The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same: Comparing Special Education Students’ Experiences of Accountability Reform Across Two Decades

Pazey, Barbara L.; Heilig, Julian Vasquez; Cole, Heather; Sumbera, Meagan

doi:10.1007/s11256-014-0312-7

Cited by 16 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Publications on the genesis and history of special education in the United States (Kirk & Lord, 1974a), evolution of special education law (Yell et al, 2011), federal policy related to personnel preparation (Kleinhammer-Tramill & Fiore, 2003; Kleinhammer-Tramill et al, 2010, 2014), and the outcomes of federal special education policy implementation (Pazey et al, 2015; Ysseldyke et al, 2004) abound in the literature. Many publications outline persistent issues of equity for students with disabilities (e.g., Castro-Villarreal et al, 2016; Skiba et al, 2008), disproportionate (overrepresentation and underrepresentation) number of students of color in special education (e.g., Artiles et al, 2010; Zhang et al, 2014), impact of standardization and accountability on students with disabilities (e.g., McLaughlin & Thurlow, 2003), and implementation, promises, and pitfalls of RtI (e.g., Balu et al, 2015; Castro-Villarreal et al, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Case Study of Federal Leadership Perspectives on Special Education

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is part of an illustrative study of federal leadership in special education based on interviews with persons who served as Assistant Secretaries in the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services and Directors of the Office of Special Education Programs. The perspectives cover the time period since the inception of the HEW—Bureau of Education for the Handicapped in 1967 until 2012. A phenomenological approach to interpreting the data revealed that these leaders faced similar barriers in their efforts to implement their vision, that their family background experiences influenced the policies they pursued, that their accomplishments frame major evolutions of the field, and, that their work represents a lifelong commitment to improving education and services for students with disabilities and special needs. We believe what we learned has value not only in helping to understand the challenges and accomplishments that have passed but also in its potential for guiding the future of federal and other legislation protecting the rights of and improving and sustaining the services needed for individuals with disabilities.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Case Study of Federal Leadership Perspectives on Special Education

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Disciplinary forces of the state apply sanctions to schools located in urban, low-income neighborhoods with high African American, Hispanic, immigrant student populations, and students with dis/abilities (Anderson, Cohen, & Seraus, 2015; Pazey & DeMatthews, 2019; Lipman, 2013; Pazey et al, 2015). In such cases, the standardization of what students are expected to achieve socially constructs and assigns deficit labels of inability and inadequacy to minoritized schools like HHS, historically situated in a low-income neighborhood (DisCrit Tenets 1, 2, and 3).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, taking an advocacy-oriented and critical approach, I sought to illustrate, support, or challenge the theoretical assumptions reinforcing neoliberal reform. In previous studies conducted over time at this school (Pazey & DeMatthews, 2019; Pazey et al, 2015; Pazey et al, 2017), I critiqued the implementation and results of these reforms by focusing on their disparate impacts, specifically their marginalizing effects on students with dis/abilities and their friends. By utilizing an interpretive critical approach, my initial intent was to illuminate the counternarratives of HHS student and adult advocates who, in opposition to the district’s proposed action, challenged the underlying assumptions and rhetoric of neoliberal-infused reform.…”

Section: Research Methods and Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to the upheaval that individuals who are associated with a so-called failing school like HHS endure when branded with a negative label such as academically unacceptable (Granger, 2008; Kirshner, Gaertner, & Pozzoboni, 2010; Malen & Rice, 2004, 2009; Meier & Wood, 2004; Nichols & Berliner, 2007; Pazey, Cole, & Spikes, 2017; Pazey & DeMatthews, 2019; Pazey, Vasquez Heilig, Cole, & Sumbera, 2015; Ravitch, 2010; Shepard, 2008; Vasquez Heilig & Darling-Hammond, 2008), critiques of neoliberal reforms like NCLB (2002) abound (Ferri & Ashby, 2017; Hursh, 2007; Johnson, 2013; Tienken, 2013). What made HHS unique, however, stemmed from the level of student involvement and adult advocacy that occurred throughout the fall 2011 semester in efforts to disprove the academically unacceptable label that the state, the media, and individuals in the larger community repeatedly used to construct a negative identity of their school and school community.…”

Section: Neoliberal Reformmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

¡Ya Basta! Countering the Effects of Neoliberal Reform on an Urban Turnaround High School

Pazey

2019

American Educational Research Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides an account of the ways in which students and adult supporters of an urban turnaround high school mobilized to defy the rhetoric of neoliberal reforms and the subsequent deficit narrative imposed on them and on their school. Their counternarratives refute the master narratives advanced by federal and state educational reforms. The current rationale of neoliberal reforms and the disabling terminology used to construct the identity of a school and the individuals associated with the school are interrogated through the theoretical framework of Dis/ability Critical Race Theory. An alternative approach and philosophy of thought regarding school reform and the ways in which we define the worth and value of a school, its students, and the larger community is offered.

show abstract

“…There is evidence to suggest students' experiences with tests and testing have undermined their motivation, interest, and enjoyment in learning (Deci & Ryan, 2016;Markowitz, 2018;Vasquez Heilig & Darling-Hammond, 2008). Although these effects vary widely, the negative effects on students are disproportionately experienced by marginalized student populations include minority youth, youth who live in poverty, youth in special education and those for whom English is a Second Language (Menken, 2010;Pazey, Vasquez Heilig, Cole, & Sumbera, 2015;Rodriguez & Arellano, 2016).…”

Section: Effects Of High-stakes Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preservice teachers’ beliefs about high-stakes testing and their working environments

Nichols

Brewington

2020

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this exploratory mixed methods survey study, we assess preservice teachers’ (n=379) experiences with and beliefs about their high-stakes testing experiences and analyze how they relate to their beliefs about the role and efficacy of high-stakes testing in education and their future profession. Using Likert, vignette, and open-ended response opportunities, we gauged preservice teachers’ beliefs about accountability and the role of high-stakes testing in three ways: (a) what are their personal experiences with high-stakes testing, (b) what are their their beliefs about accountability and high-stakes testing in general, and (b) what role does accountability (and testing pressures) play in their future workplace preferences? Results indicate that preservice teachers’ experiences with and beliefs about high-stakes testing accountability vary based on gender, ethnicity, and previous experiences with high-stakes tests. Importantly, although in aggregate our participants reported they generally disliked the high-stakes tests they personally had to take in high school, subgroup analyses reveal that for those who took them during the NCLB era, they also saw high-stakes tests as good thing for education overall. Preservice teachers who were younger and “grew up” under NCLB and the height of high-stakes testing believed high-stakes tests to be a waste of time for them personally, but a useful way to evaluate teachers as an educational policy. Vignette and qualitative analyses of workplace preferences and rationales underscore some of the assumptions our preservice teachers hold about high-stakes testing as a policy mechanism to help explain this finding. We conclude with implications for policy and future research.

show abstract

The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same: Comparing Special Education Students’ Experiences of Accountability Reform Across Two Decades

Cited by 16 publications

References 54 publications

A Case Study of Federal Leadership Perspectives on Special Education

A Case Study of Federal Leadership Perspectives on Special Education

¡Ya Basta! Countering the Effects of Neoliberal Reform on an Urban Turnaround High School

Preservice teachers’ beliefs about high-stakes testing and their working environments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About