Assignment #4

Option #2: An Analysis oI Race, Class,

Culture, Gender and Disability in the Assessment Process

Lauren Van Hook

University OI New England

Special Education Assessment in Inclusion Settings

Spring 2011

February- 2011

















Lauren Van Hook 'Assignment #4 2
Throughout the studies oI this course it has become apparent that there is still a need to
take a step back and look at the way assessments and procedures are conducted in education
today. Despite the Iact that steps have been made with the development oI the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) there still remains disparities in educational practices and
assessments. These disparities are especially notable among students oI diIIerent race, class,
culture, gender and disability. As Albert Einstein once said, 'Insanity is doing the same thing
over and over again and expecting diIIerent results. It is a challenge oI educators today, to take
a step back to review the practices and assessments we are using, to create an even playing Iield
Ior the students oI tomorrow in an attempt to stop the insanity and change the results.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act has made signiIicant eIIorts to improve
the education oI children with disabilities over the past three and a halI decades. Great strides
have been made to create alternative programs and assessment strategies as well establishing
curriculum Ior both teachers and students. What one must consider is how we can Iurther
improve these measures to make sure there are not disparities between diIIerent individuals. One
area that still remains in need oI improvement is among students Irom diIIerent race, class,
gender and culture. The IDEA oI 2004, clearly outlines that 'states must monitor
disproportionate representation by race or ethnicity in disability categories and special education
placements and require the review oI local policies, practices, and procedures when
disproportionate representation is Iound. (Skiba 2008) Disproportion reIers to the notion that
there would be a larger than expected number oI students in a certain category. In order to
determine there is disproportion it is important to review standardized test scores in relation to
students` backgrounds. This can be done by creating normative groups in which comparisons oI
students with similar backgrounds that are scoring at the expected ability level can be made to
see iI the abilities oI the students being assessed are at the expected grade, age or ability level.
Lauren Van Hook 'Assignment #4 3
When comparing results oI standardized tests and percentages oI students who are
classiIied with Individualized Education Plans (IEP) there seems to be inequity in the areas oI
race and class. Studies have shown that minority students and low income students are still
scoring lower on standardized assessments than their peers. Results Irom the Nation`s Report
Card Ior 2007 at the 4
th
Grade Level in areas oI race show a score gap oI 26 points between
White and AIrican American students, with AIrican American students receiving lower scores,
even with testing modiIications being permitted. (Lee 2007) In addition to this 'AIrican
American students are the most overrepresented group in special education programs in nearly
every state. (Skiba 2008) This is a disturbing Iigure because minority students are not the most
represented student in every school. Based on the Iindings outlined in Skiba`s article it is
evident that higher classiIication rates are prevalent among all minorities in the United States,
with the exception oI the Hispanic or Latino population; contrary to other minorities, the Latino
population is actually underrepresented in the area oI special education. (Skiba 2008)
Another area where assessment scores show a concern is in the area oI class. In the
Nation`s Report Card Ior 2007 students who were eligible Ior Iree and reduced lunch scored an
average oI 24 points lower than students who were not eligible. (Lee 2007) This Iinding shows
that low income students are still lagging behind in assessment areas. Much research has also
been conducted in this area, which states that 'economic disadvantage increases the risk, not
merely oI underachievement, but oI the speciIic types oI learning and behavior problems deIined
by IDEA as disability. (Skiba 2008) Sadly, this means many oI our lower perIorming students
are not only struggling at school but at home as well. There is a direct correlation between
wealth and achievement; simply put students who are Irom low income Iamilies consistently do
not receive the advantages oI those Irom high income Iamilies. .
When comparing these results it is important to note the inconsistencies in testing
practices. Although much has been done to try and close the margin oI testing bias, there still
Lauren Van Hook 'Assignment #4 4
remains evidence to show these biases exist. One area oI signiIicant concern is in the
misunderstanding oI cultural practices. For example many tests are designed Ior students who
are native English speakers, thus non-native English speakers would most likely receive lower
scores on the test. There is also a correlation between low standardized perIormance and
examiner Iamiliarity with the students they are assessing. (Skiba 2008) Basically, assessors are
not Iamiliar with the culture, race and class oI the students they are assessing; thereIore the
students are receiving lower standardized test scores.
In areas oI gender it seems signiIicant improvement in test scores have occurred. What
studies have Iound indicate there are noteworthy diIIerences between the development oI boys
and girls but these diIIerences are not substantial. In general, in the developmental stages oI liIe
boys preIer more physical activities where girls preIer verbal-relational toys. (Eliot 2010)
However it is hard to say iI these preIerences inhibit the developmental stages and assessment
scores oI boys and girls. Although many studies show there is a large gender gap, when
comparing assessment data Irom the Nation`s Report Card oI 2007 it is evident that many
advancements have been made. At the Iourth grade reading level both boys and girls scored
higher than the previous tests in 2005 with girls receiving an average score 7 points higher than
boys.
Overall to truly attempt equality in areas oI race, class, culture, gender and disability
educators must attempt to create an even playing Iield Ior all. This means testing bias, reliability,
and validity must be careIully examined. Educators need to Iamiliarize themselves with cultural,
language, class and gender diIIerences. All schools must receive equal Iunding and resources to
make opportunities the same Ior all students. Pre-conceived notions oI diIIerences among
students must be erased. Until this happens, the achievement gap between minorities, low-
income Iamilies and genders will continue.

Lauren Van Hook 'Assignment #4 5

#010703.08
Eliot, Lise. The Myth oI Pink and Blue Brains (2010) Educational Leadership, (68) 3, 32-36.
Retrieved Irom: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-
leadership/nov10/vol68/num03/The-Myth-oI-Pink-and-Blue-Brains.aspx

Latham, Andrew S. Gender DiIIerences on Assessments (1997/1998) Educational Leadership
(55) 4, 88-89. Retrieved Irom: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-
leadership/dec97/vol55/num04/Gender-DiIIerences-on-Assessments.aspx

Lee, J., Grigg, W., and Donahue, P. (2007). The Nations Report Card. Reading 2007 (NCES
2007-496). National Center Ior Education Statistics, Institute oI Education Sciences,
U.S. Department oI Education, Washington, D.C. Retrieved Irom:
http://www.wrightslaw.com/inIo/naep.report.card.07.pdI

Salvia, John, Ysseldyke, James E., & Bolt, Sara. (2010) Assessment in Special and
Inclusive Education, 11
th
Edition. CaliIornia: Wasworth Cengage Learning.

Skiba, Russell J., Simmons, A. B., Ritter, S., Gibb, A.C., Rausch., M. K., Cuadrado, J., Chung,
C.G. (2008) Achieving Equity in Special Education: History, Status and Current
Challenges. Council for Exceptional Children, (74)3, 264-288.