Study notes higher achievement among students with disabilities
One of the adages in business is that things that matter get measured. Even critics of No Child Left Behind concede that the data demands in the sweeping federal law prompted schools to pay attention to the kids in the back row who used to sleep through class.
A new study suggests that schools may be making headway with students with disabilities.
According to the Center on Education Policy:
Since 2006, more states have shown gains than declines in the performance of students with disabilities on reading and mathematics tests, according to a new report by the Center on Education Policy. The report cautions, however, that imprecise data make it difficult to obtain a clear picture of achievement for this group of students.
The report — State Test Score Trends Through 2007-08: Part 4. Has Progress Been Made in Raising Achievement for Student with Disabilities? – analyzes trends in the reading and math performance of students with disabilities from 2006 to 2008 at three achievement levels on the state tests used for No Child Left Behind accountability. The report also highlights reasons why test data are “fuzzy” for these students.
At the elementary, middle, and high school levels, more states showed gains in the percentage of students with disabilities scoring at the proficient level than showed declines, according to CEP’s analysis.
In addition, students with disabilities have made progress in grade 4 at three achievement levels — basic-and-above, proficient-and-above and advanced.
Even with this progress, however, large differences — as much as 30 or 40 percentage points — exist between the performance of students with disabilities and non-disabled students.
The report highlights several data issues that make it difficult to draw precise conclusions about the performance of students with disabilities.
“The differences among states in approaches for testing students with disabilities and reporting results make it hard to obtain a clear picture of achievement for students with disabilities,” said Jack Jennings, CEP’s president and CEO. “Federal and state policymakers should take steps to clarify how results for students with disabilities on state tests are reported so that trends will be more valid and meaningful in the future.”
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
8 comments Add your comment
oldtimer
November 17th, 2009
11:50 am
Cause we spend time individually teaching them the test, we read everything, testing them individually, and they are given all the time they need.
EducationCEO
November 17th, 2009
12:03 pm
The headline can be misleading is you don’t have sense enough to do your own research. The gao that still exists is deplorable because less then 60% of SWD are graduating. One Comment, don’t believe the hype: Students are not maing gains because of federally-mandated accommodations/modifications. Again, the gains are significantly small and schools should be doing more in terms of teachers receiving up-to-date professional development on differentiated learning (that could help all students). Believe it or not, there are some teachers (of SWD) who DO NOT even provide the mandated modifications/accommodations. When SPED teachers share their concerns with admin, they turn a blind-eye.
DeKalb Conservative
November 17th, 2009
12:11 pm
What is an acceptable level of achievement here? At what point and what resource level has a sufficient effort been provided and a sufficient level of achievement been produced?
“Even with this progress, however, large differences — as much as 30 or 40 percentage points — exist between the performance of students with disabilities and non-disabled students.”
Sarge
November 17th, 2009
3:28 pm
It is my understanding that, as a particular sense diminishes, the remaining senses intensify…ie one who has been afflicted with, say, blindness experiences acute hearing ability. Could the same situation apply in the case of one afflicted with a disability gaining an enhanced focus and motivation? Maybe, just maybe, we tend to offer help to those who really don’t require any assistance at all. Just a thought.
BLOGGING....WE NEED MORE MONKEYS !!
November 17th, 2009
5:49 pm
Mental or physical disabilities, or both?
The big issue is “inclusion”. Putting some of the disruptive, bad behavior types in with a normal class is short-changing the whole class. The teacher ends up spending half the time dealing with discipline for a couple of students instead of teaching to the rest of the receptive ones.
BLOGGING….WE NEED MORE MONKEYS !!!
concerned in Gwinnett
November 17th, 2009
5:57 pm
The majority of students with disabilities (SWD) are of average intelligence or higher, they just learn differently. With some supports and encouragement, these students can achieve great things. Children often live up to their expectations. On the other hand, SWD are much more prone to be on the receiving end of discipline and to be sent to alternative schools. These numbers are often counted differently… so is it a numbers game?
Joy in Teaching
November 17th, 2009
6:38 pm
I am not a SWD teacher, but I was called in to read the ITBS to ONE swd student who received double time on everything.
Why is it that the general public isn’t up in arms at how some students get the lion’s share of attention and resources while the masses are simply lumped together?
ScienceTeacher671
November 19th, 2009
6:12 am
Interesting related story in the Washington Post about this today – students with disabilities sometimes aren’t tested in the same way (although AFAIK far fewer students in Georgia are getting alternative assessments):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/18/AR2009111801796.html