The Advocacy  Institute Logo
image Search   Contact Us

 About UsProjectsServicesResourcesAdvocate AcademyAdvocacy in ActionHome page

image
improving the lives of people with disabilities
 


Our Kids Count

A Project of The Advocacy Institute

Our Kids Count > Press Release July 2006

The Advocacy Institute released the following Press Release in conjunction with the July 12, 2006 hearing in the U.S. House of Representatives, No Child Left Behind: Ensuring High Academic Achievement for Limited English Proficient Students and Students with Disabilities.

For additional information, read the testimony of Dr. Rachel Quenemoen.

```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

Press Release

6.1 Million Students with Disabilities Need
No Child Left Behind

July 12, 2006
For Immediate Release

For too long this nation’s students with disabilities have been overlooked, under taught, and left out. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 shone a bright light on the persistent underachievement of important subgroups of students and only then did educators begin to focus long needed attention on achievement of students with identified disabilities.

No Child Left Behind has finally brought students with disabilities into state and district-wide assessments. Despite a requirement added to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in the 1997 amendments requiring all students with disabilities to be included in state and district wide assessments, it was not until the passage of NCLB that schools, school districts, and states finally began to include all students and report their performance. With these requirements have come the development of accommodation policies that make it possible for students to demonstrate what they have learned and alternate assessments aligned to challenging academic content for those few students with cognitive disabilities that preclude them from attaining grade-level standards. Still, we have miles to go in developing universally designed tests, appropriate alternate assessments, and technically sound, well administered testing accommodations for all students with disabilities.

No Child Left Behind has realized the requirement that schools are accountable for ensuring that students with disabilities have access to a challenging curriculum. Every student served under IDEA is required to have an individualized education program (IEP) designed to meet their instructional needs and enable them to make progress in the general education curriculum. It was not until NCLB required schools and school districts to disaggregate the performance of students with disabilities did access to the same challenging academic content begin to become a reality. Still, challenges remain, particularly the unacceptably high percentage of schools that are allowed to escape accountability for students with disabilities because of unreasonably high minimum “n” sizes, often coupled with the use of confidence intervals.

No Child Left Behind has addressed the lack of highly qualified teachers. Despite years of federal investments in research on effective instructional practices, teacher recruitment, pre-service training, and assistive technology, only until the NCLB requirements for highly qualified teachers, buttressed by additional provisions for highly qualified special education teachers in IDEA 2004, have students with disabilities been provided the opportunity to receive instruction from both regular and special educators who have academic content knowledge. Still, much remains to be accomplished regarding the implementation of evidence-based practices, effective and ongoing professional development and higher expectations for students with disabilities.

Data reported during the past five years indicates that students with disabilities were left behind or not considered in the effort to raise standards and improve instruction in our nation’s public schools:

  • Nearly 38 percent of students with disabilities ages 14 and older dropped out of school during the 2001-2002 school year. Only 51 percent graduated with a standard diploma in the same year.
    Source: 26th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2004;
  • Roughly 10 percent of special education positions nationally — 39,140 positions — are filled by uncertified personnel who serve approximately 600,000 students with disabilities.
    Source: SPeNSE, Study of Personnel Needs in Special Education 2002
  • Only 57 percent of special education teachers say they are “very” familiar with their state’s academic content for the subjects they teach.
    Source: Quality Counts 2004: Count Me In, Education Week 2004
  • Only 35 states and the District of Columbia require schools or district report cards to include information separately on the test participation rates and performance of students with disabilities. Few states – seven and 15 respectively, require schools or districts to report dropout and graduation rates separately for students in special education.
    Source: Quality Counts 2004: Count Me In, Education Week 2004
  • Grades given to secondary school students with disabilities have been found to have no correlation to real academic functioning, misleading parents about how their child is actually performing.
    Source: Youth with Disabilities: The Achievements of Youth with Disabilities During Secondary School. Reports from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) 2003

Even with the passage of No Child Left Behind and corresponding amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 2004, children with disabilities are most certainly left behind and affected by the lack of expectations they face in their schools:

  • Only one-fifth of teachers think that “all” or “most” of their special education students can score at the proficient level on state exams.
    Source: Quality Counts 2004: Count Me In, Education Week 2004
  • The vast majority, 86 percent, of teachers feel that it is “unfair” to evaluate special education students on how well they master academic content standards based on test scores. Eighty-nine percent feel it is unfair to teachers to be evaluated on how well IEP students score on state tests.
    Source: Quality Counts 2004: Count Me In, Education Week 2004
  • Only seven states require that the IEPs of students with disabilities address state academic content standards.
    Source: Quality Counts 2004: Count Me In, Education Week 2004

Under NCLB’s “accountability” provisions school districts and individual schools must make what the Act terms “adequate yearly progress” (AYP) towards ensuring that all students achieve at least a “proficient” level on state assessments in reading and math by the 2014-2015 school year. Each state sets the standard for what constitutes “proficient,” and defines “adequate yearly progress,” per certain requirements set out in NCLB and approved by the U.S. Department of Education. To exclude students with disabilities from being included in the determination of AYP as required by NCLB and which is critical to ensuring effective teaching and instruction of ALL students to the standards expected to be met by all, would constitute a violation of their civil rights.

Children with disabilities, including those students with significant disabilities, are making progress under No Child Left Behind. The challenge for these children, their families and the advocates who are allied with them will be to ensure that our nation’s education leaders view the education of students with disabilities to high academic standards as a challenge and a shared goal. As Congress prepares to examine and reauthorize NCLB, it is encouraged to stay the course on accountability for students with disabilities.

The Advocacy Institute
Marshall, Virginia

 
About Us | Projects | Services | Resources | Advocate Academy | Advocacy in Action | Contact Us | Home

Copyright 2001-2008 The Advocacy Institute