The No Child Left Behind and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (NCLB and IDEA)

From Teach SSD

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

No Child Left Behind and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (NCLB and IDEA)

Click on the following link to review the latest information regarding No Child Left Behind Act and other legislative issues surrounding children and youth with severe and sensory disabilities.

The relationship between the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) and the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) has become increasingly significant to the education of children with disabilities. The following link provides a brief overview of IDEA and NCLB and their combined implications NCLB and IDEA

Alternate Assessments for Students with Severe Disabilities

Under the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB), students with severe disabilities are to be counted in the state assessment accountability system. This means that students with severe disabilities must be working towards the same standards as those in the general education classroom and must demonstrate improvement on state assessments. States are held accountable for all student progress and effort is placed on improving learning and achieving higher standards for students’ educational goals. The same is true for students with severe disabilities. Thurlow, Elliott, and Yessledyke (1998) provide a number of important reasons why students with severe disabilities should be included in state assessments:

  • Testing all students with disabilities provides a more accurate picture of the districts’ or states’ educational system.
  • Including 100% of students in the assessment makes it possible to more accurately make comparisons between schools than if schools, districts, or states remove some students from their assessments.
  • Including students with severe disabilities in assessments promotes high expectations. Often, students with significant disabilities are excluded from assessment because they are not expected to do well.
  • Including students with significant disabilities in state assessments is done to meet legal requirements.

For more information regarding students with severe disabilities, review the Issues Paper regarding Students with Severe Disabilities developed by the National Center on Severe and Sensory Disabilities

All Students Can Learn: A Brief History of Legislation in Education

Early in the history of education it was thought that some students were advanced learners, most could demonstrate average learning ability, and a few could not be expected to learn (Thompson, Quenemoen, Thurlow, & Yssledyke, 2001). However, the passage of various laws within the last fifty years has changed the way education is conceptualized. In 1954, Brown vs. the Board of Education of Topeka, the United States Supreme Court ruled that separate schools for black and whites inherently were unequal. In 1965, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was passed, and emphasized the importance of educating all children, including students with disabilities. In the 1970s, the [Rehabilitation Act of 1973 Rehabilitation Act (1973)] and the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (1975), also known as PL 94-142, emphasized the rights of people with disabilities. Both laws paved the way for appropriate testing for students with disabilities and a public education in the least restrictive environment. In 1988, PL 94-142 was reauthorized and named The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This reauthorization further articulated the previous laws regarding accommodations and modifications in testing. In the 1990’s, more legislative changes were made. ESEA was updated and called Improving America’s Schools Act (IASA) of 1994. This version of the law brought standards-based assessment to the forefront and called for students with disabilities to be given high expectations to achieve state standards. Later that decade, IDEA was updated and further promoted the practice that students with disabilities have access to the general education curriculum and be expected to work towards state standards. In addition, more emphasis was placed on accommodating students’ needs in the assessment process. The most recent reauthorizations to impact special education and testing of students with severe and sensory disabilities are the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (reauthorization of ESEA) and the most recent reauthorization of IDEA, now called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA, 2004). Both laws continue to hold states accountable for student achievement in both general and special education settings.

Accommodations vs Alternate Assessments

A distinction is drawn between accommodations in assessment and alternate assessments. Some students with disabilities simply need minor changes in the way tests are administered in order to demonstrate their knowledge. The accommodation can be viewed as producing a more valid indication of what the student knows. For example, a student with low vision may have the instructions read to her and may voice the answers for another person to record, or may request to have the test in large print. There are a number of accommodations that are considered acceptable and each accommodation is tailored to the needs of each student. Other examples include the use of a sign language interpreter for directions, extra breaks and more time to complete the test. For a complete list of allowable accommodations on your state’s assessment, visit your state department of education. The main point is that state assessments given to students with disabilities are the same as those given to their non-disabled peers. However, students with disabilities are allowed certain accommodations. There are some situations when it may not be possible for students with more profound needs to complete the same tests as students with or without disabilities. The most appropriate assessment for these students may be alternate assessments.

