Judging+teacher+effectiveness+in+Special+Education


 * Research Question: How can we judge teacher effectiveness in Special Education?**
 * Author: Alyssa Dagenais**

** "Learning Disabilities: What is the best education for students with special needs?" **

Jost, K. (1993, December 10). Learning Disabilities: What is the best education for students with special needs? //CQ Researcher//. Retrieved November 15, 2011, from http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1993121000&PHPSESSID=8gds5pv29sk78ufms0os2ab9k1

**Summary:** The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 requires that all students receive "free appropriate public education." This especially applies in the context of special education students. Over 2 million students in the United States have normal intelligence but have difficulty reading, speaking, or working with numbers. For this reason, they require special education services that they should be receiving at a normal public school, free of charge. Many people advocate for inclusion education, where special education students receive special services in a normal classroom setting. Others feel that students cannot receive the services that they need in this type of setting. Advocates for inclusion feel that there needs to be a single accountability system for education, regardless of special education. This would require all students to receive the necessary services to learn in a normal classroom. Critics argue that many students are thrown into an inclusion classroom where they are not given what they need to learn and prosper. Inclusion can save a school district a lot of money, but may not necessarily teach special education students effectively. Critics also argue that inclusion classrooms place a much greater work load on the classroom teacher who must work extra hard to teach students of greatly varying learning abilities. The 1975 law also requires that all students are educated in the "least restrictive environment." This would advocate for inclusion, so students can be educated with their peers. The debate continues about whether inclusion is a good method for special education, and people may never agree on what is the best method.

**Reaction:** I think that inclusion education is a very valuable thing. As a child, though I was not a special education student, my parents always requested that I be in an inclusion classroom. I think as a student without learning disabilities, this gave me compassion for those who have a harder time learning. Being in this type of classroom never held me back as a bright student. I definitely got a lot out of it, as did the special education students, who had the opportunity to be in a normal classroom, instead of taken out and stigmatized as a stupid kid. On the other hand, inclusion education can be very difficult when thinking about teacher evaluation. Those students that really need a lot of extra help but are put in a normal classroom anyway will not perform as well on standardized tests. Though a teacher may be doing all she can to provide the best services possible for that child, often that is not enough. Most special education students will never perform as well as their non-special education peers on standardized tests because of the unique struggles they have in school. The inclusion teachers who are trying so hard to get the special education students an equal education with their peers should not be penalized for their students lower test scores. Shouldn't the teachers with inclusion classes be rewarded for taking on a more difficult class and getting some improvement? Why would we penalize these hard-working teachers? And who will teach inclusion classes if the teachers are penalized for their students not performing well on standardized tests?

** "Special Education Teacher Education: A Perspective on Content Knowledge" ** Greer, D. L., & Meyen, E. L. (2009). Special Education Teacher Education: A Perspective on Content Knowledge. //Learning Disabilities Research & Practice (Blackwell Publishing Limited)//, //24//(4), 196-203. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2009.00293.x **Summary:** No Child Left Behind has documented the wide achievement gap between students with learning disabilities and those without learning disabilities. Not only is this gap present, but it widens between fourth grade and eighth grade. No Child Left Behind says that it is true that all students should not be able to perform at the same level, especially those with learning disabilities. Still, it looks to provide accountability in an effort to make sure that every student gets a proper education. Higher standards should be placed on teachers who teach special education students, especially in inclusion classes, because they must be extra prepared to meet the different needs of their diverse students. It is necessary to reevaluate the training of both general education teachers and special education teachers to ensure that their students are getting the most out of their education and meeting the standards of No Child Left Behind. As classrooms get more and more diverse, with an increase in not only learning disabled children but also in English Language Learners and students on a lower socioeconomic level, it has become more apparent that teacher education is not where it should be for special education or general education teachers. It seems that the education that teachers must receive to become certified must improve in order to help teachers to live up to the higher standards placed upon them by No Child Left Behind. Teachers especially need more training in mathematics to help them help their students with learning disabilities or other factors in their lives that stop them from learning as well as they should. Since the passage of No Child Left Behind in 2001, most states have worked hard to better align their math curriculums with the state standards. While before No Child Left Behind, children with learning disabilities got special accommodations made to help them understand better, that is more difficult with the new standards. Now, all children are expected to learn the same things, regardless of their abilities, and pass the state test. This has created more work for teachers to ensure that all of their students are living up to the standards. This is a daunting task that today seems unattainable. **Reaction:** This article focused on how teacher education is not doing enough to prepare teachers to teach children with learning disabilities. I found the article very contradictory. On one hand, it said that no matter what teachers do, there will be a significant gap on standardized test scores between those with learning disabilities and those without. On the other hand, it said that this gap exists because teachers are not properly trained to teach students with learning disabilities. On one hand, it said that No Child Left Behind does not expect all students to perform on the same level, but on the other hand, it said that No Child Left Behind mandates that all students learn the same things which gets rid of many of the special accommodations that were previously being made for special education students. I think it is very difficult to judge the effectiveness of teachers when they have such varied abilities in their classrooms. Better teacher education cannot be a bad thing. Regardless of teacher effectiveness related to No Child Left Behind, the most prepared teachers should be in the classrooms. Extra preparation should be a good thing. Blaming the discrepancy between children with learning disabilities and those without on teacher preparation should not happen. No matter how well teachers are prepared, it will still be difficult for children with learning disabilities to keep up with their not disabled peers.

