000 03907nam a22004575i 4500
001 978-94-007-2935-3
003 DE-He213
005 20140220083343.0
007 cr nn 008mamaa
008 120103s2012 ne | s |||| 0|eng d
020 _a9789400729353
_9978-94-007-2935-3
024 7 _a10.1007/978-94-007-2935-3
_2doi
050 4 _aLC8-6691
072 7 _aJNF
_2bicssc
072 7 _aEDU034000
_2bisacsh
082 0 4 _a379
_223
100 1 _aCumming, J. Joy.
_eauthor.
245 1 0 _aValuing Students with Impairment
_h[electronic resource] :
_bInternational comparisons of practice in educational accountability /
_cby J. Joy Cumming.
264 1 _aDordrecht :
_bSpringer Netherlands,
_c2012.
300 _aVIII, 95p.
_bonline resource.
336 _atext
_btxt
_2rdacontent
337 _acomputer
_bc
_2rdamedia
338 _aonline resource
_bcr
_2rdacarrier
347 _atext file
_bPDF
_2rda
490 1 _aSpringerBriefs in Education,
_x2211-1921
505 0 _aChapter 1 Towards Equitable Provision of Education for Students with Disability in Education -- Chapter 2 Educational Reform and Educational Accountability Legislation And Policy in the U.S., England and Australia -- Chapter 3 Educational Provision, Equity and Educational Accountability for Students with Disability: Intentions and Practice -- Chapter 4 Constructing the Identity of Students with Disability in Accountability Legislation and Policy -- Chapter 5 Developing an Equitable Accountability System for Students with Impairment.
520 _aIn this book, the author Joy Cumming draws on knowledge of law, assessment and measurement to provide an original analysis of the inclusion of students with impairment in educational accountability assessments in the U.S., England and Australia. Equitable education of students with impairment is worldwide policy. Educational accountability for improvement of educational outcomes is also a worldwide phenomenon. The U.S., England and Australia are well placed economically and politically to pursue best educational practice for students with impairment and well advanced in both provision and educational accountability systems. Examining these three systems enables an analysis of possible optimal practices to guide other countries. The book identifies three models of impairment in place in legislation, policy and enacted practice for educational accountability with students with impairment. Intentions of legislation and policy reflect a social model of impairment—while an individual has an impairment, social practice creates the barrier that leads to a disability. In implementation, legislation and policy rely on a medical model of disability—categorizing disability in medical or specialist terms. In educational accountability practices, it is argued in this book, a third model of disability is created—a psychometric model, with impairment constructed through overemphasis on standardization of assessment processes. Eight explicit and implicit assumptions that underpin the ways students with impairment are valued in educational accountability are identified and discussed. Three recommendations are made to promote equitable inclusive educational accountability practices for students with impairment, to inform future policy and practice in all countries.
650 0 _aEducation.
650 0 _aEducational tests and measurements.
650 1 4 _aEducation.
650 2 4 _aEducational Policy and Politics.
650 2 4 _aAssessment, Testing and Evaluation.
650 2 4 _aInternational and Comparative Education.
710 2 _aSpringerLink (Online service)
773 0 _tSpringer eBooks
776 0 8 _iPrinted edition:
_z9789400729346
830 0 _aSpringerBriefs in Education,
_x2211-1921
856 4 0 _uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2935-3
912 _aZDB-2-SHU
999 _c104612
_d104612