NCLB Alternate Assessment Policies and Postschool Employment Outcomes for Individuals With Significant Cognitive Disabilities.
Alternate tests may nudge employment up a notch, but solid job experiences do the heavy lifting.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Shepley et al. (2024) looked at kids who took the NCLB alternate test instead of the regular state test.
They asked: did these kids get jobs more often after high school?
The study used state records to compare employment for students with significant cognitive disabilities.
What they found
Kids who took the alternate test had slightly better job rates, but the numbers were fuzzy.
The bump was too small to be sure it was the policy that helped.
In short, the policy shows promise, yet we cannot bank on it alone.
How this fits with other research
Schall et al. (2020) ran a tight trial with Project SEARCH plus ASD supports.
They saw triple the competitive jobs for young adults with autism.
Their strong results say: real work experiences beat paperwork tweaks.
Grossi et al. (2020) surveyed wages statewide and found young adults with IDD earn more than older peers.
Together these studies point to the same window: the early twenties matter most.
Collin’s weak policy signal fits here—assessment tweaks may help, but only if paired with hands-on work programs.
Why it matters
You can’t hang a transition plan on a test label alone.
Use alternate assessments to open doors, then add internships, job coaching, and employer ties right away.
Push for both: policy access and real work before age 22.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Schedule at least two employer visits this month for each transition-age student, even if their assessment path is set.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The participation of students with significant cognitive disabilities in accountability assessments aligned with general education standards is a heavily debated topic in the field of special education. Attempts to understand the impact of these assessments have generally been limited to correlational methods. We employed a difference-in-differences approach using select waves of the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 dataset to estimate the impact of alternate assessment policies from the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 on the employment outcomes of individuals with significant cognitive disabilities. Our hypothesis was that these policies would produce a detrimental effect. Analyses suggested that alternate assessment policies resulted in descriptively positive employment outcomes, yet estimates were highly imprecise, which yields a complicated picture requiring more research.
Intellectual and developmental disabilities, 2024 · doi:10.1352/1934-9556-62.1.1