |
| measure the depth of  | that (a) the full     | The State's           |
| the standards? Does   | scope of the          | assessment items      |
| the assessment        | standards and their   | measure higher-order  |
| reflect the degree of | differential emphases | thinking, but do not  |
| cognitive complexity  | are reflected in the  | measure all of the    |
| and level of          | plan/blueprints/      | standards that call   |
| difficulty of the     | specifications and    | for higher-order      |
| concepts and          | that (b) the          | thinking.             |
| processes described   | assessments match the |                       |
| in the standards?     | plan/bluep            | The State has         |
|                       | rints/specifications. | developed modified    |
| If the State has      | Impartial experts     | academic achievement  |
| implemented an        | were involved in this | standards in science, |
| alternate assessment  | process.              | but the test on which |
| based on modified     |                       | they are based is not |
| academic achievement  | > **[Possible         | aligned with the      |
| standards, does the   | > Evidence]{.mark}**  | State's academic      |
| assessment reflect    |                       | content standards in  |
| the full range of the | -   Detailed          | science for the grade |
| State's academic      |     assessment        | span tested.          |
| content standards for |     specifications    |                       |
| the grade(s) tested?  |     and a description | The alternate         |
| What changes in       |     of the process    | assessment based on   |
| cognitive complexity  |     that was used to  | modified academic     |
| or difficulty, if     |     ensure that the   | achievement standards |
| any, have been made   |     State's           | is aligned to         |
| for assessments based |     assessment system | "extended standards"  |
| on modified academic  |     reflects the full | rather than the       |
| achievement           |     range of content  | grade-level content   |
| standards?            |     and level of      | standards.            |
|                       |     challenge         |                       |
| If the State has      |     specified in its  | The alternate         |
| implemented an        |     academic content  | assessment based on   |
| alternate assessment  |     standards as well | alternate academic    |
| based on alternate    |     as the range of   | achievement standards |
| academic achievement  |     performance       | is limited to         |
| standards, does the   |     indicated in its  | kindergarten content. |
| assessment show a     |     academic          |                       |
| clear link to the     |     achievement       |                       |
| content standards for |     standards.        |                       |
| the grade in which    |                       |                       |
| the students tested   | -   For an alternate  |                       |
| are enrolled although |     assessment based  |                       |
| the grade-level       |     on modified       |                       |
| content may be        |     academic          |                       |
| reduced in depth,     |     achievement       |                       |
| breadth or complexity |     standards, the    |                       |
| or modified to        |     State provides a  |                       |
| reflect pre-requisite |     comparison with   |                       |
| academic skills?      |     the general       |                       |
|                       |     assessment to     |                       |
|                       |     illustrate the    |                       |
|                       |     similarity of     |                       |
|                       |     content covered   |                       |
|                       |     and changes made  |                       |
|                       |     to the cognitive  |                       |
|                       |     challenge of the  |                       |
|                       |     items.            |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Reports of        |                       |
|                       |     independent       |                       |
|                       |     alignment studies |                       |
|                       |     and evidence of a |                       |
|                       |     systematic        |                       |
|                       |     process for       |                       |
|                       |     addressing any    |                       |
|                       |     gaps or           |                       |
|                       |     weaknesses        |                       |
|                       |     identified in     |                       |
|                       |     these studies.    |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

**SECTION 5: ALIGNMENT**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **5.3**               | The State's           | Items on the State's  |
|                       | assessments reflect   | assessments address   |
| Are the assessments   | both the content and  | only content          |
| and the standards     | the process           | dimensions of the     |
| aligned in terms of   | dimensions of the     | State's standards and |
| both **content**      | academic content      | not the process or    |
| (knowledge) and       | standards. These      | skill dimensions in   |
| **process** (how to   | assessments are       | these standards.      |
| do it), as necessary, | designed in a way     |                       |
| meaning that the      | that will allow       |                       |
| assessments measure   | students to           |                       |
| what the standards    | demonstrate content   |                       |
| state students should | knowledge through     |                       |
| both know and be able | activities described  |                       |
| to do?                | in the standards.     |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| What changes in test  | **[Possible           |                       |
| structure or format,  | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
| if any, have been     |                       |                       |
| made for assessments  | -   Detailed          |                       |
| based on modified     |     assessment        |                       |
| academic achievement  |     specifications    |                       |
| standards?            |     and a description |                       |
|                       |     of the process    |                       |
|                       |     used to ensure    |                       |
|                       |     that its          |                       |
|                       |     assessment system |                       |
|                       |     reflects both the |                       |
|                       |     content and the   |                       |
|                       |     processes and     |                       |
|                       |     skills specified  |                       |
|                       |     in its academic   |                       |
|                       |     content           |                       |
|                       |     standards.        |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Reports of        |                       |
|                       |     independent       |                       |
|                       |     alignment studies |                       |
|                       |     and evidence of a |                       |
|                       |     systematic        |                       |
|                       |     process for       |                       |
|                       |     addressing any    |                       |
|                       |     gaps or           |                       |
|                       |     weaknesses        |                       |
|                       |     identified in     |                       |
|                       |     these studies.    |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here 

