Song 1

Julia Song
Professor Smedley
English101 MWF 12pm
22 April 2016
Are We The Reason Kids Are Failing?:
Curriculum Change for Students with Disabilities
According to U.S., Census Bureau Reports, 1 in 5 people have a disability which is
equivalent to 19% of our worlds population. However, the word disability brings along a
stigma that people with disabilities live with which results in limited opportunities because of
social rejection, discriminatory employment practices, architectural barriers and inaccessibility to
transport for people with disabilities (Jaffe and Park). The second highest reported area where
people with disabilities are looked down upon is in the school system. An alarming 62% of
students with learning disabilities drop out before completing high school due to harassment,
level of difficulty, and lack of support and motivation. The dropout rate is twice that of students
without disabilities, but, why does this affect us? The steadily increasing dropout rate is causing
the American society problems regarding social and economic development because as dropout
rates increase, unemployment and incarceration also increase (National Center for Learning
Disabilities). The high-stakes that are thrown onto the students with disabilities are causing too
much pressure as it is evident that students with learning disabilities need extra help, however,
the given curriculum is designed for children without learning disabilities which is designed for
children with disabilities, to fail. This one-size-fits-all curriculum put a stress of the students
themselves, but also on special education teachers who are expected to set specific guidelines
that ignore their students needs. Even teachers trained specially for the special education

Song 2
department, find themselves saying challenge is necessary and changing the curriculum would be
stealing opportunities from most of the students (Beals). However, this is where the issue is
taken place. By generalizing what is most important for everyone, we are holding all students
to the same standards which deprives the students, who are not developmentally ready, of
optimized learning. Teachers are being pressured into spoon-feeding answers to students due to
lack of understanding and pity that teachers possess. When teachers see their students filled with
frustration and hopelessness, they feel as if there is no other option than to point to the answers
for the children, but, who is that helping? No one. Teachers sit back, watch their students
struggle, and cannot help in any way except feed answers by piecemeal which does not force the
students to think for themselves at all. This results in students leaving the classroom knowing
nothing more than they did prior to entering the classroom. By not forcing a change upon this
serious matter, we are also infringing on students rights to fair and equal education.
In a close analysis of the unyielding standards for students who learn differently, the
conflict between society wanting success for all students yet refusing to open their minds
towards cognitive diversity is revealed. This issue regarding unjust, tragic treatment of children
has been examined by many sociologists and it has been proved that the rate of dropouts is
rapidly rising (Thurlow, Sinclair, and Johnson). This paper will seek to inform readers of the
existing perception regarding people with disabilities as well as the need to change the
mistreatment of people with disabilities by opening our minds to cognitive diversity. Essentially,
we must put ourselves in the shoes of a child with special needs and feel the frustration that is
roaring inside them when they simply cannot understand the material. The sense of failure the
children must feel daily is the reason we need change, fast.

Song 3
One major issue that stems from this issue regarding students with disabilities
incompatibility to the current curriculum is the rise of student dropouts is increasing at a rapid
rate. It has been proven by many that completing high school with a diploma will lead to earning
more in their adult life. However, with the ever growing rigor of the curriculum, it is proven that
students with learning disabilities leave school before earning a diploma (Education Matters
Evaluation Committee). Although challenging students is key and essential to consider when
creating a curriculum, policy makers fail to include students with disabilities when enacting
tougher requirements on students. Students feel pushed, however, students with learning
disabilities are simply pushed over the edge. This sense of frustration and hopelessness is what is
leading to the growing dropout rate of students with disabilities. In a study conducted by
Education Matters Evaluation Committee, 12% of total enrollment left school before
graduation. 50% of students with learning disabilities dropped out. Not only does the dropout
rate reflect an evident issue within school standards, but, the dropout rate also represents
students feelings of frustration. Imagine an eighth grader who is four years behind in language
being required to read texts with vocabulary and sentence complexity as such in Midsummer
Nights Dream. Is it fair to force a student who can barely read English at their given grade level
to read Shakespearean language? It is simply a language they are not ready to understand at the
pace expected to.
Those arguing against change in the curriculum and pushing towards the importance of
challenging students feel that if students are not pushed, they will never learn and exceed
expectations. As previously studied, students drop out of school for a myriad of reasons such
as their sense of preparation, motivation, and required courses (Rosann). It is not always the
learning disability itself that poses the issue. However, although all of these given reasons do

