The “Two Percent Students”: Considerations and Consequences of Eligibility Decisions

Since the 2001–02 school year, the accountability provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) have shaped much of the work of public school teachers and administrators in the United States. NCLB explicitly prohibits schools from excluding students with disabilities from the accountability system and requires not only participation of all students in statewide accountability assessments but also reporting of the results for students with disabilities along with other students and as a disaggregated group. From the beginning of these requirements, lawmakers recognized that there would be a small group of students with disabilities for whom the regular assessment, even with accommodations, would not be appropriate and they authorized states to develop an alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) for this group of students. More recently, responding to pressures from the field, additional flexibility has been granted to develop an additional alternate assessment based on modified grade-level achievement standards (AA-MAS) for students with disabilities who present with persistent academic difficulties. It is expected that approximately 2% of the total student population might be included in this new alternate assessment. This article examines the decisions that need to be made by individual states to determine the target population for this new alternate assessment and the policy implications of these decisions.     

Considerations for Equating Alternate Assessments: Two Case Studies of Alternate Assessments Based on Alternate Achievement Standards

The development of alternate assessments for students with disabilities plays a pivotal role in state and national accountability systems. An important assumption in the use of alternate assessments in these accountability systems is that scores are comparable on different test forms across diverse groups of students over time. The use of test equating is a common way that states attempt to establish score comparability on different test forms. However, equating presents many unique, practical, and technical challenges for alternate assessments. This article provides case studies of equating for two alternate assessments in Michigan and an approach to determine whether or not equating would be preferred to not equating on these assessments. This approach is based on examining equated score and performance-level differences and investigating population invariance across subgroups of students with disabilities. Results suggest that using an equating method with these data appeared to have a minimal impact on proficiency classifications. The population invariance assumption was suspect for some subgroups and equating methods with some large potential differences observed.     

State Perspectives on Implementing,or Choosing Not to Implement,an Alternate Assessment Based on Modified Academic Achievement Standards

Since Federal regulations have given states the option to implement alternate assessments based on modified academic achievement standards (AA-MAS) as part of their accountability systems for a small group of students with disabilities, a number of states have made decisions about whether or not to develop and implement such an assessment. State-level directors of assessment and directors of special education were surveyed about their state's decisions on implementing AA-MAS. Improvements in accessibility and appropriateness were reasons given for choosing to implement an AA-MAS, whereas lack of resources and guidance were identified as barriers. This article presents the findings from a survey on 22 states' decisions concerning implementation of AA-MAS.     

Special educational needs,disability and school accountability: an international perspective

Standards-based accountability approaches in education are increasingly being adopted in many industrialised countries. This tends to involve the scrutiny of student performance in national academic tests and then holding schools accountable for subsequent progress. International assessments such as Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) are not accountability measures in themselves, but are often utilised in a similar way and national policies are judged against performance in these tests. Drawing upon the examples of PISA and national assessments in the USA, this paper explores how students with special educational needs and disability (SEND) are included in, and served by, these assessment policies. The analysis suggests that while these approaches are inclusive in their intent (most obviously through efforts to include students with SEND in testing) they may poorly represent the progress of these students. It is argued that more equitable inclusion of students with SEND must find a balance between accountability measures which measure performance in traditional attainment-focused tests and other relevant assessments which are meaningful to the given student and/or SEND sub-group.     

Schools for the deaf and the No Child Left Behind Act

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) emphasizes educational accountability for all students. Twenty-eight states have policies to aggregate student participation and proficiency data for schools for the deaf in NCLB reports. The remaining states account for these students in other ways: referring student data to "sending" schools and aggregating data to the district or state level are most prominent. In reports of student assessment results for academic year 2002-2003, three schools for the deaf made "Adequate Yearly Progress" under NCLB: These schools demonstrated at least a 95% participation rate in assessments, and at least 95% of their students met or surpassed state proficiency benchmarks in reading and mathematics. Proficiency levels for other schools varied by report, but were often comparable to those of students with disabilities. Challenges and strategies for capturing the impact of NCLB accountability policies on deaf students are discussed.     

