Examining Competing Notions of Social Justice at the Intersections of High-Stakes Testing Practices and Parents’ Rights: An Inclusive Education Perspective
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 2016
Examining Competing Notions of Social Justice at the Intersections of High-Stakes Testing Practices and Parents’ Rights: An Inclusive Education Perspective
In this article, we examine tensions that can materialize at the intersection of high-stakes accountability assessments and the rights of parents of students with dis/abilities. We bring to the surface and analyze the competing notions of social justice that have fueled the implementation of both high-stakes testing and the inclusion of students with dis/abilities in public schooling. Our purpose is to problematize narrow discussions about high-stakes testing and students with dis/abilities, contextualizing them in broader struggles for inclusive education. To achieve this task, we examine an event, framed as a case study, which emerged from a larger research project. Our analysis is informed by an understanding of inclusive education as situated practice in which historically evolving notions of justice are tangled and enacted to negotiate situated identities. We conclude with implications for practice and accountability models.
AppleM. A. (2001). Educating the “right” way: Markets, standards, God, and inequality. New York, NY: Routledge.
3.
AppleM. W. (2007). Ideological success, educational failure? On the politics of No Child Left Behind. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(2), 108–116).
4.
ArtilesA. J. (1998). The dilemma of difference: Enriching disproportionality discourse in theory and context. Journal of Special Education, 32(1), 32–36).
5.
ArtilesA. J. (2009). Re-framing disproportionality research: Outline of a cultural-historical paradigm. Multiple Voices for Ethnically Diverse Exceptional Learners, 11(2), 24–37).
6.
ArtilesA. J., Harris-MurriN., & RostenbergD. (2006). Inclusion as social justice: Critical notes on discourses, assumptions, and the road ahead. Theory into Practice, 45(3), 260–268). doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4503_8
7.
BallS. J. (2003). The teacher's soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Educational Policy, 18(3), 215–228).
8.
BallS. J. (2006). Education policy and social class: The selected works of Stephen J. Ball. London, England: Routledge.
9.
Brookhart v. Illinois State board of Education, 697 F. 2d 179 (7th Cir. 1983).
10.
BrownW. (2003). Neo-liberalism and the end of liberal democracy. Theory & Event, 7(1), 37–59).
11.
CortiellaC. (2006). NCLB and IDEA: What parents of students with dis/abilities need to know and do. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Darling-HammondL. (2007). Race, inequality, and educational accountability: The irony of ‘No Child Left Behind.’Race, Ethnicity, and Education, 10(3), 245–260). doi:10.1080/13613320701503207
14.
Debra P. by Irene P. v. Turlington, 730 F. 2d 1405 (11th Cir. 1984).
15.
Delgado-GaitanC. (1991). Involving parents in the schools: A process of empowerment. American Journal of Education, 100(1), 20–46).
16.
El-HajT. R. A. (2006). Elusive justice: Wrestling with difference and educational equity in everyday practice. New York, NY: Routledge.
17.
FaircloughN. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London, England, & New York, NY: Routledge.
18.
FraserN. (1997). Justice interruptus: Critical reflections on the postsocialist condition. London, England: Routledge.
19.
FraserN. (2009). Scales of justice: Reimagining political space in a globalizing world. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
20.
FuhrmanS. H., & ElmoreR. F. (Ed.). (2004). Redesigning accountability systems for education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
21.
GartnerA., & LipskyD. K. (1987). Beyond special education: Toward a quality system for all students. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 367–395).
22.
GeeJ. P. (2000). Identity as an analytical lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25, 99–125).
23.
GeeJ. P. (2001). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. New York, NY: Routledge.
24.
GewirtzS., & CribbA. (2002). Plural conceptions of social justice: Implications for policy sociology. Journal of Education Policy, 17(5), 499–509).
25.
GraffC. S., & VazquezS. L. (2013). Family resistance as a tool in urban school reform. In KozleskiE.B., & ThoriusK.K. (Eds.), Ability, equity, and culture: Sustaining inclusive urban education reform (pp. 80–106)). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
26.
GreenoJ. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In SawyerR.K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79–96)). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
HarryB., KlingnerJ. K., & HartJ. (2005). African American families under fire: Ethnographic views of family strengths. Remedial and Special Education, 26(2), 101–112).
30.
HarveyD. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
31.
HollandD., & LaveJ. (2001). History in person: Enduring struggles, contentious practice, and intimate identities. Albuquerque, NM: School of American Research Press.
32.
HollandD., SkinnerD., LachiotteW.Jr., & CainC. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Press.
33.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (1997).
34.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).
35.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Regulations, 34 C.F.R. § 300.1 et seq. (2004).
36.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.Remedial and Special Education, 22(6), 324–334).
37.
KalyanpurM., & HarryB. (2012). Cultural reciprocity in special education: Building family–professional relationships. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
38.
KatsiyannisA., YellM. L., & BradleyR. (2004). Reflections on the 25th anniversary of the
39.
KlingnerJ., MooreB., DavidsonA. O., BoeléA., BoardmanA., FigueroaR., … SagerN. (2015). Cultural and linguistic diversity in special education. In BatemanB., LloydJ.W., & TandersleyM. (Eds.), Enduring issues in special education: Personal perspectives (pp. 110–131)). New York, NY: Routledge.