**SECTION 5: ALIGNMENT**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **5.4**               | The number of score   | One or more           |
|                       | points in content     | sub-domains in the    |
| Do the general        | sub-domains on the    | State's academic      |
| assessments and       | State's assessment is | content standards are |
| alternate assessments | consistent with the   | under- or             |
| based on modified     | representation of     | over-represented by   |
| achievement standards | these sub-domains in  | score points on its   |
| if any, reflect the   | the State's academic  | assessments.          |
| same **degree and     | content standards.    |                       |
| pattern of emphasis** |                       |                       |
| as are reflected in   | **[Possible           |                       |
| the State's academic  | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
| content standards?    |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Detailed          |                       |
|                       |     assessment        |                       |
|                       |     specifications    |                       |
|                       |     and a description |                       |
|                       |     of the process    |                       |
|                       |     used to ensure    |                       |
|                       |     that its          |                       |
|                       |     assessment system |                       |
|                       |     reflects the      |                       |
|                       |     degree and        |                       |
|                       |     patterns of       |                       |
|                       |     emphasis that are |                       |
|                       |     specified in its  |                       |
|                       |     academic content  |                       |
|                       |     standards.        |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Reports of        |                       |
|                       |     independent       |                       |
|                       |     alignment studies |                       |
|                       |     and evidence of a |                       |
|                       |     systematic        |                       |
|                       |     process for       |                       |
|                       |     addressing any    |                       |
|                       |     gaps or           |                       |
|                       |     weaknesses        |                       |
|                       |     identified in     |                       |
|                       |     these studies.    |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here 

**SECTION 5: ALIGNMENT**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **5.5**               | The State's           | The items do not      |
|                       | assessments have      | reflect the full      |
| Do the assessments    | sufficient items at   | range of achievement  |
| yield scores that     | each level to permit  | implied by the        |
| reflect the full      | students to           | State's academic      |
| range of achievement  | demonstrate the full  | achievement           |
| implied by the        | range of the State's  | standards.            |
| State's academic      | academic achievement  |                       |
| achievement           | standards.            |                       |
| standards?            |                       |                       |
|                       | **[Possible           |                       |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Detailed          |                       |
|                       |     assessment        |                       |
|                       |     specifications    |                       |
|                       |     and a description |                       |
|                       |     of the process    |                       |
|                       |     used to ensure    |                       |
|                       |     that its          |                       |
|                       |     assessment system |                       |
|                       |     reflects the full |                       |
|                       |     range of          |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     described in its  |                       |
|                       |     academic          |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards         |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Reports of        |                       |
|                       |     independent       |                       |
|                       |     alignment studies |                       |
|                       |     and evidence of a |                       |
|                       |     systematic        |                       |
|                       |     process for       |                       |
|                       |     addressing any    |                       |
|                       |     gaps or           |                       |
|                       |     weaknesses        |                       |
|                       |     identified in     |                       |
|                       |     these studies.    |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here 

##### SECTION 5: ALIGNMENT

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **5.6**               | The State has         | The State provides no |
|                       | designed reports and  | information about the |
| Assessment results    | communicated          | alignment of its      |
| must be expressed in  | assessment results in | standards and         |
| terms of the          | terms of its          | assessments for       |
| achievement           | achievement           | educators, parents,   |
| standards, not just   | standards.            | or the public.        |
| scale scores or       |                       | Results are expressed |
| percentiles.          | The State's           | only as percentiles   |
|                       | assessments yield     | or normal curve       |
|                       | scores that are       | equivalents.          |
|                       | clearly aligned with  |                       |
|                       | the State's academic  | The State indicates   |
|                       | content standards at  | or implies that there |
|                       | the domain and/or     | really is no easy way |
|                       | sub-domain levels.    | for teachers or the   |
|                       |                       | public to see whether |
|                       | **[Possible           | or how well the       |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    | assessments are       |
|                       |                       | aligned with the      |
|                       | -   Examples of       | standards.            |
|                       |     existing          |                       |
|                       |     documents, such   |                       |
|                       |     as web pages,     |                       |
|                       |     brochures,        |                       |
|                       |     guidelines, or    |                       |
|                       |     media reports,    |                       |
|                       |     designed to       |                       |
|                       |     communicate the   |                       |
|                       |     alignment between |                       |
|                       |     the standards and |                       |
|                       |     assessments to    |                       |
|                       |     all members of    |                       |
|                       |     the school        |                       |
|                       |     community.        |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Brochure for      |                       |
|                       |     parents explains  |                       |
|                       |     the meaning of    |                       |
|                       |     modified academic |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards in      |                       |
|                       |     terms of the      |                       |
|                       |     grade-level       |                       |
|                       |     skills            |                       |
|                       |     represented at    |                       |
|                       |     each achievement  |                       |
|                       |     level.            |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here 

**SECTION 5: ALIGNMENT**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **5.7**               | The State has used    | The State has not     |
|                       | the information       | implemented           |
| What ongoing          | gained through its    | strategies, such as   |
| procedures does the   | series of alignment   | adding items to the   |
| State use to maintain | studies to eliminate  | assessment, adding    |
| and improve alignment | gaps and weaknesses   | multiple measures,    |
| between the           | in alignment and is   | adding a writing      |
| assessments and       | implementing a plan   | test, or adopting the |
| standards over time?  | for continuous        | longer version of a   |
|                       | quality review to     | test, to address the  |
|                       | maintain alignment    | gaps and weaknesses   |
|                       | over time.            | identified in its     |
|                       |                       | alignment studies.    |
|                       | **[Possible           |                       |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Documentation of  |                       |
|                       |     independent       |                       |
|                       |     alignment         |                       |
|                       |     studies.          |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   If any            |                       |
|                       |     independent       |                       |
|                       |     alignment studies |                       |
|                       |     reveal gaps or    |                       |
|                       |     weaknesses in the |                       |
|                       |     alignment of the  |                       |
|                       |     State's           |                       |
|                       |     assessments and   |                       |
|                       |     standards,        |                       |
|                       |     existing written  |                       |
|                       |     documentation     |                       |
|                       |     describing the    |                       |
|                       |     State's           |                       |
|                       |     systematic        |                       |
|                       |     process for       |                       |
|                       |     addressing these  |                       |
|                       |     deficiencies.     |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here

+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| #  **S                 |                      |                      |
| ection 6:** **Inclusio |                      |                      |
| n of all students in t |                      |                      |
| he assessment system** |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in NCLB      | Sec. 1111(b)(1), (3) |                      |
| legislation:           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in final     | Sec. 200.1, 200.2,   |                      |
| regulations:           | 200.6                |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

**Overview**

Just as its title indicates, one of the fundamental principles of NCLB
is the inclusion of *[all]{.underline}* students in a State's system of
standards, assessments, and accountability. By excluding any student or
group of students from its assessment system, a State suggests that its
high expectations apply only to some, but not all, students.

