Special Education Student Article Analysis

The authors of the article explained how important it is to meet the needs of the students with limited English ability in the education system. One of the main point expresses about how frustrating it could be for these students, especially if they were never expose to this sort of environment or language before. Another point that was made in the article, explains how the educational system was not prepared for changes in this sort of population. In most cases, some of the curriculum that is being offered in school cannot be changed to accommodate English Limited Learners, also known as ELLs. Budget is also another issue, as schools are limited to hiring more ELL teachers.

Ironically, the No Child Left Behind Act was meant to help poverty-stricken children the most, but “despite the ideology that schools should be held accountable for unequal academic progress, children who attend inner-city schools with the highest poverty rates must still overcome the second-rate education they receive in overcrowded classrooms in school facilities that are badly in need of repair” (Hollingworth). The No child Left Behind Act fails to take into consideration the real world application of socioeconomic differences in the United States. Students located in high poverty areas are still responsible for attaining the same level of proficiency the NCLB requires despite the differences the children experience. Even though there are students that “have a cognitive disability, speak entry-level English, or have speech delays, everyone takes the same test and the results are posted,” (Hobart) which has the potential to lower the school’s overall scores. The No Child Left Behind Act requires all students, no matter the differences, to take the same test and achieve the same results. All students are not the same and differ in their ability to perform equally as others on the same test. Students with mental disabilities or students in which English is not their first language are expected to achieve the same scores as general education

The author performed two separate interviews face-to-face, selecting two individuals with different backgrounds in order to obtain unique perspectives. The first interviewee, named Jennifer Hodge, works for Allen ISD as a special education teacher for a self-contained DEAR (Developing Early Academics Readiness) class for students in kindergarten through sixth grade. In addition, her experience includes teaching for 22 years, with seven of those years teaching students with disabilities in both self-contained classrooms along with resource and inclusion environments. The meeting to discuss psychoeducational testing occurred in Jennifer’s work place during her conference period over a 45 minute period on Friday, August 28, 2015. The second

The Toms River High School East Child Stud Team (CST) would like to provide comments and concerns relating to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), No Child Left Behind, and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 2004 requirement of assessments in public schools and that all students must participate, with the sole focus on the state of New Jerseys decision to use the PARCC. Specifically, considering the impact is has on students classified with learning disabilities. I would like to urge you to think about reevaluating the procedure of using the PARCC and other standardized tests that are geared to general education students to assess our students because it seems to be doing more harm than good. During the

Analyzed below are the two journal articles about special education assessments entitled, Predictors of Assessment Accommodations Use for Students Who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing from the Journal of Educational Research & Policy Studies (Cawthon & WurtzBest, 2010) and A Methodology for Assessing the Functions of Emerging Speech in Children with Developmental Disabilities from the Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis (Parten, et al, 2005). The analysis revolves around the following areas: nature of research, summary, critique, personnel, future practice, and future research.

Prior to 1975, no federal requirements existed for students with disabilities to attend school, or requirements for schools to attempt to teach students with disabilities (Salvia, Yesseldyke, & Bolt, 2013, p. 25). However, upon the enactment of several federal laws, such as Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB), student with disabilities received access to free, appropriate public education which in turned required students with disabilities to participate in statewide assessments. According to Public Law 94-142 (now included in IDEA), it requires an individual education program (IEP) for students with disabilities. As part of the IEP, it contains items such as present levels of academic achievement and functional performance, measurable annual goals, criteria of progress, special education and related services as well as documenting any necessary accommodations needed for statewide assessments. The author provides a comparison of statewide assessments including items such as participation, accommodations and types of assessments between the states of Texas and Massachusetts.

Channelview ISD, the district in which I was raised and currently teach, is considered a low demographic district with a high population of at-risk, economically disadvantaged and special education students. The TAPR results exhibit a clear correlation between the demographics of the school and their performance results. Results vary sporadically and show clear indicators of differences amongst demographic factors such as grade, gender, race, economic level, language capabilities and intelligence level, however, some factors influence test results more than others. Grade, intelligence level and language capabilities prove to be the main factors in the gaps between the percent of the state that were at Level II Satisfactory or Above and district percentage results. Also analyzed were the percentages of students who were at Postsecondary Readiness and Advanced and lastly and analysis on what percent of students made progress and exceeded progress as well as identifying which students performed well and

“I would just like to call to the Court’s attention what the realities of that situation are, and I think I can speak with some authority because for the last nine years, my fifteen-year-old- daughter has been denied access to public education…” were the words of Leonard Kalish, a father from the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1972), speaking about his daughter not being able to attain a public education (Kemerer and Sansom, 2005). He continues by stating, “…and as a result of which we have had her in private schools…we have spent approximately forty thousand dollars…” (p. 293). Like Mr. Kalish, many parents have gone in front of the courts to fight for their child’s right to a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) and receive financial compensation, like the parents of Jeremy Wartenberg, from Wartenberg v. Capistrano Unified School District (1995) (West Law, 1995). However, before discussing the Wartenberg’s case, it is key to look back on special education and how it has evolved over time.

DuVall was interviewed she was questioned about achievement testing. ?Ms. DuVall indicated that she does assess achievement, but does include the scores in the reports. A special education teacher, named Mark Hayes does the standardized achievement testing. He uses the Woodcock Johnson IV Achievement Testing. The other methods of academic progress to assess student progress used by Ms. DuVall are teacher reports, grades, transcripts, and School Loop. She explained School Loop as a database used by parents and teachers to update student?s grades. Ms. DuVall explained that teacher reports are used to gain data on how well the student is doing in class and if there are any major issues. The grades, transcripts, and School Loop are used to know the areas of possible aid the student needs and additional resources to provide the student. Therefore, she is able to include student?s grades and reflect on the student's academic standing in her reports alongside the students standardized achievement scores. Furthermore, Ms. DuVall said, ?The achievement scores help at times clarify if a student is eligible under Specific Learning Disability (personal communication, September 8, 2017).? She further explained how achievement scores and discrepancy scores come into play later on in the

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.

This article discusses whether or not special education teachers, as well as general education teachers, are prepared to teach students with autism. According to the article, autism is ranks at the sixth most commonly classified disability in the United States. There is a very wide spectrum for autism which include disorders like Asperger’s and pervasive developmental disorders not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS). 1 out of 150 American children will be born with autism (Autism Society of America, NDb).

The article “High-Stakes Testing and Students With Disabilities” discusses how the exams effect the special education population. Only students with severe cognitive disabilities get the chance to take alternative assessments while the rest of the special education population takes the same exam as the rest of the class. According to the article, there has been an increase in levels of performance by special needs students in high-stakes testing. On the other hand, students with disabilities have a huge challenge achieving proficient levels and their score effect how the school’s overall scores look. All students tend to stress about the exam but special needs students tend to stress more about their scores and also while they are taking the exam.

First, I want to communicate my personal experiences with i-Ready and then an overview of the program’s acclaimed association and its direct correlations to the Common Core and Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, some document research and case support. Next, it is important to go over some parts of the program’s components for understanding. Finally, to reflection on how this program adheres to Universal Access through differentiated instruction in meeting the needs of English Language Learners and special populations by utilizing a range of, programs and diagnostic reports like the attached samples, titled “Overall Performance” that identifies students’ scores per domain.

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.