Revisiting the Meaning of “Reduced Depth, Breadth, and Complexity” for AA-AAAS - NCEO Report 441

Oct 15, 2026

Revisiting the Meaning of “Reduced Depth, Breadth, and Complexity” for AA-AAAS (NCEO Report 441) examines how terms commonly used in alternate assessments—depth, breadth, and complexity—relate to alternate academic achievement standards. The report reviews relevant history and legislation, highlights gaps in how these terms are defined, and provides targeted questions for states revising or developing AA-AAAS. It also supports states preparing evidence for U.S. Department of Education peer review by strengthening validity arguments and clarifying technical adequacy.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages19

Reading Time48 min

AccessFree to download

Executive Summary

Overview

Federal Legislation

Questions to Ask about Reduced Depth, Breadth, and Complexity

Depth

Breadth

Complexity

Conclusions

References

Appendix A: Federal Information Related to Depth, Breadth, and Complexity

Appendix B: Questions and Answers in the Federal Non-Regulatory Guidance on Alternate Achievement Standards

Appendix C: Peer Review Guidance

Revisiting the Meaning of “Reduced Depth, Breadth, and Complexity” for AA-AAAS NCEO Report 441 NCEO Report 441 Revisiting the Meaning of “Reduced Depth, Breadth, and Complexity” for AA-AAAS Martha L. Thurlow, Andrew R. Hinkle, Sheryl S. Lazarus, and Kristin K. Liu January 2024 All rights reserved. Any or all portions ofthis document may be reproduced and distributed without prior permission, provided the source is cited as: Thurlow, M. L., Hinkle, A. R., Lazarus, S. S., & Liu, K. K. (2024). Revisiting the meaning of “reduced depth, breadth, and complexity”for AA-AAAS (NCEO Report 441) . National Center on Educational Outcomes. The Center is supported through a Cooperative Agreement (\#H326G210002) with the Research to Practice Division, Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education. The Center is affiliated with the Institute on Community Integration at the College of Education and Human Development, University of Minnesota. Consistent with EDGAR §75.62, the contents of this report were developed under the Cooperative Agreement from the U.S. Department of Education, but do not necessarily represent the policy or opinions of the U.S. Department of Education or Offices within it. Readers should not assume endorsement by the federal government. Project Officer: David Egnor In collaboration with: NCEO Core Staff Sheryl S. Lazarus, Director Jessica Bowman Kascinda Fleming Gail Ghere Linda Goldstone Andrew R. Hinkle Kristi K. Liu Charity Funfe Tatah Mentan Michael L. Moore Darrell Peterson Mari Quanbeck Virginia A. Ressa Christopher M. Rogers Jennifer Sommerness Kathy Strunk Martha L. Thurlow Yi-Chen Wu National Center on Educational Outcomes University of Minnesota 2025 East River Parkway, Room 1-330 • Minneapolis, MN 55414 Phone 612/626-1530 [http://www.nceo.info](http://www.nceo.info) The University of Minnesota shall provide equal access to and opportunity in its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, gender, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. This document is available in alternative formats upon request. ~~Executive Summary ~~ The terms “depth,” “breadth,” and “complexity” are often used to describe alternate assessments based on alternate academic achievement standards (AA-AAAS) . Yet, the meaning of these terms often is not defined, nor is it clear how a state might incorporate these concepts into the development of its AA-AAAS or in the validity arguments that the state makes for its assessment. This report was developed to provide (a) an overview of relevant history and legislation that address depth, breadth, and complexity of AA-AAAS; and (b) questions for states to consider as they revise or develop new AA-AAAS. The information also can be useful for states submitting evidence for an existing AA-AAAS to the U.S. Department of Education peer review process. The identified questions can produce descriptions that may be helpful in documenting evidence for the validity of results and interpretations ofthe AA-AAAS. It is important for each state to have a clear understanding and strong rationale for the terms it uses to describe depth, breadth, or complexity, and how they are reflected in the design, development, and evidence of technical adequacy of its AA-AAAS. The questions provided in this report were created to help states clarify their understanding of the terms in their own AA-AAAS. Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. iii Overview .................................................................................................................................... 1 Federal Legislation...........................................................................................................

FAQs

What problem does the report address regarding “depth, breadth, and complexity” in AA-AAAS?

The report notes that these terms are often used to describe AA-AAAS, but their meanings are frequently not defined and it is unclear how states incorporate them into AA-AAAS development and validity arguments.

What is the purpose of the report for states revising or developing AA-AAAS?

It provides an overview of relevant history and legislation and offers questions states can use to clarify how reduced depth, breadth, and complexity are reflected in AA-AAAS design, development, and evidence of technical adequacy.

How can the report support peer review evidence submissions?

The identified questions can help produce descriptions and documentation that strengthen evidence for the validity of results and interpretations of the AA-AAAS during the U.S. Department of Education peer review process.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Jordan Avery