Group One Discussion on State Policies

Group One Discussion on State Policies

drsarah 25 May 2007 18:45

The paper presented here discusses the policies about accommodiation for assessments that different states have in place for students with exceptionalities. The ways in which students are able to receive supports during standardized tests continues to be a major point of discussion for many in the educational policy realm and for parents and teachers of students who claim the right to these supports. Check out the paper, and share you thought on what you think the implications of the accommodiations and the policies means for education and understanding student learning through assessments like the ones discussed in the text.
electronic version of article
The article is also attached below as a PDF

Last edited on 25 May 2007 18:46 by drsarah Show more

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

danny1820 06 Jun 2007 15:51

Before I even read this article, I told myself to be open mided and to read this article with no previous notions. I most certainly have a better idea of state polocies now and I have questions. My first question or comment really is about a statement on page 2, "statewiede assessment results help policeymakers make decisions to improve programs". Even though I think this is a great "idea", why do they need state assessments? Why don't we have a committe that visits these schools, observes our teachers, and do inventory within our schools to make sure they have the proper tools to teach their students. I know these may seem harder than it appears, but I don't think its unreasonable. I have never been a fan of statewide assessment test because they all differ, and how can we accurately measure a student's progress when one standard for one state is different from another. What if a child moves, and there are certain things they don't know or haven't learned yet, but should have. Another questions of mine and concern, is that even though they have accomodations for students with disabilities, how are we going to know whether that student is going to keep up at the same pace as the students that don't need accomodations. Furthermore, I think that all the states should have the same accommodations for students with learning disabilities. Again I go back to the issue, what if a child moves from one state to another and the accomodation that had previously are no longer allowed? How is this fair or right? I think more teachers, school administrators, and parents should try and become more active in deciding what accomodations are allowed. Personally, I think if it helps the child to successfully take these "assessment tests" then why not let them have the accomodations. If we don't, and if we put limits, then we are setting them up to fail. I could go on and on about this topic but I wanted to jump to two other questions I had. 1.) "Six states permitted assessment participation decision to be based, in whole or part, on a student's emotional anxiety and the student's possible adverse reaction to the testing situation", which states were these? 2.) "Allowed accomodations" "Not allowed accomodations" "Standard accomodations" and nonstandard accommodations" is there any way we would be able to see a list of these?
I just think that if we are going to have these statewide tests, then they need to be fair. But when we take away students' ability to take these tests then we "the system" has failed not only ourselves but that student. I think that we should do whatever we can to help them, whether they are slow, fast, need accommodations or not. I think certain people need to re-evaluate what an education is and what it means to a teacher and to a student. I think somewhere in time we have lost sight, and we need to get it back. Being learning disabled, however never being placed into a public school system I have never had to fight for my accommodations or rights to them, my parents did. And after reading these accommodations that are being decided on whether to use them or not, I can say that they don't give students a leg up. I had extended time, but it depends on whether or not I went into the test knowing the information or not. Because I could sit there for hours but if I don't know it, then I wont know it an hour later. But it did help me calm down and not glance at the clock all the time. I had time to think, organize my thoughts and take tests effectively. Now how I did on those tests is up for debate. I know this is a touchy subject in the world of teachers and education, so I'm interested to hear what other think about these state polocies on assessments.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

JSweeney 12 Jun 2007 03:47

Before reading this response, I must state that I am adamantly against state-wide assessments. I have always felt that all students suffer from such exams, not just the learning disabled.

