Washington Code 28A.655.095 – Students with cognitive disabilities — Alternative assessment system
Current as of: 2023 | Check for updates
|
Other versions
The office of the superintendent of public instruction shall continue to actively collaborate with teachers and directors of special education programs in the development and implementation of a process to transition from the current portfolio system of assessment of students with significant cognitive challenges to a performance task-based alternative assessment system based on state standards. Before such time as a new assessment becomes available, and within existing resources, the office of the superintendent of public instruction shall coordinate efforts to: Align academic goals in a student’s individualized education program with the current statewide assessment system by identifying detailed statewide alternate achievement benchmarks for use by teachers in the current portfolio system; develop a transparent and reliable scoring process; efficiently use technology; and develop a sensible approval process to shorten the time involved in developing and collecting current assessment data for students with significant cognitive disabilities.
[ 2011 c 75 § 2.]
NOTES:
Findings—2011 c 75: “The legislature finds that:
(1) One of the difficult issues facing states and school districts throughout the country is the meaningful inclusion of students with significant cognitive challenges in their current state assessment and accountability systems.
(2) Assessment and accountability systems provide valuable information to parents and educators, and all students deserve a system that encourages them to meaningfully access and make progress in the general education curriculum. Nevertheless, assessing the academic knowledge and skills of students with unique and significant cognitive disabilities can be challenging concerning the student’s access to and progress in the general education curriculum. Furthermore, the development of meaningful assessment portfolios in the current system can be extremely time-consuming for both teachers and students, provide limited information for parents, and include questionable test and measurement practices.” [ 2011 c 75 § 1.]
