The fairness of report card grading adaptations: What do students with and without learning disabilities think?

Remedial and Special Education

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 84-92

  Bursuck, William D ^a   Munk, Dennis D ^c   Olson, Mary M ^b  

^a NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Warren Township High School   (United States)

^c Northern Illinois University ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033458655     PISSN: 07419325     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/074193259902000205     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bursuck, W. D., Polloway, E. A., Plante, L., Epstein, M. H., Jayanthi, M., & McConeghy, J. (1996). Report card grading and adaptations: A national survey of classroom practices. Exceptional Children, 62, 301-318.
2. Donohue, K., & Zigmond, N. (1990). Academic grades of ninth-grade urban learning disabled students and low achieving peers. Exceptionality, 1, 17-27.
3. Friend, M., & Bursuck, W. D. (1999). Including students with special needs: A practical guide for teachers (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
4. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Phillips, N. B., & Karns, K. (1995). General educators' specialized adaptation for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 61, 440-459.
5. Gersten, R., Vaughn, S., & Brengelman, S. V. (1996). Grading and academic feedback for special education students and students with learning difficulties. In T. R. Guskey (Ed.), ASCD year book 1996: Communicating student learning (pp. 47-57). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
6. Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. (1985). Kaufman test of educational achievement. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
7. Kazdin, A. E. (1980). Research design in clinical psychology. New York: Harper and Row.
8. Keogh, B. K. (1988). Improving services for problem learners: Rethinking and restructuring. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 19-22.
9. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A source book of new methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
10. Munk, D., & Bursuck, W. D. (1998). Report card grading adaptations for students with disabilities: Types and acceptability. Intervention in School and Clinic, 33, 306-308.
11. Polloway, E. A., Bursuck, W. D., Jayanthi, M., Epstein, M. H., & Nelson, J. S. (1996). Treatment acceptability: Determining appropriate interventions within inclusive classrooms. Intervention in School and Clinic, 31, 133-144.
12. Polloway, E., Epstein, M. H., Bursuck, W. D., Roderique, T. W., McConeghy, J. L., & Jayanthi, M. (1994). Classroom grading: A national survey of policies. Remedial and Special Education, 15, 162-170.
13. Psychological Corp. (1992). Stanford achievement test (8th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Author.
14. Schumm, J. S., & Vaughn, S. (1995). Getting ready for inclusion: Is the stage set? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 10, 169-179.
15. U.S. Department of Education (1997). Nineteenth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
16. Valdes, K. A., Williamson, C. L., & Wagner, M. M. (1990). The national transition study of special education students (Vol. 1). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
17. Vasa, S. F. (1980). Alternative procedures for grading handicapped students in the secondary school. Lincoln: University of Nebraska.
18. Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., Klingner, J., & Saumell, L. (1995). Students' views of instructional practices: Implications for inclusion. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18, 236-248.
19. Woodcock, R. W., & Johnson, M. B. (1990). Woodcock-Johnson psycho-educational battery-Revised. Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.
20. Zigmond, N., & Baker, J. (1994). Is the mainstream a more appropriate educational setting for Randy? A case study of one student with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9, 108-117.