Do Students With Disabilities Meet the State Mandated Requirements - Essay Example

The Disability Achievement Gap The Disability Achievement Gap Introduction Children with disabilities have a right to education just like any other child. They deserve to have access to quality education and school systems that cater to their unique needs. The United Nations has identified disability as a human rights issue, a factor that places emphasis on the need for inclusion and integration of children with disabilities in the education system. Therefore, many policies developed to promote the inclusion of children with disabilities in the school system target to ensure that such children access, free primary education, as well as secondary education on equal terms with other children. States should ensure that the school systems have in place reasonable accommodation that addresses the needs of children with disabilities. Evidently, children with disabilities require support provided by the entire school system if they are to benefit from education. In addition, individualization of the support cannot be underestimated because it is required to ensure maximized learning. In the United States, the No Child left Behind Act of 2001 was passed in an effort to ensure that all children including those with disabilities have access to quality education. Each state and county are required to develop education policies that conform to the act. However, there is evidence that these efforts have not filled in the disability achievement gap. This paper will discuss how students with disabilities are still left behind in the education sector. The No Child left Behind Act of 2001 was developed to address barriers that had been identified that served to prevent children with disabilities from accessing education opportunities. Before the act was passed, many states did not have any specific policies regarding the education of children with disabilities (Colker, 2013). Although some states had some policies, they proved to be outdated and ineffective to address the existing barriers of educating children with disabilities. Many of the school systems did not provide any support services for children with disabilities. There was a social stigma associated with disability, which affected the learning process for children with disabilities. Since disability and poverty are interlinked, many children with disabilities, and from poor backgrounds were the worst affected by the barriers to education. Notably, school budgets did not allow the schools to invest in facilities that could offer children with disabilities the relevant support in the education system (Shriner & Ganguly, 2007). Worst still, many teachers lacked the relevant training of including of including children with disabilities in the learning process. There was also an evident limited awareness of disability exhibited by both teachers and school staff. An act passed in 2001 was intended to address all these issues and register an increased inclusion of children with disabilities in the education system (Bechtoldt & Bender, 2008). An additional purpose of the implementation of the act was to ensure that a different curriculum was designed specifically for children with disabilities (Olivert, 2007). The curriculum was to include assessment methodologies that fit the individual needs of children with disabilities. Although some children with disabilities were still allowed to take general assessments, the act required schools to design different assessment techniques and reporting of the performance of children with disabilities. A close analysis of the success of the act reveals that there is still an existing gap (McLaughlin et al, 2005). For example, some schools have not yet implemented challenging curriculums specifically designed for children with disabilities. Moreover, their accountability levels concerning the performance of children with disabilities prove to be unsatisfactory (Antley, 2010). The No Child left Behind Act of 2001 sought to ensure that more teachers were available who had the capacity to handle the unique needs of children with disabilities. Although remarkable efforts were made in 2004, in an effort to recruit teachers with skills of handling special needs, and empowering them through pre-service and in-service training programs, there is a need for more teachers if the gap is to be completely narrowed down. Teachers who lacked the relevant training in special needs filled in an approximated 10% of positions in special education (Humphrey et al, 2013). One of their responsibilities was to handle over 600,000 students who had disabilities. These statistics only serve to indicate that many children are still left behind if teachers lack the relevant training. Previous studies indicated that about 10% positions of special education. Without doubt, teachers need to exhibit higher expectations for children with disabilities. Moreover, only about 60% of teachers indicated that they were adequately conversant with the needs of children with disabilities (Boyle & Topping, 2012). In order to achieve this, there is a need for rigorous research in the identification of evidence-based instructional practices that can promote maximized learning in children with disabilities. On a different note, it emerges that children with disabilities are prone to school drop out, a factor that contributes to their being left behind. An estimated 38% of children with disabilities dropped out school, limiting their chances of completing their education and accessing employment opportunities (Bejoian & Reid, 2005). In higher education, only about 51% indicated that they had graduated with a diploma. These statistics serve to place emphasis on the fact that children with disabilities are still left behind in the education sector. There is a salient need to address the achievement gap in an effort to narrow it down further. The attitude exhibited by teachers when dealing with students with disabilities in terms of achievement has contributed to the widening of the academic gap. It is saddening that only a fifth of teachers exhibit a conviction that students with disabilities can exhibit proficient scores in many state exams (Gordon & Morton, 2008). Evidently, unless teachers make efforts towards exhibiting inclusive attitudes and behaviour, it will prove impossible to narrow down the achievement gap. Conclusion Although there are positive aspects achieved by the No Child left Behind Act of 2001 in narrowing down the achievement gap, there is a salient need for more to be done. It is remarkable that students with disabilities have registered a better performance after the implementation of the act. However, the government is yet to ensure full inclusion of children with disabilities in the education system. The existing barriers need to be addressed promptly, in an effort to ensure that children with disabilities enjoy their right to education. References Antley, T. B. (2010, January 1). Inclusion Practices for Students with Disabilities in Three Schools Which Are Meeting Accountability Mandates of No Child Left Behind: A Multiple Site Case Study. ProQuest LLC. Bechtoldt, J. L., & Bender, V. (2008, January 1). A Policy Analysis: The Intersection of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the No Child Left Behind Act. ProQuest LLC. Bejoian, L. M., & Reid, D. (2005). A Disability Studies Perspective on the Bush Education Agenda: The No Child Left behind Act of 2001. Equity And Excellence In Education, 38(3), 220-231. Boyle, C., & Topping, K. J. (2012). What works in inclusion? Maidenhead, England: Open University Press. Colker, R. (2013). Politics Trump Science: The Collision Between No Child Left Behind and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Journal of Law & Education, 42(4), 585-631. Gordon, L., & Morton, M. (2008). Chapter fourteen: Inclusive Education and School Choice: Democratic Rights IN A Devolved System. In Disability & the Politics of Education: An International Reader (pp. 237-250). Humphrey, N., Lendrum, A., Barlow, A., Wigelsworth, M., & Squires, G. (2013). Achievement for All: Improving psychosocial outcomes for students with special educational needs and disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 341210-1225. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2012.12.008. McLaughlin, M. J., Embler, S., Hernandez, G., & Caron, E. (2005). No Child Left Behind and Students with Disabilities in Rural and Small Schools. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24(1), 32-39. Olivert, D. P. (2007). No Child Left Behind Act: Text, interpretation, and changes. New York: Nova Science Publishers. Shriner, J. G., & Ganguly, R. (2007). Assessment and Accommodation Issues under the No Child Left behind Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act: Information for IEP Teams. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(4), 231-243. Read More