Part 1: READING RESPONSE REFLECTIONS (SHORT BUT FOCUSED) FOR 4 ARTICLES Include a list of new and salient ideas, vocabulary (and names of important people and organizations), information, issues and perspectives learned from the week’s readings (you may use bulleted notes, and these may be brief – BUT SPECIFIC/DETAILED – SUCH AS DATES, ETC. Try to focus on your analysis/synthesis rather than a summary of the articles. Length: Total of approximately 250 Words (1 page) for Reading Response (this includes the list and your reflection).
The readings this week go into greater depth regarding documentation for students with learning disability labels. They address the implications IDEA 2004 and ADD AA (2008) have on documentation submitted to postsecondary institutions. Although all of the articles where published after 2008 the authors sometimes cite articles published before 2008 as evidence to support their claims. This is not always a concern; however, I suggest that for now, and in the future, try to be primed for those dates.
As you read, try to consider how such pre-2008 citations influence your assessment of the article. Do you think the evidence still stands or do you think the same study would produce different results? The authors this week seem to want a consensus regarding documentation procedures and long for the established guidelines that are losing judicial support. The benefits of consensus are easier to identify, which is why I ask: What are some of the concerns and/or pitfalls? Consider the influence IDEA 2004 and ADD AA (2008) has had in relation to documentation at the postsecondary level. Are the authors’ findings what you would have expected or are you surprised? What do you think might happen in the years to come?
Most of the articles addressed documentation considerations from the high school to postsecondary school transition. What are your thoughts regarding the postsecondary to the graduate school transition?
Part 2: GIVE AN IN-DEPTH REFLECTION/ANALYSIS (NOT A SYNOPSIS) OF THE READINGS IN YOUR OWN WORDS FOR 3 ARTICLES (200 WORDS) Your responses should be SUBSTANTIVE (but, not overly exhaustive when appropriate): they should demonstrate a serious engagement with the text(s), all claims you make should be fully and completely explained and claims about what the text says should be backed with PROPER quotations and/or evidence from the text. Be sure to provide enough reference information in your responses so that we can find the page/quotation/etc. that you are referring to or discussing in your responses. You may NOT RECYCLE /USE THOUGTHS, PHRASES FROM THE ANALYSIS IN PART 1. YOU MAY NOT USE ANY OUTSIDE SOURCES – ONLY WHAT IS PROVIDED. This should INCORPORATE YOUR THOUGHTS /REACTION (Light Citation should be incorporated 3-4) in approximately 200 words per reading. Cite the source after response. Citations: APA Style
(1)Madaus, Banerjee & Hamblet (2010) Madaus, J. W., Banerjee, M., & Hamblet, E. C. (2010). Learning disability documentation decision making at the postsecondary level. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 33
(2), 68-79. (2)Shaw (2012) Shaw, S. F. (2012). Disability documentation: Using all the data. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability 25(4), 277-282.
(3)Shaw, Keenan, Madaus & Banerjee (2010) Shaw, S. F., Keenan, W. R., Madaus, J. W. & Banerjee, M. (2010). Disability Documentation, the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act, and the summary of performance: How are they linked? Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability 22(3), 142-150.
(4)Sparks & Lovett (2014) Sparks, R. L., & Lovett, B. J. (2014). Learning Disability Documentation in Higher Education What Are Students Submitting? Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(1), 54-62.