As with many ideas for accommodation for disabled, I am left to wonder what about the average every day student. There are the exceptional students: gifted and disabled. Money is secured to help them, but the rest of students are left lost within the system. One example in the Bolick article is about a student without a disability who needs to receive extra help in reading. In order to receive the help, he has to be labeled learning disabled. There is just not sufficient amount of funds. I am not saying that accommodations should be cut for LD students; I just feel that the money, accommodations, and aid could be better distributed.
First, I feel that learning disabled should be defined soundly. Today, as mentioned in the textbook learning disabled is a final explanation for why a student is failing academically when all other possibilities have been exhausted. Just as we have read, this category not only holds those with true disabilities, but also minority groups and the wealthy that recognize the extra benefits that their children will receive within the program.
Second, I feel that accommodations should be made for all students to help pull the students out of the LD category that do not belong there. In order to do this, schools need to implement smaller class sizes, aids that help teachers and students, study groups, etc. All students could benefit from such methods; rather than one or two students receiving all of the attention. In small classroom settings and small groups, teachers and aids are able to help each individual student with his or her need.
Finally, at the conclusion of the article, it mentions expanding accommodations to more students on exams. I think this is an excellent start to helping the average student. Danny1820 mentioned that he or she (I’m sorry the correct pronoun usage is lost online) felt that the extra time on tests really helped with his or her learning disability. I feel that all students could benefit from that extra time. Instead of racing through the exam cognizant of the clock, all students could relax and thoughtfully answer each question. It would allow all students (not just those on the LD list to have a leg up). It is as Danny1820 said if the student does not know the answer all the time in the World will not help them to answer it.
By allowing all students to have the same benefits that learning disabled students receive, I feel would stop labels. With all students allotted the same amount of time, it would be fair and everyone would be accepted. If all students had the opportunity to learn in smaller more intimate class settings, while teachers and aids could help individual students as well as the whole in order to promote cooperative learning and acceptance; perhaps more students could excel.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

schultnk 21 Jul 2007 15:49

After reading the article I immediately thought of my own personal experience with standardized tests. As an "average" student I always struggled with standardized tests due to the time limits. I can remember feeling very anxious and worrying about not being able to complete the test portion in time. Because I was never labled learning disabled, I was not given the opportunity to have extra time to complete the tests. The article mentions though that, "Five states now have policies that indicate assessment accommodations can be used by any student" (p. 239). I think that is a step in the right direction. I think that majority of students dispite their learing style and ablitiy level can benifit from this policie.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

andyspann 23 Jun 2007 00:01

Like most individuals who read this article I tried to be objective. I am a person with a learning disability who is provided extended time on test. To me this has been a lifesaver but I was in clear shock to read that not all states provide this accomadation. Despite have LD, I have heard many people say that they are horrible test takers. It is sad how the whole child is no longer taken into consideration. Scores and assessment scores are all that matters. I believe whole heartedly that assessments does not test a persons knoweledge of a subject. For example at the school I did my practicum at I was with first grade. Although assessments don't count for them I mean the state assessment they still do assessments such as DIBBLES. One of the students there who is above grade level in all of the subjects especially Math and Reading, did horrible on the Dibbles assessment. My cooperating teacher and I were both shocked. She chalked it up to he was rushing through the exam. It makes me wonder how many other kids rush through the exam or get nervous or other factors and just don't do well on a test. How do you really assess someone's knoweledge of a subject matter with today's standards ? Everything is a score. It is just not conducive especially when the have and have nots still receive drastically different education. I am glad that state policies have evolved to accomadate more people but NCLB and state assessments must evolve into including the whole child (assessment, grades, GPA, etc) in order to recieve proper assessment of one's knoweledge of particular subject matters.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

Lauren12 09 Jun 2007 18:27

I found this paper regarding state policies about assessments for exceptional students very interesting. I had no idea that in the past, students with disabilities were not allowed to take the state assessments, and therefore were exempt from the reforms made as a result of the test's findings (p. 232). I also didn't know that it was 97's IDEA and 01's NCLB (tests that we hear about so often and are areas of such controversy) that were the major catalysts that caused students with exceptionalities to be required by states to take statewide tests (232). In addition, I thought the study discussed throughout the paper was a unique look into the world of how accommodations are implemented, restricted, opposed, supported, etc., and the results were surprising to me.

I should probably start out by saying that, like the previous poster, I found myself biased prior to reading the article. I have always been skeptical of statewide assessments for the simple reason that they are statewide, not nationwide. How we can we, as teachers or future teachers in certain states, test our students on material that is evaluated only by our state and not others? What happens when our students venture off to a college in a different state? In addition, I found myself biased regarding my own experiences with accomodations for students with disabilities during testing. For example, I have major problems with reading comprehension but am not diagnosed as having any type of a disability. I remember being in high school, and having friends who went to a "special needs" class as part of their day, and there were able to get help from their teachers on tests that I had to take by myself. The difference between us, of course, was that they were diagnosed as having some type of an exceptionality where I was not, but it always bothered me that they were able to receive help (such as extended testing time, calculators, dictionaries, read alouds, or rereading/clarification-as mentioned on page 236 of the paper). I know now, after learning about special needs students, that my friends in these certain classes did need extra help that I did not, but ever since then I have found the policies put in place for accommodations intriguing. As the previous poster said, with the mention in the paper about all of the difference participation and accommodation policies, such as additional testing options (234), "okay" and "not okay" accommodations (236), and especially the accommodations frequently mentioned in state policies (236), it just seems that the severly differing policies of different states are just unfair. Take, for example, the fact that student emotional anxiety is used without restrictions in 3 states, with restrictions in 3 states, but not mentioned at all in 44 states. I don't think it is fair that some school officials in certain states take emotional anxiety of their students into account (either restricting it or not), but in most states it is not even thought of (or at least mentioned in their written policies). Won't the students in those 6 states have some sort of advantage or disadvantage compared to students in the other 44 states?