For some students with disabilities and for students who are not yet
proficient in English, participation in the State's assessment system
may require special considerations.[^3] In all cases, however, decisions
must be made regarding [how]{.underline} an individual student will
participate in the assessment system, not [whether]{.underline} the
student will participate.

To ensure that all students can participate fully in its assessment
system, a State must provide the following assessment options:

-   The general grade-level assessment (available to limited English
    proficient students and students with disabilities).

-   The general grade-level assessment with approved accommodations that
    support valid results (available to limited English proficient
    students and students with disabilities).

-   One or more alternate assessments, which may include any of the
    following:

    -   An alternate assessment that is aligned with the State's
        academic content standards and based on grade-level academic
        achievement standards (available to limited English proficient
        students and students with disabilities).

    -   An alternate assessment that is aligned with the States
        grade-level academic content standards and based on modified
        academic achievement standards (limited to students with
        disabilities who meet the State-defined eligibility criteria).

    -   An alternate assessment that is based on alternate academic
        achievement standards (limited to students with the most
        significant cognitive disabilities).

Implementation of these options will require States to identify the
needs of its special student populations so that it can appropriately
address these needs. For example, for students who are visually- or
hearing-impaired, the State needs to make available appropriate
accommodations that will allow these students to demonstrate what they
know and can do, as well as develop a system for ensuring that these
accommodations are selected and used appropriately. For students with
limited English proficiency, the State must offer accommodations
including, to the extent practicable, native-language assessments
designed to ensure that these students have an opportunity to
demonstrate their academic knowledge and skills based on grade-level
standards.

In addition to addressing the needs of students with disabilities and
students with limited English proficiency, a State must take steps to
ensure the participation of all migrant, otherwise mobile, and homeless
students in its assessment system. This includes the accurate
identification of migrant students and policies requiring assessment of
all students, regardless of how long these students have been enrolled
in the State.

It is important to note that, as States continue to improve alignment
between standards and assessments, the use of universal design
principles holds great promise for designing and aligning standards,
curriculum, instructional materials and strategies. Assessments that are
designed to be valid and accessible for the widest possible range of
students may help all students, particularly students with cognitive
disabilities, and would reduce the need for accommodations.

**SECTION 6: INCLUSION**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **6.1**               | The State has         | The State does not    |
|                       | documented its total  | offer participation   |
| 1\. Do the State's    | and subgroup          | data for all          |
| participation data    | enrollments in each   | students.             |
| indicate that all     | of the required grade |                       |
| students in the       | levels or grade       | The State provides    |
| tested grade levels   | ranges and calculates | participation data    |
| or grade ranges are   | its participation     | for assessments that  |
| included in the       | rates as a proportion | do not meet NCLB      |
| assessment system     | of students assessed  | requirements.         |
| (e.g., students with  | to students enrolled  |                       |
| disabilities,         | during the test       |                       |
| students with limited | administration        |                       |
| English proficiency,  | period.               |                       |
| economically          |                       |                       |
| disadvantaged         | **[Possible           |                       |
| students,             | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
| race/ethnicity,       |                       |                       |
| migrant students,     | -   Reports that      |                       |
| homeless students,    |     specify the       |                       |
| etc.)?                |     participation     |                       |
|                       |     rates and the     |                       |
| 2\. Does the State    |     method of         |                       |
| report separately the |     calculations for  |                       |
| number and percent of |     all students and  |                       |
| students with         |     for each subgroup |                       |
| disabilities assessed |     in the assessment |                       |
| on the regular        |     system.           |                       |
| assessment without    |                       |                       |
| accommodations, on    | -   Report that shows |                       |
| the regular           |     that 100% of      |                       |
| assessment with       |     students with     |                       |
| accommodations, on an |     disabilities are  |                       |
|                       |     taking the        |                       |
| alternate assessment  |     general           |                       |
| against grade-level   |     assessment or an  |                       |
| standards, and, if    |     alternate         |                       |
| applicable, on an     |     assessment.       |                       |
| alternate assessment  |                       |                       |
| against alternate     | -   Curriculum guides |                       |
| achievement standards |     that inform       |                       |
| and/or on an          |     educators about   |                       |
| alternate assessment  |     the inclusion of  |                       |
| against modified      |     students with     |                       |
| academic achievement  |     disabilities in   |                       |
| standards?            |     general           |                       |
|                       |     assessments, with |                       |
|                       |     or without        |                       |
|                       |     accommodations,   |                       |
|                       |     or alternate      |                       |
|                       |     assessments based |                       |
|                       |     on grade-level    |                       |
|                       |     standards, or, if |                       |
|                       |     the State allows  |                       |
|                       |     it, alternate     |                       |
|                       |     assessments based |                       |
|                       |     on alternate or   |                       |
|                       |     modified          |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards.        |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

