NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ808038
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2005
Pages: 4
Abstractor: As Provided
Reference Count: 7
ISSN: ISSN-1046-6819
Disaggregation: What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander, Assessment for NCLB vs. Assessment for Learning Disability Identification
Cherkes-Julkowski, Miriam
Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, v13 n4 p151-154 2005
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) firmly insists that performance analyses use disaggregated scores. Disaggregation, according to NCLB, involves measuring and reporting achievement for separate subgroups of children so that achievement problems in any one subgroup are not disguised when averaged or aggregated with higher achieving children in the same classroom. Despite the absolute requirement for disaggregation in NCLB, it has become common practice to do the opposite when identifying students with learning disabilities: use aggregated or composite ability and achievement scores. In fact, school personnel are highly resistant to disaggregating the ability and achievement scores for individual children. The aggregating procedure used to identify learning disabilities flagrantly flies in the face of those very sound disaggregating measurement principles considered nonnegotiable in NCLB.
Learning Disabilities Association of America. 4156 Library Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15234. Tel: 412-341-1515; Fax: 412-344-0224; e-mail:; Web site:
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Reports - Descriptive
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers - Laws, Policies, & Programs: No Child Left Behind Act 2001