Special Education–Non-Special Education Achievement Gap in Math: Effects of Reporting Methods, Analytical Techniques, and Reclassification

Thurlow, Martha L.; Wu, Yi-Chen; Lazarus, Sheryl S.; Ysseldyke, James E.

doi:10.1080/09362835.2014.986614

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, Ysseldyke and Bielinski found larger achievement differences between SWD and students without disabilities (SWOD) using the current year classification compared with the first-year classification. These findings were confirmed and extended by Thurlow, Wu, Lazarus, and Ysseldyke (2016), who reported that students who move from SWD to SWOD classification tend to be higher performing than those who remain in special education, and those who move from SWOD to SWD tend to be lower performing than those who remain in general education.…”

Section: Variability In Exceptionality Classification Across Studentssupporting

confidence: 59%

“…In response to the first research question, we documented the movement of students between general and special education as well as reclassification from one disability category to another (e.g., Carlson & Parshall, 1996;Thurlow et al, 2016;Walker et al, 1988;Schulte and Stevens (2015), approximately 10% (n = 2,830) to 12% (n = 3,409) of the sample cohort received special education services in any one grade from 3 through 8, with 11% (n = 3,032) receiving services in Grade 3, about 17% (n = 4,957) receiving special education services in at least 1 year, and approximately 5% (n = 1,404) receiving special education services in every year in Grades 3 to 8. Furthermore, a very small proportion of students remained in the same disability category across Grades 3 to 8, ranging from 0.07% for ED to about 2% for SLD (see column "Always" of Table 1).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modeling the Time-Varying Nature of Student Exceptionality Classification on Achievement Growth

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our purpose was to examine different approaches to modeling the time-varying nature of exceptionality classification. Using longitudinal data from one state’s mathematics achievement test for 28,829 students in Grades 3 to 8, we describe the reclassification rate within special education and between general and special education, and compare four alternative growth models for students with and without disabilities with different specifications of disability classification as time-variant (TVC) or time-invariant (TIC) covariates. Although model fit statistics were inconsistent in endorsing a single model, we found that the TIC results were generally preferable to the TVC; however, the choice of model specification may rest on the purpose of the researcher and goals of representing the influence of covariates on growth.

show abstract

Section: Variability In Exceptionality Classification Across Studentssupporting

confidence: 59%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling the Time-Varying Nature of Student Exceptionality Classification on Achievement Growth

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These differences may have implications for students with disabilities. Education experts have long voiced concern regarding limited growth in achievement by students in response to special education services (e.g., Chudowsky et al, 2009; Feng & Sass, 2013; Kavale, 2007; Thurlow et al, 2016). Thus, the nature and effectiveness of professional development offered to educators working with special education students must undergo close examination.…”

Section: Advancing Research On Coaching For Special Education Teachersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the Effects of Coaching for General and Special Education Teachers in High-Poverty Urban Elementary Schools

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research that examines coaching approaches for special education teachers is very limited. This study, a secondary analysis of a wait-list controlled, randomized trial (106 teachers, 2,195 students, 18 schools), investigated the effects of a data-driven coaching that integrated observational assessment and performance feedback on general education (GE) versus special education (SE) teacher practices and student outcomes in high-poverty urban elementary schools. Coaches used observational data via the Classroom Strategies Assessment System to identify practice needs, set goals, create plans, and monitor progress toward goals. Prior to coaching, GE and SE teachers were observed using evidence-based instructional and behavior management practices; however, some practices were at rates lower than recommended by the research literature. Results suggest that goal selection and frequency and quality of practices were generally comparable between GE and SE teachers. However, SE teachers used 30% fewer behavior corrective feedback statements, on average, than GE teachers ( p = .04). Overall, the effect of the coaching intervention did not differ across GE and SE teachers; both had significantly improved instructional and behavior management practices and student outcomes when compared with teachers in the control condition. Limitations and future directions for research and practice are discussed.

show abstract

“…This direction of intentionality towards expected mathematical achievement also contains expressions that scrutinise and problematise the measurement of achievement and gaps in achievement between students in need or with disabilities and normally achieving students Thurlow, Wu, Lazarus, & Ysseldyke, 2016).…”

Section: Direction Of Intentionality Of Enhanced Mathematical Achievementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Issues in the Undergraduate Mathematics Preparation of School Teachers, 1, 1-13. *Thurlow, M., Wu, Y., Lazarus, S., & Ysseldyke, J. (2016).…”

Section: Concluding Reflectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Directions of intentionalities in special needs education in mathematics

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article builds upon a systematic review of 53 articles in international research journals and makes three main contributions. First, it develops a method for identifying motives, values, and assumptions in research by analysing segments of text in journal articles. Second, it represents a reflective account of research within the field of mathematics education. Third, it captures the ongoing directions of intentionalities inherent in the diverse field of special education mathematics and, thereby, some of the characteristics of the core issues in this field. Three directions of intentionalities were identified: towards teachers and teaching competence, towards enhanced mathematical achievement, and towards every student's learning. The results indicate that each direction has specific limitations and potentials. In order to improve special education mathematics, we recommend that researchers and practitioners remain broadly informed and involved in all three directions of intentionalities.

show abstract

Special Education–Non-Special Education Achievement Gap in Math: Effects of Reporting Methods, Analytical Techniques, and Reclassification

Cited by 6 publications

References 5 publications

Modeling the Time-Varying Nature of Student Exceptionality Classification on Achievement Growth

Modeling the Time-Varying Nature of Student Exceptionality Classification on Achievement Growth

Comparison of the Effects of Coaching for General and Special Education Teachers in High-Poverty Urban Elementary Schools

Directions of intentionalities in special needs education in mathematics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About