40.
KozleskiE. B., & WaitollerF. R. (2010). Teacher learning for inclusive education: Understanding teaching as a cultural and political practice. International Journal for Inclusive Education, 14(7), 655–666).
41.
KurzA., & ElliottS. N. (2011). Overcoming access to barriers for students with disabilities: Testing accommodations and beyond. In RussellM., & KavanaughM. (Eds.), Assessing students in the margin: Challenges, strategies, and techniques (pp. 31–58)). Charlotte, NC: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
Ladson-BillingsG. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding achievement in U.S. schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12).
43.
LalvaniP. (2012). Parents’ participation in special education in the context of implicit educational ideologies and socioeconomic status. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 47(4), 474–486).
44.
LipskyD. K., & GartnerA. (1996). Equity requires inclusion: The future for all students with disabilities. In ChristensenC., & RizviF. (Eds.), Disability and the dilemmas of education and justice (pp. 145–155)). Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
45.
MadausG., RussellM., & HigginsJ. (2009). The paradoxes of high stakes testing: How they affect students, their parents, teachers, principals, schools, and society. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
46.
McLaughlinM. J., & ThurlowM. (2003). Educational accountability and students with disabilities: Issues and challenges. Educational Policy, 17(4), 431–451). doi:10.1177/0895904803254962
47.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Public Law 107–110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
48.
Ong-DeanC. (2009). Distinguishing disability: Parents, privilege, and special education. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
49.
PattonM. Q. (2001). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50.
RawlsJ. (1972). A theory of justice. Oxford, England: Clarendon.
51.
RizviF., & LingardB. (1996). Disability, education, and the discourses of justice. In ChristensenC., & RizviF. (Eds.), Disability and the dilemmas of education and justice (pp. 9–26)). Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
52.
SaltmanK. J. (2014). Neoliberalism and corporate school reform: “Failure” and “creative destruction.” Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 36(4), 249–259). doi:10.1 080/10714413.2014.938564
53.
ScribnerJ. D., YoungM. D., & PedrozaA. (1999). Building collaborative relationships with parents. In ReyesP., ScribnerJ.D., & ScribnerA.P. (Eds.), Lessons from high-performing Hispanic schools: Creating learning communities (pp. 36–60)). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
54.
SleeR. (2011). The irregular school: Exclusion, schooling, and inclusive education. Oxon, England: Routledge.
55.
SolórzanoD., & Delgado BernalD. (2001). Examining transformational resistance in a critical race and LatCrit theory framework: Chicana and Chicano students in an urban context. Urban Education, 36(3), 308–342).
56.
StraussA., & CorbinJ. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
57.
ThoriusK. A. K., & TanP. (2016). Expanding analysis of educational debt: Considering ntersections of race and ability. In ConnorD., FerriB., & AnnammaS.A. (Eds.), is Crit: Critical Conversations Across Race, Class, & Dis/ability (pp. 87–97)). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
58.
ThoriusK. K., MaxcyB., MaceyE., & CoxA. (2014). A critical practice analysis of Response to Intervention appropriation in an urban school. Remedial and Special Education, 35(5), 287–299). doi:10.1177/0741932514550812
59.
TomlinsonS. (Ed). (2014). The politics of race, class and special education: The selected works of Sally Tomlinson. New York, NY: Routledge.
60.
TrainorA. A. (2010). Diverse approaches to parent advocacy during special education home–school interactions: Identification and use of cultural and social capital. Remedial and Special Education, 31(1),34–47). doi:10.1177/0741932508324401
61.
TurnbullH. R., StoweM. J., & HuertaN. E. (2007). Free appropriate public education: The law and children with disabilities (7th ed.). Denver, CO: Love.
62.
Vasquez HeiligJ., & Darling-HammondL. (2008). Accountability Texas style: The progress and learning of urban minority students in a high-stakes testing context. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30, 75–110).
63.
WaitollerF. R. (2014). Becoming a culturally responsive special educator amidst school/ university partnerships: Teaching and learning in boundary-zone activity. Mind, Culture & Activity, 21(1), 53–73). doi:10.1080/10749039.2013.832330
64.
WaitollerF. R., & ArtilesA. J. (2013). A decade of professional development research in inclusive education: A critical review and notes for a research program. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 319–356). doi:0034654313483905
65.
WaitollerF. R., & ArtilesA. J. (2016). Teacher learning as curating: Becoming inclusive educators in school/university partnerships. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 360–371).
66.
WaitollerF. R., & KozleskiE. B. (2013). Working in boundary practices: Identity development and learning in partnerships for inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 31, 35–45).
67.
WaitollerF. R., & KozleskiE. B. (2015). No stone left unturned: The emergence of New Capitalism in inclusive education reform. Education and Policy Analysis Archives, 23(18). http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.1779
68.
WeberM. C. (2013). Children with disabilities, parents without disabilities, and layers: Issues of life experience, affinity, and agency. In KanterA.S., & FerriB.A. (Eds.), Righting educational wrongs: Disability studies in law and education (pp. 207–217)). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
69.
WertschJ. V., & RupertL. J. (1993). The authority of cultural tools in a sociocultural approach to mediated agency. Cognition & Instruction, 11(3), 227–239).
70.
YellM. L. (2016). The law and special education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
