School administrators in six school districts were interviewed. Each district had been identified previously as having increasing rates of retention in grade or transitional-grade placements and increasing incidence of the identification of students as having disabilities. School administrators offered a variety of explanations for students' learning difficulties and offered a number of suggested remedies. virtually all of the explanations and remedies placed the school outside the central sphere of influence. In other words, in these interviews administrators offered few ideas for altering the current general education programs as a potential strategy for addressing the problems of at-risk children.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allington, R. L. (1994). What's special about special programs for children who have difficulty learning to read?Journal of Reading Behavior, 26, 1–21.
2.
Allington, R. L., & Cunningham, P. (1996). Schools that work: All children read and write. New York: HarperCollins.
3.
Allington, R. L., & McGill-Franzen, A. M. (1989). Different programs, indifferent instruction. In A. Gartner & D. Lipsky (Eds.), Beyond separate education: Quality education for all (pp. 75–98). Baltimore: Brookes.
4.
Allington, R. L., & McGill-Franzen, A. M. (1992a). Does high-stakes testing improve school effectiveness?ERS Spectrum, 10, 3–12.
5.
Allington, R. L., & McGill-Franzen, A. M. (1992b). Unintended effects of educational reform in New York State. Educational Policy, 6, 396–413.
6.
Allington, R. L., & McGill-Franzen, A. M. (1995). Flunking: Throwing good money after bad. In R. L. Allington & S. A. Walmsley (Eds.), No quick fix: Rethinking literacy programs in America's elementary schools (pp. 45–60). New York: Teachers College.
7.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1991). The implications of testing policy for quality and equality. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 220–225.
8.
Elliott, J. L., Erickson, R., & Thurlow, M. L. (1996, April). State-level accountability for the performance of students with disabilities: Five years of change?Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
9.
Gartner, A., & Lipsky, D. K. (1987). Beyond special education: Toward a quality system for all students. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 367–395.
10.
Haladyna, T. H., Nolan, S. B., & Haas, N. S. (1991). Raising standardized achievement test scores and the origins of test score pollution. Educational Researcher, 20, 1–7.
11.
Hammill, D. D. (1993). A brief look at the learning disabilities movement in the United States. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 295–310.
12.
Haynes, M. C., & Jenkins, J. R. (1986). Reading instruction in special education resource rooms. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 161–190.
13.
Johnston, P. A., & Allington, R. L. (1991). Remediation. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. II, pp. 984–1012). New York: Longman.
14.
Leinhardt, G. (1980). Transition rooms: Promoting motivation or reducing education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 55–61.
15.
Levin, H. M. (1987). Accelerated schools for disadvantaged students. Educational Leadership, 44, 19–21.
16.
Mardell-Czudnowski, C., & Goldenberg, D. (1983). Developmental indicators for the assessment of learning-Revised. Edison, NJ: Childcraft Corp.
17.
McGill-Franzen, A. M. (1987). Failure to learn to read: Formulating a policy problem. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 475–490.
18.
McGill-Franzen, A. M. (1994). Is there accountability for learning and belief in children's potential? In E. H. Hiebert & B. M. Taylor (Eds.), Getting reading right from the start: Effective early literacy interventions (pp. 13–35). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
19.
McGill-Franzen, A. M., & Allington, R. L. (1991). The gridlock of low achievement: Perspectives on policy and practice. Remedial and Special Education, 12, 20–30.
20.
McGill-Franzen, A. M., & Allington, R. L. (1993). Flunk èm or get them classified: The contamination of primary grade accountability data. Educational Researcher, 22, 19–22.
21.
McGrew, K. S., Thurlow, M. L., & Spiegel, A. N. (1993). An investigation of the exclusion of students with disabilities in national data collection programs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 339–355.
22.
Moats, L., & Lyons, R. (1993). Learning disabilities in the United States: Advocacy, science, and the future of the field. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 282–294.
23.
National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). The condition of education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
24.
O'Day, J. (1995). Systemic reform and Goals 2000. In J. J. Jennings (Ed.), National issues in education: Goals 2000 and school-to-work (pp. 99–115). Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
25.
Parrish, T. B. (1994). Fiscal issues in special education: Removing incentives for restrictive placements (Policy Paper No. 4). Palo Alto, CA: Center for Special Education Finance, American Institutes for Research.
26.
Pinnell, G. S. (1989). Reading recovery: Helping at-risk children learn to read. Elementary School Journal, 90, 161–184.
27.
Potter, D., & West, M. (1992, April). Higher standards for grade promotion and graduation: Unintended effects of reform. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
28.
Puma, M. J., Jones, C. C., Rock, D., & Fernandez, R. (1993). Prospects: The congressionally mandated study of educational growth and opportunity—The interim report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
29.
Salvia, J., & Ysseldyke, J. (1985). Assessment in special and remedial education. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
30.
Scanlon, D. M., & Vellutino, F. R. (1996). Prerequisite skills, early instruction, and success in first-grade reading: Selected results from a longitudinal study. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities: Research and Review, 2, 54–63.
31.
Shepard, L. A., & Smith, M. L. (Eds.). (1989). Flunking grades: Research and policies on retention. Philadelphia: Falmer.
32.
Skrtic, T. M. (1991). The special education paradox: Equity as the way to excellence. Harvard Educational Review, 61, 148–206.
33.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Neverstreaming: Preventing learning disabilities. Educational Leadership, 53, 4–7.
34.
Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Karweit, N. L., Livermon, B. J., & Dolan, L. (1990). Success for all: First-year outcomes of a comprehensive plan for reforming urban education. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 255–278.
35.
Spear-Swerling, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Off track: When poor readers become “learning disabled.”Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
36.
Vellutino, F., Scanlon, D., Sipay, E. R., Small, S. G., Pratt, A., Chen, R., & Denkla, M. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult to remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experientially based deficits as basic causes of reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601–638.
37.
Viadero, D. (1992, August 15). Report finds record jump in special education enrollment. Education Week, 30, 11, 19.
38.
Wasik, B. A., & Slavin, R. E. (1993). Preventing early reading failure with one-to-one tutoring: A review of five programs. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 178–200.
