High Stakes Testing Research Paper

In discussions of students with disabilities and their academic success, a controversial issue is weather or not students with identified learning disabilities should be required to participate in high stakes testing. While some argue that all students should be held to the same academic standards, regardless of their disability, others believe that these tests are too difficult for some students, namely – those with learning disabilities. Although it may not seem unfair to hold all students to the same academic standard, the reality is that not all students are exposed to the same content, that being the content that must be learned in order to pass most standardized tests. In an article published by Great Schools Staff they stated, “While every state is required to have high academic standards that are the same for every student, we know that many students with disabilities are not yet being taught to those standards.” In recent years, high stakes testing has become the most common form of assessment in public schools in the United States. “By 2010, 28 states had high school exit exams. In fact, these exit exams
were used in 24 of these states for meeting the high school graduation accountability mandates of NCLB.” (Yell, Collins, & Losinski, 2012) In some states failing the state test can mean failing the entire grade, and being held back due to the accountability requirements set by NCLB. These nerve-wrecking consequences, along with the fact that many students often have a hard time understanding these tests can cause anxiety in the smartest students, and especially students with learning disabilities. Many students already have test anxiety, and that anxiety is only intensified when they know that so much is at stake, if they fail. “Given the potential negative consequences these assessments have for all stakeholders (i.e., students, parents, and schools), participation of students with disabilities in these assessments has been controversial” (Ysseldyke, Nelson, & Christenson, 2004). Although there are alternate options for students to use, the fact still remains; students with identified disabilities shouldn’t be required to participate in high-stakes testing. And even with alternate options, many schools don’t provide disabled student’s with enough exposure to even be equip to succeed with accommodations or modifications. “The effect of high-stakes assessment for students with disabilities has resulted in both positive and negative consequences being reported anecdotally in the media” (Ysseldyke, Nelson, & Christenson, 2004). Indeed, the intended goal of high stakes testing is to measure students progress and performance, while providing accountability for school improvement, which is a great thing. However, this well-intended goal poses a risk for students with disabilities. In the article, “Implications of High-Stakes Testing for Students with Learning Disabilities”, it’s stated that there are many barriers to success on high-stakes tests for students with learning disabilities. These include, an inadequate opportunity to learn due to the lack of exposure to the subject matter, the restrictive setting that students with disabilities are placed in, the lack of reasonable accommodations, inadequate access to remediation and over-reliance on a single test score. These are all very real problems that many students with learning disabilities are faced with everyday in the classroom, and in most cases are the reason in which they aren’t successful on standardized tests. Many people assume that students with disabilities are exposed to the same content as all other students. However, the fact of the matter is that students with learning problems or any form of disability are usually pulled out of their normal classroom for alternate instruction. This means they don’t learn as much content as the rest of the students who stay with their teacher for the entire school day. Therefore, students with learning disabilities don’t learn all of the material that they need to know in order to be successful on standardized tests. It goes without saying that they are at a disadvantage when it comes to understanding the information that these tests are composed of. Under NCLB, all public schools have to meet and report Annual Yearly Progress (AYP), which is based on student’s test scores. Schools are rewarded if they meet AYP but if they don’t, they’re penalized. As a result, teachers potentially lose their jobs and schools get shut down or converted to state charter schools. “Schools have been quick to raise concerns over these new mandates, given the historically poor performances of special education students on these assessments” (Katisyannis, Zhang, Ryan & Jones, 2007). Many schools fail to meet AYP due to the failing grades that some student’s with disabilities obtain. “In Mobile County, for example, 27 of the 33 schools that failed to make AYP would have otherwise passed had they not been forced to include test scores from special education students” (Katisyannis, Zhang, Ryan & Jones, 2007). According to a student’s IEP, they may receive accommodations or alternate assessments to help their performance on high-stakes tests, but the reality is that many students don’t receive the right accommodations, or have an IEP altogether. “These programs, however, have been reported to be inadequate in "benefiting" students with severe disabilities. Some of them are aligned with state standards but do not assess the individual's true level of functioning, whereas others assess student performance that is unrelated to state content standards” (Katisyannis, Zhang, Ryan & Jones, 2007). Most states don’t give sufficient consideration to either appropriate accommodations or alternate assessments for disabled students. In addition, because implementation of the high-stakes tests is often rushed, students are not given ample time to prepare. Many standardized tests are not developed or implemented well, leading to students failing, many students dropping out of school altogether, and loss of self-esteem and educational advancement.
The level of difficulty can be overwhelming for students with disabilities. Not to mention those trying to graduate from high school. “A serious concern for parents of students with disabilities was the difficulty that their children would almost surely have in qualifying for a diploma that required them to pass tests that spoke only to specific skills at levels beyond their reach. A committee of parents and educators worked with the Department of Education and Early Development to recommend accommodations for students with disabilities. Sadly, the accommodations were to be available to only 2% of the special education population” (McDermott & McDermott,
2002). Depending on a student’s learning disabilities they can have difficulty with spelling, punctuation, grammar, and even the mere act of writing itself due to problems with visual and fine motor functions. “Not being able to automatically produce legible handwriting may greatly affect the learning of student’s with disabilities. For example, many student’s with processing deficits find text production as challenging as idea generation” (Cahill, 2009). Standardized tests are one-size-fits-all approach to assessing students on academic progress. They are all set up the same way, and presume that all students will understand the content. However, a student with a learning disability might not comprehend or process the test the same way that other students are able to. Regardless of the difficulty that many disabled students have, it shouldn’t be assumed that all students with learning disabilities aren’t able to succeed on standardized tests. Some of them, indeed are able to succeed. “Nonetheless, students with disabilities have been making impressive strides in improving their academic performance and other related outcomes” (Katisyannis, Zhang, Ryan & Jones, 2007). However, some students are still incapable of meeting the requirements of high stakes tests, and they shouldn’t be retained or penalized because of their inability to be like everyone else. These students should be given the option of participating, by choosing to be exempt or attempt the test if they wish, but they should be able to move on to the next grade if they have met all other requirements.