Assessing Students With Disabilities: Issues and Evidence

Historically, many students with disabilities were excluded from large-scale assessments. Recent federal and state policy initiatives, including the most recent reauthorization of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, require that the large majority of students with disabilities be included in the statewide assessments used in accountability systems. Although most observers agree that educational outcomes for students with disabilities were inadequate before the new policies were implemented, the research undergirding the new policies is limited. The reforms have spurred a rapid increase in relevant research, but more and improved research is needed. This article reviews the status of research on issues that are central to the new reforms and recommends directions for future research.     

Opportunities and Options for Facilitating and Evaluating Access to the General Curriculum for Students With Disabilities

Federal regulations concerning the development and implementation of alternate assessments based on modified achievement standards include a set of safeguards intended to ensure that eligible students have access to grade-level general curriculum. These regulations concerning curricular access and opportunity to learn for students with disabilities may prove difficult for educational researchers and policymakers to operationalize and evaluate. This article provides a historical and policy context for efforts to ensure curricular access. In addition, this article reviews research on potential indicators of (or ways of measuring) access to the general curriculum and opportunity to learn. Finally, best practices for facilitating and evaluating access to the general curriculum are discussed.     

The Relationship of Teachers' Instructional Decisions and Beliefs about Alternate Assessments to Student Achievement

In the decade since alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) were first required, special education teachers have had to develop content knowledge and pedagogical skills to teach academics to students with significant cognitive disabilities. The purpose of this study is to examine the impact that teachers' instructional decisions and beliefs about AA-AAS have on the academic achievement of students with significant cognitive disabilities. A survey of nearly 400 teachers across three states provided evidence of teachers' beliefs, as well as their instructional planning processes for students. Students' learning characteristics were also identified. Survey responses were analyzed in conjunction with students' 2010–2011 scores on their statewide AA-AAS. The results indicated that students with presymbolic communication systems had a lower likelihood of achieving proficiency in English language arts/reading and math than students with abstract symbolic communication. Students with concrete symbolic communication systems had lesser odds of proficiency in ELA/reading but not in math. Teachers who agreed that AA-AAS had an impact on instruction tended to have students with higher achievement proficiency. However, more negative views of the validity of AA-AAS scores were associated with greater odds of proficiency.     

美国全纳教育对学习障碍学生的教育影响

全纳教育通过为有障碍和无障碍学生建立学习型社区,使所有学生在适龄的普通教育场景接受相同的教育。全纳教育代表所有学生的利益,提倡教师要为差异而教。学习障碍学生是美国中小学接受特殊教育的最大群体。全纳教育对美国学习障碍学生的教育安置、学业进步和社会性发展均产生一定影响。研究全纳教育对学习障碍学生的教育影响有助于提高全纳教育的效能并对评估和推进全纳教育起到指导作用。     

Attitudes towards inclusion in higher education in a Portuguese university

In this article, we present data concerning the inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education (HE) at a Portuguese university. This research is part of a wider project designed to understand the trajectories and experiences of students with disabilities at the University of Algarve. This exploratory study raises questions about inclusion and discusses this concept based on the perspectives of academic and non-academic staff. A qualitative approach was used to provide an informative exploration of attitudes towards inclusive education and recommendations for promoting best practices therein. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews. We found positive perceptions of university staff members about the inclusion of the students with disabilities. However, more effort is needed to provide these students with opportunities to continue their academic career in HE and to promote inclusion, personal development and participation in social and economic life. Although inclusive education is on political and educational agendas, the perception of disabilities as deficits prevails. The findings of this study, therefore, reveal that changes must be implemented to effectively adopt the social and educational model of disability.     

Inclusion in South Korea: The current situation and future directions

Inclusion has occupied the centre of attention in education in many countries for the past few decades, and it is the same in South Korea. Although most researchers and educators agree that inclusion is necessary for equal educational opportunities and social participation of students with disabilities, there are debates about the most effective and appropriate services for these students and how teachers should deliver these services. The purpose of this article is to introduce the educational system and the unique cultural situation in South Korea to the reader and to suggest future directions for successful inclusion. Inclusion can grow and be meaningful in South Korea if it is based on the thoughtful and sustained efforts of people who have the passion and compassion that inspires others to listen to different opinions. Finally, successful inclusion can come about when the government supports changes in the community and schools.     