**SECTION 6: INCLUSION**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **6.2**               | The State provides    | The State does not    |
|                       | clear, written        | provide clear,        |
| > 1\. What guidelines | guidelines to all     | written guidelines to |
| > does the State have | LEAs concerning how   | all LEAs on how to    |
| > in place for        | to appropriately      | maximize inclusion of |
| > including all       | include               | students with         |
| > students with       | *[all]{.underline}*   | disabilities in its   |
| > disabilities in the | students with         | assessment system.    |
| > assessment system?  | disabilities in the   |                       |
|                       | assessment system.    | The State allows some |
| (a) Has the State     | This statement        | students with         |
|     developed,        | specifies that        | disabilities to be    |
|     disseminated      | decisions about how   | exempted from         |
|     information on,   | to include students   | participating in the  |
|     and promoted use  | with disabilities     | assessment system.    |
|     of appropriate    | (i.e., whether a      |                       |
|     accommodations to | student takes the     |                       |
|     increase the      | general assessment    |                       |
|     number of         | without               |                       |
|     students with     | accommodations, the   |                       |
|     disabilities who  | general assessment    |                       |
|     are tested        | with accommodations,  |                       |
|     against academic  | an alternate          |                       |
|     achievement       | assessment based on   |                       |
|     standards for the | grade-level           |                       |
|     grade in which    | achievement           |                       |
|     they are          | standards, an         |                       |
|     enrolled?         | alternate assessment  |                       |
|                       | based on modified     |                       |
| (b) Has the State     | achievement           |                       |
|     ensured that      | standards, or an      |                       |
|     general and       | alternate assessment  |                       |
|     special education | based on alternate    |                       |
|     teachers and      | achievement           |                       |
|     other appropriate | standards) must be    |                       |
|     staff know how to | made on an individual |                       |
|     administer        | basis. Further,       |                       |
|     assessments,      | decisions about how a |                       |
|     including making  | student will          |                       |
|     use of            | participate must be   |                       |
|     accommodations,   | consistent with the   |                       |
|     for students with | routine instructional |                       |
|     disabilities and  | approaches as         |                       |
|     students covered  | identified by each    |                       |
|     under Section     | student's IEP or 504  |                       |
|     504?              | plan.                 |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| 2\. If the State has  | **[Possible           |                       |
| approved/adopted      | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
| modified or alternate |                       |                       |
| academic achievement  | -   The State's       |                       |
| standards for certain |     guidelines, as    |                       |
| students with         |     communicated to   |                       |
| disabilities, what    |     LEAs, provide for |                       |
| guidelines does the   |     the inclusion of  |                       |
| State have in place   |     all students with |                       |
| for placing those     |     disabilities in   |                       |
| students in the       |     the assessment    |                       |
| appropriate           |     system,           |                       |
| assessment?           |     consistent with   |                       |
|                       |     the requirements  |                       |
| (a) Has the State     |     listed in this    |                       |
|     developed clear   |     element.          |                       |
|     guidelines for    |                       |                       |
|     IEP Teams to      | ```{=html}            |                       |
|     apply in          | <!-- -->              |                       |
|     determining which | ```                   |                       |
|     students with     | -   State guidelines  |                       |
|     disabilities are  |     that include all  |                       |
|     eligible to be    |     required          |                       |
|     assessed based on |     components for    |                       |
|     modified or       |     implementation of |                       |
|     alternate         |     modified or       |                       |
|     academic          |     alternate         |                       |
|     achievement       |     achievement       |                       |
|     standards?        |     standards have    |                       |
|                       |     been disseminated |                       |
| (b) Has the State     |     to LEAs.          |                       |
|     informed IEP      |                       |                       |
|     Teams that        |                       |                       |
|     students eligible |                       |                       |
|     to be assessed    |                       |                       |
|     based on          |                       |                       |
|     alternate or      |                       |                       |
|     modified academic |                       |                       |
|     achievement       |                       |                       |
|     standards may be  |                       |                       |
|     from any of the   |                       |                       |
|     disability        |                       |                       |
|     categories listed |                       |                       |
|     in the IDEA?      |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| (c) Has the State     |                       |                       |
|     provided IEP      |                       |                       |
|     Teams with a      |                       |                       |
|     clear explanation |                       |                       |
|     of the            |                       |                       |
|     differences       |                       |                       |
|     between           |                       |                       |
|     assessments based |                       |                       |
|     on grade-level    |                       |                       |
|     academic          |                       |                       |
|     achievement       |                       |                       |
|     standards and     |                       |                       |
|     those based on    |                       |                       |
|     modified or       |                       |                       |
|     alternate         |                       |                       |
|     academic          |                       |                       |
|     achievement       |                       |                       |
|     standards,        |                       |                       |
|     including any     |                       |                       |
|     effects of State  |                       |                       |
|     and local         |                       |                       |
|     policies on the   |                       |                       |
|     student's         |                       |                       |
|     education         |                       |                       |
|     resulting from    |                       |                       |
|     taking an         |                       |                       |
|     alternate based   |                       |                       |
|     on alternate or   |                       |                       |
|     modified          |                       |                       |
|     standards?        |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| (d) Has the State     |                       |                       |
|     ensured that      |                       |                       |
|     parents are       |                       |                       |
|     informed that     |                       |                       |
|     their child's     |                       |                       |
|     achievement will  |                       |                       |
|     be based on       |                       |                       |
|     modified or       |                       |                       |
|     alternate         |                       |                       |
|     academic          |                       |                       |
|     achievement       |                       |                       |
|     standards and of  |                       |                       |
|     any possible      |                       |                       |
|     consequences      |                       |                       |
|     resulting from    |                       |                       |
|     LEA or State      |                       |                       |
|     policy (e.g.,     |                       |                       |
|     ineligibility for |                       |                       |
|     a regular high    |                       |                       |
|     school diploma)?  |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| 3\. If the State has  |                       |                       |
| adopted modified      |                       |                       |
| academic achievement  |                       |                       |
| standards, do the     |                       |                       |
| guidelines include    |                       |                       |
| all required          |                       |                       |
| components?           |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| (a) Criteriafor IEP   |                       |                       |
|     Teams to use to   |                       |                       |
|     determine which   |                       |                       |
|     students with     |                       |                       |
|     disabilities are  |                       |                       |
|     eligible to be    |                       |                       |
|     assessed based on |                       |                       |
|     modified academic |                       |                       |
|     achievement       |                       |                       |
|     standards that    |                       |                       |
|     include, at a     |                       |                       |
|     minimum, each of  |                       |                       |
|     the following?    |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| -   The student's     |                       |                       |
|     disability has    |                       |                       |
|     precluded the     |                       |                       |
|     student from      |                       |                       |
|     achieving         |                       |                       |
|     grade-level       |                       |                       |
|     proficiency as    |                       |                       |
|     demonstrated by   |                       |                       |
|     objective         |                       |                       |
|     evidence of the   |                       |                       |
|     student's         |                       |                       |
|     academic          |                       |                       |
|     performance; and  |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| -   The student's     |                       |                       |
|     progress to date  |                       |                       |
|     in response to    |                       |                       |
|     appropriate       |                       |                       |
|     instruction,      |                       |                       |
|     including special |                       |                       |
|     education and     |                       |                       |
|     related services  |                       |                       |
|     designed to       |                       |                       |
|     address the       |                       |                       |
|     student's         |                       |                       |
|     individual needs, |                       |                       |
|     is such that,     |                       |                       |
|     even if           |                       |                       |
|     significant       |                       |                       |
|     growth occurs,    |                       |                       |
|     the IEP Team is   |                       |                       |
|     reasonably        |                       |                       |
|     certain that the  |                       |                       |
|     student will not  |                       |                       |
|     achieve           |                       |                       |
|     grade-level       |                       |                       |
|     proficiency       |                       |                       |
|     within the year   |                       |                       |
|     covered by the    |                       |                       |
|     student's IEP;    |                       |                       |
|     and               |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| -   The student's IEP |                       |                       |
|     goals for         |                       |                       |
|     subjects assessed |                       |                       |
|     by the statewide  |                       |                       |
|     system are based  |                       |                       |
|     on the academic   |                       |                       |
|     content standards |                       |                       |
|     for the grade in  |                       |                       |
|     which the student |                       |                       |
|     is enrolled.      |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| (b) Has the State     |                       |                       |
|     informed IEP      |                       |                       |
|     Teams that a      |                       |                       |
|     student may be    |                       |                       |
|     assessed based on |                       |                       |
|     modified academic |                       |                       |
|     achievement       |                       |                       |
|     standards in one  |                       |                       |
|     or more subjects? |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| (c) Has the State     |                       |                       |
|     established and   |                       |                       |
|     monitored         |                       |                       |
|     implementation of |                       |                       |
|     clear and         |                       |                       |
|     appropriate       |                       |                       |
|     guidelines for    |                       |                       |
|     developing IEPs   |                       |                       |
|     that include      |                       |                       |
|     goals based on    |                       |                       |
|     content standards |                       |                       |
|     for the grade in  |                       |                       |
|     which a student   |                       |                       |
|     is enrolled?      |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| (d) Has the State     |                       |                       |
|     ensured that      |                       |                       |
|     students who are  |                       |                       |
|     assessed based on |                       |                       |
|     modified academic |                       |                       |
|     achievement       |                       |                       |
|     standards have    |                       |                       |
|     access to the     |                       |                       |
|     curriculum,       |                       |                       |
|     including         |                       |                       |
|     instruction, for  |                       |                       |
|     the grade in      |                       |                       |
|     which the         |                       |                       |
|     students are      |                       |                       |
|     enrolled?         |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| (e) Has the State     |                       |                       |
|     ensured that      |                       |                       |
|     students who take |                       |                       |
|     an alternate      |                       |                       |
|     assessment based  |                       |                       |
|     on modified       |                       |                       |
|     academic          |                       |                       |
|     achievement       |                       |                       |
|     standards are not |                       |                       |
|     precluded from    |                       |                       |
|     attempting State  |                       |                       |
|     diploma           |                       |                       |
|     requirements?     |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| (f) Has the State     |                       |                       |
|     ensured annual    |                       |                       |
|     IEP Team review   |                       |                       |
|     of assessment     |                       |                       |
|     decisions?        |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| 4\. Has the State     |                       |                       |
| documented that       |                       |                       |
| students with the     |                       |                       |
| most significant      |                       |                       |
| cognitive             |                       |                       |
| disabilities are, to  |                       |                       |
| the extent possible,  |                       |                       |
| included in the       |                       |                       |
| general curriculum?   |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here