After reading this paper and the study that it described, I feel that the discussed accommodations and policies have a larger affect on education and student learning than I had originally thought. I have always learned that statewide assessments are meant to assess the schools' achievements in relation to how well they are teaching their students (when I think of statewide assessments I think of the SOL's and Regents, which definitely grade students but are more intended to examine how well schools and states are meeting requirements). But this study, under the section 'Need for High-Quality Alternate Assessments' (238) says that they are used to "measure appropriately the academic achievement of students with significant cognitive disabilities," therefore seemingly changing the role of such assessments.

Last edited on 09 Jun 2007 18:30 by Lauren12 Show more

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

RFries 11 Jun 2007 01:15

First and foremost, I have to say that I laughed when I read the previous two postings because I think that we all had similar reactions to the fact that we were facing the task of reading an article about standardized testing. I cringed, I sighed, and I told myself to try to be open minded about what I was about to read. In point of fact, I do not disagree with many of the conditions of the NCLB legislation but testing is such a buzzword that I sometimes find it difficult to formulate a working opinion on the matter. From day to day I read and hear and argue points for and against standardized testing and there are many valid and well-researched opinions to absorb. Not having ever been in the position to prepare a class for the DC CAS test (as I do not have my own class currently and also because I work with first graders who are not tested) I begin to nibble on my fingernails when I think about what I will be up against in the future. Which brings me to one of the most intriguing items in the article: the issue of student emotional anxiety as a factor in testing participation.

In the chart on page 235 of the article we can see that while the number of states that allowed for test participation to be influenced by student anxiety increased from 3 to 6. At the same time, 3 other states banned the same policy and 44 states made no mention of the matter at all. Standardized? I think not. Moreover, this category strikes me as something that is quite subjective. Personally I feel that student anxiety level could be taken into consideration in order to determine participation in testing but certainly not in the haphazard manner that it is now. Surely it is an advantageous policy for those schools that do allow students with extreme levels of anxiety to opt out of testing.

I think that the issues that arise in my mind as I read over this article (such as the accommodation policies mentioned on page 237 - how is it possible that three whole states disallow extended testing time for children with exceptionalities? Also, I am hard pressed to think of a time when a spell checking program would be appropriate for someone eligible to be tested) all run along the same vein: all children are unique. Learning types, home lives, exceptionalities, and personality fluctuations are just a few of the reasons why public schools are such fascinating, lively places. All of those items also play a role in confounding NCLB legislation. I feel that in regards to testing NCLB is doomed to fail because the federal government can only extend itself so far into the realm of state-organized public schooling. As a result we have charts like the ones on pages 234, 235, and 237 of this article which prove only that in some states, some children have access to resources that help (or excuse) them when testing occurs and some do not. If the testing of special education students is to generate any meaningful data for educators across the nation the accommodation should continue but it must be executed in a uniform manner. In lieu of these measures I feel that all that we are really achieving a uniformly neurotic public school system.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

Allison Aboud 11 Jun 2007 03:57

It's been very interesting to read the postings of my classmates on this issue, as well as the article itself. I guess I can jump right onto the bandwagon in regards to my feelings about standardized testing at the state level! In fact, the difficulty in comparing testing and accommodation strategies across states in a way immitates the inherent problem of standardized testing of students. As the students are so immensely diverse in their unique learning styles and issues, as are each of the states diverse in the types of resources and issues they bring to the table. In looking at these figures and reading about the various policy variables and types of accommodations used, it made me wonder the following questions:

• How does a state's fiscal situation impact it's policy decisions in regards to providing accommodations?
• Given the mixed research findings on how accommodations impact student performance, in what ways other than academic performance can these accommodations serve the student population?
• Do certain accommodations serve students with disabilities more effectively than others? If so, would it help to "standardize" certain accommodations across states?

