History of education

Changes in Education

Super Student Name

Grand Canyon University

SPD 501: Graduate Studies in Special Education

Professor Kimber Underdown

October 1, 2020

Changes in Education

Educational professionals have the task of preparing students to be productive members of society. This task, although difficult, is usually achieved through the use of resources available to teachers and students. Unfortunately, the availability of these resources is not the same across the board, as schools face funding issues. Resources and accommodations can be even more scarce when dealing with students who have special needs. Historically, an uneven distribution of wealth has resulted in larger successes for those students from homes with a better economic status (Brun-Bevel & Byrd, 2015). With this being the case, metrics used to identify students who are meeting the standards, educationally, are not entirely fair. As time has changed, reforms have been passed to provide a better representation of quality education for all students, including those with special needs; however, there is still more work to be done before becoming a society that is as strong as its most educated members. This paper will address assessment, standards, RTI, and proposed changes to the educational system for students with specialized and diverse needs.

Assessment

Assessment is a necessary tool in evaluating the success or failure of an academic institution. For years, standardized testing has been used to measure the progress of students and schools all over the country. “Standardized tests are used to evaluate students’ educational progress and knowledge, evaluate teacher and administrative effectiveness, and measure states’ educational efforts” (Brun-Bevel & Byrd, 2015, page 434). Using the same tests to identify the success of all students is not entirely fair because all students are not the same. This was realized once it was implemented, and reforms, such as Common Core Standards, which were adopted, to even out the playing field (Brun-Bevel & Byrd, 2015). In addition, to accommodate students with disabilities, amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act required States to accommodate students with disabilities by providing testing options that better demonstrate their competence (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2017). This was a plus, as inclusion into the testing system can help students with special needs achieve future success, as some of these assessments are required for admission into higher learning or trade schools.

Although, there are positive aspects to the changes associated with standardized testing, negative aspects exist as well. Unfortunately, there is still a heavy reliance on the tests ability to predict intelligence and/or future success. This is a negative aspect of standardized testing because the idea of intelligence itself (and even of academic success) has changed over the years. Previously, the ability to be successful in life was thought to be something a student was born with. However, it is now recognized that types of intelligence and success vary, and intelligence includes independent living skills and creative abilities as well (Gersten, Jayanthi, & Dimino, 2017). This is something that cannot be measured by a standardized tests with questions that only catered to specific types of academic and cognitive skills. It is well understood now that, although standardized tests are sometimes good indicators of future success, this is not necessarily so. Since this discovery, many secondary educational institutions have changed their admission policies to stop relying so heavily on standardized testing (Gersten, Jayanthi, & Dimino, 2017). Still, there is still great reliance on standardized assessments for the majority of schools, which indicates that major reform is unlikely. Another negative aspect of standardized assessments is that it is unclear of what exactly it measures. It is very possible that standardized testing simply measures if the student is a good test taker (Gersten, Jayanthi, & Dimino, 2017). Standardized testing does not account for individual abilities like having a photographic memory or the ability to concentrate for long periods of time (Gersten, Jayanthi, & Dimino, 2017). Just because some students have this ability, some others do not, and this does not mean that one type of thinker is more intelligent or more capable of future academic performance than the other.

RTI

Changes to the educational system are also present through the introduction of RTI, known as Response to Intervention. This usually begins when there is an early discovery of a child who may show difficulty in learning or be at-risk for future struggles (Gersten, Jayanthi, & Dimino, 2017). With this policy, academic institutions use different screening tools to identify students who have trouble reading, for example, and are given intervention reading interventions to propel their learning so that students can be given specialized interventions earlier and reduce the stressors on the special education programs within schools (Gersten, Jayanthi, & Dimino, 2017). This was a major change from prior years when students were not able to receive help with reading until second or third grade, for example, because of the nature of the testing protocols. By the time they were then identified, they had been labeled with having a learning disability and were even further behind their peers (Gersten, Jayanthi, & Dimino, 2017).

Identifying students earlier with reading problems (which is just one example) is a positive aspect of RTI, but there are negative aspects of the program as well. The feel of it is very “one stop shop” without varying assessments and intervention methods. There is evidence that students who do not need an intervention in reading are receiving one and that the services they receive are either harming them or not helping them enough to make a difference (Gersten, Jayanthi, & Dimino, 2017). Providing services for students who do not need them is a waste of resources and it is counterproductive for the student.

Proposed Change

Although there have been changes made to the educational system to meet the needs of all students, there is still more that can be done. Schools can become more inclusive, thus reducing overall costs for services and providing all students with a more real-life opportunity to engage with diverse learners, who will one day be their fellow workers in the world. Affording all students opportunities to be with diverse populations, including students with special needs, encourages a greater understanding of the world for all learners. It also ensures that all students are given equal access to the standards and curriculum, thus allowing a greater opportunity for all to succeed on standardized assessments.

Proposed Implementation

To implement this change, it may be as simple as providing the school boards the research behind an inclusive environment. Seeking out the research and then sharing it with the decision makers is crucial in making any sustainable change. When the stakeholders are aware of the benefits of inclusion, it is far more likely the change will be made and sustained. Another way to implement the inclusive environment would be to create grass roots movements and encourage legislation that promotes a more inclusive learning environment for students in Kindergarten-12th grade environments.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the recent decades have provided meaningful change for schools. Along with the positive, there is always negative. It is impossible to have any perfect reform, but society can always strive for improvement. One improvement would be more inclusive classrooms for all learners. Only through sustainable changes can the future of the world be transformed.

References

Brun-Bevel, R. J., & Byrd, C. (2015). The foundation of racial disparities in the standardized testing era: The impact of school segregation and the assault on public education in Virginia. Humanity and Society, 39(4), 419-448. Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2017). The school superintendents association. Retrieved from Fair and Unfair Testing Accommodations: http://www.aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=14932 Gersten, R., Jayanthi, M., & Dimino, J. (2017). Too much, too soon? Unanswered questions from national Response to Intervention Evaluation. Exceptional Children, 3, 244-254.