National survey of accommodations and alternate assessments for students who are deaf or hard of hearing in the United States

This paper reports the results of the National Survey of Accommodations and Alternate Assessments for Students who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing in the United States (National Survey). This study focused on the use of accommodations and alternate assessments in statewide assessments used with students who are deaf or hard of hearing. A total of 258 participants responded to the survey, including 32 representing schools for the deaf, 168 from districtwide/school programs, and 58 from mainstreamed settings. These schools and programs served a total of nearly 12,000 students who are deaf or hard of hearing nationwide. The most prevalent accommodations used in 2003-2004 statewide standardized assessments in mathematics and reading were extended time, an interpreter for directions, and a separate room for test administration. Read aloud and signed question-response accommodations were often prevalent, used more often for mathematics than in reading assessments. Participants from mainstreamed settings reported a more frequent use of accommodations than those in schools for the deaf or districtwide/school programs. In contrast, schools for the deaf were most likely to have students participate in alternate assessments. The top three alternate assessment formats used across all settings were out-of-level testing, work samples, and portfolios. Using the National Survey results as a starting point, future research will need to investigate the validity of accommodations used with students who are deaf or hard of hearing. In the context of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 accountability policies, the accommodations and alternate assessment formats used with students who are deaf or hard of hearing may result in restrictions in how scores are integrated into state accountability frameworks.     

Building Validity Evidence for Scores on a State-Wide Alternate Assessment: A Contrasting Groups, Multimethod Approach

The relationships between ratings on the Idaho Alternate Assessment (IAA) for 116 students with significant disabilities and corresponding ratings for the same students on two norm-referenced teacher rating scales were examined to gain evidence about the validity of resulting IAA scores. To contextualize these findings, another group of 54 students who had disabilities, but were not officially eligible for the alternate assessment also was assessed. Evidence to support the validity of the inferences about IAA scores was mixed, yet promising. Specifically, the relationship among the reading, language arts, and mathematics achievement level ratings on the IAA and the concurrent scores on the ACES-Academic Skills scales for the eligible students varied across grade clusters, but in general were moderate. These findings provided evidence that IAA scales measure skills indicative of the state's content standards. This point was further reinforced by moderate to high correlations between the IAA and Idaho State Achievement Test (ISAT) for the not eligible students. Additional evidence concerning the valid use of the IAA was provided by logistic regression results that the scores do an excellent job of differentiating students who were eligible from those not eligible to participate in an alternate assessment. The collective evidence for the validity of the IAA scores suggests it is a promising assessment for NCLB accountability of students with significant disabilities. The methods of establishing this evidence have the potential to advance validation efforts of other states' alternate assessments.     

Assistive Technology: Legislation and Legal Issues

Developing special education programs that confer a free appropriate public education (FAPE) for students with disabilities has been a challenge for local education agencies since the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was first passed in 1975. Developing a FAPE has been particularly challenging when students require assistive technology (AT) services or devices to meet their unique educational needs. In this article, we consider how students' individualized education program (IEP) planning teams have met this challenge by examining administrative and judicial rulings on the use of AT services and devices by students' with disabilities. Specifically, we first examine rulings from 2005 to the first half of 2013 regarding the IDEA, FAPE, and AT. Second, we explore how courts have interpreted the AT obligations of educational agencies with a focus on cases in which parents were the prevailing party. Primary reasons for school district losses in these cases include failing to: (a) provide AT assessments (b) address AT needs, (c) provide the AT devices or services specified in a student's IEP, (d) properly implement AT services. We end by discussing the implications of these court decisions for school districts use of AT services and devices with students in special education.     

