For the FutureJessica Sellitto

April 12, 2016

High-Stakes Testing and Its Impact On Special Education Students

Introduction

In the United States, standardized testing that assesses student aptitude and achievement

has played a significant role in shaping educational thinking. Since the 1980’s, in order to ensure

that American students are competitive with their counterparts in other countries, U.S.

policymakers have tried countless measures to improve the public school system.1 Recent

reforms have led to the current high-stakes testing movement, which measures student

achievement and school effectiveness mainly through the analysis of standardized test scores.2

The resulting policies have put an emphasis on using test results to make important decisions

about students, teachers, and administrators in elementary and secondary schools around the

country. All students, even ones with special needs, have to pass these tests and meet stringent

graduation requirements in order to be granted a high school diploma.

Special education students in the United States make up 13 percent of public school

enrollment.3 Some of the learning challenges that these students face include Down Syndrome,

dyslexia, autism, dyscalculia, and ADHD. These disabilities have a significant impact on

learning basic skills such as reading, writing and math.  They can also interfere with higher-level

skills such as organization, abstract reasoning, memory and attention.4 Many of these students

can meet the same achievement standards as other students if they are given access to the same

content as their peers and are provided specially designed instruction, supports, and

accommodations when needed. Students with learning disabilities have gained access to specific

accommodations such as alternate locations, adapted questions, and assistants to read test

questions out loud to them. 5 In fact, prior to the high-stakes testing movement, many states, in

response to the unreasonable testing inflicted upon special needs students, modified their state

assessments at the local level. With the imposition of high-stakes testing, however, local

districts are prohibited by state mandates from modifying the tests but still expect special

education students to pass them.6 Special education students only get their accommodations or

modifications listed in their Individualized Educational Programs.7 Participation policies have

varied across states, and special education students’ needs for assessment accommodations

haven’t always been met.

NCLB and Assessments

Most would agree that the movement toward high-stakes testing was an extension of the

No Child Left Behind Act. The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was signed into law in 2002 and

its provisions include testing grades 3-8 annually in reading and math.8 NCLB provided that the

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) should be the primary means for

evaluating the success of NCLB. Students with learning disabilities are included in the

accountability system of NCLB since the act requires all schools to test all students, including

those with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and 504 plans.9 If a child receives special

education services, it is part of the law that they must have an IEP. An IEP is an important legal

document that indicates a child’s learning needs, the services the school will provide and how

progress will be measured.10 Similar to an IEP, a 504 plan can help students with learning

disabilities as it outlines how a child’s specific needs are met with accommodations,

2

modifications and other services. 11A student with a

504 plan, however, usually spends the entire school

day in a general education classroom and typically,

children who need modifications would have an IEP,

not a 504 plan.12 Clearly, the goal of NCLB was to

increase student’s achievement and access to learning.

With a growing focus on standardized testing and

added pressure on both faculty and students, however,

test scores have actually declined. For example,

according to figure 1, test scores for a Pennsylvania

School Assessment declined over a three-year period,

with the special education population declining the

most.13

Risks and Issues With Testing: What Do These Test Measure?

Another major problem with standardized testing is in relation to what it actually

measures. The data is used to determine if a school, district, or state is making progress in

student achievement in the areas of reading and math. Schools that fail to achieve certain

standards for the students in each grade assessed, each area assessed, and in each subgroup are

subject to a series of sanctions. Therefore, the performance of students with disabilities can have

a substantial impact on the overall performance of the school. It is entirely possible for a school

that achieves adequate yearly progress for the total school population, as well as all but one

subgroup, such as the subgroup of students with disabilities, to be rated as needing improvement

under NCLB.14 This level of accountability puts pressure on teachers and parents of students with

Figure 1: PSSA test score decline statewide, 2011-14

Source: Reprinted From: http://www.post-gazette.com/news/education/2014/11/21/State-student-scores-declined-with-reduced-funding-test-results-show/stories/201411240030

3

disabilities. Why should students from any subgroup who learn in a unique and individual

manner define the progress of the school? Students with disabilities have individualized plans for

a reason, but then are seen as no different than a student without a learning disability. This not

only ignores the student’s needs but also has a negative impact on the teacher and the school. It

is necessary that students with learning disabilities’ needs are acknowledged, accommodated and

realistic to their education plans.

