Many readers probably have read about the issues surrounding California’s (US) High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) and students with Learning Disabilities. The topic’s been swirling for many months, with litigation, legislation, and (of course) political grandstanding. California’s governor signed legislation 30 January exempting high school seniors with disabilities from the requirement; to be exempt students with disabilities must be on track for graduation.
California’s exit exam requires that “all” (yes, I’m hedging) students who receive high school diplomas must pass tests of English and mathematics competence. The tests are designed to determine whether students can handle literacy tasks at about the 10th grade level and arithmetic and mathematics tasks at about the 7th grade level (approximations; grade levels are such a squishy measure). California’s plans included accommodations (e.g., scribes, sign-language interpreters) that should have allayed some of the concerns. However, only about 1 in 3 students with disabilities have passed the test.
I’ve intended to cover this topic, but just haven’t done so. (More paving stones on the road to perdition, I ’spose.) For those who are interested here are a few links to help examine the examination issue.
- CA Department of Education subsite describing the CAHSEE;
- Los Angeles (CA; US) Times article by Duke Helfand about the signing;
- San Fransisco (CA; US) Chronicle forum showing youths’ opinions about the matter.
- Google news search on ‘California high school exit test disabilties’
- Google news search on ‘California high school exit test disabilties’
As an aside: For some practical information about accommodations and students with disabilities, see an article my colleagues and I published in January in Teaching Exceptional Children. It’s not yet listed on the Web site yet, but should be soon. Citation:
Edgemon, E. A., Jablonski, B. R., & Lloyd, J. W. (2006). Large-scale assessments: A teacher’s guide to making decisions about accommodations. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(3), 6-11.
Latest Comments