Common Core Impairment

The special education programs in the United States have been designed to help children with special needs learn easier and fit in better with the education program. Unfortunately, many minority students get caught up in the mix and don’t get the proper attention they deserve. Furthermore, minority students are seriously over-represented in the educational programs. Many minority students are misdiagnosed and put into special education programs when in fact; they do not have a learning disability. This has become a growing problem in this country because it is seen as the easy way out. Schools all over the U.S. are doing this in order to not have to properly test and evaluate students for learning problems.

In recent years, legislative mandates, like the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA), have required students to participate in the same assessments that general education students are taking. Although these new, controversial mandates resonated with a lot of people, critics argue that they cause more harm than good. According to Inclusion: The Pros and Cons—A Critical Review, Carl Savich states that the federal legislation on inclusion took the attention away from the general and advanced students with “a concomitant lowering of standards” (Savich 1). However, supporters of these new mandates state that the pros vastly outweigh the cons. According to Assessment and Accommodations, Stephen Luke states that inclusion

We must not label children due to their disability. It is important we look at their individual need first without focusing on their impairment. We should be realistic about their expectations and modify the curriculum to suit, give them extra support or their own SEN, depending on needs but also encouraging independence as much as possible.

High Stakes Testing has been overly integrated in the education systems. High-stakes testing are used to determine grade retention, school curriculum, and whether or not students will receive a high school diploma (Myers, 2015). Since the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, high stakes testing has become the norm and mandating that students must pass a standardized test before moving up in grade. As a special education director, the focus is to ensure the student’s accommodations are being followed. Accommodations help increase students’ academic performance. “Both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) of 2004 and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) call for students with disabilities to participate in the general education curriculum and in testing programs to the maximum extent possible for each student (Luke and Schwartz, 2010).” Throughout the years, high stakes testing is becoming more common than ever before. The reality is high stakes testing is one indicator in evaluating children with specific needs. This paper will discuss, the violation of the statutory language regarding assessment based on IDEA, the strategies and goals of a remediation, staff training, common Core and PARCC assessment, and funding for the remediation plan under IDEA.

The research in this paper is to discuss strategies used to teach students with severe disabilities in mathematics. “According to the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, (AAIDD) Intellectual disability is characterized by significant limitations both in intellectual functioning and in adaptive behavior as expressed in conceptual, social, and practical adaptive skills. The diagnoses of the disability should come before the age of 18 (Westling, Fox, & Carter, 2015).” Mathematics is a core subject area that can pose a challenge for a large amount of students in America, and especially those with severe disabilities. “According to a study, only a quarter of students with disabilities that

Another way that the Common Core has its problem, is with the politics. The Common Core is only dealing with confusion of this and must be brought to attention by everyone, not just the educators of schools. Regular exams assess these lessons, and allow states to measure their progress against each other. While Christie and others claimed they are ditching Common Core, a closer look reveals that this is not quite the case.

This report compromises evidence surrounding the use of standardized testing for students with disabilities. Testing protocols for minority students necessitates a great deal of reform. Yielding a corroborated framework, two powerful research professionals join forces; producing pragmatic analysis and improvement ideals in regards to assessing students with disabilities, a vastly marginalized minority in regards to standardize testing. Karen Barton, lead Principal Research Scientist for Power of U, McGraw-Hill, obtained her Ph.D. in Educational Research and Measurement from the University of South Carolina preceding Barton achieved her M.S. in Special Education at Longwood College. Offering unique and extensive research abilities, she consults often regarding education-based research. Barton’s co-collaborator, Daniel Koretz is an expert on educational assessment and the impact of high-stakes testing. His research has includes the assessment of students with disabilities. Koretz obtained a doctorate is in developmental psychology from Cornell University. Koretz maintains fifteen national affiliations with educational associations and forty, globally referenced publications. Prudent to my research, by utilizing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and policies pertaining to students’ Individualized Education Program (IEP) these two authors and their publication assists in supplementing validity to this essay as these sources along with additional methodically integrated

There are many debates that go on in the field of special education today. One of the major debates is whether students with disabilities should be fully included in “regular” classrooms with students without disabilities, or if they should be provided with a continuum of services, where they are provided with a variety of services that may fit their individual needs. While there is many arguments for both sides, I believe that the continuum of services model is the most effective for students with disabilities. I believe this is more effective because no student with disabilities is exactly the same. Each student can vary in disability and have a different variation of skills.

Most of these goals aim to not only help those that have disabilities, but to diversify the education experience of someone that doesn’t have a disability to allow them to see the different types of people that exist in this world (Baglieri & Shapiro, 2012, 12-14).

How many different ways are there to do addition? According to the common core there are several ways to add. This is one reason of the many reasons why parents are against the common core. Parents are not the only ones protesting against the new teaching curriculum. Teachers are protesting just as vividly too. The common core needs to go, not only is it confusing for the parents but it is hard for kids; and it is hard for the teachers to teach.

Many children have had learning disabilities for many years. Each year more and more of these children are being helped. Schools are working to improve their special education programs and to have all kinds of students work together in the same classroom. The practice of inclusion was started because educators felt that special needs students would achieve more in traditional classrooms with non-learning disabled students than they would in special education classes. However, research findings suggest that there really is no difference in academic achievement levels for special needs students when they are placed in regular classrooms.

In today’s educational environment, all students expect to receive the same level of instruction from schools and all students must meet the same set of standards. Expectations for students with learning disabilities are the same as students without any learning difficulties. It is now unacceptable for schools or teachers to expect less from one segment of students because they have physical disabilities, learning disabilities, discipline problems, or come from poor backgrounds. Standardize testing has resulted in making every student count as much as their peers and the most positive impact has been seen with the lowest ability students. Schools have developed new approaches to reach these previously underserved students while

One of the most controversial issues facing educators today is the topic of educating students with disabilities, specifically through the concept of inclusion. Inclusion is defined as having every student be a part of the classroom all working together no matter if the child has a learning disability or not (Farmer) (Inclusion: Where We’ve Been.., 2005, para. 5). The mentally retarded population has both a low IQ and the inability to perform everyday functions. Activities such as eating, dressing, walking, and in some cases, talking can be hopeless for a child with mental retardation.

According to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, students with disabilities should be placed in a “least restrictive environment.” One of the main ideas of this act was to improve the learning experiences of students with disabilities by giving them learning opportunities outside of a special education classroom. The number of students with disabilities being placed in their general education classrooms is increasing more and more each year. The U.S Department of Education’s 27th annual report to Congress on the implementation of The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2005) indicates that the number of students with disabilities in general education classrooms has risen to almost 50 percent. This is about a 17 percent increase from the 1997 U.S

Throughout my years at Lehigh, I have proclaimed that I have a passion to teach, to show students that mathematics is not difficult, and that they are able to understand mathematics. However, when it came to special education students, my philosophy changed, due to their learning disability. I was ignorant to the special education movement of inclusion, because I feared the idea of teaching students who were not “normal”.