Since these tests represent high-stakes for individual students, such as grade promotion or

even a standard school diploma, high-stakes testing is designed to hold individual students

accountable for their own test performance, unlike “system accountability,” which is aimed at

the providers of education, such as states, school districts, and schools.15 High-stakes and

standardized testing pose extreme risks for students with learning disabilities, however. While

students with learning disabilities could benefit from increased focus on student achievement,

high-stakes standardized testing can also present serious obstacles and consequences.

Testing Accommodations and Opting Out

One of the major risks for the special education population is that accommodations are

not always provided and therefore parents are increasingly deciding to opt out of tests.

Accommodations must be determined by the student’s IEP team or Section 504 team, including

the parent and they should be based on the student’s individual needs and should be similar to

those provided to the student during classroom assessment.16 Decisions about assessment

accommodations are not to be made on the basis of disability category; therefore, schools are

unable to develop a predetermined list of accommodations specifically for those students with

learning disabilities.17 It has become increasingly difficult for parents to find perfect

accommodations for their child and as a result, the stress and pressure surrounding these tests

4

have begun to outweigh any benefit of having a standardized testing system.

Because of the problems with accommodations, some parents have chosen to have their

child opt out of taking standardized tests. It is sometimes difficult, however, for parents to find

ways to opt out of these tests. For example, IEP teams may not exempt students from

participating in a state’s assessment system. The IEP or 504 team determines how a student will

participate, not whether a student will participate. Therefore the student does not always have

the option to opt out, based on state policies.18 And as a result, many parents choose to keep

their children home from school on designated test days. . “One-size-fits-all tests” punish and

discourage students who are already vulnerable, including children with special needs, thus

creating the desire for parents choosing to opt out of high-stakes tests.19 Opting out should not

be viewed as a “cop-out” to prevent failure in any way but rather is a way to take control back of

schools and education.

How Standardized Tests Affect the Student, the Teacher and the Community

Standardized testing has negatively impacted students, teachers and classrooms in a

multitude of ways. The most significant is obviously how if affects the students themselves.

Quite often, standardized tests do not accurately measure the progress of students with special

needs because these students are not always performing at grade level or have disabilities that

inhibit their ability to complete standardized assessments in the same manner as their non-

disabled people.20 Standardized tests cause severe stress and anxiety in all students, so when

students with learning disabilities are forced to take these tests, the impact could be even greater

in terms of anxiety and pressure. These tests have a particularly harmful impact on the frustration

level and emotional state of students with special needs, which can result in negative views of

school and learning for students who are already struggling.21 If a student is not in an

environment in which he or she can focus and thrive, it is counterproductive for them in any way

5

to take these exams. The sitting times of these tests are long and create exhaustion and frustration

for students with special needs. For example, if students miss class because of an extended time

accommodation for testing, they will fall behind all the other students and therefore their in-class

performance would suffer. In addition, the majority of students with special needs require extra

time to complete assessments. Therefore, pulling them from the classroom in order to be tested

and reduces the amount of instructional time students receive during the year. With these two

realities in mind, there are little to no positive effects of these tests overall on student learning

and educational progress. According to a Gallup Survey, as shown in Figure 2, parents are

beginning and continuing to worry about the impact that high-stakes tests have on their

children.22 Only fourteen percent of parents see testing as effective in measuring school

effectiveness in this survey, and that number is something that should be recognized by state

education departments. 23

Students aren’t the only ones to be concerned about the realities of high-stakes testing.

Educators have grown frustrated with the current system in place. High-stakes testing

undermines teacher collaboration. For example,

since teachers are evaluated based on the

performance of their classes, they are discouraged

from helping students in another teacher’s class. It

becomes a competition and takes the focus away

from learning and enjoyment in the classroom. It

also makes their work environment more hostile

and intense. Further, “teaching to the test" is

replacing good teaching practices with "drill and

kill" rote learning. A five-year University of

Maryland study completed in 2007 found "the

6

pressure teachers were feeling to 'teach to the test'" since NCLB was leading to declines in

teaching higher-order thinking, in the amount of time spent on complex assignments, and in the

actual amount of high cognitive content in the curriculum. 24 Teachers who love teaching become

frustrated with their jobs and as a consequence, may find something else to do while their jobs

will be taken over by people who have no interest in or passion about education. Teachers have a

huge impact on every student’s life, and if a teacher is given no time to expand beyond the

material being tested, their students won’t learn valuable life lessons and will not be as

passionate about their learning. Enthusiasm is infectious and teacher pressure to teach to a test

rather than excitement for the learning process will certainly be sensed by students. As an

extension of this problem, students will come to school and attend classes without teachers

motivated to educate and memorization and rote learning will take the place of any form of

creative learning processes.25  Teachers no longer have to truly engage students or challenge their

ideas because all answers will already be preconceived or, at the very least, preordained by a test

constructed not by teachers but by “big business.”

