Online ISSN: 2325-7466
2006
Triannual
National Association of Special Education Teachers (NASET)
United States

Articles

Educational Policy: Instruction and Assessment

  • Christina M. Sorrentino, M.S. Ed (Author)
    Christina M. Sorrentino, M.S. Ed. is a professionally dual licensed general education and special education science teacher in the states of New York and New Jersey. She received her Bachelor of Science in Biology and Adolescent Education Grades 7-12 from the College of Staten Island Teacher Education Honors Academy, and then received her Masters of Science in Education with a concentration in Middle Childhood 5-8 Generalist Special Education from the College of Staten Island. She has taught chemistry, living environment, and earth science to special education students in both standalone and integrated co-teaching classrooms. Ms. Sorrentino was a special education liaison and participated in curriculum development for the New York City Department of Education at her former school. She has also helped to design and implement the S.T.E.M. curriculum for the Archdiocese of Newark at a Catholic school where she volunteered her time working with the Science Department. Her research interest is differentiation in the classroom and its effects on the performance of special education students on summative assessments.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64546/jaasep.366
Abstract
A challenging educational issue, which has in recent times been overlooked in the educational community, is what should be the relationship between instruction in the classroom and assessment at the end of the school year. Specifically, the educational issue concerns special education students in general education classrooms. Researchers within the field of education have come to understand the most beneficial method to ensure student progress at the high school level is for there to be a parallelism between instruction in the classroom and assessment at the end of the year. This paper presents an argument criticizing the existence of non-alignment between instruction in the classroom for the high school science curriculum and end of the year assessment. This research critique of educational policy provides new incite to how non-alignment is present between instruction and assessment, but it is possible for changes to be made to the educational policy.
Keywords
Alignment (Education), Educational Policy, High School Students, Instruction, Regular and Special Education Relationship, Special Education
References

Anderson, L. W. (2002). Curricular alignment: A re-examination. Theory into Practice, 41, 255-260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_9

Bhola, D.S., Impara, J.C., & Buckendahl, C.W. (2003). Aligning tests with states' content standards: Methods and issues. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(3), p. 21-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2003.tb00134.x

Hill, P.T., Lake, R.J., Petrilli, M.J., & Coghen, M. (2002). Standards and accountability in Washington State. Brookings Papers on Educational Philosophy, 4, 199-234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/pep.2002.0009

La Marca, P.M., Redfield, D., Winter, P.C., Bailey, A., & Hansche Despriet, L. (2000). State standards and state assessments: A guide to alignment. Council of Chief State School Officers, Washington, D.C.

Li, J., Klahr, D., & Siler, S. (2006). What lies beneath the science achievement gap: The challenges of aligning science instruction with standards and tests. Science Educator, 15(1), 1-64.

Martone, A. (2007). Exploring the impact of teachers’ involvement in an assessment standards alignment study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst.

Martone, A. & Sireci, S.G. (2009). Evaluating alignment between curriculum, assessment, and instruction. Review of Educational Research, 79(4), 1332-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309341375

McCaffrey, D.F., Hamilton, L.S., Stecher, B.M., Klein, S.P., Bugliari, D., & Robyn, A. (2001). Interactions among instructional practices, curriculum, and student achievement: The case of standards-based high school mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(5), 493-517. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/749803

McGehee, J.J. & Griffith, L.K. (2001). Large-Scale Assessments Combined with Curriculum Alignment: Agents of Change. Theory into Practice, 40(2), 137-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4002_8

Roach, A. T., & Elliott, S. N. (2006). Influence of access to the general education curriculum on the alternate assessment performance of students with significant cognitive disabilities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28, 181–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737028002181

Roach, A.T., Niebling, B.C., & Kurz, A. (2008). Evaluating the alignment among curriculum, instruction, and assessments: Implications and applications for research and practice. Psychology in the Schools, 45(2), 158-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20282

Rothman, R. (March 2003). Imperfect matches: The alignment of standards and tests. National Academy of Science, 1-32.

Webb, N.L. (1999). Alignment of science and mathematics standards and assessments in four states. National Institute for Science Education Publications, 18, 1-47.

Webb, N.L. (1997). Determining alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science education. National Institute for Science Education, 1(2), 1-8.

There are 14 references in total.
How to Cite
Sorrentino, C. M. (2018). Educational Policy: Instruction and Assessment. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, 13(2), 71-83. https://doi.org/10.64546/jaasep.366

Spring/Summer 2018

Article Information

  • Article Type Articles
  • Submitted May 8, 2018
  • Published June 15, 2018
  • Issue Spring/Summer 2018
  • Section Articles
  • File Downloads 0
  • Abstract Views 0
  • Altmetrics
  • Share
Download data is not yet available.