There is so much to consider when talking about assessments. There are all kinds of different types of assessments. There are assessments that happen on a daily basis in the classroom and then there are the tests that everyone knows about; the state mandated assessments, map test, and some know about DIBLES tests. These are the types of tests that parents, teachers, and administrators debate about. The debate is whether or not these test are doing students any good or harming them. It is good to have data on student and school’s progress, it keeps everyone accountable however, some believe that schools are testing too much. That all this time focused on testing is actually taking away from learning time. Each type of assessment has it’s own set of challenges.
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
In the article, Education and Schooling: You Can Have One Without the Other, Mwalimu J. Shujaa of the State University of New York discusses the importance of learning that there is a difference between schooling and education. Can education exist without schooling or vice versa? Shujaa’s article gives an insight into the conjunction of schooling and education and how they impact the culture of African Americans.
The differences were connected with a teacher’s original preparation for the teaching profession, licensing in the particular subject area to be taught, strength of the educational experience, and the degree of experience in teaching along with the demonstration of abilities through the National Board Certification, in which all of these facets can be addressed through policy (Darling-Hammond, 2010).America has not produced a national method containing supports and reasons to guarantee that teachers’ are adequately prepared and equipped to teach all children effectively when they first enter into the career of teaching. America also does not have a vast collection of methods available that will maintain the evaluation and continuing development of a teacher’s effectiveness in the classroom, or support decisions about entry into the field of teaching and the continuance in the profession of teaching (Darling-Hammond, 2010). n order to reach the belief that all students will be taught and learn to high standards calls for a makeover in the methods our system of education in order to be a magnet for, train, support or uphold, and cultivate effective teachers in more efficient ways. A makeover that is contingent in a certain degree of how the abilities or skills are comprehended (Darling-Hammond, 2010).In the last few years there has been increasing
The new law (ESSA) continues to require some annual testing for certain grades and students needing accommodations on tests can still receive them; however, states must limit to only 1 percent those students allowed to take the alternative tests typically reserved for students with cognitive deficits within the special education program. In the matter of opting out, the new law continues to remain silent, forcing the states to set guidelines in this area if they desire. Although assessments continue to be required as a way to monitor student progress, states can choose from a wider variety of tests, including nationally recognized tests. In addition, ESSA provides for funding to a select few states to explore new types of testing as well as funding for all states to audit their tests with a view towards reducing unnecessary testing.
I believe students face the challenges of assessment and accommodations in different ways than their educators. In the past testing accommodations for schools were often found to be unpredictable
Before the rewrite of the emergency preparedness plan could be started, the principal sent out forms to all the teachers and staff to find out what different types of special talents were in the building. The staff went through the forms and
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
In order for a student to be diagnosed for any disability, there is a process that involves many people that are important in the child’s life. The school must conduct tests that measure the child’s academic success in the classroom, as well as tests that measure IQ (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children), work samples, developmental history (usually get this information from the parents), physical exams (vision, hearing etc.), psychological tests, adaptive skills (BASC) and other areas as needed. Testing is usually done by professionals from various disciplines. In order to qualify for special education services under IDEA, the disability must impact the child’s ability to be academically successful (IDEA, 2004).
This is where students with disabilities take an alternate assessment where it is based on alternate achievement standards that coincide with grade-level standards, but have been reduced in complexity, depth, or breadth.
155: Diagnostic assessment in support of student learning highlights the explicit exercise of power. Within this policy framework is the overt role of the teacher in student assessments. Upon careful consideration, the policy points out the parameters of student assessment as it states, “teachers will use their professional judgment…| to determine which assessment tools are utilized]…from the board’s list of pre-approved assessment tools as well as the frequency, and timing of use of the tool” (Ontario Ministry of Education , 2013, p. 1). The explicit exercise of power can be seen through the language of this document, noting that teachers should use their discretion, but at the same time limiting their power by the standards set by the ministry. Exceptions to this policy document are clearly stated, giving allowances for special education assessments such as the Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO), the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMMS), the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), and other national assessment organizations. Moreover, the policy also sets specific guidelines on the selection and criteria of the diagnostic assessment tools used by the teachers. Although the policy speaks directly to teachers and their use of the assessment tools, principals and school board staff all “share a collective responsibility and accountability for student achievement” and learning
In 2011, the Pennsylvania Department of Education offered to school districts a new computer adapted test known as the Classroom Diagnostic Tools (CDT) (Pennsylvania Department of Education, n.d.). The CDT is an online, computer-adapted exam that is designed to measure both student strengths and their weaknesses in math, reading, and science so that instruction can be modified to support them (Pennsylvania Department of Education, n.d.). This exam is aligned with the PSSA and the Keystone eligible content (Pennsylvania Department of Education, n.d.). The intent of the CDT is to provide a snapshot on how students are progressing toward Pennsylvania assessment anchors (Data Recognition Corporation, n.d.). The Data Recognition Corporation (DRC) provides the link to the CDT through a web-based server. This server allows school personnel to establish test sessions for students and to read reports documenting student performance on the
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
How is it possible for teachers, school principals, to label students as a disabled and shovel them in special education classrooms, mainly because the students are not responding accurately to traditional standardized testing? Unfortunately, there have been many scenarios’ where students are not being supported with a variety of instructional strategies, and because of this, they are mislabeled and misplaced in special education classrooms.
When I think about teachers that I have had in the past, several different ones come to my mind. Each of these educators stands out in my mind for a variety of diverse reasons. Whether it is their sense of humor, their tactfulness, their love of the subject matter, their fanatical and sporadic behavior, or their yearning to be childish themselves, I can still remember at least one quality of every teacher I have ever encountered. Every one of these teachers conveyed subject material to their students just as they were educated and employed to do. However, I trust that every professional in the world has an abundance of opportunity for improvement; teachers could discover and improve themselves merely by having