The Echo

The following text is an excerpt from:
Educating One and All: Students with Disabilities and Standards-Based Reform (1997) 
Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (CBASSE)

Though the book was published in 1997, many of the concerns raised by CBASSE continue to hold true today. - Elizabeth

BOX 4-1 Credentialing, the High School Diploma, and Students with Disabilities

The credentialing issue is critical in standards-based reform because credentials are the means for communicating students' high school performance to the public. Since a high school diploma is the minimum requirement for a variety of employment opportunities, some educators are concerned about the impact standards-based reform could have on the high school credentialing process for a number of students, including some with disabilities.

Over the last several decades, as the proportion of high school students receiving a high school diploma has increased, not having a diploma is regarded as damning to one's job prospects. At the same time, having a diploma has seemed, for some time now, to be only minimally impressive to employers (Bishop, 1996; Hawkins, 1978; Pedulla and Reidy, 1979). Some argue that there is no substantive relationship between academic content and the awarding of a high school diploma (Bishop, 1989, 1994; Sedlak et al., 1986). They see the move to ratchet up standards required for a diploma as an attempt "to hold schools to standards that the lay public could easily measure and understand" (Sedlak et al., 1986:28). Raising standards in a credible way is thus a response to employer concerns about the devaluing of a diploma, as well as to more general concerns about U.S. international competitiveness.

Some students with disabilities in certain states receive differentiated diplomas, which distinguish students following a rigorous academic track from those following a minimally academic or vocational track. The latter group receives certificates of attendance or other nonacademic diplomas (see Chapter 3). Thus, students with disabilities operate in a credentialing universe much more complex than their general education counterparts. Potential employers may face difficulty in putting an applicant's credential in the appropriate context, given the diversity in the credentialing of students with disabilities. This diversity makes it that much harder for students with disabilities to showcase their achievements and abilities.

A number of issues about credentialing for students with disabilities warrant attention. First, if standards for a high school diploma are increased, more students—including those with disabilities—may not receive diplomas and, more to the point, they will not easily be able to convey to potential employers what they have achieved in high school. Some students, including some with disabilities, who currently receive certificates of attendance face this problem. All students—whether they currently would receive a diploma, certificate of attendance, or no certification whatsoever—deserve to leave high school able to signal credibly to potential employers what they have achieved.* The students who do not attain a diploma may experience hardship, particularly in the short run. In the medium to long run, job requirements will presumably adjust to the new standards, although what form of readily ascertainable certification will replace the high school diploma is unclear.

Second, as one changes the nature of the credentialing process, whether by increasing standards or by requiring minimum competency tests, students must first be adequately prepared to meet the challenges posed by the new credentialing process. In other words, the K-12 curriculum ought to provide students with opportunities to learn the material required for the credential. This concept has proved controversial and subject to litigation (Debra P. v. Turlington 644 F. 2d 397, 1981), both for students with disabilities and for other disadvantaged groups (see Chapter 5 for further discussion). The issue is further complicated by the laws requiring accommodations for students with disabilities. Phillips (1993) and Vitello (1988) discuss issues relevant to this debate in more detail.

Third, it is important to recognize that employers are constantly looking for ways to lower costs. To the extent that the credentialing system makes it more, rather than less, costly for business to evaluate the capabilities of students with disabilities, the system makes the transition to employment harder. The importance of providing clear and credible evidence of what students have achieved and are capable of should not be underestimated.

*Such certification should be flexible enough to signify differential achievement to allow potential employers to distinguish among them. Bishop sees students having the opportunity to signal higher achievement to potential employers as providing an important incentive. Michigan, New York, and Tennessee have honors diplomas to acknowledge those whose achievements sufficiently surpass the basic requirements (Bond et al., 1996).