Moving Children, Distorting Data: Changes in Testing of Students with Disabilities in Connecticut from 2000–2013

2016 ◽  
Vol 118 (14) ◽  
pp. 1-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Cotto
Keyword(s):  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Grade Level ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
High Stakes Testing ◽  
Standard Test ◽  
Department Of Education ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Federal Department ◽  
Racial Progress

Connecticut experienced two major changes in testing policy for children with disabilities that played a major role in conclusions about educational progress in the state. First, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 required that all students with disabilities participate in grade-level, standardized tests. This movement of students deepened a crisis of stagnant and disparate achievement indicators. Policy reversed in 2007, when the federal Department of Education opened the door for modified assessments based on grade-level content and standards. When testing policy reversed, the exclusion of students with disabilities temporarily resolved this crisis by artificially inflating test results in math and reading. This article provides an overview of testing data from the Connecticut State Department of Education within its historical context. These fluctuations in standard test participation often linked closely with overall results and produced misinterpretations of educational and racial progress over time. Responses to these changes in testing policy make Connecticut an illuminating case regarding the problem of high-stakes testing and changes in policies for students with disabilities in a particular state characterized by deep racial and economic inequity. Rather than raising questions, moving children helped reinforce the legitimacy of high-stakes testing and nationally touted educational reforms.

Intersections of Accountability and Special Education: The Social Justice Implications of Policy and Practice

2016 ◽  
Vol 118 (14) ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Felicia Castro-Villarreal ◽  
Sharon L. Nichols
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Public Schools ◽  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
High Stakes Testing ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Federal Policies ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
The Social

High-stakes testing accountability has wreaked havoc on America's public schools. Since the passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) in 2001, virtually every public school student has experienced the pressures of preparing for, practicing, and taking standardized state exams, the results of which have had significant consequences for their schools, teachers, and themselves. These test-based pressures have altered educational practices in significant ways for all students, but especially for students with disabilities. The goal of this article is to briefly describe the educational climate for students with disabilities, focusing on emergent federal policies that have had the contradictory effect of expanding and narrowing learning opportunities for students. This article provides the backdrop for the volume by introducing the reader to the general characteristics of our special education population, discussing the past and current federal policies guiding their education, and offering implications for policy and practice.

Inclusive Reform as a Response to High-Stakes Pressure? Leading toward Inclusion in the Age of Accountability

2016 ◽  
Vol 118 (14) ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
George Theoharis ◽  
Julie Causton ◽  
Chelsea P. Tracy-Bronson
Keyword(s):  
School Reform ◽  
General Education ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Standardized Tests ◽  
Distributed Leadership ◽  
High Stakes Testing ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Inclusive School ◽  
Age Of Accountability ◽  
General Education Classrooms

Students identified with disabilities are increasingly being educated with the assistance of support services within heterogeneous (i.e., general education) classrooms. Yet, in this era of high-stakes accountability, students are labeled, sorted, and differentially treated according to their academic achievement as reflected on standardized tests. We engaged in a project to better understand how educators grapple with these externally imposed pressures as they work to change the organizational structure of their schools to be able to implement greater inclusion of their students served by special education. We spent four years in two elementary schools engaged in inclusive school reform (shifting from exclusionary model to an inclusive one) specifically as a response to the pressures of test-based accountability mandates. Our work was guided by the following questions. In this era of high-stakes testing accountability: • What does school-wide inclusive reform for students with disabilities involve? • What kinds of changes can result from inclusive reform? • What role does leadership play in inclusive reform? The article focuses on what inclusive reform involved, the resulting changes, and the role distributed leadership played in moving toward more inclusive service in the age of high-stakes accountability.

Teaching World History in a Swirl of Standards

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Merry E. Wiesner-Hanks
Keyword(s):  
Social Studies ◽  
Education Reform ◽  
Common Core ◽  
Grade Level ◽  
World History ◽  
High Stakes Testing ◽  
State Standards ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
History Teaching ◽  
Single State

Standards-based education reform efforts that began in the 1990s resulted in social studies standards by grade level in every single state, stretching from kindergarten to grade 12. All of these standards single out history as a separate subject or strand, and many include world history as a subset within history as a whole. These standards are highly variable, idiosyncratic, and sometimes error-ridden, and they have been the source of enormous controversy. Some world history standards are completely skills-based, with only one sentence about content, and many are very Eurocentric, especially in the lists of individuals and events students should know. Recent efforts to develop better standards, such as the C3 Framework, have become embroiled in the controversy over Common Core, but because high-stakes testing is often based on state standards, world historians should get involved in improving them, and advocate for better world history teaching.

