tatarskajaust.weebly.com€¦ · web viewthere is a “need to view students as individuals...

MILD DISABILITIES AND ITS IMPACT ON ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

Mild Disabilities and its Impact on Academic Achievement

EDUC 5345 Evidence-Based Practices for Students with Mild Disabilities

Anastassia Tatarskaja

University of St. Thomas

February 17, 2015

1


“High achievement always takes place in the framework of high

expectation.”

Charles Kettering

I wanted to begin my research paper with the quote above because in essence it

summarizes the main idea of my research. There can be no achievement if there is

never an expectation of higher purpose or a goal. Our students, including students with

mild disabilities need to be taught a value of having a goal and following their dream of

becoming someone greater. Throughout my research it was clear that the degree of the

achievement of students with mild disabilities is directly proportional to student

expectations. There were other factors which contributed to the degree of failure, like

race, student socio-economic factors, lack of motivation, inadequate teacher

preparation and collaboration, and lack of proper accommodations. Nevertheless, one

parameter that remained constant throughout was higher expectations. Interestingly

enough, the degree of achievement was even higher when the family’s expectations in

regards to education matched the expectations of the school.

Can higher expectations and proper inclusion practices be the answer to student

achievement? In my research, I have concentrated on successful inclusion and dropout

rate of students with mild disabilities and barriers to student achievement. Most

research indicated that students with mild disabilities, when applied to all population of

students included in the general education setting, have a higher chance of graduating

from high school if high expectations are set in the early years of their development.

In order to understand the dynamics of development of the special education law

and how it relates to school accountability and student achievement, let’s first examine

2


the historic perspective. Since 1975, with the first passing of the IDEA law that

mandated all schools educate students with disabilities, we have come a long way in

identifying and providing services to students with disabilities. Student achievement was

also noted in the “reports such as A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence

in Education, 1983) that were generally critical of the quality of teaching, curriculum

requirements, and achievement standards. In addition, studies that compared the

achievement of American students to those in other countries have revealed lower

levels in the United States laws in particular have made the biggest impact on school

accountability and student achievement” (Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, 2001). No Child

Left Behind Law(NCLB), 2001, “mandated for all students, including students with

disabilities, to be proficient in math and reading by the year 2014” (Lerner & Johns,

2015, pg. 63). Second, is the reauthorization of the IDEA in 2004, “each state must

have achievement goals that are measured by statewide tests for all public schools”

(Lerner & Johns, 2015, pg. 63).

It was clear that the educational reform was needed not only to address the

academic achievement of students in the general education, but also students with

disabilities. Especially it was evident that reform was needed to address the

achievement of students with mild disabilities due to the fact that students with mild

disabilities are the highest percentile on the chart when compared to other disability

categories (see Table 1b).

According to Table 1b, “the vast majority of special education students have mild to

moderate learning disabilities instead of severe handicaps. For example, more than 40

percent of all students who receive special services under IDEA are classified as having

3


“specific learning disabilities.” This category is defined as “an imperfect ability to listen,

think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculation” (U.S. Department of

Education 2006c). In practical terms, it includes any student with a discrepancy between

his or her achievement and intellectual ability. It includes mild disabilities, such as

dyslexia. Students with specific learning disabilities typically spend almost all of their

day in traditional classrooms” (Boser, 2009).

Moore, Gilbreath, & Maiuri (1998) explain that school reform should be based on

research and that all decisions made in the “best practice” efforts should be based on

the individualized instruction and collaboration between the general education teachers

and special education teachers (Moore, Gilbreath, & Maiuri, 1998, pg. 5). There is a

“need to view students as individuals first” and general education working together with

special education teachers creating a basis for student motivation and eventually

academic achievement. These authors were able to recognize the need for

individualized instruction in 1998, way before the passing on the No Child Behind in

2001 and the reauthorization of the IDEA in 2004. Moore, Gilbreath, & Maiuri (1998)

also recognized the need for high quality inclusion practices vs. constant pull-out of the

students, which would further deteriorate educational process of the students with mild

disabilities:

We Had to Take Our Kids Back

A small, rural school has seen a major resource cutbacks in the past five years. When they thought morale was at its low point, staff was further reduced. When the number of special education teachers was down to one, the only choice was to have the kids stay in the regular classroom, with the one special education teacher acting as a consultant to the regular teachers. The general education teachers now explain that they really never felt like these were their kids when they were pulled for their “special” education. One teacher said “I never used to worry about their learning because I didn't have to grade them and someone else would teach them to read.” Now, though, they take full

4


responsibility for these students’ education, and the kids themselves have become members of the classroom community. “Now these are my kids,” this teacher added (Moore, Gilbreath, & Maiuri, 1998, pg. 7).

In my opinion, the most important phrase of this excerpt is the notion of kids

becoming “members of the classroom community” which means they are educated with

their non-disabled peers and that they are held to the same standards as general

education students. The intention of the law has finally been realized and recognized as

a necessary condition of any student achievement including students with disabilities.

