Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same: Comparing Special Education Students’ Experiences of Accountability Reform Across Two Decades

  • Published:
The Urban Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Over the last two decades, our nation has seen an array of reform initiatives that support lofty goals for student achievement. An underexplored issue in the literature is how this school reform set against the backdrop of high-stakes testing has impacted the students it is designed to assist. Now armed with years of student data, critics of accountability reform have argued that high stakes testing has done little to improve the educational outcomes of persistently low achieving students—urban poor, minority and students with disabilities. The statistics show a bleak picture. But, the numbers only tell half the story. This qualitative case study uses narrative analysis to detail the stories of 12 special education students in an urban Texas high school who experienced first hand the effects and fallout of accountability reform. The authors had the unique opportunity to interview two sets of students, one in 1995 when high stakes testing was first introduced and one in 2012 after two decades of implementation. Chronicling the voices of special education students at the same school over a 15 year period reveals that schooling experiences of these students have neither fundamentally changed nor improved despite numerous reform efforts. The paper provides a critical context for accountability reform juxtaposed with the students’ personal experiences of testing and accountability reform. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of the importance of including student voice, particularly marginalized student voice, in ongoing reform efforts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Artiles, A. J. (2011). Toward an interdisciplinary understanding of educational equity and difference: The case of the racialization of ability. Educational Researcher, 40(9), 431–445. doi:10.3102/0013189X11429391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Astuto, T. A., Clark, D. L., Read, A. M., McGree, K., & Fernandez, L. P. (1993). Challenges to dominant assumptions controlling educational reform. (Final Report). Andover, MA: Regional Laboratory for Educational Improvement of the Northeast Islands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, L., Frederick, M., Gulbrandsen, T., & Murillo, E. (2002). The marketization of education: Public schools for private ends. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 33, 5–29. doi:10.1525/aeq.2002.33.1.5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaudoin, N. (2008). The magic is in the students: Elevating student voice and creating a democratic school pay off in student satisfaction and academic performance. Principal Leadership, 8(6), 28–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bejoian, L. M., & Reid, D. K. (2007). A disability studies perspective on the Bush agenda: The no child left behind act of 2001. Equity & Excellence, 38(3), 220–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, R. (2008). The case for comparative institutional assessment of higher-order thinking skills. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 40(6), 50–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett de Marrais, K. B., & LeCompte, M. D. (1995). The way schools work: A sociological analysis of education (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bickel, W. E., & Bickel, D. D. (1986). Effective schools, classrooms, and instruction: Implications for special education. Exceptional Children, 52, 489–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, K. D., Foster, W., & Jubala, K. A. (1993). The social construction of disability in education: Organizational considerations. In C. Capper (Ed.), Educational administration in a pluralistic society (pp. 173–202). New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booher-Jennings, J. (2005). Below the bubble: “Educational triage” and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 231–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brantlinger, E. A. (2005). Who benefits from special education? Remediating (fixing) other people’s children. LEA. Retrieved December 3, 2011, from Ebook Library.

  • Brayboy, B. M. J., Castagno, A. E., & Maughan, E. (2007). Equality and all? Examining race in education scholarship. Review of Research in Education, 31, 159–194. doi:10.3102/0091732X07300045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, A. P. (1994, September 15). Motivation, hard work produce ‘education miracles.’ Austin American-Statesman, p. A10.

  • Carnoy, M., Loeb, S., & Smith, T. L. (2001). Do higher state test scores in Texas make for better high school outcomes? Research Report Series, RR-047, Consortium for Policy Research in Education (November).

  • Cherryholmes, C. H. (1988). Power and criticism: Poststructuralist investigations in education. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clandinin, D. J., & Rosick, J. (2007). Mapping a landscape of narrative inquiry: Borderland spaces and tensions. In D. J. Clandinin (Ed.), Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology (pp. 35–75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Coles, G. (1987). The learning mystique: A critical look at “learning disabilities”. New York: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, K. M., & Valente, J. (2010). [Dis]abling the race to the top. Teachers college record, Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentId=16020.

  • Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1990). Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19(5), 2–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (2000). Narrative inquiry. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook-Sather, A. (2002). Authorizing students’ perspectives: Toward trust, dialogue, and change in education. Educational Researcher, 31(4), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook-Sather, A. (2006). Sound, presence, and power: “Student voice” in educational research and reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(4), 359–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (1997). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    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. doi:10.1080/13613320701503207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dilger, C. (2008). First school closures take place under Texas public school accountability system. Interim News: House Research Organization Texas House of Representatives, 80(6), 1–10. Retrieved from http://www.hro.house.state.tx.us/interim/int80-6.pdf.

  • Elmore, R. F., Abelmann, C. H., & Fuhrmann, S. H. (1996). The new accountability in state education reform: From process to performance. In H. F. Ladd (Ed.), Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education (pp. 65–98). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitch, F. (2003). Inclusion, exclusion, and ideology: Special education students’ changing sense of self. The Urban Review, 35(3), 233–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, M. E. (1992). Culturally sensitive instructional practices for African-American learners with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 59, 115–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frattura, E. M., & Topinka, C. (2006). Theoretical underpinnings of separate educational programs: The social justice challenge continues. Education and Urban Society, 38(3), 327–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuhrman, S. H., & Elmore, R. F. (Eds.). (2004). Redesigning accountability systems for education. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., & Woodward, J. (1994). The language-minority student and special education: Issues, trends, and paradoxes. Exceptional Children, 60, 310–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. (1981). Ideology, culture, and the process of schooling. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glesne, C. (2006). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, J. F., & Eren, N. S. (2013). Student agency: Success, failure, and lessons learned. Ethics and Education, 8(2), 123–139. doi:10.1080/17449642.2013.843360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, M., Heilig, V., & Pazey, B. L. (2014). A nostrum of school reform?: Turning around reconstituted urban Texas high schools. Urban Education, 49(2), 182–214. doi:10.1177/0042085913475636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, L. S., Stecher, B. M., Marsh, J. A., McCombs, J. S., Robyn, A., Russell, J. L., et al. (2007). Standards-based accountability under No Child Left Behind: Experiences of teachers and administrators in three states. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harry, B., & Klingner, J. K. (2006). Why are so many minority students in special education?. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • H.R. 6–103rd Congress: Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994. (1994). In www.GovTrack.us. Retrieved July 18, 2013, from http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/103/hr6.

  • Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 2004, Pub L. No. 108-446 (2004).

  • Janesick, V. J. (2004). “Stretching” exercises for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karen, D. (2005). No child left behind? Sociology ignored! Sociology of Education, 78, 165–182. doi:10.1177/003804070507800204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, J. K., Luke, A., & Green, J. (2008). What counts as knowledge in educational settings: Disciplinary knowledge, assessment, and curriculum. Review of Research in Education, 32, vii-x. doi:10.3102/0091732X07311063.

  • Kimmelman, P. L. (2006). Implementing NCLB: Creating a knowledge framework to support school improvement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirshner, B., & Pozzoboni, K. M. (2011). Student interpretations of a school closure: Implications for student voice in equity-based school reform. Teachers College Record, 113(8), 1633–1667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kortering, L. J., & Braziel, P. M. (1999). Staying in school: The perspective of ninth grade students. Remedial and Special Education, 20(2), 106–113. doi:10.1177/074193259902000208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowal, J. M. & Hassel, E. A. (2005). School restructuring under no child left behind: What works when? Turnarounds with new leaders and staff. Retrieved from http://www.centerforcsri.org/pubs/restructuring/KnowledgeIssues4Turnaround.pdf.

