Students with disabilities have been included in state accountability systems for more than a decade; however, only in the past few years have alternate assessments of alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) become stable enough to allow examination of these students' achievement growth. Using data from Oregon's AA-AAS in Reading during the period , we examined the achievement growth for a sample of 1,061 elementary students using two growth models: a transition matrix and a multilevel linear growth model. The authors found with the transition matrix model that a majority of students remained at the same performance level from one year to the next, whereas with the multilevel linear growth model, students' scores revealed small, but statistically meaningful, growth year to year. The article concludes by noting advantages and disadvantages of these models to characterize growth and their implications for policy and practice.

Students with significant cognitive disabilities are eligible to participate in two statewide testing options for accountability: alternate assessments or general assessments with appropriate accommodations. Participation guidelines are generally quite vague, leading to students "switching" test participation between years. In this study, we tracked test participation for two cohorts of students with a documented disability over 3 years. Results suggested approximately 25% of students who initially took the alternate assessment switched test type at least once, although patterns of switching were not consistent across disabilities. Students on the performance "bubble" were more likely to switch test participation. Test switching poses challenges for monitoring students' academic growth within accountability frameworks.