It seems to me that if the goal of NCLB is to accurately measure student progress and learning in a standardized way, then there needs to be more research directed towards the impact of these accommodations on test scores. With mixed findings on how accommodations actually impact student performance, states do not have the scientifically grounded knowledge they need to direct their own policy decisions. The term "accommodation" becomes more generalized, and parents, students and teachers advocate for something that is not fully understood or valildated.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

tmgdq86 22 Jun 2007 01:58

From reading the other postings, I notice that almost everyone would agree that accommodation policies should be standardized from state to state in order to be more effective. I agree with this as well, but I do think that even if all accommodation policies were standardized, there would be no different results because the tests are not standardized across the board.

I have not studied a lot on this subject, and I never knew that there was a time where students with disabilities were excluded from statewide assessments. This was interesting to learn because if tests are meant to help diagnose students needs, then this would be directly discriminatory. In that case, these tests should be universally administered because it should be a service provided to all students. However, if some students are excluded from the process, or their scores are excluded from the aggregate score, then this only proves the point that the tests are not meant to help students, rather they are meant to "grade" a school. And no school can be completely assessed without looking at the entire student population.

It's hard to get out of the area of arguing that these tests should not be administered at all and to accurately analyze how accommodation policies should be formed. However, if there was an ideal testing system, then it would include standardized participation and accommodation polices because this would provide accurate results fairly.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

SGoldstein 28 Jun 2007 00:37

I think one aspect that is left out of this article but deserves serious consideration is that instead of testing students with cognitive disabilities at a different level or instead of simply providing the accommodations for them to be able to take the same test as everyone else in a different way, perhaps the test itself should be different. Students with cognitive disabilities have different goals to reach for than other students and certain activities and assessments will be much more beneficial to them than to the other students. If a student has difficulty putting thoughts together and expressing them orally than perhaps that student should be given an oral exam instead of a written one. If a students needs most to gain writing competency, perhaps it is important that that is included in their assessment. I am not suggesting a different type of assessment for every student in every class, I think something more uniform is possible, however I do want to point out that while all of these accommodations are necessary, they may not be the best or most progressive solution.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

JSweeney 24 Jul 2007 17:59

I definitely agree with you. The general way of conducting and assessing students, is inadequate. The testing looks for fast-paced, good-test-takers, and leaves much to be desired from the assessment. If we truly need to test every individual in different subject areas, reforms need to be instituted, creating a better way to test students’ knowledge. SGoldstein states that students taking the test should/might have different goals especially students with disabilities. Perhaps in instituting new testing procedures, instead of defining a student as pass or fail, it could measure their abilities in certain areas to give teachers and understanding them. Or even aptitude testing, which might suggest the best way that a child learns. There are so many ways that testing can be beneficial to the learning process for all students that the government and NCLB should assess in order to promote all students to succeed.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

Allison Aboud 04 Jul 2007 00:06

I thought the group might be interested to see the following resource that the US Office of Special Education Programs has created for states and districts: http://www.studentprogress.org/default.asp

The National Center on Student Progress Monitoring is relatively new and reflects the NCLB trend of performance assessment. In some ways, it addresses the problem of standardizing assessments across states - in the sense that it provides resources, studies, and tools for states and districts to use. For example, it actually provides detailed lists of assessment tools that teachers can use in their classrooms, along with usages and reporting information. This information is free to the public, and even can be used by parents who are interested in taking a more active role in their child's education process.

