Equity Through Accountability? Mandating Minimum Competency Exit Examinations for Secondary Students With Learning Disabilities

Manset, Genevieve; Washburn, Sandra

doi:10.1207/sldrp1503_6

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In an earlier study, MacMillan et al (1992) found that students who failed to pass MCEs were 10 times more likely to drop out of school than those who passed them (Amrein & Berliner, 2002). Manset and Washburn (2000) posit that the potential negative effects of MCEs (e.g., increased drop-out rates) outweigh any potential benefits (e.g., improved academic outcomes, enhanced status of the diploma) they may provide.…”

Section: Minimum Competency Examsmentioning

confidence: 99%

High-Stakes Testing and Students With Disabilities

Katsiyannis

Zhang

Ryan

et al. 2007

Journal of Disability Policy Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of high-stakes testing has become an increasingly popular assessment for schools to use in demonstrating individual academic performance of students, and providingaccountability for school improvement. Given the potential negative consequences associated with mandatory testing (e.g., grade retention, withholding of high school diplomas, labeling failing schools), students, parents, and school districts all bear significant risks based upon student test scores. The historically poor performance of students with disabilities on these assessments has raised concerns over minimum standards, permissible test modifications, and alternate assessments. The authors provide a review of recent research literature, legislation, and court decisions pertaining to the use of high-stakes testing for students with special needs in support of : (a) federal legislation (i.e., No Child Left Behind and Individual With Disabilities Education Act), (b) Mandatory Competency Exams to determine grade promotion, and (c) Mandatory Exit Exams to meet graduation requirements.

show abstract

Section: Minimum Competency Examsmentioning

confidence: 99%

High-Stakes Testing and Students With Disabilities

Katsiyannis

Zhang

Ryan

et al. 2007

Journal of Disability Policy Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The experts’ responses are then systematically organized and categorized. On subsequent rounds, statistical data such as means, medians, and standard deviations, are compiled and shared with panel members to provide them with feedback regarding their collective opinions (Cannon, Idol, & West, 1992; Graves, Landers, Lokerson, Luchow, & Horvath, 1993; Hakim & Weinblatt, 1993; Somers et al., 1984; West & Cannon, 1988). Panel members are also given the opportunity to compare their responses to the group consensus and can decide to maintain their responses or to revise them in subsequent rounds.…”

Section: The Cross-cultural Psychology Competency Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The procedure provides researchers with a systematic way to build constructs and organize ideas that can be validated later and organized further into models or theories (Linstone & Turoff, 1975). In the field of education, several investigations have used Delphi procedures to identify essential competencies for special educators working with inclusion students (Putnam et al, 1995), students with learning disabilities (Graves et al, 1993), and students with hearing impairments (Grissom & Cochran, 1986). Competencies relevant to general and special educators were also identified by Cannon et al (1992) and by West and Cannon (1988).…”

Section: The Cross-cultural Psychology Competency Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing cross-cultural school psychology competencies.

Lopez¹,

Rogers²

2001

School Psychology Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Delphi study was designed to identify essential cross-cultural competencies for school psychologists. The investigation extends the results of the Rogers and Lopez (in press) Delphi study by using a distinct panel of experts, different instrumentation, and a modified process to identify cross-cultural competencies for school psychologists. The term cross-cultural is defined broadly and refers to racially, ethnically, culturally and linguistically diverse clients from African American, Asian American, Hispanic, Native American and Pacific Islander backgrounds in addition to individuals with diverse handicaps, sexual orientations, economic status, religious backgrounds, and gender. In this study, the investigators used the Delphi technique to poll the opinions of 11 experts in cross-cultural school psychology using an open-ended questionnaire. The panelists reached high levels of agreement in identifying 89 essential cross-cultural competencies. The competencies reflect a wide range of knowledge and skills for school psychologists working in broad ranging capacities with students with cross-cultural backgrounds. Although some essential cross-cultural competencies from the present study are similar to those obtained in the Rogers and Lopez study and in the cross-cultural counseling competency literature, the essential competencies also reflect differences in the scope and types of competencies identified.The call for psychologists to develop cross-cultural competencies is driven by several long-standing and compelling movements in our society and profession. Due to changes in our nation's demographics, many school psychologists are currently providing psychological services to a significant number of racially, ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse children and families (National A sincere thank you is extended to our panelists for all their hard work and contributions to this investigation. We would also like to thank J.

show abstract

“…Several issues have surfaced regarding the participation of students with disabilities in state-and districtwide assessments. For example, the nature and adequacy of alternate assessments (Thurlow, Lazarus, Thompson, & Morse, 2005;Turner, Baldwin, Kleinert, & Kearns, 2000), allowable accommodations (Bolt & Thurlow, 2004;O'Neill, 2001), and the legality of minimum competence examinations for students with disabilities regarding graduation (Manset & Washburn, 2000;O'Neill, 2001). Unfortunately, little is known about the consequences of including students with disabilities in these reform efforts (Schulte, Villwock, Whichard, & Stallings, 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance on Exit Exams by Students With Disabilities

Zhang

Katsiyannis

Kortering

2007

Career Development for Exceptional Individuals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the results of students with disabilities participation in statewide exams reported by public schools in North Carolina from 2000-2001 to 2003-2004. Results included (a) students without disabilities significantly outperformed their peers with disabilities in each of four content areas (English 1, Algebra 1, Biology, and Physical Science); (b) among the four disability groups, students with learning disabilities (LD) and other health impairments (OHI) had comparable performance levels as both groups consistently outperformed peers with emotional/behavioral disorders (E/BD) or educable mental disabilities (EMD); (c) all groups showed measurable rates of improvement over the 4 years on the English 1 and Physical Science tests; and (d) students from economically advantaged school districts demonstrated significantly higher rates of success.

show abstract

Equity Through Accountability? Mandating Minimum Competency Exit Examinations for Secondary Students With Learning Disabilities

Cited by 5 publications

References 20 publications

High-Stakes Testing and Students With Disabilities

High-Stakes Testing and Students With Disabilities

Conceptualizing cross-cultural school psychology competencies.

Performance on Exit Exams by Students With Disabilities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About