Policy and practice : Knowledge and beliefs of education professionals related to the inclusion of students with disabilities in a state assessment

Remedial and Special Education

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 208-217

  Crawford, Lindy ^a   Tindal, Gerald ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33747039002     PISSN: 07419325     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/07419325060270040201     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Abrams, L. M., Pedulla, J. J., & Madaus, G. F. (2003). Views from the classroom: Teachers' opinions of statewide testing programs. Theory Into Practice, 42(1), 18-29.
2. Albrecht, S. F., & Joies, C. (2003). Accountability and access to opportunity: Mutually exclusive tenets under a high-stakes testing mandate. Preventing School Failure, 47, 86-91.
3. Baker, E. L. (2003). From usable to useful assessment knowledge: A design problem (CSE Report 612). Los Angeles: University of California-Los Angeles, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).
4. Bolt, S., Krentz, J., & Thurlow, M. (2002). Are we there yet? Accountability for the performance of students with disabilities (Technical Report 33). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved July 16 from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/ OnlinePubs/Technical 33.htm
5. Carter, S. C. (2000). No excuses: Lessons from 21 high-performing, high-poverty schools. Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation.
6. Cimbricz, S. (2002). State-mandated testing and teachers' beliefs and practice. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(2), 1-22.
7. Cizek, G. J. (2005). High-stakes testing: Contexts, characteristics, critiques, and consequences. In R. P. Phelps (Ed.). Defending standardized testing (pp. 23-54). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Conley, D. T. (2003). Who governs our schools? Changing roles and responsibilities. New York: Teachers College Press.
9. Cook, B. G., & Schirmer, B. R. (2003). What is special about special education? Overview and analysis. The Journal of Special Education, 37, 200-204.
10. Crawford, L., Almond, P., Tindal, G., & Hollenbeck, K. (2001). Teacher perspectives on inclusion of students with disabilities in high-stakes assessments. Special Services in the Schools, 18(1/2), 95-118.
11. DeBard, R., & Kubow, P. K. (2002). From compliance to commitment: The need for constituent discourse in implementing testing policy. Educational Policy, 16, 287-405.
12. Dorn, S. (2004. October). Sideways policy analysis: An historian looks at high-stakes testing. Paper presented at the National Academy of Education Fellows Retreat, Tempe, AZ.
13. Elmore, R. F., & Fuhrman, S. H. (2001). Holding schools accountable: Is it working? Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 67-72.
14. Feuerstein, A., & Dietrich, J. A. (2003). State standards in the local context: A survey of school board members and superintendents. Educational Policy, 17, 237-256.
15. Firestone, W., Mayrowetz, D., & Fairman, J. (1998). Performance-based assessment and instructional change: The effects of testing in Maine and Maryland. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20, 95-113.
16. Fuhrman, S. H. (2003). Redesigning accountability systems for education (Policy Brief No. RB-38). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
17. Grant, S. G. (2001). An uncertain lever: Exploring the influence of state-level testing on teaching social studies. Teachers College Record, 103, 398-426.
18. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendmenls of 1997, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.
19. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, H.R. 1350. Retrieved December 27, 2004, from http://thomas.loc.gov/cgibin/query/z?c108:h.1350.enr
20. Kampfer, S. H., Horvath, L. S., Kleinert, H. L., & Farmer Kearns, J. (2001). Teachers' perceptions of one state's alternate assessment: Implications for practice and preparation. Exceptional Children, 67, 361-374.
21. Koretz, D. M., & Barton, K. (2003). Assessing students with disabilities: Issues and evidence (CSE Report 587). Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation.
22. Koretz, D., Mitchell, K., Barron, S., & Keith, S. (1996). The perceived effects of the Maryland school performance assessment program (CSE Report 409). Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation.
23. Mabry, L., Poole, J., Redmond, L., & Schultz, A. (2003). Local impact of state testing in Southwest Washington. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(22), 1-35.
24. Marshall, C., & Patterson, J. A. (2002). Confounded policies: Implementing site-based management and special education policy reforms. Educational Policy, 16, 351-386.
25. Mazzeo, C. (2001). Frameworks of state: Assessment policy in historical perspective. Teachers College Record, 103, 367-397.
26. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425.
27. Olson, L. (2004, January 8). Enveloping expectations. Education Week, 23, 8-20.
28. Smith, M. L. (1991). Put to the test: The effects of external testing on teachers. Educational Researcher, 20(5), 8-11.
29. Stecher, B. M., Barron, S., Kaganoff, T., & Goodwin, J. (1998). The effects of standards-based assessment on classroom practices: Results of the / 996-97 RAND survey of Kentucky teachers of mathematics and writing (CSE Report 482). Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation.
30. Stecher, B., & Borko, H. (2002). Combining surveys and case studies to examine standards-based educational reform (CSE Report 565). Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation.
31. Stecher, B., & Chun, T. (2001). School and classroom practices during two years of education reform in Washington state (CSE Report 550). Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation.
32. Taylor, G., Shepard, L., Kinner, F., & Rosenthal, J. (2003). A survey of teachers' perspectives on high-stakes testing in Colorado: What gets taught, what gets lost (CSE Report 588). Santa Cruz: University of California, Center for Research on Evaluation, Diversity, and Excellence.
33. Vogler, K. (2002). The impact of high-stakes, state-mandated student performance assessment on teachers' instructional practices. Education, 123(1), 39-51.