  • Kretovics, J., & Nussel, E. J. (1994). Transforming urban education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunc, N. (1992). The need to belong: Rediscovering Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. In R. A. Villa, J. S. Thousand, W. Stainback, & S. Stainback (Eds.), Restructuring for caring and effective education: An administrative guide to creating heterogeneous schools (pp. 25–39). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J. (1985). Introduction: Situationally specific practice. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 16, 171–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2013). The constructivist credo. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindstrom, J. H. (2011). High stakes testing and accommodations. In J. M. Kauffman & D. P. Hallahan (Eds.), Handbook of special education (pp. 321–333). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linehan, P. (2002). Expecting success: An analysis of education policies in Texas. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED468011.pdf.

  • Linn, R. L. (2000). Assessment and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29(2), 4–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Losen, D. J., & Orfield, G. (Eds.). (2002). Racial inequity in special education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manna, P. (2004). Leaving no child behind. In C. T. Cross (Ed.), Political education: National policy comes of age. NY: Teacher College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, C. (1993). Beyond the poverty of theory in race relations: Nonsyncrony and social difference in education. In L. Weis & M. Fine (Eds.), Beyond silenced voices: Class, race, and gender in United States schools (pp. 325–346). New York: State University of New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, B. L. (2003). A framework for the redesign of K-12 education in the context of current educational reform. Theory into Practice, 42(2), 93–101. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4202_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, R. P. (1989). Discussant’s comments: Making dropouts. In H. T. Trueba, G. L. Spindler (Eds.), What do anthropologists have to say about dropouts? The first centennial conference on children at risk (pp. 16–26). New York: Falmer Press.

  • McDermott, R., Goldman, S., & Varenne, H. (2006). The cultural work of learning disabilities. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 12–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, R., & Varenne, H. (1995). Culture as disability. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 26, 324–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, B. (1992). Myths and misconceptions about second language learning: What every teacher needs to learn. Santa Cruz, CA: National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, M., Malmgren, K., & Nolet, V. (2006). Accountability for students with disabilities who receive special education: Characteristics of the subgroup of students with disabilities. A summary of quantitative findings from the Educational Policy Reform Research Institute (EPRRI). Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED509859.pdf.

  • McLaughlin, M. J., & Thurlow, M. (2003). Educational accountability and students with disabilities: Issues and challenges. Educational Policy, 17(4), 431–451. doi:10.1177/0895904803254962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeil, L. (2004). Creating new inequalities: Contradictions of reform. In D. J. Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.), The Curriculum Studies Reader (2nd ed., pp. 275–284). New York: Routledge Falmer.

  • McNiff, J. (2007). My story is my living educational theory. In D. J. Clandinin (Ed.), Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology (pp. 308–329). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mead, S. (2007, Winter). Easy way out: “Restructured” usually means little has changed. Education Next, 7(1), 52–56. Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/easy-way-out/.

  • Mehan, H. (1992). Understanding inequality in schools: The contribution of interpretive studies. Sociology of Education, 65(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehan, H., Hertweck, A., & Meihls, J. L. (1986). Handicapping the handicapped: Decision making in students’ educational careers. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, D., & Wood, G. (Eds.). (2004). Many children left behind: How the No Child Left Behind Act is damaging our children and our schools. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, D. L. (2003). Student voice in school reform: Reframing student teacher relationships. McGill Journal of Education, 38(2), 289–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, D. L. (2009). Amplifying student voice. In M. Scherer (Ed.), Engaging the whole child: Reflections on best practices in learning, teaching, and leadership (pp. 242–252). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, D. L., & Gross, S. J. (2009). Increasing student voice in high school reform: Building partnerships, improving outcomes. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(4), 522–543. doi:10.1177/1741143209334577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagle, K. M., McLaughlin, M. J., Nolet, V. & Malmgren, K. (2007). Students with disabilities and accountability reform: Findings from the Texas case study. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED509867.pdf.

  • New Tech Network (2012). New Tech Network. Retrieved from http://www.newtechnetwork.org/.

  • Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts America’s schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2008). Testing the joy out of learning. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 14–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).

  • O’Neill, P. T. (2004). No Child Left Behind compliance manual. Fairfield, CT: Brownstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orfield, G., & Kornhaber, M. L. (Eds.). (2001). Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high stakes testing in public education. New York: Century Foundation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, C. M. (2008). So much reform, so little change: The persistence of failure in urban schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pazey, B. L. (1996). Understanding students’ funds of knowledge: A study of high school special populations students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest UMI Dissertations Publishing (9705933).