** "How a Good School Can Fail on Paper" **

Winerip, M. (2003, October 8). ON EDUCATION; How a Good School Can Fail on Paper. //The New York Times//. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/08/nyregion/on-education-how-a-good-school-can-fail-on-paper.html

**Summary:** Micro-Pine Level Elementary School has 45 special education students. The principal at the school keeps the special education classes small, with around 6 students per class. Most of the students have shown huge educational gains as a result of the special education program at their school. A fifth-grader with severe retardation finally learned his vowels after years of not understanding the concepts. Still, he often spells words completely wrong. The principal still recognizes his extraordinary gains. Micro-Pine Level Elementary School is considered a failure, regardless of these major gains, because of the special education students. Though 86% of students there are passing state tests, 34 of the 45 special education students needed to pass the state test for the school to meet adequate yearly progress. 8 automatically failed because they took an easier version of the test. Out of the 37 remaining special education students, only 31 passed, making the school a failing school. Though the school is technically failing, the principal understands that the special education students are getting the most out of their education. Making them take a test they are not ready for would make them feel dumb, which is something she refuses to make them do. It seems that No Child Left Behind is Failing, not the special education students or their teachers.

**Reaction:** What the principal of Micro-Pine Level Elementary School is doing is very honorable. She is accepting the fact that her school is failing in order to help her students to the best of her ability. Any system that stops a school from servicing its students to the best of its ability is not an effective system. No students should be made to feel stupid in hopes of having the school pass adequate yearly progress. The system is wrong. How can we judge student proficiency by judging how much they have improved? It should be acknowledged that there are some students who will never be regarded as proficient. Schools and teachers should not be penalized for this. And how will the parents with students who do not have learning disabilities feel about sending their children to a school that is regarded as failing? No Child Left Behind must change to stop penalizing schools for servicing special education students.

**"Guest Editorial"**

GUEST EDITORIAL. (2007, May).//Support for Learning//, pp. 50-51. **Summary:** Special education in the past few years has been moving from integration to inclusive education. Integration is putting a special education student into a "normal" classroom and expecting them to adapt to the learning strategies presented in that class. This was an ineffective method because of all of the unique learning styles exhibited among people. It is wrong to tell anyone they must learn in a particular way. The shift has moved to inclusion education. In this type of special education, students are included in "normal" classes and the teaching in the classroom adapts to help everyone involved get a successful education. This is a much better method that provides equal opportunities for students with learning disabilities and those without. For inclusion programs to be successful, many things must happen. All teachers must undergo professional development in order to better adapt to the unique needs of all students. A strong support system should be put in place to help parents, teachers, and administration communicate. Depending on the needs of students and the severity of their conditions, class sizes may need to decrease so all students can get the attention they deserve. To go along with smaller class sizes, schools must have adequate funding for these programs. Obviously, a lot must go into the success of these programs, but if executed appropriately, inclusion is a good strategy to use in special education. ** Reaction: ** One detail that the author of this editorial failed to recognize is teacher evaluation. When the trend was integration, it could be blamed on the students if they were not meeting the standards that they had to. Though this was not the answer to reform or special education, inclusion may not be either. In inclusion, the blame is placed on the teachers if the students do not perform well. Though many things must be put into place to ensure a successful inclusion program, many special education students still will not live up to the goals set by No Child Left Behind. This is being blamed on the teachers. Along with all of the other support systems that need to be put in place for successful inclusion education, the government must come up with fair methods of judging teacher effectiveness in these settings. Testing does not work, so another method should be put in place, along with all the other things that must go into inclusion.

Overall Reaction to Your Research
//What did your research teach you about your original question? How would you sum up what you've learned?//

My research taught me about the different methods that are being used to help children with learning disabilities get an education. On of the most prominent methods I found was inclusion, where students are able to learn along with their peers. The problems I found with inclusion went right along with my research question about how teacher effectiveness can be judged when teachers have a high population of special education students. Inclusion increases the amount of special education students in normal classrooms. This means that more teachers will have to worry about how they are being assessed because of these students who will not score high on standardized tests. Though I could not find many articles about special education in relation to No Child Left Behind, the New York Times article about the school that was failing because of its special education program had a lot of impact. It shows that No Child Left Behind has no compassion for the special circumstances that students and teachers may be facing. Instead of finding success in the small improvements that special education students exhibit, NCLB expects too much. I think this particular story proves our argument that teachers and schools that are dealing with special circumstances cannot be judged the way they are currently being judged.

Relevance in Rhode Island Schools
//How does what you learned in your research inform efforts to reform schools in Rhode Island?//

According to the Rhode Island Strategic Plan, to ensure teacher excellence, by 2012, all teachers will be evaluated on many factors including student achievement. This requirement is unfair to teachers with a high population of special education students. Even the best teacher will probably not get adequate test scores in her class if a high percentage of the students have learning disabilities. Rhode Island must come up with a fair way to assess teacher effectiveness that does not include student achievement. If this change is made, teacher evaluation will be much more fair and teachers will be encouraged rather than discouraged as they are now, to teach special education students without fear of losing their job.