Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Page 1
--
--
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the
Master of Arts in Education or Advanced Studies Certificate
--
By
Jessiah P. Gilchrist
Taft Middle School
Cedar Rapids, IA
April 24th, 2016
--
past half-century. Originally designed to ensure that students with physical disabilities
could attend school just as a non-disabled student would, special education was the
route which advocacy groups took to get handicapped children in school. Wright and
Wright explain how school leaders could keep students whom they thought would not
benefit from the educational system out of the school. (2007) Special education is
now a system by which students are deemed eligible to receive services via specially
function at their highest level, it seems the goal, and ultimately, the student is
The special education system is set up to identify students with special needs
beginning in second grade. Students with severe disabilities are identified much
earlier and receive services as early as their first year of life. However, students with
less severe disabilities must undergo an eligibility process that, depending on the
academic discrepancy and skill level, can take anywhere from six weeks to multiple
school years to complete. Once the student is deemed eligible, the evaluation team,
parents, and other interested parties will engage in an IEP team meeting whereby
services and accommodations will be put in place for them based on the evaluations
back into their Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). The LRE for special education
students varies by individual student and can range from a small class with a modified
curriculum to a general education class with special education teacher consulting the
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 3
teacher regarding the instruction of the student. The spectrum is massive and there are
many combinations of services and instruction that can be put in place for each
student. For students with marginal discrepancies, special education services should
not be permanent, yet it often is. The removal of services seems to be a firm trigger by
This author has noted many 8th grades special education students with
marginal discrepancies linger in special education with minimal gaps in learning and
the cost may be great for these students. Special education services may stifle
academic and social opportunities for these special education students. With these
assumptions in mind, the reciprocal must be addressed. How does the removal of
To address this question, one must first understand how students with marginal
gains are served. There is not one specific mode of delivery for these students as it
varies from school to school. Many factors are included in why special education
students with marginal gaps are served so differently across schools. These factors
experience, and even services available during their time in special education.
At the Cedar Rapids School District in Cedar Rapids, IA, the mode of delivery
is left to the IEP team which consists of the special education teacher, a general
education teacher, the parent(s), the student, administration from the school, a Grant
Wood Representative, the school nurse, if needed, and any other party who has an
interest in the students education. Furthermore, at Taft Middle School, the special
education teacher, as the professional, has the most suggestive pull for making
educational programming changes for the student. Traditionally, Taft Middle School
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 4
special educators have retained students in special education until they reach full
general education grade level expectations. As a special education teacher, I raised the
research question after seeing many special education students succeed in their special
education programming as shown by multiple forms of data and then continue to stay
in special education when it seemed natural for them to move towards general
be moved to general education earlier than they had been. Although they were not at
grade level, they were often close; what were they missing by being held in special
on special education, there was not a lot on how the removal of special education
services affected the academic growth of students with or without marginal academic
gains. In my opinion, there are two possible reasons for this. First, there is not enough
students who have exited special education to focus specific studies on said students
and second, special education teachers do not, by habit, push students towards exiting
services has been moving toward provision within general education. Ainscow,
Dyson, & Weiner (2006) explain further, Across the world there is evidence of
an emphasis on integration and, finally, to the idea of inclusive education. (p. 6) This
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 5
has been evidenced in the lives of both general and special education teachers; rather
removed special education setting, the shift in how teachers provide this instruction
has been ever moving toward the general education setting. The evidence of the
success of students with special needs being in their least restrictive environment
education student can receive services and accommodations for their education buy
still participate in the general education class. There are many benefits to a co-taught
students in special education appreciated the extra attention they were able to receive.
(2007) By just placing a special education teacher in the classroom, students who
originally might struggle to keep up and understand the general education curriculum
are now able to attain and maintain success because of the support they have access to
in a co-taught setting.
Wagner and Blackorby have studied how special education students fare post
high school and explain how difficult it is to study special education students when
comparing them to general education students because they are often significantly
different than their general education peers and because of these different levels, the
included in this research, as outlined in later sections, are not significantly different
than their general education peers thus keeping the study of described programming
intact.