  • Price, H. E. (2010). Does no child left behind really capture school quality? Evidence from an urban school district. Educational Policy, 24(5), 779–814. doi:10.1177/089590810376564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramanathan, A. (2008). Paved with good intentions: The federal role in the oversight and enforcement of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Teachers College Record, 110(2), 278–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravitch, D. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reyes, P., & Valencia, R. (1993). Educational policy and the growing Latino student population: Problems and prospects. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 15(2), 258–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riessman, C. K. (1993). Qualitative research methods series: Narrative analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizvi, F. (1993). Race, gender and the cultural assumptions of schooling. In C. Marshall (Ed.), The new politics of race and gender: The 1992 yearbook of the politics of education association (pp. 203–217). Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rueda, R., Klingner, J., Sager, N., & Velasco, A. (2008). Reducing disproportionate representation in special education. In T. C. Jiménez & V. L. Graf (Eds.), Education for all: Critical issues in the education of children and youth with disabilities (pp. 131–166). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarason, S. B. (1990). The predictable failure of educational reform: Can we change course before it’s too late?. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, L. (2008). A brief history of accountability testing: 1967–2007. In K. E. Ryan & L. A. Shepard (Eds.), The future of test-based educational accountability (pp. 25–46). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shields, C. M. (2003). ‘Giving voice’ to students: Using the internet for data collection. Qualitative Research, 3(3), 397–414. doi:10.1177/1468794103033007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skerrett, A., & Hargreaves, A. (2008). Student diversity and secondary school change in a context of increasingly diversified reform. American Educational Research Journal, 45(4), 913–945. doi:10.3102/000283120832043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skrtic, T. M. (1991). Behind special education: A critical analysis of professional culture and school organization. Denver: Love.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skrtic, T. M. (Ed.). (1995a). Disability and democracy: Reconstructing (special) education for postmodernity. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skrtic, T. M. (1995b). The functionalist view of special education and disability: Deconstructing the conventional knowledge tradition. In T. M. Skrtic (Ed.), Disability and democracy: Reconstructing (special) education for postmodernity (pp. 65–103). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skrtic, T. M. (2005). A political economy of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 149–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Storz, M. G. (2008). Educational inequity from the perspectives of those who live it: Urban middle school students’ perspectives on the quality of their education. Urban Review, 40, 247–267. doi:10.1007/s11256-008-0083-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strike, K. A. (2004). Community, the missing element of school reform: Why schools should be more like congregations than banks. American Journal of Education, 110(3), 215–232. doi:10.1086/383072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunderman, G. L., & Kim, J. S. (2007). The expansion of federal power and the politics of implementing the No Child Left Behind Act. Teachers College Record, 109, 1057–1085.

    Google Scholar 

  • Superfine, B. M. (2005). The politics of accountability: The rise and fall of Goals 2000. American Journal of Education, 112(1), 10–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Supovitz, J. (2009). Can high stakes testing leverage educational improvement? Prospects from the last decade of testing and accountability reform. Journal of Educational Change, 10, 211–227. doi:10.1007/s10833-009-9105-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talbert-Johnson, C. (2004). Structural inequities and the achievement gap in urban schools. Education and Urban Society, 37(1), 22–36. doi:10.1177/0013124504268454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Texas American Federation of Teachers (2008, October). Beyond TAKS (and NCLB): Putting Texas school accountability back on track. Retrieved April 4, 2012 from http://docs.texasaft.org/legislative/TestReformForumPaper100208.pdf.

  • Texas Education Agency (1997). Expanding the scope of the Texas public school accountability system. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/search?q=expanding+the+scope+of+the+texas+accountability+system&oq=expanding+the+scope+o&aqs=chrome.0.59j57j0l2j60.3756j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8.