Song 4
pose a fair argument, these reasons all stem from one issue- the curriculum. The reason children
with disabilities blame their ill preparation is because students were filter fed the answers all
throughout their educational career (Beals). If all they had to do was write down what the teacher
told them to, they get the answer right, but, absorb nothing leading to ill preparation. Moreover,
lack of motivation around them is also a reason stemmed from the curriculum. Children need
motivation around them to push them to grow. However, although extrinsic motivation is
necessary, children with disabilities do not have intrinsic motivation to begin with due to their
feelings of incompetency because of their inability to required assignments (Koch). There is a
difference between someone pushing a student to do better and someone pushing a student to be
something they are not. Lastly, children do not feel certain classes such as foreign language,
history, trigonometry, literature are benefitting them in any way, instead, they are just extra
challenging (Strauss). Therefore, children stop trying in these classes leading to failures which is
a factor to dropping out. However, the classes are not the problem, but, it is the curriculum that
made it a requirement to force children into taking these classes. All of these reasons fall back to
the general core standards made and enforced upon in our society today.
The creators of the core standards have the best interest for all students designed to get
students across the country on the same page as they prepare for college and beyond(Locke).
Supporters of the core standards believe changing the curriculum will prevent students from
growing and challenging oneselves. An anonymous special education teacher, she asked, Why
would we take a whole class of citizens and say you don't get to learn the standards that we say
are most important for everyone? Many critics believe if we change the curriculum and make it
easier for children with special needs, we are depriving these children from learning the
necessary subject matter that children without special needs have the opportunity to learn.

Song 5
Within this new curriculum the special education students are expected to learn toward high
standards, individualized education program (IEP) teams, general education staff, and special
education staff are forced to rethink how students spend their time in school (National Center on
Educational Outcomes). Even teachers themselves are blinded by the general curriculum being
forced into thinking equal opportunity over ability as teachers have suggested that as they learn
new assessment strategies for their students participating in alternate assessments and link those
strategies back to instruction, they have refocused on learning and away from caretaking
(National Center on Educational Outcomes). But, who said students do not need a little
caretaking?
Therefore in refutation with this point, in our education system today, teachers are only
expected to teach. Teachers teach at a general pace that they have been instructed to teach at in
order for the teachers to make it through the entire given curriculum within the allotted time.
Well, not only is this one-size-fits-all curriculum style affecting students, but, it is also
affecting the teachers themselves. Teachers are expected to push their students to strive for
greatness and challenge themselves. The one thing teachers always want to see is their students
succeeding. However, given the standards of education today, teachers are also feeling frustrated.
Teachers can only sit back, watch their students struggle, and cannot help in any way except feed
answers by piecemeal which does not force the students to think at all. By a teacher having to
spoon-feed answers to their students, it will not guarantee success for students outside of a
classroom environment which is the ultimate goal of schools. Students will not leave school with
a mind of their own because they will have just been fed the answers by their teachers which
contradicts the purpose of school. Moreover, this curriculums effect of frustration posed on
students with disabilities have forced the students to take part in cheating. There have been