As a side note, I do find it interesting as an art teacher that there are no formal assessments designed for the arts. While state standards do exist for the arts, there are not any clear ways that teachers can test their students' progress, other than their own classroom rubrics. While I'm not advocating that assessments need to be designed for the visual and performing arts, I do find it curious that they are consistently overlooked compared to other subject areas, like reading and math. This clearly reflects a value judgment in our current education system about what subjects are most important and "worth" testing progress.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

Lauren12 28 Jul 2007 14:44

I am currently working at an elementary summer school in my county, and I witnessed an experience that reminded me of this topic. Summer school is coming to a close, and teachers are scrambling to perform the necessary assessments on their students. I know these assessments are not instituted by state policies, but they are required by county policies, and so are just an example. I was working with a potential second grade class (students who are supposed to be entering second grade in the fall), when I observed one student taking her end-of-the-year assessment, which was very much like a 4-page SOL for math. She was doing terribly on it, even though she had improved drastically throughout the course of summer school. She has a learning disability, and the test was obviously unsuited to assess her progress. In addition, I found it interesting that middle and high schoolers in summer school must pass their assessments in order to go on to the next grade, but elementary schooler are let slide if they do not pass. This just seems weird to me—this student who I described is unable to count past 19, has failed her assessment (which proved nothing except that she was horribly stressed and depressed by it), but is still able to enter second grade in the fall. What is the point of such assessments, I wonder?

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

tmgdq86 31 Jul 2007 03:24

Lauren brought up a very interesting point. There is such a stigma to holding students back because they will no longer be in their same grade level groupings, but is it really benefitting students to let them move ahead with their peers if they have not mastered basic skills? I think that as students move into higher grades, they begin to have more trouble because they do not have a solid background in earlier skills that many of their peers do have. I tutored students in a fifth grade class in Dallas and two of my students could barely read basic sentences. I understand that there is a fear of holding students back, but maybe if attitudes were different and it was more common, then students could have the chance to form a solid foundation before building upon that. Otherwise they are going to continue to have trouble, unless someone takes the time to catch them up.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

LuisTorres 31 Jul 2007 16:20

I was born and raised in Texas. I lived through a series of standardized tests throughout my entire schooling and not once do I remember feeling like I had accomplished or learning something incredible as a result of the testing. I am not a big fan of using statewide assessments to measure intelligence, Rodney Stark, the author of my college sociology book, mentions that the highest correlated variable between a child's performance on a test is a teacher's score on a literacy test and a mother's educational attainment level. In that case, why don't we just test the parent and the teacher and use that data as a basis for our tracking for particular students? Sounds absurd, doesn't it? Well, it is. Testing is a tool in education only in so far as it serves as one of many other indicators of progress. There must be multiple educational assessments in order to get a full picture of a child's growth of the course of the year. There are multiple forms of intelligence and these need to be assessed and children need to be allowed an opportunity to come through in various areas.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

andyspann 01 Aug 2007 02:28

I agree with the latest postings some of my collegues added. I thought that it would be interesting for many to know that in DC a child cannot be retained in the earlier grades unless the parent gives permission. Parents , I noticed at the school I did my practicum at, did not want to adhere to the teachers' recommendation. I sometimes wondered if they did not want it to look like a bad reflection on them but then again I thought that hopefully people are not that shallow. Why would you want to push the child onto a higher level when a foundation has not been set. It is just setting that child up for future disappointments and struggles. It is also interesting to note that not everyone in the education world thinks retention is benificial. Some studies do intake that a student will catch up on his/her own. But still I think it is wrong to push someone into something they are clearly not ready for. Also I think it would be great if we have to live in a world of testing and standards, the students work and their progression in school work carry some weight. Hopefully we will grow to where the whole child is assessed not his/her test score or standards.

Re: Group One Discussion on State Policies

JSweeney 02 Aug 2007 20:22

I tend to think that society has become so politically correct and trying not to offend anyone that they sometimes do not look to what is beneficial for the child, but rather what will feel the best. I have two relatives whose children were suggested to be held back in elementary school, and I think their stories are relevent for this conversation. One set decided to hold their child back and the second did not.

The set that did not decided against it because of the “stigma” that the child would have for the rest of her life. The first time that the school suggested for her to be held back was in first grade and the second time was in third or fourth. Both times, the parents rejected the idea, because they were afraid that she would never be accepted by her peers. While I think that parents do have to be concerned with a child’s feelings, I tend to think that doing what is best for the child is generally more beneficial. The end of this story is not a happy one. By the time that this child entered high school, she was so far behind in everything, because throughout her school career she kept barely passing that she dropped out.

The other set, whose daughter was held back, worked out better. I once asked her about ever feeling left out because she had been held back. She said she never really noticed because she had the same classmates since elementary school and that the age difference did not matter. However, she did say that it was great when she was the first one in her class to get her license and a car.

Last edited on 03 Aug 2007 14:11 by JSweeney Show more