The other important part of student achievement is the ability to read, and as Zentall

and Beike (2012) noted most students who qualify to receive special education services

as students with Specific Learning Disabilities have some form of reading deficiencies,

like Reading Comprehension, Basic Reading Skills or Math Reasoning. As professional

educators we are fully aware of that the ability to read will affect all other aspects of

school life: math, writing, ability to formulate sentences when speaking, social studies,

science and vocabulary development. It is especially evident when we take into

consideration English Language Learners, at-risk students, and students coming from

households whose parents are not educated. “The ability to read in the first grade is

directly related to long-term outcomes in student achievement (reading comprehension,

vocabulary, and general knowledge), as assessed in a 10-year follow-up study even

when partialing out cognitive ability” (Zentall & Beike, 2012, pg. 39).

Zentall and Beike (2012) also point out that “ children with mild disabilities

experience sufficient failure to produce negative future expectations (goals), which may

compound early academic and social deficits” (Zentall & Beike, 2012, pg. 39). In their

study, Zentall and Beike (2012) pointed out that students with disabilities, or who are at

5


risk of being identified, were less motivated to do their best, especially at older age

levels, with fewer goals related to self-determination.

As someone once said, “begin with the end in mind” which in our context can be

interpreted as what happens in the early stages of child development in a school setting

has a direct link to graduation rates and success in life. Lerner & Johns (2015) argue

that “general education classrooms can provide students with disabilities greater access

to their general education peers, raise expectations for student performance, help

general education students be more accepting of diverse students, and improve

coordination between regular and special educators” (Lerner & Johns, 2015, pg. 29).

Most studies agree that inclusion can provide better opportunities for academic

achievement for students with mild disabilities. Consequently, I was interested to

discover how does inclusion relates to graduation rates of students with mild disabilities.

Goodman, Hazelkorn, Bucholz, Duffy, & Kitta, (2011) noted that “although

accountability related to state curriculum standards and standardized test scores is

important, graduation rates may be the critical factor in deciding whether current

educational policy is resulting in successful outcomes for students. This study examined

the records of 67,749 students with mild disabilities in Georgia during a 6-year period to

determine the effects of inclusion (i.e., the amount of time spent in general education

classrooms) on graduation rates. Results indicated a 62% increase in the percentage

rate in inclusion for students with mild disabilities, while graduation rates for students

with mild disabilities have remained stable (+0.4%) at less than 30%” (Goodman,

Hazelkorn, Bucholz, Duffy, & Kitta, 2011).

6


“Those who study the issue believe that part of the problem is that minority special

education students are more likely to grow up in poor neighborhoods. The higher

incidence of low-birthweight babies, environmental toxins, and malnutrition in these

neighborhoods can trigger more disabilities.But societal misconceptions might be part of

the problem as well. The disparities between whites and some minorities in special

education appear mostly in the categories with the most subjective eligibility criteria,

such as “mild mental retardation” or “specific learning disabilities.” Many believe the

disproportionate representation is due to misconceptions about race and culture, and

that black and Hispanic children are more likely to be misidentified as disabled” (The

Center for Public Education, 2009).

In conclusion, there are several factors that affect academic achievement of

students with mild disabilities like, family involvement, goal setting, motivation, and

inclusion practices. Educators and parents can collaborate to encourage, motivate and

help students with mild disabilities set goals to achieve success.

7


References

Moore, C., Gilbreath, D., Maiuri, F., Western Regional Resource Center, E. O., & Alaska

State Dept. of Education, J. D. (1998). Educating Students with Disabilities in General

Education Classrooms: A Summary of the Research.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2001). Self-regulated Learning and Academic

Achievement : Theoretical Perspectives. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum.

Bouck, E. b., & Satsangi, R. (2014). Evidence-Base of a Functional Curriculum for

Secondary Students with Mild Intellectual Disability: A Historical Perspective. Education

& Training In Autism & Developmental Disabilities, 49(3), 478-486.

Link, S. (2015). Mainstreaming in the Public Schools. Mainstreaming In The Public

Schools -- Research Starters Education, 1.

DOYLE, M. B., & GIANGRECO, M. (2013). Guiding Principles for Including High School

Students with Intellectual Disabilities in General Education Classes. American

Secondary Education, 42(1), 57-72.

Zentall, S. S., & Beike, S. M. (2012). Achievement and Social Goals of Younger and

Older Elementary Students: Response to Academic and Social Failure. Learning

Disability Quarterly, 35(1), 39-54.

Shandra, C. L., & Hogan, D. P. (2009). The Educational Attainment Process among

Adolescents with Disabilities and Children of Parents with Disabilities. International

Journal Of Disability, Development And Education, 56(4), 363-379.

Goodman, J. I., Hazelkorn, M., Bucholz, J. L., Duffy, M. L., & Kitta, Y. (2011). Inclusion

and Graduation Rates: What Are the Outcomes?. Journal Of Disability Policy Studies,

21(4), 241-252. doi:10.1177/1044207310394449

8


Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2006). Prediction of Dropout Among Students With

Mild Disabilities: A Case for the Inclusion of Student Engagement Variables. Remedial

& Special Education, 27(5), 276-292.

The Center for Public Education (2009). Special Education: A Better Perspective(full

report. Retrieved from:

http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/Evaluating-performance/Special-education-

At-a-glance/Special-education-A-better-perspective-full-report.html

9

http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/Evaluating-performance/Special-education-At-a-glance/Special-education-A-better-perspective-full-report.html

http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/Evaluating-performance/Special-education-At-a-glance/Special-education-A-better-perspective-full-report.html


10


11


12


13


14

tatarskajaust.weebly.com€¦ · web viewthere is a “need to view students as individuals...

Documents