Song 6
numerous headlines related to teacher burnout, high rates of teacher and principal retirements or
resignations, and cheating on high stakes tests during the past few years because teachers and
principals both feel hopeless when it comes to addressing issues that cannot be argued and
students simply cannot finish a test they have no idea how to complete.
Since it is evident students cannot finish this test, is it worth to give them the task? Critics
say participants speculated that schools could become more inclusive as general and special
educators partner to ensure all students have access to the general education curriculum
(Quenemoen et al.). They perceived that the duty special educations teachers have is now shared
with general education teachers more so than in the past leading to the thinking that by having
one curriculum throughout all students within the nation, it will create a sense of unity amongst
students. Students with disabilities already experience many feelings of being an outsider so,
this is one area the students with disabilities can be treated as a normal, everyday student.
Nonetheless, this is a valuable argument. School is a place where all students are put on an equal
playing field, therefore if we change the curriculum, the playing field is no longer balanced.
Although an equal playing field is there to create fairness, children with disabilities
feeling the playing field they are put at is not fair. Kids and teachers are hiding under rocks
from the assessment special education, private schools, teachers exempting students, moving
kids because before the children are even given the chance to take these placement tests, the
children and teachers themselves already know they will not place in the classroom setting all
students want to be placed in which is why kids decide to hide (Inclusive Schools Network). The
curriculum is set to include all students however it is doing just the opposite. By putting what is
best for all students, we are overlooking that students with disabilities need a little more help

Song 7
in certain cases. There are high stakes tests children must take that place them in certain levels of
classes. This is where children are put in higher level or base level classroom settings. This
is where the curriculums expectation of an equal playing field, takes a toll. Schools become less
inclusive with high stakes test pressures. Schools may be unwilling to place classes of students
with significant disabilities if having a large number of students in the alternate assessment
lowers the accountability index rating for that site. Therefore, since it has been proven by
ParentCenter.org, students with disabilities place lower in high stakes tests. This causes them to
be excluded in classroom settings with children without disabilities which is exactly what the
students do not want. This is why children are starting to run away from the curriculum leading
to higher rates of dropout, exemption, and exclusion.
You can see that the issue regarding children with disabilities and the current curriculum
is a larger problem than sought out to be. Children with disabilities are dropping out and being
overlooked. Although the standards are put in place to treat all children fairly, overlooking
disabilities is not being fair. Children with disabilities want to be challenged and want to be
included, however, these expectations are simply too high. Forcing a thirteen year old who learns
at a pace of a third grader to read Mark Twains novel, Tom Sawyer, and be able to summarize
the development of the morality...and analyze its connection to themes is asking a child to speak
a different language. Imagine how tough things become and put yourself in the shoes of a child
with special needs. This curriculum that sets them to an expectation so high leads them to
feelings of failure daily. There is only so much a student can take before giving up which is why
our dropout rate is growing at an endless rate. Because you see how this problem is so grand, we
must all work together to propose change to the curriculum to benefit all. This process must
incorporate fundamental change in the way a school community supports and addresses the

Song 8
individual needs of each child. Inclusive education will not only benefit students with
disabilities, but also create an environment in which every student is ensured the opportunity to
flourish because together, we learn better.

Song 9
Works Cited
Education Matters Evaluation Committee. "Drop Out Rates of Teenagers with Learning
Disabilities." LDOnline. WETA, 2015. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Inclusive Schools Network. "Together We Learn Better: Inclusive Schools Benefit All Children."
Inclusive Schools. Inclusive Schools Network, 10 June 2015. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Institute on Community Integration. "Issue Brief." Publication of the National Center on
Secondary Education and Transition. National Center on Secondary Education and
Transition, 13 Dec. 2007. Web. 06 Apr. 2016.
Koch, Kathy. "Special Education." CQ Researcher 10 Nov. 2000: 905-28. Web. 26 Feb. 2016.
Locke, Michelle. "Core Changes." Scholastic Publishes Literacy Resources and Children's
Books
for Kids of All Ages. Scholastic, 2012. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Quenemoen, Rachel, Martha Thurlow, Camila Lehr, and Carol Massanari. "Students with
Disabilities in Standards-based Assessment and Accountability Systems: Emerging
Issues, Strategies, and Recommendations." NCEO Synthesis Report 37. National Center
on Educational Outcomes, Feb. 2001. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Rosann, Gregg. "Students with Learning Disabilities Drop Out For The Same Reasons as Other
Students and Ability Isn't One of Them."NoDropouts.org. Graduation Alliance, 26
May 2012. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Strauss, Valerie. "Why Kids Hate School - Subject by Subject." Washington Post. The
Washington Post, 7 Sept. 2012. Web. 19 Apr. 2016.
Thurlow, Martha, Mary Sinclair, and David Johnson. "Issue Brief." Publication of the National

Song 10
Center on Secondary Education and Transition. National Center on Secondary Education
and Transition, June 2002. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.