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 6
Research from Texas has shown that students who exit from special education
do not fare as well as those who are in special education when studied by the effect on
program effectivness. Hanushek, Kain, and Rivkin (2002) found that exiting students
likely depress the average program effect, which in their case is based on a
achievement gains following the exit. (p. 591) This study infers that the special
education students gains were greater during their time in special education than after
their final exit. However, many factors are not addressed in this study and two in
particular, may have influenced the data in question. First, students may exit special
education for a variety of reasons, not just academic and achievement growth. If the
students in this research were exited for reasons other than obtaining the marginal
academic gains level mentioned in this research, the data could be invalid. If, for
example, the students were exited from special education due to parental refusal, than
it can be assumed their post special education performance would depress program
effectiveness due to their lack of proper growth. Second, the special education
students studied by Hanushek, Kain, and Rivkin were learning disabled, emotionally
decrease in program effectiveness post special education exit, the learning disabled
group, most closely represented by this research held a small effect on program
impaired students.
mathematical achievement in varying groups over the course of five years.. The study
closing the achievement gap over the course of the study. One group was students
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 7
who were never in special education, one who were always in special education, and
one who were in special education at some point throughout the study. Although this
group most likely refers to students who began in special education and were exited
from special education, the authors explained that it may also mean students who
were not in special education but later identified. The group with the largest amount
of success in closing the achievement gap was the students who were never in special
education. The group with the lowest gains was the students who were always in
special education. The group who were in special education were reported to have
lower gains than the group who were never in special education but larger gains than
the students who were always in special education. (Shulte and Stevens, 2015).
Although this is not definite proof that removal of special education services improves
academic achievement, it outlines how greater gains can be achieved when students
Research Plan/Method
marginal gains, limitations exist that impact the research. One cannot randomly select
special education students with marginal gains and remove services to see how they
I teach. Therefore, the research taken is done so only on students whom have shown
they have met the states criteria to exit special education. That criteria being that the
IEP team determines the student has the ability to succeed in the general education
setting without special education support delivered in the form of specially designed
Because this criteria only exists for a small portion of the special education
students this researcher serves, the research sample is relatively small. Additionally,
the sampling of students with whom will be compared is small due to the lack of the
number of students available to study whom have marginal gains but are kept in
special education.
With this limit in research subjects, seven subjects will be used to determine
the effectiveness of the removal of special services while only three subjects will be
used as a comparison. The students being researched have had marginal academic
gains for multiple years and their progress will be compared across the span of two
years.
Data
Data was taken from a variety of sources to fully determine if the students had
indeed make growth academically. First, IA Assessment data was used to determine
Standard Scores (NSS). Each of the scores were overall Assessment scores, not
subtest category scores. Naturally, if growth occurs in the students NSS scores, their
NPR scores should also rise. However, there may be cases where this does not happen
due to other students rising at the same rate as the student in question, thereby
Second, Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI) is collected each year for students
from 3rd grade to 12th grade to assess students progress to college and career
readiness. Proficiency levels at the end of each grade level produce ranges that each
student is expected to be within by then end of that academic year. Growth of students
SRI is represented by the formula year 2 SRI- year 1 SRI equals growth.
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 9
Third, growth rate was measured in each of their IEP goals over the course of
their 8th grade year (research group) and 9th grade year (comparison group). Each
student had either different goal areas or goals written differently for them depending
on their individual skill level. IEP goal growth is represented using the formula of
median ending progress data subtracted by the baseline data divided by the number of
weeks of instruction.
Fourth, grades were analyzed over the course of two years. Grades are
subjective and vary from teacher to teacher but because they are subjective both in 8th
grade and 9th grade, they are still a useful indicator of academic success. Grade point
averages (GPA) from each year were used and growth was determined using the
Fifth, a parent survey was given to the research subjects and not the
comparison group. The research questions consisted of the following four questions:
2. Has Payton struggled in any way this past year that you feel
would have been avoided had special education services not been
removed?
3. Has Payton's school based options such as non-core
classes increased since the removal of special education services?
