Education test policy revisited

[Harold F. Schiffman]

Article published Feb 11, 2007

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feb 11, 2007

Education test policy revisited

Changes weighed for special ed pupils

By Nancy Zuckerbrod THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON When Tori Boyles of Columbia, Mo., takes a test at school, an
adult often reads the questions to her because the 9-year-old has learning
disabilities that make reading difficult. That kind of accommodation
generally is not allowed for the reading test that public school students
take under the federal No Child Left Behind law. Also, skipping the exam
is not permitted for Tori, who has spina bifida, a condition often
accompanied by learning problems. Her mother, Becky Boyles, asks why she
can't opt out of that. She just has to stare at this piece of paper. Shell
tell you she feels stupid. She feels absolutely stupid.

Boyles and other parents are not the only ones frustrated when children
such as Tori take federally mandated tests and do poorly. School
administrators feel trapped by the system as well, and lagging children
risk being blamed for an entire schools failure. The dilemma is how to fix
the problem without abandoning kids with special needs. Under the federal
law, which seeks to get all students reading and doing math on grade level
by 2014, schools have to analyze the scores of groups of children,
including special education students and foreign-language speakers just
learning English.

If certain groups of students fail to meet specific goals, an entire
school can be labeled as needing improvement, and might face steps such as
having to replace teachers and principals. Critics say that can place
enormous pressure on the lagging groups. In some instances, its made them
into scapegoats. You hear, Well, if it wasn't for these children, then we
would be OK. Its criminal to treat them this way, said Carol Kula, who
teaches high school students in Muscatine, Iowa, who are learning English
as a second language. The 5-year-old federal law is scheduled to be
rewritten this year, and the lawmakers in charge say they will try to
change the rules for special education students and recent immigrants. The
aim is to inject more common sense into the law while sticking with its
promise to leave no child behind.

I think for both of these groups of students, the law was not well
designed. It does not acknowledge (that) by definition these kids are not
going to meet the same standards at the same pace as other students, said
Michael Petrilli, who wrote a book on the law and helped oversee the first
years of the program at the Education Department. Parents, teachers and
state policymakers are among those pushing for more flexibility in testing
special education students and immigrants, while cautioning against
loosening the rules too much. What we're hoping is that students with
disabilities continue to be part of the accountability system. If they're
not, schools are going to make decisions that don't include them, said Katy
Neas, a lobbyist for Easter Seals, which helps people with disabilities
and special needs.

Delia Pompa, vice president for education at the National Council of La
Raza, a Latino advocacy group, said excusing immigrants from tests could
slow their learning. She says public schools have a long history of
providing less than rigorous course work for students who are learning
English. The No Child Left Behind law requires annual testing in reading
and math in third grade through eighth grade and once in high school.
Roughly 10 percent of special education students those with the most
severe disabilities take alternative tests under the law. These are easier
than the regular exams. But critics say the tests still are too hard for
some children and do not reflect lessons typically taught to severely
disabled students.

In addition to this group, the Education Department is considering
allowing about one-fifth of the rest of the special education students to
take alternative tests. They are expected to be harder than the ones given
to the first group but easier than the typical tests. There is a debate
about whether that overall total about 30 percent of special education
students is the right proportion of students to single out and whether
states should be able to set such policies on their own. Similarly, there
is disagreement over how to test students who are learning English as a
second language.

The government exempts students enrolled in U.S. schools for less than a
year from taking reading tests. After that time, these students have to be
tested. The law says students can take the test in their native language
for up to three years. States, however, have been slow to develop tests in
other languages. Critics say children cannot be expected to be proficient
in reading until they have mastered English, which generally takes several
years. Students learning English and those with disabilities were an
afterthought when the No Child Left Behind law was being written,
according to those involved. We said if you're going to have an
accountability system, it needs to include everybody, and then the
drafters said, Oh yeah, you're right, said Neas, the Easter Seals lobbyist.
She said she has heard complaints from teachers who say the law is too
rigid and from parents who want to know why their disabled children have
to take the tests.

Peggy Walker, who teaches sixth-graders with disabilities in Stoughton,
Wis., says the law has brought extra attention to the education of
special-needs students. Everybody at our school is very focused on
reducing the number of kids that aren't proficient, Walker said. Walker
said she worries the law further stigmatizes children with disabilities by
placing schools on watch lists when those students fail. Many educators
say entire schools should not be labeled as failing in those circumstances
and should only have to provide extra attention to lagging students.

Rep. Dale Kildee, who is in charge of the House subcommittee with
jurisdiction over the education law, argues against making a hasty change.
I think were very cautious in changing that, so we don't have them lose
sight of the fact that they have to serve those kids well, said Kildee,
D-Mich. The education subcommittees top Republican, Delaware Rep. Michael
N.  Castle, recently said the law needs to be improved for special
education students and new immigrants. But he stopped short of spelling
out what he wants to do. California Democrat George Miller, who chairs the
full education committee, also said these two areas must be reviewed. One
proposal expected to be considered would give schools credit if their
students, including those with disabilities or those who are learning
English, make strides but fall short of a specific goal.

If every student moves forward, isn't that the key? Some will move faster
than others because of many elements in their lives, said Brenda Dietrich,
a school superintendent in the Topeka, Kan., area. She oversees a district
where a school failed to meet the laws progress goal because of the scores
of special education students. For Becky Boyles, who has adopted six
children, including Tori, the idea of giving schools credit for progress
makes sense. She likened it to the way she runs her home. Everybody's
expected to help out, but Tori, who uses crutches, can't really get her
dishes to the dishwasher, she said. Tori can get the soap in the
dishwasher and get the table wiped off. She's still helping, but I'm not
making her do things that she absolutely cannot do.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order the Telegram & Gazette, delivered daily to your home or office!
www.telegram.com/homedelivery
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 Worcester Telegram & Gazette Corp.

http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070211/NEWS/702110515/1116

***********************************************************************************

N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner or sponsor of
the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who disagree with a
message are encouraged to post a rebuttal.

***********************************************************************************