Bibliography
Aiden, Hardeep, and Andrea McCarthy. "Current Attitudes Towards Disabled People." (2014):

Song 11
3-18. http://www.scope.org.uk. England & Wales, May 2014. Web. 9 Feb. 2016.
CDC, and U.S. Census Bureau.. "Disability Statistics: Facts & Statistics on Disabilities &
Disability Issues." Disabled World. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 24 Dec.
2015. Web. 28 Feb. 2016.
Center for Parent Information and Resources. "Supports, Modifications, and Accommodations
for Students | Center for Parent Information and Resources." Center for Parent
Information and Resources. NICHCY, Sept. 2010. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Education Matters Evaluation Committee. "Drop Out Rates of Teenagers with Learning
Disabilities." LDOnline. WETA, 2015. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Ellis, Edwin. "Watering Up the Curriculum for Adolescents with Learning Disabilities, Part I:
Goals of the Knowledge Dimension." Ellis. LDOnline, 2002. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Griffin, Rodman D. "The Disabilities Act." CQ Researcher 27 Dec. 1991: 993-1016. Web. 26
Feb. 2016.
Inclusive Schools Network. "Together We Learn Better: Inclusive Schools Benefit All Children."
Inclusive Schools. Inclusive Schools Network, 10 June 2015. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Institute on Community Integration. "Issue Brief." Publication of the National Center on
Secondary Education and Transition. National Center on Secondary Education and
Transition, 13 Dec. 2007. Web. 06 Apr. 2016.
Koch, Kathy. "Special Education." CQ Researcher 10 Nov. 2000: 905-28. Web. 26 Feb. 2016.

Locke, Michelle. "Core Changes." Scholastic Publishes Literacy Resources and Children's
Books
for Kids of All Ages. Scholastic, 2012. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Munyi, Chomba Wa. "Past and Present Perceptions Towards Disability: A Historical

Song 12
Perspective." Disability Studies Quarterly. DSQ, 2012. Web. 26 Feb. 2016.
Peters, Susan J. "Disability Culture." Encyclopaedia Britannica. Britannica Academic, 21 Dec.
2015. Web. 14 Feb. 2016.
Quenemoen, Rachel, Martha Thurlow, Camila Lehr, and Carol Massanari. "Students with
Disabilities in Standards-based Assessment and Accountability Systems: Emerging
Issues, Strategies, and Recommendations." NCEO Synthesis Report 37. National Center
on Educational Outcomes, Feb. 2001. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Rosann, Gregg. "Students with Learning Disabilities Drop Out For The Same Reasons as Other
Students and Ability Isn't One of Them."NoDropouts.org. Graduation Alliance, 26
May 2012. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Saho, Abdou Aziz. "Change Your Perception About Disability." Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Africa News Service, 12 Dec. 2012. Web. 22 Feb. 2016.
Smith, Hallie. "What the Common Core Standards Mean for Special Education Students."
Scientific Learning. Scientific Learning Corporation, 20 Jan. 2014. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Strauss, Valerie. "Why Kids Hate School - Subject by Subject." Washington Post. The
Washington Post, 7 Sept. 2012. Web. 19 Apr. 2016.
Strom, Erich. "Common Modifications and Accommodations."Understood.org. Understood, 03
Jan. 2014. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.

Thurlow, Martha, Mary Sinclair, and David Johnson. "Issue Brief." Publication of the National
Center on Secondary Education and Transition. National Center on Secondary Education
and Transition, June 2002. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.
Wilson, Barbara. "Common Core State Standards and Students with Disabilities." International
Dyslexia Association. IDA, 2012. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.

Song 13