**SECTION 6: INCLUSION**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **6.3**               | The State provides    | The State does not    |
|                       | clear, written        | provide clear,        |
| What guidelines does  | guidelines to all     | written guidelines to |
| the State have in     | LEAs concerning how   | all LEAs on how       |
| place for including   | to include            | *[all]{.underline}*   |
| all students with     | *[all]{.underline}*   | limited English       |
| limited English       | limited English       | proficient students   |
| proficiency in the    | proficient students   | are to be included in |
| tested grades in the  | in the assessment     | its assessment        |
| assessment system?    | system. These         | system.               |
|                       | guidelines specify    |                       |
| (a) Has the State     | that decisions about  | The State allows some |
|     made available    | how to include        | limited English       |
|     assessments, to   | limited English       | proficient students   |
|     the extent        | proficient students   | who have attended     |
|     practicable, in   | (i.e., whether a      | schools in the US for |
|     the language and  | student takes the     | more than 12 months   |
|     form most likely  | general assessment    | to be exempted from   |
|     to yield accurate | without               | participating in the  |
|     and reliable      | accommodations, or    | assessment system.    |
|     information on    | the general           |                       |
|     what these        | assessment with       | The State allows      |
|     students know and | accommodations) must  | limited English       |
|     can do?           | be made on an         | proficient students   |
|                       | individual basis.     | who have not been     |
| (b) Does the State    |                       | enrolled in its       |
|     require the       | The State provides an | school system for at  |
|     participation of  | alternate assessment  | least one year to be  |
|     every limited     | in English aligned    | categorically         |
|     English           | with grade-level      | exempted from         |
|     proficient        | standards for limited | participation in the  |
|     student in the    | English proficient    | assessment system.    |
|     assessment        | students who have not |                       |
|     system, unless a  | yet acquired a level  | The State does not    |
|     student has       | of proficiency in     | require decisions     |
|     attended schools  | English that would    | about how limited     |
|     in the US for     | allow them to         | English proficient    |
|     less than 12      | participate in the    | students will         |
|     months, in which  | general assessment,   | participate in the    |
|     case the student  | even with             | assessment system to  |
|     may be exempt     | accommodations.       | be made on an         |
|     from one          |                       | individual basis.     |
|     administration of | **[Possible           |                       |
|     the State's       | Evidence]{.mark}**    | The State does not    |
|     reading/language  |                       | offer assessments for |
|     arts assessment?  | -   The State's       | limited English       |
|                       |     guidelines, as    | proficient students   |
| (c) Has the State     |     communicated to   | who have not yet      |
|     adopted policies  |     LEAs, call for    | acquired a level of   |
|     requiring limited |     the inclusion of  | proficiency in        |
|     English           |     all limited       | English that would    |
|     proficient        |     English           | allow them to         |
|     students to be    |     proficient        | participate in the    |
|     assessed in       |     students in the   | general assessments,  |
|     reading/language  |     State's           | even with             |
|     arts in English   |     assessment        | accommodation.        |
|     if they have been |     system.           |                       |
|     enrolled in US    |                       |                       |
|     schools for three | -   Existing written  |                       |
|     consecutive years |     documentation     |                       |
|     or more?          |     describing the    |                       |
|                       |     form and content  |                       |
|                       |     of any alternate  |                       |
|                       |     assessments for   |                       |
|                       |     limited English   |                       |
|                       |     proficient        |                       |
|                       |     students, the     |                       |
|                       |     process by which  |                       |
|                       |     these assessments |                       |
|                       |     were developed,   |                       |
|                       |     and the process   |                       |
|                       |     by which the      |                       |
|                       |     State has         |                       |
|                       |     ascertained the   |                       |
|                       |     alignment of      |                       |
|                       |     these assessments |                       |
|                       |     with its academic |                       |
|                       |     content standards |                       |
|                       |     and academic      |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards and     |                       |
|                       |     comparability of  |                       |
|                       |     results with the  |                       |
|                       |     general test.     |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### 