  • The Forum for Education and Democracy (n.d.). Creating a national culture of learning: The forum for education and democracy’s recommendations for the reauthorization of ESEA. Retrieved from http://www.kidsconsortium.org/documents/fed_ese.pdf.

  • Thiessen, D. (2006). Editorial: Student knowledge, engagement, and voice in educational reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(4), 345–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thurlow, M. L. (2004). In S. H. Fuhrman & R. F. Elmore (Eds.), Redesigning accountability systems for education (pp. 115–137). New York: Teachers College Press.

  • Thurlow, M. L., Nelson, J. R., Teelucksingh, E., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (2000). Where’s Waldo? A third search for students with disabilities in state accountability reports (Technical Report No. 25). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

  • Thurlow, M. L., & Quenemoen, R. F. (2011). Standards-based reform and students with disabilities. In J. M. Kauffman & D. P. Hallahan (Eds.), Handbook of special education (pp. 134–146). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurlow, M. L., Quenemoen, R. F., & Lazarus, S. S. (2012). Leadership for student performance in an era of accountability. In J. Crockett, B. Billingsley, & M. L. Boscardin (Eds.), Handbook of leadership in special education (pp. 3–16). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Education (1991). America 2000: An education strategy. Sourcebook. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED327985&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED327985.

  • U.S. Department of Education (1994, March 29). Summary of the final version of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act. Washington, DC: Author.

  • U.S. Department of Education (2009). Race to the top: Executive summary. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/executive-summary.pdf.

  • Vannest, K. J., Mahadevan, L., Mason, B. A., & Temple-Harvey, K. K. (2009). Educator and administrator perceptions of the impact of No Child Left Behind on special populations. Remedial and Special Education, 30(3), 148–159. doi:10.1177/0741932508315378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varenne, H., & McDermott, R. (1998). Successful failure: The school America builds. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasquez Heilig, J. (2011a). As good as advertised? Tracking urban student progress through high school in an environment of accountability. American Secondary Education, 39(3), 17–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasquez Heilig, J. (2011b). Understanding the interaction between high-stakes graduation tests and English learners. Teachers College Record, 113(12), 2633–2669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasquez Heilig, J., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Accountability Texas-style: The progress and learning of urban minority students in a high-stakes testing context. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(2), 75–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasquez Heilig, J., & Nichols, S. (2013). A quandary for school leaders: Equity, high-stakes testing and accountability. In L. C. Tillman & J. J. Scheurich (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational leadership for diversity and equity (pp. 409–435). New York, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasquez Heilig, J., Young, M., & Williams, A. (2012). At-risk student averse: Risk management and accountability. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(5), 562–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasudevan, L., & Campano, G. (2009). The social production of adolescent risk and the promise of adolescent literacies. Review of Research in Education, 33, 310–353. doi:10.3102/0091732X08330003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasburn-Moses, L., & Frager, A. M. (2009). Point-counterpoint: Can special education and general education get along? Educational Forum, 3, 215–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Window on State Government (2000). Retrieved from http://www.window.state.tx.us/.

  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Special Education and Educational Administration, The University of Texas at Austin, George I. Sanchez Building (SZB) 374C, 1912 Speedway D5300, Austin, TX, 78712-0374, USA

    Barbara L. Pazey

  2. Department of Education Leadership and Policy Studies, California State University, Sacramento, Sacramento, CA, USA

    Julian Vasquez Heilig

  3. Department of Special Education, The University of Texas at Austin, George I. Sanchez Building (SZB) 306, 1912 Speedway D5300, Austin, TX, USA

    Heather A. Cole

  4. Department of Educational Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

    Meagan Sumbera

Authors
  1. Barbara L. Pazey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julian Vasquez Heilig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heather A. Cole
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Meagan Sumbera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barbara L. Pazey.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pazey, B.L., Heilig, J.V., Cole, H.A. et al. The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same: Comparing Special Education Students’ Experiences of Accountability Reform Across Two Decades. Urban Rev 47, 365–392 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-014-0312-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-014-0312-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation