Trends in the incidence of retention, remediation, and identification of students as handicapped were examined in 12 elementary schools across a period of increased high-stakes assessment and public accountability (1978-1979 to 1988-1989). At the primary grade levels there was a significant increase in the incidence of identification of students as handicapped and a significant increase in the proportion of children retained in grade or identified as handicapped. The increases occur before the administration of the first mandated high-stakes assessments. The implications of these trends for understanding reports of school effectiveness and statewide student achievement in reading are discussed Finally, suggestions for the redesign of large-scale high-stakes assessment reports are offered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allington, R. L.
(1991). How policy and regulation influence instruction for at-risk learners, or why poor readers rarely comprehend well and probably never will. In L Idol & B. F. Jones (Eds.), Educational values and cognitive instruction: Implications for reform (pp. 273-296). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2.
Allington, R. L.
, & McGill-Franzen, A. (1992). Does high-stakes testing improve school effectiveness? ERS Spectrum, 10, 3-12.
3.
Berrueta-Clement, J. R.
, Schweinhart, L. J., Barnett, W. S., Epstein, A. S., & Weikart, D. P. (1984). Changed lives: The effects of the Perry preschool program on youths through age 19. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.
4.
Carter, L.
(1984). The sustaining effects study of compensatory and elementary education. Educational Researcher, 12, 4-13.
5.
Clay, M. M.
(1991). Reading recovery surprises. In D. Deford, C. Lyons, & G. S. Pinnell (Eds.), Bridges to literacy: Learning from reading recovery (pp. 55-75). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
6.
Coley, R. J.
, & Goertz, M. (1990). Educational standards in the 50 states: 1990 (Rep. No. 90-15). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
7.
Crowder, B. H.
(1990). Excellence and accountability: Realizing the vision. In An education Janus: From there (pp. 17-20). Castleton, NY: Greater Capital Region Teacher Center.
8.
Darling-Hammond, L.
(1991). The implications of testing policy for quality and equality. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 220-225.
9.
David, J. L.
(1988). The use of indicators by school districts: Aid or threat to improvement? Phi Delta Kappan, 69, 449-502.
10.
Dyer, P. C.
(1992). Reading recovery: A cost-effectiveness and educational-outcomes analysis. Spectrum, 10, 10-19.
11.
Gartner, A.
, & Lipsky, D. K. (1987). Beyond special education: Toward a quality system for all students. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 367-395.
12.
Gottfredson, G. D.
(1986). You get what you measure, you get what you don t: Higher standards, higher test scores, more retention in grade (Report No. 2a). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools.
13.
Kelly, G. P.
, & Seller, M. S. (1985). Historical perspectives on reform in New York State. In P. G. Altbach, G. P. Kelly, & L. Weis (Eds.), Excellence in education: Perspectives on policy and practice (pp. 253-273). Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.
14.
Levin, H.
(1989). Financing the education of at-risk students. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 47-60.
15.
McGill-Franzen, A.
(1987). Failure to learn to read. Formulating a policy problem. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 475-490.
16.
McGill-Franzen, A.
, & Allington, R. L. (1991). The gridlock of low reading achievement: Perspectives on practice and policy. Remedial and Special Education, 12, 20-30.
17.
Mofis, D. R.
(1991, April). Structural patterns and change in grade retention rates: An aggregate analysis of data from a large urban school district. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
18.
Nelson, F.
(1983). School district response to labeling, cost and programmatic incentives in special education. Journal of Educational Finance, 8, 380-398.
19.
New York State Council on Children and Families.
(1988). State of the child. Albany: Author.
20.
New York State Education DepartmenL
(1989). A report to the governor and the legislature on the educational status of the state's schools: Statewide profile of the educational system. Albany: Office for Policy Analysis and Program Accountability.
21.
New York State Education Department.
(1990). A report to the governor and the legislature on the educational status of the state's schools: Statewide profile of the educational system. Albany: Office for Planning, Research, and Program Accountability.
22.
Shepard, L. A.
, & Smith, M. L. (Eds.). (1989). Flunking grades: Research and policies on retention. Philadelphia: Falmer.
23.
Toch, T.
(1991). In the name of excellence: The struggle to reform the nation's schools, why it's failing, and what should be done. New York: Oxford University Press.
24.
U.S. Department of Education.
(1988). Tenth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Education of the Handicapped Act. Washington, DC: Division of Educational Services, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
25.
Walker, J.
, & Levine, D. U. (1988, April). The inherent impact of non-promoted students on reading scores in a big city elementary school. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
