Excerpt from Thesis:
While many suggest that high-stakes testing can be an not enough way of measuring the academic achievements and learning of most pupils, many as well agree that high-stakes testing has severe disadvantages to get special education students. Kymes points out that high-stakes assessment may be a discriminatory evaluation method for special needs pupils, placing a great “unfair burden” on these types of students. The scholar states that tests plans can not be created for each and every student, as well as when they can, these assessment plans are certainly not always put into practice (Kymes). In addition , Ralabate notes the importance of actually finding alternate assessment methods that allow college students with disabilities to perform for their highest capacity.
Determining that high-stakes assessment is not a correct approach to assessment to get special demands students, yet , is just half the task at hand. In fact , significant information is available to argue that students with disabilities, moreover to schools, can be seriously harmed by simply these examination methods. Initial, Kymes remarks that special needs pupils who are assessed by using a high-stakes screening method might feel like failures, suffer from low self-esteem and other emotional medical problems, and even drop-out of school. Instead of focusing on leaving no child behind, therefore , this type of tests may actually encourage students to leave themselves behind – for good. Second, Kymes likewise writes that students “often feel personally responsible for their very own district’s not receiving… awards” mainly because such honours are based on evaluation scores. Similarly, as test scores figure out what schools are penalized and which are paid, schools with high masse of particular education students may be the unfair recipients of such fees and penalties. This could business lead schools to encourage special needs students to be missing on assessment days as well as to move to other schools, which in turn would have an identical detrimental affect on them.
To conclude, the NCLB Act was signed in to law simply by President George W. Bush in order to reform education. Unfortunately, its excellent assessment tool is high-stakes testing, upon which schools can receive either rewards or penalties. As this testing continues to be long wondered as to the validity, learners, parents, and teachers cannot be sure that the assessment is accurate for just about any student. Furthermore, the problem is compounded for particular education college students, who frequently cannot conduct to the most of their potential on these kinds of tests. The tests not only penalizes the school districts, consequently , but also the students, who have may suffer by emotional problems and remorse due to the analysis model. As a result, as Ralabate suggests, diverse assessment versions must be learned in order to make NCLB more comprehensive and fair to special education students.
Works Cited
Fact Sheet: Not any Child Left Behind. 8 January 2002. The White Property. 19 November 2008. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020108.html
Kymes, Nancy. “The Simply no Child Forgotten Act: A review of Provisions, Philosophies, and Accommodement. ” Diary of Industrial Instructor Education. forty one. 2 (2004) 19 The fall of 2008. http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JITE/v41n2/kymes.html
Marlow, Ediger. Assessment and High Stakes Screening. Speech, 2001. Educational
Useful resource Information Centre. ED449234.
Ralabate, Patti. Affirmation of Patti Ralabate Posted by NEA to Aspen Institute’s
Commission on No Child Left out. 2 August 2006. National Education Connection. 19 Nov 2008. http://www.nea.org/lac/esea/080206testi.html