##### List State Evidence Here

**SECTION 6: INCLUSION**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **6.4**               | The State provides    | The State allows some |
|                       | clear, written        | migrant or other      |
| What policies and     | guidelines to all     | mobile students to be |
| practices does the    | LEAs concerning how   | exempted from         |
| State have in place   | to identify and       | participating in its  |
| to ensure the         | include               | assessment system.    |
| identification and    | *[all]{.underline}*   |                       |
| inclusion of migrant  | migrant and other     | The State does not    |
| and other mobile      | mobile students in    | have a valid and      |
| students in the       | its assessment        | reliable method for   |
| tested grades in the  | system.               | identifying migrant   |
| assessment system?    |                       | students.             |
|                       | **[Possible           |                       |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   The State's       |                       |
|                       |     guidelines, as    |                       |
|                       |     communicated to   |                       |
|                       |     LEAs, for the     |                       |
|                       |     inclusion of all  |                       |
|                       |     migrant and other |                       |
|                       |     mobile students   |                       |
|                       |     in its assessment |                       |
|                       |     system.           |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here

+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| # **Section 7:         |                      |                      |
|  An effective system o |                      |                      |
| f assessment reports** |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in NCLB      | Sec. 1111(b)(3)      |                      |
| legislation:           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Reference in final     | Sec. 200.8           |                      |
| regulations:           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

**Overview**

A State's assessment reports represent the culmination of all other
aspects of its standards and assessment system. In these reports, a
parent, educator, or other stakeholder should find answers to questions
about how well a student or group of students is achieving, as well as
important information on how to improve achievement in the future.

NCLB requires States to produce reports at the individual student,
school, LEA, and State levels. At each of these levels, reports must
include scores that are aligned with the State's academic content
standards. Also, total test scores must be reported in relation to the
performance levels defined in the State's academic achievement standards

Each of a State's reports should be produced and disseminated as soon as
possible after each assessment administration. The individual student
reports, at least, also need to be accompanied by interpretive guidance
that will help parents and educators understand and be able to use the
information the reports provide. States must ensure that this guidance
is accessible to all parents.

States must carefully protect the data files containing student-level
information that are produced following each assessment administration.
When the State allows access to this information, it must do so in a way
that maintains the confidentiality of each student's records.