Assessing No Child Left Behind and the Rise of Neoliberal Education Policies

2007 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 493-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Hursh
Keyword(s):  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
High Stakes Testing ◽  
Education Reforms ◽  
Education Policies ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
Public Figures ◽  
Globalized Economy ◽  
To Receive

No Child Left Behind and other education reforms promoting high-stakes testing, accountability, and competitive markets continue to receive wide support from politicians and public figures. This support, the author suggests, has been achieved by situating education within neoliberal policies that argue that such reforms are necessary within an increasingly globalized economy, will increase academic achievement, and will close the achievement gap. However, the author offers preliminary data suggesting that the reforms are not achieving their stated goals. Consequently, educators need to question whether neoliberal approaches to education should replace the previously dominant social democratic approaches.

scholarly journals Cheating in the first, second, and third degree: Educators' responses to high-stakes testing

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Audrey Amrein-Beardsley ◽  
David C. Berliner ◽  
Sharon Rideau
Keyword(s):  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
High Stakes Testing ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Group Data ◽  
Focus Group Data ◽  
Testing Policies

Educators are under tremendous pressure to ensure that their students perform well on tests.  Unfortunately, this pressure has caused some educators to cheat.  The purpose of this study was to investigate the types of, and degrees to which, a sample of teachers in Arizona were aware of, or had themselves engaged in test-related cheating practices as a function of the high-stakes testing policies of No Child Left Behind. A near census sample of teachers was surveyed, with valid responses obtained from about 5 percent, totaling just over 3,000 teachers. In addition, one small convenience sample of teachers was interviewed, and another participated in a focus group. Data revealed that cheating occurs and that educators can be quite clever when doing so. But how one defines cheating makes it difficult to quantify the frequency with which educators engage in such practices. Our analysis thus required us to think about a taxonomy of cheating based on the definitions of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree offenses in the field of law. These categories were analyzed to help educators better define, and be more aware of others' and their own cheating practices, in an attempt to inform local testing policies and procedures.

Look Back: The feds, the states, and Kappan

2019 ◽  
Vol 101 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-7
Author(s):  
Teresa Preston
Keyword(s):  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Department Of Education ◽  
Federal Mandates ◽  
Elementary And Secondary Education ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
Federal Department ◽  
Education Act ◽  
State And Local ◽  
Every Student Succeeds Act

Across the decades, the balance of power between the federal government, states, and local districts has shifted numerous times, and Kappan authors have weighed in on each of those shifts. Kappan Managing Editor Teresa Preston traces those shifts, beginning with the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which gave the federal government a larger role in public education. Further expansion occurred under the Carter administration, with the launch of the new federal Department of Education. As the new department continued operations under Reagan, its priorities expanded, but actual decision-making authority reverted to states. States, in turn, began involving themselves more with instructional and curricular matters, a trend that eventually made its way back to the federal level, with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Under NCLB, federal mandates had the effect of requiring state and local levels to take on additional responsibilities, without necessarily having the capacity to do so. This capacity issue remains a concern under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

When the Achievement Gap Becomes High Stakes for Special Education Teachers: Facing a Dilemma with Integrity

2017 ◽  
Vol 119 (9) ◽  
pp. 1-39
Author(s):  
Heinrich Mintrop ◽  
Robin Zane
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
Achievement Gap ◽  
Standardized Testing ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Special Education Teachers ◽  
Wide Spectrum ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Accountability System

Context A fundamental assumption behind a high stakes accountability system is that standardized testing, proficiency goal setting for demographic student subgroups, and sanctions would motivate teachers to focus on students whose performance had heretofore lagged. Students with disabilities became one such subgroup under the No Child Left Behind system. Special education teachers faced a novel pressure: to radically narrow the achievement gap between their students with disabilities towards proficiency or incur sanctions and corrective action for their schools and districts. Purpose The study uses the concept of “integrity” to analyze public service workers’ agency in situations of strain or crisis. Integrity consists of four overlapping domains of judgment: obligations of office, personal integrity, client needs, and prudence. Research Design The study is an in-depth multiple case study of seven teachers; 21 structured interviews, and 17 observations, augmented by a number of informal contact that included invitations to observe teacher meetings and conversations with school administrators. Findings The study found that the special education teachers faced a true dilemma. Teachers adopted contradictory solutions — some embraced the new demands, some rejected them. Both seemed equally untenable. The study reveals salient dimensions of this dilemma: how teachers related to the external moral obligation to equalize, what they chose to ‘see’ when they viewed the achievement gap; how they explained, or explained away, their agency in narrowing the gap; how they strategized and muddled through with instructional maneuvers to make the gap go away; and what they regarded, and guarded, as fields of professional responsibility and autonomous decision making. Implications What kind of accountability system would enable a collective dialogue among special education teachers in which high expectations, keen diagnosis, instructional expertise, internal responsibility for individualized learning gains, openness to external challenge, and attention to results would be the poles of the discussion? At the core, such an accountability system would validate the professionalism of the most expert teachers and avoid activating their defensiveness and demoralization. It would guard against middling expectations by making the performance of a wide spectrum of high and low performing schools or special education departments transparent. It would stay away from high pressure attached to unrealistic goals in order to discourage teachers from developing blind spots about their students, or acting with mere compliance and expediency. It would motivate a dynamic of student-centered continuous improvement in reference to a common standard, but also to low-stakes metrics that may guide iterative improvement.

High-Stakes Testing of Students with Disabilities

2000 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 305-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha L. Thurlow ◽  
David R. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
High Stakes Testing ◽  
High Stakes
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document