IDEIA requires a student who receives special education services to have an IEP that is specific to each student and NCLB requires that all students be taught the same knowledge and skills. The purpose of this study was to determine with which federal school law, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) or Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA), school districts in Mississippi are choosing to comply and what drives that decision. The research questions were: (a) Are Mississippi school districts choosing to comply with NCLB or IDEIA when writing IEPs for their students receiving special education services? and (b) What are the reasons for that decision? A multiple-case design was used in this study resulting in a more convincing explanation because when more cases are involved variation increases across the studies. Real-life applications and issues were noted in case studies. The researcher was the main instrument for data collection and analysis. Three school districts participated in the study that included 11 teachers. Five themes emerged from the case studies. Those were: (a) teacher opposition, (b) out-of-level testing, (c) achievement test preparation, (d) lack of written guidelines, and (e) different approaches in meeting educational needs of students receiving special education services. Recommendations included: (a) development of guidelines for special education students who do not take the grade level MCT , (b) mandatory training on standardized IEP guidelines, (c) further study on report of numbers of special education students within schools, (d) further study on self-concept of special education students who participate in out-of-level instruction and testing, (e) comparative study of inclusion and resource students using MCT as pre- and post-test.

Above-level testing is the practice administering a test level—of usually an academic achievement or aptitude test—to a gifted or high achieving child. This procedure is widely accepted in gifted education circles, on the basis of theoretical claims that above-level testing raises the test ceiling, increases variability among gifted students’ scores, improves reliability of data, reduces regression toward the mean, and improves interpretation of data from gifted students. However, above-level testing has not been subject to careful psychometric scrutiny. In this study, I examine reliability data, growth trajectories, distributions, and group differences of above-level test scores obtained from the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS) and Iowa Tests of Educational Development (ITED). Subjects in this study were 224 students tested a total of 435 times while enrolled in a gifted magnet program for middle schoolers. Longitudinal analyses performed with hierarchical linear modeling indicate that substantial differences exist between students from overrepresented ethnicities (White and Asian Americans) and those from underrepresented ethnicities (Hispanic and African Americans) in both initial scores and the rate of score gains. Gender differences existed only for the rate of score increases for above-level reading scores. Socioeconomic differences existed, but did not have a unique impact beyond that of the ethnicity variable. A discussion of the place of these results within the wider gifted education research context and suggestions for further research are included. An appendix to the study gives information about item difficulty indexes for every item in the ITBS/ITED core battery for the eighth, ninth, and tenth grade levels of Form C.