##  

##### SECTION 7: ASSESSMENT REPORTS

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **7.1**               | The State's reporting | The State's reporting |
|                       | system includes       | system does not       |
| Does the State's      | supporting            | include training for  |
| reporting system      | information to        | those who will        |
| facilitate            | facilitate accurate   | receive and use its   |
| appropriate,          | interpretation of     | reports on the        |
| credible, and         | data for those who    | appropriate           |
| defensible            | will receive and use  | interpretation and    |
| interpretation and    | its reports, such as  | use of its assessment |
| use of its assessment | information about the | results.              |
| data?                 | content and structure |                       |
|                       | of its assessments,   | The State does not    |
|                       | and how the           | include interpretive  |
|                       | assessments are       | guidance within or    |
|                       | related to its        | attached to each of   |
|                       | standards. The State  | its assessment        |
|                       | uses a variety of     | reports or this       |
|                       | ways to publicize     | guidance is not easy  |
|                       | this information,     | for stakeholders to   |
|                       | such as manuals,      | access, understand    |
|                       | bulletins, reports of | and use.              |
|                       | results, and          |                       |
|                       | websites.             |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | **Possible Evidence** |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Examples of the   |                       |
|                       |     State's score     |                       |
|                       |     reports at the    |                       |
|                       |     individual        |                       |
|                       |     student, school,  |                       |
|                       |     LEA, and State    |                       |
|                       |     levels.           |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Examples of the   |                       |
|                       |     interpretive      |                       |
|                       |     guides that       |                       |
|                       |     accompany         |                       |
|                       |     reports.          |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Descriptions of   |                       |
|                       |     the State's       |                       |
|                       |     system for        |                       |
|                       |     training          |                       |
|                       |     educators on the  |                       |
|                       |     appropriate       |                       |
|                       |     interpretation    |                       |
|                       |     and use of        |                       |
|                       |     assessment        |                       |
|                       |     results. State    |                       |
|                       |     training          |                       |
|                       |     materials         |                       |
|                       |     include: the      |                       |
|                       |     purpose and       |                       |
|                       |     content of the    |                       |
|                       |     assessments, the  |                       |
|                       |     reliability of    |                       |
|                       |     the assessment    |                       |
|                       |     scores, and       |                       |
|                       |     sufficient        |                       |
|                       |     information to    |                       |
|                       |     allow use of the  |                       |
|                       |     assessment        |                       |
|                       |     results in making |                       |
|                       |     sound educational |                       |
|                       |     decisions or for  |                       |
|                       |     conducting        |                       |
|                       |     scientifically    |                       |
|                       |     based research to |                       |
|                       |     improve           |                       |
|                       |     educational       |                       |
|                       |     outcomes.         |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here 

**SECTION 7: ASSESSMENT REPORTS**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **7.2**               | The State reports     | The State does not    |
|                       | participation and     | disaggregate and      |
| Does the State report | performance results   | report scores for one |
| participation and     | for all students and  | or more required      |
| assessment results    | for each required     | subgroups even when   |
| for all students and  | subgroup at the       | these subgroups are   |
| for each of the       | school, LEA, and      | relatively large.     |
| required subgroups in | State levels. The     |                       |
| its reports at the    | State has established | The State reports all |
| school, LEA, and      | and justified the     | scores, regardless of |
| State levels? In      | minimum number and    | the size of the       |
| these assessment      | minimum and maximum   | subgroup.             |
| reports, how has the  | proportions of        |                       |
| State ensured that    | students necessary to |                       |
| assessment results    | allow reporting of    |                       |
| are not reported for  | scores for any group  |                       |
| any group or subgroup | or subgroup to ensure |                       |
| when these results    | that personally       |                       |
| would reveal          | identifiable          |                       |
| personally            | information about any |                       |
| identifiable          | individual student is |                       |
| information about an  | not reported          |                       |
| individual student?   | publicly.             |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | **[Possible           |                       |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   For all           |                       |
|                       |     assessments,      |                       |
|                       |     including those   |                       |
|                       |     based on          |                       |
|                       |     alternate and     |                       |
|                       |     modified academic |                       |
|                       |     achievement       |                       |
|                       |     standards, the    |                       |
|                       |     State provides    |                       |
|                       |     examples of       |                       |
|                       |     assessment score  |                       |
|                       |     reports that      |                       |
|                       |     include all       |                       |
|                       |     required          |                       |
|                       |     components at the |                       |
|                       |     school, LEA, and  |                       |
|                       |     State levels.     |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Documentation     |                       |
|                       |     describing the    |                       |
|                       |     State's rules for |                       |
|                       |     determining       |                       |
|                       |     whether data are  |                       |
|                       |     reported for a    |                       |
|                       |     group or subgroup |                       |
|                       |     as well as a      |                       |
|                       |     description of    |                       |
|                       |     how these rules   |                       |
|                       |     are implemented   |                       |
|                       |     and monitored.    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Documentation     |                       |
|                       |     that electronic   |                       |
|                       |     student files     |                       |
|                       |     from the SEA are  |                       |
|                       |     available to      |                       |
|                       |     LEAs.             |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

