Somerville Argumentative To Expository
Somerville Argumentative To Expository
Somerville Argumentative To Expository
Argumentative to Expository
Comprehensive Assessment for Students with Learning Disabilities
Hunter C. Somerville
Texas A&M University-Texarkana
educator that is responsible for conducting these assessments must understand what tools are
available and the benefits of each type of test. Educators must also know which tool works best
for each type of learning disability and each student. The many tools available are:
standardized tests, informal measures, observations, student self-reports, parent reports, and
progress monitoring data from response-to-intervention (RTI) approaches (Gartland, 2010, p.
3). The National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (NJCLD) strongly supports
comprehensive assessment and evaluation of students with learning disabilities by a
multidisciplinary team for the identification and diagnosis of students with learning disabilities
(Gartland, 2010, p. 3). Research has shown that the multidisciplinary approach to assessment is a
better predictor of student success as the person reaches and enters into adulthood. This
comprehensive approach to assessment helps educators in determining that there is a learning
disability and the type of disability. Comprehensive assessment and evaluation procedures are
both critical for making an accurate diagnosis of students with learning disabilities. Procedures
that are not comprehensive can result in identification of some individuals as having learning
disabilities when they do not, and conversely, exclude some individuals who do have specific
learning disabilities (Gartland, 2010, p. 4). There is a great need for assessment and diagnosis of
learning disabilities because the adolescent and adult population with LD continues to be
underserved and underprepared to meet the demands of postsecondary learning and work
environments (Gregg, 2012, p. 47).
Strategy
Educators, employers, and students themselves can make a plan for the future. A key
component in successful people is the ability to understand what works for them and what does
not work. Younger students rely on parents and teachers for that guidance. Building a portfolio
of skills early in life can help an individual grow those attributes and compensate for the other
disabilities. Comprehensive assessment means using all of these tools to create this bigger
picture and minimize the reliance on any one individual test as a predictor of performance. By
strategizing strengths and documenting disabilities the student and have a better chance at
success. Planning and evaluating and having a portfolio that evolves can also give the student a
sense of pride of his or her accomplishments. Using the comprehensive assessment properly can
also detect learning disabilities or exceptionalities that may have not been known or emerge later
in life. The results from comprehensive assessments can help educators to better design
curriculum and enhance the learning of all students while individually meeting the needs of
others.
Conclusion
Comprehensive assessment is a tool that can be very useful in assessing all students and
necessary for those with learning disabilities. Many educators are uncomfortable with
comprehensive assessment because there is a subjective component which can lead to bias.
Educators must understand that the laws and acts such as No Child Left Behind and The
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) do not mean that there are not needs and
exceptionalities that must be defended. In the not so distant past students were often assessed
while demonstrating their knowledge, comprehensive assessment. Since the passage of
education laws, students must prove themselves on paper and students with disabilities are often
ranked lower. Moving back to a comprehensive environment of teaching and testing will better
serve our students and communities in the future. Linear testing or standardized testing when
used solely for assessment poses limitations on students with learning disabilities and many are
excluded from educational opportunities because they are assumed to be lacking in one or more
References