Evaluating the alignment among curriculum,instruction, and assessments: Implications and applications for research and practice

Alignment has been defined as the extent to which curricular expectations and assessments are in agreement and work together to provide guidance for educators' efforts to facilitate students' progress toward desire academic outcomes. The Council of Chief State School Officers has identified three preferred models as frameworks for evaluating alignment: Webb's alignment model, the Surveys of Enacted Curriculum model, and the Achieve model. Each model consists of a series of indices that summarize or describe the general match or coherence between state standards, large‐scale assessments, and, in some cases, classroom instruction. This article provides an overview of these frameworks for evaluating alignment and their applications in educational practice and the research literature. After providing an introduction to the use of alignment to evaluate large‐scale accountability systems, the article presents potential extensions of alignment for use with vulnerable populations (e.g., students with disabilities, preschoolers), individual students, and classroom teachers. These proposed applications can provide information for facilitating efforts to improve teachers' classroom instruction and students' educational achievement. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

South Korean Perspective on Learning Disabilities

In the context of the educational system and the nature of special education in South Korea, I describe policy, practice, and research about children with learning disabilities (LD). Recently, the study of LD has attracted professionals from multiple disciplines including general and special education, medicine, psychology, and social work. In Korea, the field of LD has developed rapidly over a brief period, but there are many problems to be solved in the near future. In particular, the field of LD in Korea lacks: (a) consensus about a conceptual definition, (b) a clear set of criteria for identifying students with LD, (c) lack of assessment instruments for identifying LD, and (d) general low understanding or misunderstanding of students with LD among teachers and parents.     

Neoliberal versus social justice reforms in education policy and practice: discourses,politics and disability rights in education

This article uses critical discourse analysis in order to discuss the equity and social justice implications of an envisaged education reform agenda in Cyprus, as articulated by two consultation reports commissioned by the World Bank. The reports highlight, inter alia, the imperative to improve teaching and enhance accountability regimes with regard to students’ learning. Selected extracts from these documents are analyzed in order to highlight the absence of a social justice discourse in the rhetoric of educational reforms, despite the alleged centrality of a social justice discourse in official policy. The reports fail to include issues of social justice and learner diversity in discussing the necessity to strengthen the existing teacher policy framework and to mobilize structural educational reforms. This omission is indicative of the neoliberal imperatives that drive the envisaged education policy reforms as well as the low priority attributed to issues of equity and learner diversity, with particular reference to students designated as having special educational needs and/or disabilities.     

Accountability Is Overdue: Testing the Academic Achievement of Limited English Proficient Students

Providing an equal education for the 3.5 million children who do not have a sufficient knowledge of the English language and to help them participate fully in mainstream classrooms is a growing challenge for U.S. public schools. Education reform and accountability initiatives in several states are beginning to include limited English proficient (LEP) students in their assessment efforts. Educators recognize the importance of maintaining rigorous standards and high expectations for language minority students. Legal mandates require periodic assessments of LEP students' progress and the allocation of additional resources where needed. Texas leads the country in bringing about academic accountability for LEP students-through evaluating and reporting annually on their progress in English-language literacy and in their learning of school subjects, and by documenting the steady growth in successful performance on state tests by this special population.     

An Application of Generalizability Theory to Evaluate the Technical Quality of an Alternate Assessment

Although federal regulations require testing students with severe cognitive disabilities, there is little guidance regarding how technical quality should be established. It is known that challenges exist with documentation of the reliability of scores for alternate assessments. Typical measures of reliability do little in modeling multiple sources of error, which are characteristic of alternate assessments. Instead, Generalizability theory (G-theory) allows researchers to identify sources of error and analyze the relative contribution of each source. This study demonstrates an application of G-theory to examine reliability for an alternate assessment. A G-study with the facets rater type, assessment attempts, and tasks was examined to determine the relative contribution of each to observed score variance. Results were used to determine the reliability of scores. The assessment design was modified to examine how changes might impact reliability. As a final step, designs that were deemed satisfactory were evaluated regarding the feasibility of adapting them into a statewide standardized assessment and accountability program.     

Using a Self‐Advocacy Intervention on African American College Students’ Ability to Request Academic Accommodations

Due to an increase in enrollment of African American students with disabilities in postsecondary education, there is a need to identify strategies that may lead to improved transition and self‐advocacy skills for these students. These strategies include teaching students to request academic accommodations and to have an understanding of how their disability affects their academic learning. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to provide an in‐depth explanation of a self‐advocacy strategy that was used to teach three African American male college students how to request their academic accommodations. Results indicated this strategy may be a promising intervention for African American college students with disabilities.