According to the amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, students with disabilities are required to participate in state- and districtwide assessments with appropriate accommodations and modifications when necessary. The data on the performance of students with disabilities on these assessments indicate that they are not performing well compared to their general education peers. As a result, some states are issuing alternate exit documents from high school in the form of occupational diplomas, General Educational Development diplomas (GEDs), and certificates of attendance, achievement, or completion. The authors interviewed a random sample of employers, asking them if they were willing to hire prospective employees with these types of alternate diplomas. Employers were least willing to hire individuals with certificates of attendance, achievement, or completion and most willing to hire those with occupational diplomas and GEDs.
Center on Educational Policy. (2003). State high school exit exams put to the test. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved May 1, 2004 , from www.cepdc.org
2.
Day, J.C., & Newburger, E.C. (2002). The big payoff: Educational attainment and synthetic estimates of work-life earnings. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau. Retrieved November 20, 2003, from http://landview.census.gov/prod/2002puibs/p23-120.pdf
3.
deFur, S. (2002). Education reform, high-stakes assessment, and students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education , 23, 203-211.
4.
Elliott, J.L., & Thurlow, M.L. (2006). Improving test performance of students with disabilities . . . on district and state assessments. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
5.
Gaumer-Erickson, A.S., Kleinhammer-Trammil, P.J., & Thurlow, M.L. (2007). An analysis of the relationship between high school exit exams and diploma options and the impact on students with disabilities . Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 18(2), 117-128.
6.
Gerber, P.J. (1992). Personal perspective: At first glance. Employment for people with learning disabilities at the beginning of the ADA era. Learning Disability Quarterly, 15, 330-332.
7.
Guy, B., Shin, H., Lee, S., & Thurlow, M. (1999). State graduation requirements for students with and without disabilities (NCEO Technical Report 24). Minneapolis : University of Minnesota, National Center of Educational Outcomes.
8.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. §1400 (1997).
9.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq (2004).
10.
Johnson, D.R. & Thurlow, M.L. (2003). A national study on graduation requirements and diploma options for youth with disabilities (Technical Report 36). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 10, 2004 , from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Technical36.htm
11.
Lanford, A., & Cary, L. (2000). Graduation requirements for students with disabilities . Remedial and Special Education, 21(3), 152-160.
12.
Miao, J., & Haney, W. (2004). High school graduation rates: Alternative methods and implications. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 12(55). Retrieved January 8, 2005, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v2012n2055/
13.
National Center on Educational Outcomes. ( 2003a). Accountability for assessment results in the No Child Left Behind Act: What it means for children with disabilities. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 6, 2004, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/NCLBaccountability.html
14.
National Center on Educational Outcomes. ( 2003b). Putting it all together: Including students with disabilities in assessments and accountability systems. NCEO Policy Directions , 16, 1-6.
15.
National Leadership Summit on Improving Results for Youth. ( 2003). State priorities and needs for assistance. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Secondary Education and Transition. Available from http://www.ncset.org
16.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. §6301 (2002).
17.
O'Neill, P.T. (2001). Special education and high stakes testing for high school graduation: An analysis of current law and policy. Journal of Law and Education, 30, 185-222.
18.
Price, L.A. & Gerber, P.J. (2001). At second glance: Employers and employees with learning disabilities in the Americans with Disabilities Act era. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(3), 202-210, 248.
19.
Roach, A.T. (2005). Alternate assessment as the "ultimate accommodation": Four challenges for policy and practice. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 31(1), 73-78.
20.
Sitlington, P.L., & Clark, G.M. (2006). Transition education and services for students with disabilities (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
21.
Sitlington, P.L., Neubert, D.A., Begun, W., Lombard, R.C., & Leconte, P.J. (2007). Assess for success: A practitioner's handbook on transition assessment (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
22.
Swanson, C.B. (2004). Who graduates? Who doesn't? A statistical portrait of public high school graduation, class of 2001. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Available from http://www.urban.org
23.
Thompson, S., & Thurlow, M. (1999). State special education outcomes, 1999: A report on state activities at the end of the century. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes. (ERIC Document Production Service No. ED 440 507)
24.
Thurlow, M., & Johnson, D. (2000). High-stakes testing of students with disabilities . Journal of Special Education, 51(4), 305-314.
25.
Thurlow, M., & Thompson, S. (2000). Diploma options and graduation policies for students with disabilities. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes. (ERIC Document Production Service No. ED 440 510)
26.
Thurlow, M.L. (2000). Standards-based reform and students with disabilities: Reflection on a decade of change. Focus on Exceptional Children , 33(3), 1-16.
27.
Unger, D.D. (2002). Employers' attitudes toward persons with disabilities in the workforce: Myths or realities? Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 17(1), 2-10.
28.
U.S. Department of Commerce. (1980). Standard occupational classification system manual ( U.S. Government Printing Office 1980 0-332-946). Springfield, VA: Author.
29.
U.S. Department of Commerce. (2000). Standard occupational classification system manual ( U.S. Government Printing Office 2001-472-736/45401). Springfield, VA: Author.
30.
U.S. Office of Special Education Programs. ( 2004, April). Facts from OSEP's National Longitudinal Studies: Standardized testing among secondary school students with disabilities. Washington, DC: Author.
31.
Ysseldyke, J.E., & Thurlow, M.L. (1999). Assessment and accountability for students with disabilities: 1999 status update and emerging issues. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes . (ERIC Document Production Service No. ED 427 461)