4. If you had to make the decision again, would it be the same?
The response were analyzed based on a positive, negative, or neutral response and put
into percentage form. For each positive answer, the student earned 25%, for each
negative answer, the student earned -25%, and for each neutral answer, the student
Research Subjects:
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 10
The research subjects are categorized through the use of data as it pertains to
their selected academic skill or skills. Data used to conduct this research will be IA
Assessment percentiles and national standard score (NSS) growth, Scholastic Reading
Inventory (SRI) scores, Individual Education Plan (IEP) goal scores, grade reports,
and a parent survey. Data will be analyzed from one year prior to the removal of
special services until one year after the removal of special education services.
The research group subjects being used are those with marginal academic
gains who have been exited from special education. The control group subjects being
analyzed are those with marginal academic gains who have not exited special
education. Marginal academic gains for the research group means less than one
academic school year of deficiency when compared to grade level standards. Marginal
academic gains for the control group means between 1-2 years of academic deficiency
when compared to their grade level peers. Chart 1a below describes the expected and
average general education academic standard at the 8th grade level across the data
being analyzed.
Iowa Assessment data is a normed reference test and is collected in the spring
and in this study includes NPR and NSS data. National percentile scores rank students
as they compare to other students who take the assessment. The NSS score give a
score to every student and provides a normed range of scores that every student scores
within. Rather than comparing the NSS score to other students, the NSS is used to
compare previous years scores to their current years scores and then analyze the
individual growth. For this reason, the NSS data is listed as a percentage of growth as
compared to their scores from previous years, not their peers scores.
The only forms of data that will be compared between the research group and
the control group will be IA Assessment percentile data and NSS scores, SRI scores,
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 11
and GPA. Data has been collected and the growth of each of the students was
analyzed and then averaged together to form a group growth score across the four data
areas collected.
Results
Table 1 outlines the data being collected and provides describes the expected growth or range
for 8th and/or 9th grade students. IA Assessment percentiles ranges are based on the normed bell curve
test where the averages fall between the 16th and 84th percentiles. The growth on the NSS scores from
the IA Assessments vary depending on the students previous years level. Scholastic Reading Inventory
(SRI) proficiency ranges are based on nationally recognized Lexile reading levels. Expected IEP goal
growth vary by student and goal. Grade point averages are based on nationally recognized averages and
expectations. Parent surveys expected range cannot be determined but vary depending on the 9th grade
experience of the research group.
Table 1 Data analyzed with explanation of expected performance for general education students.
IA IA SRI scores IEP Goals Grade Parent
Assessment Assessment Reports Survey
Percentiles NSS
Expected: Expected: Year End Varies Expected: Varies but
Above 40th Growth (8th grade) depending 3.0-4.0 positive
%ile Varies Proficiency on goal area Avg: responses
Avg. 16th- depending Range from 2.0 indicate
84th %ile. on students 955-1155 expected
current standard.
level
Table 2 compares the research groups data from their 8th grade academic year to their 9th grade
academic year across all data collected. Some data is incomplete for a variety of reasons. The IA
Assessment data for the most recent assessment is not available yet. The IEP goals are only available
from the research group from 8th grade as they do not have IEP goals in 9th grade due to their final exit.
The current group of 8th grade students who are exiting special education will also not have IEP goals
for their 9th grade year as they no longer have IEPs. Parent survey data was only taken on students who
have not had an IEP for more than one year.
Table 2: Cohort 1, Students with marginal gains exited from special education.
IA IA SRI scores IEP Goals Grade Parent
Assessment Assessment Reports Survey
Percentiles NSS
Student/Grade 8th 9th 8th 9th 8th 9th 8th 9th 8th 9th9th
Only
1.PB 54 N/A 255 N/A 1090 * .12 N/A 3.08 1.889 50%
2.LP 72 N/A 276 N/A 1081 1166 .512 N/A 3.87 3.5885 25%
3.PW 61 N/A 263 N/A 990 1069 .475 N/A 3.75 3.3 100%
4.IL 86 N/A 281 N/A 1415 N/A 1.3 N/A 3.1 N/A N/A
5.JM 52 N/A 242 N/A 980 N/A .233 N/A 2.95 N/A N/A
6.MS 32 N/A 222 N/A 902 N/A -.78 N/A 2.64 N/A N/A
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 12
7.MW 44 N/A 263 N/A 1065 N/A .629 N/A 2.67 N/A N/A
Students 4-7 9th grade data not available as they are not in 9th grade when data was compiled.