Standardized testing affects individuals so therefore it has an affect on the community

and school district as a whole. Local newspapers print test scores making them a source of public

conversation and controversy. Even more controversial is the fact that test scores can greatly

affect a school district’s funding. The standard is that the federal government plays an important

role in funding local schools, and without federal funding many schools would cease to exist.26

While schools don't actually have to administer annual achievement tests, they'll lose funding if

they don't. This forces schools to put funds before the students and before their faculty. This is

unfair to all students, and especially unfair to students with special needs whose scores should

not always be factored into the funding of the school. Another issue is that high-stakes tests can

even negatively impact real estate. Property values will decrease if a school is not considered

“good” based on its test scores. This raised the question of what actually makes a school good.

7

Test scores cannot be the only determinant, considering that there are so many drawbacks that

come with high-stakes test taking.

Possible Solutions: Opting Out, Alternative Testing, Portfolio-Based Assessment

Although it is evident that there have been some gains in high-stakes testing, many

problems still exist. Figure 3 shows the pros and cons associated with opting out in New York

State, for example. 27

Figure 3: The Gains and Downsides of the High-Stakes Testing

Gains Downside

Last year, the opt-out movement exploded, fed by educators, teachers unions and social media. It led to 200,000 kids statewide and 70,000 on Long Island opting out.

The state and Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo have let teachers and parents evaluate every individual learning standard, made changes to the length and structure of tests, and created a system to let teachers evaluate every test item.

The state is replacing the current test producer.

NYS adopted a four-year moratorium on using scores to rate teachers.

State exams are loaded with poorly written, ambiguous questions. A recent statement signed by 545 NYS Principals noted that many teachers and principals could not agree on the correct answers.

Ineffective teachers are seldom fired. Substandard schools hardly ever

improve. Poorly educated and special education

children rarely succeed. There are too many ineffective teachers, substandard schools and districts, and poorly educated children.

Standardized tests are the only objective way to compare achievement across multiple classrooms, schools, districts and states.

Less than 40 percent of New York students are on track to be college and career ready by graduation

It may cost schools and districts millions of dollars in state and federal funding

Source: Created from information from Newsday. http://www.newsday.com/opinion/editorial/opt-out-season-is-back-1.1161904

It is evident that the current standardized test system in place is not effective and is often

opposed by teachers and parents alike. High-stakes tests and the other expectations placed on

special needs students might negatively impact them in a multitude of ways. The pressure may

result in fewer diplomas for them, less opportunity for life skills training in school. Their days

are filled with more academic support classes to get them through, thus eliminating opportunities

for art, music and other creative experiences. Some of the needs of students with learning

8

disabilities are met through certain accommodations in the classroom, so why are they not met

with same treatment in relation to tests? These tests do not measure anything related to what

students actually learn or need to learn for their future, especially if a special needs students

wishes to develop skills that will make them successful in the job market. Further, high-stakes

tests can even threaten the successful achievement of a high school diploma as standardized

testing becomes an integral part of a student’s academic profile. The current solution is for

parents to have their children to opt out. While this is a temporary solution, it is not the definitive

fix to the problems caused by high-stakes testing. School districts are penalized when too many

students opt out of tests. In some states, if fewer than 95% of the students in a given school or

district take the test, that school cannot make AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) and lose funding

and resources.28 This is one of the ways schools can fail when students opt out.

The spirit of NCLB is that “no child should be left behind” yet ironically that is exactly

what we are doing to special education students when there are unreasonable expectations and

lack of resources for the students to meet the standards. While it would be extremely difficult to

get rid of standardized tests completely, modifications need to be made in order to better the

United States’ education system. A significant aspect of standardized tests is that these tests are

not made by educators. Rather, they are created by legislators. To solve the problems associated

with high-stakes testing, it is important to first look at how the tests are made and make changes

from there. Legislators must recognize that the educators should make the decisions in regards to

test questions, requirements and distribution. Until educators are the decision-makers, it is

crucial that parents get together to support legislators who support their educational agendas.

