The impact of standards-based reform on special education and the creation of the ‘dividual

References

• Allbritten, D., Mainzer, R., & Ziegler, D. (2004). Will students with disabilities be scapegoats for school failures? Educational Horizons, 82, 153–160.
   Google Scholar
• Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). An analysis of some unintended and negative consequences of high stakes testing. Tempe: Arizona State University Education Policy Research Unit. Retrieved from http://nepc.colorado.edu/files/EPSL-0211-125-EPRU.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Amrein-Beardsley, A. (2009). The unintended, pernicious consequences of “staying the course” on the United States No Child Left Behind policy. International Journal of Educational Policy & Leadership, 4(1–11), 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Apple, M. W. (2004). Creating difference: Neo-liberalism, neo-conservatism and the politics of educational reform. Educational Policy, 18(1), 12–44. doi:10.1177/0895904803260022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apple, M. W. (2006). Understanding and interrupting neoliberalism and neoconservatism in education. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 1(1), 21–26. doi:10.1207/s15544818ped0101_4
   Google Scholar
• Bacon, J., & Ferri, B. (2013). The impact of standards-based reform: Applying Brantlinger’s critique of ‘hierarchical ideologies’. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(12), 1312–1325.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, S. J. (1990). Introducing Monsieur Foucault. In S. J. Ball (Ed.), Foucault and education: Disciplines and knowledge (pp. 1–8). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, S. J. (1993). What is policy? Texts, trajectories and toolboxes. In S. J. Ball (Ed.), Sociology of education (pp. 1830–1841). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, S. J. (1997). Policy sociology and critical social research: A personal review of recent education policy and policy research. British Educational Research Journal, 23(3), 257–274. doi:10.1080/0141192970230302
   Google Scholar
• Brantlinger, E. A. (2006). Winners need losers: The basis for school competition and hierarchies. In E. A. Brantlinger (Ed.), Who benefits from special education? Remediating [fixing] other people’s children (pp. 197–232). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Castle, R. (1991). From dangerousness to risk. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Christenson, S., Decker, D., Triezenberg, H., Ysseldyke, J., & Reschly, A. (2007). Consequences of high-stakes assessment for students with and without disabilities. Educational Policy, 21, 662–690. doi:10.1177/0895904806289209
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole, C. (2006). Closing the achievement gap series, part III: What is the impact of NCLB on the inclusion of students with disabilities? Center for Evaluation and Education Policy Brief, 4(11), 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Cosier, M., Causton-Theoharis, J., & Theoharis, G. (2013). Does access matter? Time in general education and achievement for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 34(6), 323–332. doi:10.1177/0741932513485448
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Race, inequality and educational accountability: The irony of ‘No Child Left Behind’. Race Ethnicity and Education, 10(3), 245–260.
   Google Scholar
• Defur, S. (2002). Education reform, high stakes assessment, and students with disabilities: One state’s approach. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 203–211. doi:10.1177/07419325020230040301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscript on the societies of control. October, 59, 3–7.
   Google Scholar
• Eckes, S., & Swando, J. (2009). Special education subgroups under NCLB: Issues to consider. Teachers College Record, 111(11), 2479–2504.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fierros, E. G., & Conroy, J. (2002). Double jeopardy: An exploration of overrepresentation of minority children in special education. In D. J. Losen, & G. Orfield (Eds.), Racial inequity in special education (pp. 39–70). Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project, Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Flowers, C., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., Browder, D., & Spooner, F. (2005). Teachers’ perceptions of alternate assessments. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 30, 81–92. doi:10.2511/rpsd.30.2.81
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality an introduction: Volume 1. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1997). Society must be defended: Lectures at the College de France, 1975–1976. New York, NY: Picador.
   Google Scholar
• Foucualt, M. (2004). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the college de France 1978–1979. New York, NY: Picador.
   Google Scholar
• Gaumer-Erickson, A. S., Kleinhammer-Tramill, J., & Thurlow, M. L. (2007). An analysis of the relationship between high school exit exams and diploma options and the impact on students with disabilities. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 18(2), 117–128. doi:10.1177/10442073070180020201
   Google Scholar
• Gentry, M. (2006). No Child Left Behind: Neglecting excellence. Roeper Review, 29(1), 24–27. doi:10.1080/02783190609554380
   Google Scholar
• Harry, B., & Klingner, J. (2006). Why are so many minority students in special education? Understanding race & disability in schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hehir, T., Grindal, T., & Eidelman, H. (2012). Review of special education in the commonwealth of Massachusetts: A synthesis report. Thomas Hehir and Associates. Retrieved from http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/2012/0412sped.html
   Google Scholar
• Hehir, T., & Katzman, L. (2012). Effective inclusive schools: Designing successful schoolwide programs. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Heubert, J. P. (2002). Schools without rules? Charter schools, federal disability law, and the paradoxes of deregulation. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved January 15, 2008, from http://www.cast.org/publications/ncac/ncac_schools.html
   Google Scholar
• Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA). (2004). Public Law 108-446. Retrieved from http://idea.ed.gov/download/statute.html
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. R., Thurlow, M., Cosio, A., & Bremer, C. D. (2005). Diploma options for students with disabilities (NCSET Information Brief Vol. 4 No. 1). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Secondary Education and Transition.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, J. S., & Sunderman, G. L. (2005). Measuring academic proficiency under the No Child Left Behind Act: Implications for educational equity. Educational Researcher, 34(8), 3–13.