*Student did not take the SRI their 9th grade year.
Table 3 includes the comparison group; students who have marginal, but greater academic gaps than
the research group. IA Assessment data for the comparison group is also not available at the time the
data was collected. The parent survey was also not included in the group as they were not exited from
special education and the survey would not apply.
Table 3: Cohort 2, Students with marginal gains not exited from special education.
IA IA SRI scores IEP Goals Grade Reports
Assessment Assessment Growth
Percentiles NSS
Student/Grade 8th 9th 8th 9th 8th 9th 8th 9th 8th 9th
1.CR 44 N/A 244 N/A 970 * 1.21 .75 3.573 3.8055
2.TH 21 N/A 219 N/A 760 774 .261 .805 2.94 3.222
3.QS 36 N/A 236 N/A 1166 1177 -.03 .13 2.26 2.278
*Student did not take the SRI their 9th grade year.
Table 4: Growth of students with marginal gains exited from special education from
8th to 9th grade.
IA Assessment IA SRI IEP Grade
Percentiles Assessment scores Goals Reports
NSS
1.PB *** *** N/A * -1.19
2.LP *** *** 151 * -.2815
3.PW *** *** 79 * -.45
4.IL *** *** ** * **
5.JM *** *** ** * **
6.MS *** *** ** * **
7.MW *** *** ** * **
*Represents growth during 8 grade year as no IEP goal existed during 9 grade year.
th th
**Growth cannot be analyzed as these students have not been in 9 th grade at time of data collection.
***Data not made public at time of data collection.
Table 5: Growth of students with marginal gains not exited from special education
from 8th to 9th grade years.
IA Assessment IA SRI IEP Grade
Percentiles Assessment scores Goals Reports
NSS
1.CR N/A N/A N/A -0.46 .2325
2.TH N/A N/A 14 .281 .282
3.QS N/A N/A 11 .16 .018
Limitations
The largest and most noticeable limitation of this research is the difference
between the two groups being studied. The research group with marginal gains who
exited special education had smaller academic gains than the control group who
continued in special education. Additionally, some students in the research group held
different academic gains, such as gains in writing instead of reading, than the control
group which causes potential misrepresentations in the data. For example, student A
may have been improving their reading skills while student B was improving their
writing skills. Each of the students growth in IA assessments was an overall score
and not a subsection score. Subjects could have had overall growth but not made
Another limitation of this study is the grade level switch from 8th to 9th grade.
The variables for students who begin high school are numerous and different for each
student. Variables that change for students entering high school include but are not
change in family life or other extracurricular activities. Due to the random events and
family life that influence the change from 8th to 9th grade, it is difficult to ensure that
the shift from special education to general education is the cause, or any cause for an
Non-Compared Data
Data was collected for the research group that was not compared to the control
group but was considered important by the researcher. The first is IEP goal data from
their last year in special education. This data was important to see their final progress
toward closing their academic gaps and laterally moving toward being equally
comparable to their general education peers. Interesting trends were uncovered. Most
of the research groups IEP growth over the course of their final year in special
education were very large. One student had negative growth but was still exited due to
her ability to maintain success in general education without any specially designed
instruction or accommodations. All others in the research maintained large IEP goal
growth which shows their ability to successfully integrate into general education
Two of the three control group showed large growth in their IEP goals during
their 8th grade years and the large growth was continued in their 9th grade year. This
would appear to show their special education instruction and accommodations are
working to continually close the achievement gaps existent in each of these students.
The parent survey was also provided to the parents of the research group.