Alternate assessments are simply different ways of assessing the same standards that other students are held accountable to achieve. The assumptions are that “alternate assessments focus on authentic skills and on assessing experiences in community and other real-life environments and that alternate assessments should measure integrated skills across settings” (Thompson, Quenemoen, Thurlow, & Yssledyke, 2001, pp. 9). It is important to note that even though the tests are different, the standards that the tests assess are the same. Students with significant disabilities can learn and be held to the same expectations as other students. However, it is up to the student’s IEP Individualized Education Program team to determine how the student will demonstrate progress towards the standards. It should be noted that school districts are limited in the numbers of students who can take alternate assessments to show annual year progress (AYP). This is referred to as the 2% Rule.

Standards-Based Assessment: How Does it Impact Special Education?

Each state has a set of standards that are used to assess student progress and are based on essential skills and knowledge for students of different grade levels. Standards are composed of content standards, which specify the knowledge students should attain, and performance standards, which specify what students must be able to do in order to satisfy the content standards. The following are more specific definitions provided by Thompson, Quenemoen, Thurlow, and Yssledyke, (2001):

  • Content standards define what students are expected to know and be able to do.
  • Performance standards describe the quality of performance expected for proficiency on the content standards.
  • Benchmarks are specific examples of the academic standards at each grade level or in each academic course.
  • Performance indicators are measurable, observable skills expected at each grade level or in each academic course.

Furthermore, Thompson, Quenemoen, Thurlow, and Yssledyke, (2001) describe the types of skills and abilities typically included in content standards:

  • Basic content area knowledge, skills, and understanding, particularly in the areas of literacy and numeracy
  • The ability to transfer knowledge to new settings and seek out new learning
  • The ability to apply what is learned to career or vocational paths, citizenship, resource management, or technology

In order to include students with disabilities in state assessments, it is important for special educators to become familiar with their state standards. Learn about your school’s general education curriculum. Many schools have a curriculum coordinator who can provide you with this information. The standards may also be provided on each state’s website. Mid-Continent Regional Education Laboratory is also a rich source of information on standards. It is also possible to participate in training programs on state standards.

The next step is to find out how your state specifies how students with severe disabilities can show progress towards standards through alternate assessments. Many states now include “expanded” standards that “help students link across their traditional academic disciplines with skills to seek out and apply knowledge in a third area, such as career-vocational linkages, citizenship, resources management, or use of technology” (Thompson, Quenemoen, Thurlow, and Yssledyke, (2001, pp. 17). Once knowledge of the standards is gained, then instructional strategies and goals in a student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP) can be developed to teach students with severe disabilities according to the same high standards that other children work towards attaining.

Some IEP goals may already be in place and it is necessary to determine how these goals are based on the standards. For example, an elementary math standard may involve knowledge of geometry and without knowing very much about how that standard is articulated, special educators may not be able to see a connection. Once connections are seen, however, special educators may notice that an IEP goal of recognizing and identifying safety symbols fulfills a geometry standard because it requires the student to classify geometric shapes, such as a triangle for a yield sign.

Please see the National Center of Educational Outcomes for more information regarding alternate assessments and other related topics.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is important for students with severe disabilities to be included in state assessments in order to hold states accountable for education and to influence policy decisions that may impact their education. Students with severe disabilities may be held to the same standards as other children. States are making progress towards including these students in assessments by expanding standards to include functional and essential skills in vocations, citizenry, and technology. Alternate assessments ultimately ensure that students with significant disabilities are counted in our educational system and foster the belief that all students can learn.

Recommended Reading

  • Elliot, J. L., & Thurlow, M. L. (2006). Improving test performance of students with disabilities…on district and state assessments. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.
  • Essex, N. L. (2006). What every teacher should know about no child left behind. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
  • Irons, E. J., & Harris, S. (2007). The challenges of no child left behind: Understanding the issues of excellence, accountability, and choice. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
  • Thompson, S. J., Quenemoen, R. F., Thurlow, M. L., Yssledyke, J. E. (2001). Alternate assessments for students with disabilities. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.
  • Thurlow, & Yssledyke, J. E. (2002). Including students with disabilities in assessments. Washington, D.C.: National Education Assn.
  • Thurlow, M. L., Elliot, J. L., & Yssledyke, J. E. (1998). Testing students with disabilities: Practical strategies for complying with district and state requirements. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.
  • Yell, M. L., & Drasgow, E. (2004). No child left behind: A guide for professionals. Upper Saddle River, New Jersy: Pearson Education, Inc.
Retrieved from "http://teachssd.org/tssd/index.php?title=The_No_Child_Left_Behind_and_the_Individuals_with_Disabilities_Education_Improvement_Act_%28NCLB_and_IDEA%29"