   Google Scholar
• Kluth, P. (2001). ‘Our school doesn’t offer inclusion’ and other legal blunders. Educational Leadership, 59(4), 24–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreitzer, A. E., Madaus, G. F., & Haney, W. (1989). Competency testing and dropouts. In L. Weis, E. Farrar, & H. G. Petrie (Eds.), Dropouts from school: Issues, dilemmas, and solutions (pp. 129–152). Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lazarus, S. S., Thompson, S. J., & Thurlow, M. L. (2006). How students access accommodations in assessment and instruction: Results of a survey of special education teachers. EPRRI Issue Brief Seven. College Park, MD: Educational Policy Reform Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Lillard, D. R., & DeCicca, P. P. (2001). Higher standards, more dropouts? Evidence within and across time. Economics of Education Review, 20, 459–473. doi:10.1016/S0272-7757(00)00022-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGlaughlin, M., Miceli, M., & Hoffman, A. (2009). Standards, assessments and accountability for students with disabilities: An evolving meaning of a “free and appropriate public education. In M. R. Wolff (Ed.), NCLB at the crossroads: Reexamining the federal effort to close the achievement gap (pp. 106–133). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• New York State Department of Education. (2011). Questions and answers about schools identified as persistently lowest-achieving and concurrently as schools under registration review. Retrieved from http://www.p12.nysed.gov/pla/FAQ.html
   Google Scholar
• No Child Left Behind Act. 2001, U.S.C. 20 § 6301. Et seq. (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Olssen, M. (2005). Foucault, educational research and the issue of autonomy. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 37(3), 365–387. doi:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2005.00127.x
   Google Scholar
• Peters, S., & Oliver, L. (2009). Achieving quality and equity through inclusive education in an era of high-stakes testing. Prospects, 39, 265–279.
   Google Scholar
• President Bush. (2000, July 10). George W. Bush’s speech to the NAACP. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/elections/bushtext071000.htm
   Google Scholar
• Ralabate, P., Hehir, T., Dodd, E., Grindal, T., Vue, G., Eidelman, H., … Carlisle, A. (2012). Universal design for learning: Initiatives on the move: Understanding the impact of the race to the top and ARRA funding on the promotion of universal design for learning. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Universal Design for Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of error: The hoax of the privatization movement and the danger to America’s public schools. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
   Google Scholar
• Rea, P., McLaughlin, V., & Walther-Thomas, C. (2002). Outcomes for students with learning disabilities in inclusive and pullout programs. Council for Exceptional Children, 68(2), 203–223.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ronfeldt, M., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2013). How teacher turnover harms student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 50(1), 4–36. doi:10.3102/0002831212463813
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandholtz, J. H., Ogawa, R. T., & Scribner, S. P. (2004). Standards gaps: Unintended consequences of local standards-based reform. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1177–1202. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00376.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoolwide Integrated Framework for Transformation. (2014). U.S. The University of Kansas. Retrieved from http://www.swiftschools.org/
   Google Scholar
• Smyth, T. S. (2008). Who is No Child Left Behind leaving behind? The Clearinghouse: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 81(3), 133–137.
   Google Scholar
• Stevens, J. C. (2009). Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) for Limited English Proficient Students/ English Language Learners (LEP/ELLs). New York State Education Department. Retrieved from http://www.p12.nysed.gov/biling/bilinged/documents/AMAOLetterfor2009.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sunderman, G. L. (2006). The unraveling of No Child Left Behind: How negotiated changes transform the law. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED490859.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Theoharis, G. (2009). The school leaders our children deserve: Seven keys to equity, social justice, and school reform. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, S., & Thurlow, M. (2003). 2003 State special education outcomes: Marching forward. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, S., & Thurlow, M. L. (2001). 2001 state special education outcomes: A report on state activities at the beginning of a new decade. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/onlinedefault.html
   Google Scholar
• Tremain, S. (2005). Foucault, governmentality, and critical disability theory: An introduction. In S. Tremain (Ed.), Foucault and the government of disability. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education. (2009, November). Race to the top program: Executive summary. Washington DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/executive-summary.pdf
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). Digest of education statistics (NCES 2014-015). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=64
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, M. M., & Blackorby, J. (1996). Transition from high school to work or college: How special education student’s fare. Special Education for Students with Disabilities, 6, 103–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolf, N. (2011). A case study comparison of charter and traditional schools in New Orleans recovery school district: Selection criteria and service provision for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 32(5), 382–392. doi:10.1177/0741932510362220
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ysseldyke, J., Nelson, J., Christenson, S., Johnson, D., Dennison, A., Triezenberg, H., … Hawes, M. (2004). What we know and need to know about the consequences of high-stakes testing for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71(1), 75–95. doi:10.1177/001440290407100105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar