Effect of Different Methods of Reporting and Reclassification on Trends in Test Scores for Students with Disabilities

Abstract

State education agencies are now required to report on the educational performance and progress of all students, including students with disabilities. States are beginning to report trends, and to compare trends in performance of students with and without disabilities. We compare the effects of different methods of analyzing trends to illustrate how failure to account for changes in classification of students will lead to misinterpretation of data on the performance and progress of students with disabilities, and inappropriate policy decisions. We compare three ways of looking at trends over time, and use data from 5 years of assessment in a large state to illustrate the effects of students who change classification. We discuss how accounting for changes in classification of individual students will lead to more appropriate decisions and help avoid negative consequences for students with disabilities.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Carlson

Parshall

(1996). Academic, social, and behavioral adjustment for students declassified from special education. Exceptional Children, 63, 89–100.

McMillen

Kaufman

(1997). Dropout rates in the United States: 1996. (National Center for Education Statistics, NCES 98–250). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Rossi

Herting

Wolman

Quinn

(1997). Profiles of students with disabilities as identified in NELS:88. (National Center for Education Statistics, NCES 97254). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Texas Education Agency, NCS Pearson, Harcourt Brice Educational Measurement, Measurement Incorporated. Texas student assessment program. Technical digest for the academic year 1999–2000. Austin, TX: Author.

Thurlow

Ysseldyke

(1999). Actual data from states on the participation of students with disabilities in state assessments. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Council for Chief State School Officers, Salt Lake City.

Thurlow

M. L.

Bielinski

Minnema

Scott

(in press). Out-of-level testing revisited: New concerns in the era of standards-based reform. In Tindal

Haladyna

(Eds.), Large-scale assessment programs for all Students: Development, implementation and analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.

Trimble

(1998). Performance trends and use of accommodations on a statewide assessment (Maryland/Kentucky Report 3). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

U.S. Department of Education. (1998). Twentieth annual report to congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.

Wagner

D'Amico

Marder

Newman

Blackorby

(1992). What happens next? Trends in postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities. The second comprehensive report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study of Special Education Students. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.

10.

Walker

Singer

Palfrey

Orza

Wenger

Butler

(1988). Who leaves and who stays in special education: A 2-year follow-up study. Exceptional Children, 54, 393–402.

11.

Ysseldyke

Thurlow

Langenfeld

Nelson

J. R.

Teelucksingh

Seyfarth

(1998). Educational results for students with disabilities: What do the data tell us? (Technical Report 23). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.