Quantitative data can provide many details and support the researchers hypothesis
but it cannot provide accurate qualitative data that can often be as or more important
than the quantitative data so relied on by research. Due to the timeframe restraints of
the study, only three of the seven research subjects parents were interviewed. One of
the three parents interviewed provided very neutral answers to the questions posed.
There was a sense of take it or leave it in regards to their student exiting special
education. They did not feel it was a negative or positive move but spoke of it more as
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 15
a horizontal move. The second research subject provided all negative answers due to
their students anxiety hitting her very hard midway through her 9th grade year.
Interestingly enough, this same student held the largest gains in both the SRI and GPA
categories. As a parent myself, it is safe to assume that the mental health of ones
children is as important, and potentially more important than academic gains. The
final research subjects parent was thrilled with the exit from special education and
explained that her daughter seemed to have become ever more motivated and driven
to do well since being exited from special education. Although there was no
comparative purpose of the parent survey, it is important to note the varying responses
of the parents as they have the most vested interest in their child future and success.
Compared Data
The IA Assessment data was not available at the time of original data
collection so it is unknown what growth was experienced by both the research group
The average SRI score growth was comparable across the research group and
the control group. The research group maintained a larger growth margin (102.5) than
the control group. SRI scores are indicative of reading comprehension gains and
provide students with a score that details the students levels compared to their peers.
Data showing greater growth among the research group is likely due to the greater
provided with general education instruction but at a slower pace and is often
naturally ethical and correct, students with marginal gains in special education are
often given lesser expectations than their general education peers. The amount of
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 16
Regarding GPA, the research group had a much lower growth (-.6405) as
compared to the control group (.1775). One explanation for this discrepancy is the
amount of expectations placed on the research group after their final exit from special
education. General education teachers in high school are not necessarily aware of
their previous special education status and treat them as they would any other general
education student. However, the control group with their accommodations and slower
pace, are often treated different and given higher grades for hard work even if the
Multiple conclusions can be drawn based on the data. With the ultimate goal
being to push students toward their least restrictive environment, an exit from special
education should be at the forefront of priorities for special educators. The data
supports this assumption can be considered correct. The only quantitative data to
support that the removal of special education services and accommodations should
not occur for students with marginal gains is the decrease in GPA after being exited
from special education. However, it is important to note that high grades do not
ability. The other data that suggests the removal of special education for students with
marginal gains is the parents concerns for one of the research subjects. This student is
struggling with anxiety, a large part of this anxiety could have stemmed from not
being in special education and feeling safe or having a location in the school where
she knows she could go to get away from the source of her anxiety. However, using
this logic begs the question, If she had continued in special education would she
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 17
have had the same level of anxiety? This question is impossible to answer. The
academic gains she has earned may be greater than if she continued in special
education and her anxiety could still have been as high as it is now.
With all of the data in mind, it is important to note the individual student each
unprofessional and unethical to create a line students can meet and then cut the
platform from under them that has helped them to become successful to that point.
The idea of the individual student must take precedence and each special education
teacher must look at all perspectives prior to making a decision for the students they
serve.
If indeed the individual is the focal point of the decision and it is decided that
the student could be successful in general education without the support of specially
based on the data, it is the better way to obtain continued academic success and
growth. Although the student may still make gains if they continue in special
education, data supports larger gains in students who have ended their special
education services.
The Effects of the Removal of Special Education Services
Page 18
References
Ainscow, M., Dyson, A., Weiner, S. (2013) From exclusion to inclusion: ways of
responding in schools to students with special needs. CfBT Education Trust.
Wright, P.W., Wright P.D. (2007) Wrightslaw: Special Education Law (2nd ed.).
Hartford, VA: Harbor House Law Press.
Schulte, A.C., Stevens, J.J., (2015) Once, sometimes, or always in special education:
mathematics growth and achievement gaps. Exceptional Children, 81(3), 370-387
Wagner, M.M., Blackorby, J., (1996)Transition from high school to work or college:
How special education students fare. The Future of Children 6(1), 103-120.
Hanushek, E.A., Kain, J.F., Rivkin, S.G. (2002) Inferring program effects for special
populations; does special education raise achievement for students with disabilities?
The Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(4), 584-599.