One solution could be to reinstate the idea of alternative assessment for special education

students. Alternative tests were essentially eliminated with the rise of high-stakes tests. These

tests would be effective because the content that intellectually disabled students are taught and

9

the standards they are expected to meet might be very different from those of their grade-level

peers. Alternate assessments enable schools to measure progress from year to year for a student

who is still struggling to learn and understand different concepts.29. Another promising form of

assessment is what is known as "portfolio-based assessment." The approaches to portfolios vary

considerably, but they all rest on records kept by the teacher and on collections of the student's

work, called the "student portfolio."30 Students are usually encouraged to reflect on the work that

has been selected which helps students think not only about what they have learned, but about

their own learning processes, all of which contributes to the overall goal of improving student

learning. Schools should not be so focused on meeting testing requirements. This focus is taking

away from the improvement and growth of students with disabilities and also without

disabilities. Although standardized tests can play a useful role in education, they need to be

detached from high-stakes consequences. Educational reform has to be fluid and therefore

standardized tests are not answer to solving crisis in American education.

10

1 Gail L. Thompson, and Tawannah G. Allen. “Four Effects of the High-stakes Testing Movement on African American K-12 Students”. The Journal of Negro Education 81.3 (2012): 218–227.

2 Ibid

3 Lazarus, Sheryl, Quenemoen, Rachel and Thurlow, Martha. “Meeting the Needs of Special Education Students: Recommendations for the Race to the Top Consortia and States.” Cehd.umn.edu.

4 Learning Disabilities Association of America. “Types of Learning Disabilities.” http://ldaamerica.org/types-of-learning-disabilities/. 2016.

5 Fuchs, Douglas and Fuchs, Lynn. “Fair and Unfair Testing Accommodations.” The School Superintendents Association.

6 Ibid

7 GreatSchools Staff. “Implications of High-Stakes Testing for Students With Learning Disabilities.” Greatschools.org. http://www.greatschools.org/gk/articles/high-stakes-testing-learning-disabilities/. 2010.

8 Strauss, Valerie. “No Child Left Behind: What standardized test scores reveal about its legacy.” The Washington Post. 2015.

9 Ibid

10 Ibid

11 Ibid

12 Stanberry, Kristin. “Understanding 504 Plans.” Understood.org. June, 2014.

13 Chute, Eleanor. “Pennsylvania student scores declined with reduced funding, test results show." Pittsburg Post Gazette. November 21, 2014.

14 GreatSchools Staff. “Implications of High-Stakes Testing for Students With Learning Disabilities.” Greatschools.org. http://www.greatschools.org/gk/articles/high-stakes-testing-learning-disabilities/. 2010.

15 Ibid

16 Ibid

17 Ibid

18 Juerling, Merry. “Guide for Opting Out/Refusing High Stakes Testing and Test Preparation for Special Needs/Exceptional Students.” Unitedoptout.com. February 7, 2015.

19 NYStopTesting. “Why Opt Out of NYS Standardized Tests?” http://www.nystoptesting.com/2014/03/why-opt-out-of-nys-standardized-tests.html. March 27, 2014.

20 Willis, Judy. “Brain-Friendly Strategies for the Inclusion Classroom.” ASCD.

21 AFT. “Against Standardized Assessments for Students Receiving Special Education Services.” http://www.aft.org/resolution/against-standardized-assessments-students-receiving-special-education-services

22 Walker, Tim. “Poll: Americans Want Less Standardized Testing and More School Funding.” NeaToday. August 23, 2015.

23 Ibid

24 ProCon.org. “Is the Use of Standardized Tests Improving Education in America?” http://standardizedtests.procon.org

25 Ibid

26 Van Thompson. “Do Standardized Test Scores Factor in to How Much Money a School Will Receive?” Global Post.

27 The Editorial Board. “Opt-out movement is out of hand.” Newsday. http://www.newsday.com/opinion/editorial/opt-out-season-is-back-1.1161904. March 26, 2016.

28 FairTest. “How NCLB Relates to Opting Out of Tests.” http://www.fairtest.org/sites/default/files/Federal_law_related_to_opting_out_-final.pdf

29 Gryta, Virginia. “Alternate Assessments: What They Are and How They Work.” Understood.org. https://www.understood.org/en/school-learning/partnering-with-childs-school/tests-standards/alternate-assessments-what-they-are-and-how-they-work

30 Neill, Molly and Peterson, Bob. “Alternatives to Standardized Tests.” Rethinking Schools. http://www.rethinkingschools.org/restrict.asp?path=archive/13_03/assess.shtml