**SECTION 7: ASSESSMENT REPORTS**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **7.3**               | For each student who  | The State does not    |
|                       | participates in the   | provide individual    |
| How has the State     | assessment system,    | student reports for   |
| provided for the      | including students    | each participating    |
| production of         | assessed on the basis | student following     |
| individual            | of alternate or       | each administration   |
| interpretive,         | modified academic     | of its assessments.   |
| descriptive, and      | achievement           |                       |
| diagnostic reports    | standards, the State  | Scores on the State's |
| following each        | disseminates two or   | individual student    |
| administration of its | more copies of an     | reports are reported  |
| assessments?          | individual student    | only at the total     |
|                       | report to the         | test level or         |
| (a) Do these          | student's school as   | otherwise are not     |
|     individual        | soon as possible      | aligned with the      |
|     student reports   | after each assessment | domains and           |
|     provide valid and | administration. One   | subdomains defined in |
|     reliable          | of these copies is    | the State's academic  |
|     information       | sent to the student's | content standards.    |
|     regarding         | home by the school    |                       |
|     achievement on    | and at least one copy | Scores on the State's |
|     the assessments   | is kept in the        | individual student    |
|     in relation to    | student's files. The  | reports reflect only  |
|     the State's       | scores in this report | overall means or      |
|     academic content  | reflect performance   | percentile ranks or   |
|     and achievement   | in domains and        | are otherwise not     |
|     standards?        | subdomains defined in | directly associated   |
|                       | the State's academic  | with the State's      |
| (b) Do these          | content standards and | academic achievement  |
|     individual        | indicate which of the | standards.            |
|     student reports   | achievement levels    |                       |
|     provide           | the student's scores  | The State does not    |
|     information for   | correspond to. The    | include information   |
|     parents,          | State includes        | about the reliability |
|     teachers, and     | interpretive guidance | of the scores         |
|     principals to     | with each of the      | reported in the       |
|     help them         | individual student    | individual student    |
|     understand and    | reports and supports  | reports in the        |
|     address a         | local efforts to      | guidance that         |
|     student's         | translate this        | accompanies these     |
|     specific academic | guidance as needed to | reports.              |
|     needs? Is this    | make it accessible to |                       |
|     information       | parents who do not    | The State does not    |
|     displayed in a    | read English. The     | provide adequate      |
|     format and        | guidance includes     | interpretive guidance |
|     language that is  | information about the | to accompany its      |
|     understandable to | reliability of the    | individual score      |
|     parents,          | scores that are       | reports or this       |
|     teachers, and     | reported.             | guidance is overly    |
|     principals and    |                       | complex or not        |
|     are the reports   | **[Possible           | accessible to parents |
|     accompanied by    | Evidence]{.mark}**    | who do not read       |
|     interpretive      |                       | English.              |
|     guidance for      | -    Examples of the  |                       |
|     these audiences?  |     State's           | The report formats    |
|                       |     individual        | for assessments based |
| (c) How has the State |     student reports   | on modified or        |
|     ensured that      |     for each grade    | alternate achievement |
|     these individual  |     and content area  | standards do not      |
|     student reports   |     combination.      | clearly explain the   |
|     will be delivered |                       | meaning of the        |
|     to parents,       | -   Examples of the   | results.              |
|     teachers, and     |     interpretive      |                       |
|     principals as     |     guidance that is  | The State's           |
|     soon as possible  |     designed to       | individual student    |
|     after the         |     accompany student | reports are not       |
|     assessment is     |     reports,          | delivered to parents, |
|     administered?     |     including reports | teachers, or          |
|                       |     based on          | principals as soon as |
|                       |     alternate or      | possible following    |
|                       |     modified academic | each administration   |
|                       |     achievement       | of its assessments.   |
|                       |     standards, that   |                       |
|                       |     contain           | Student results are   |
|                       |     information about | available only        |
|                       |     how this guidance | through electronic    |
|                       |     is made           | media and therefore   |
|                       |     accessible to all | not readily available |
|                       |     parents.          | to all parents.       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Documentation of  |                       |
|                       |     the scoring and   |                       |
|                       |     reporting         |                       |
|                       |     timeline for each |                       |
|                       |     assessment.       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**List State Evidence Here**

**SECTION 7: ASSESSMENT REPORTS**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **7.4**               | The State has a clear | The State posts       |
|                       | policy and detailed   | student-level data on |
| How has the State     | procedures for        | an unsecured website. |
| ensured that          | allowing access to    |                       |
| student-level         | its student-level     | The State allows      |
| assessment data are   | assessment data. The  | liberal access to its |
| maintained securely   | State stores these    | student-level         |
| to protect student    | data in a manner that | assessment data or    |
| confidentiality?      | is secure both        | retains students'     |
|                       | physically and        | names or other        |
|                       | electronically.       | variables that could  |
|                       |                       | be used to identify a |
|                       | **[Possible           | particular student in |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    | the files that it     |
|                       |                       | allows to be used for |
|                       | -   Documentation of  | research or           |
|                       |     the State's       | evaluation purposes.  |
|                       |     policies and      |                       |
|                       |     procedures for    |                       |
|                       |     allowing access   |                       |
|                       |     to its            |                       |
|                       |     student-level     |                       |
|                       |     data files.       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here

**Section 7: Assessment Reports**

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Critical Element**  | **Examples of         | **Examples of         |
|                       | Acceptable Evidence** | Incomplete Evidence** |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **7.5**               | In its reports at the | The State provides    |
|                       | student, classroom,   | only total test       |
| How has the State     | school, and LEA       | scores.               |
| provided for the      | levels, the State     |                       |
| production of         | includes results for  | The State provides    |
| itemized score        | each of its academic  | subdomain scores on   |
| analyses so that      | content standards and | LEA reports but not   |
| parents, teachers,    | also each of the      | on school reports.    |
| and principals can    | subdomains/ strands   |                       |
| interpret and address | within these          |                       |
| the specific academic | standards, to the     |                       |
| needs of students?    | extent that these     |                       |
|                       | subscores are based   |                       |
|                       | on enough items or    |                       |
|                       | score points to be    |                       |
|                       | meaningful.           |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | **[Possible           |                       |
|                       | Evidence]{.mark}**    |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
|                       | -   Examples of       |                       |
|                       |     assessment score  |                       |
|                       |     reports at the    |                       |
|                       |     individual        |                       |
|                       |     student, school,  |                       |
|                       |     LEA, and State    |                       |
|                       |     levels; examples  |                       |
|                       |     of                |                       |
|                       |     classroom-level   |                       |
|                       |     reports if the    |                       |
|                       |     State produces    |                       |
|                       |     them.             |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

##### List State Evidence Here

[^1]: State law exception as stated in Section 200.4 of the July 5, 2002
    Regulations and Section 1111(b)(5) of NCLB.

[^2]: Science assessments are not due until the 2007-08 school year.

[^3]: For LEP students who have been in schools in the U.S. for less
    than 12 months, regulations permit the State to substitute
    participation in the State's English proficiency test for
    participation in the grade-level reading/language arts test for one
    year only. (72 FR 54188, (Sept. 13, 2006)).