State assessment systems continue to evolve as federal requirements change and more students are included in the assessment systems. An examination of states' participation and accommodations policies in place at the beginning of the accountability requirements set by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 revealed that policies for both participation and accommodations were becoming more specific in comparison to previous years. Additional participation options beyond the usual three (participation without accommodations, participation with accommodations, alternate assessment) were more evident in state policies, and states continued to increase the number of accommodations included in their policies. Some states allowed accommodations for all students regardless of whether they received special education services. The most controversial accommodations continued to be read aloud, calculator, and scribe. Changes in state policies, differences among current policies, and implications of these policies are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Calhoon, M.B., Fuchs, L.S., & Hamlett, C.L. (2000). Effects of computer-based test accommodations on mathematics performance assessments for secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 23, 271—282.
2.
Centra, J.A. (1986). Handicapped student performance on the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19(6), 324—327.
3.
Elliott, J., Erickson, R., Thurlow, M., & Shriner, J. (2000). State-level accountability for the performance of students with disabilities: Five years of change?The Journal of Special Education, 34(1), 39—47.
4.
Elliott, J.L., Thurlow, M.L., Ysseldyke, J.E., & Erickson, R.N. (1997). Providing assessment accommodations for students with disabilities in state and district assessments (Policy Directions 7). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
5.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S.B., Hamlett, C., Binkley, E., & Crouch, R. (2000). Using objective data source to enhance teacher judgments about test accommodations. Exceptional Children , 67(1), 67—81.
6.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S.B., Hamlett, C., & Karns, K. (2000). Supplementing teacher judgements about test accommodations with objective data sources. School Psychology Review, 29(1), 65—85.
7.
Huebert, J., & Hauser, R. (1999). High stakes: Testing for tracking, promotion, and graduation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
8.
Koretz, D. (1997). The assessment of students with disabilities in Kentucky (CSE Technical Report No. 431). Los Angeles: Center for Research on Standards and Student Testing.
9.
Krentz, J., Thurlow, M., Shyyan, V., & Scott, D. (2004). Alternate routes to the standard diploma (Synthesis Report). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes .
10.
Lehr, C., & Thurlow, M. (2003). Putting it all together: Including students with disabilities in assessment and accountability systems (Policy Directions No. 16). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved May 4, 2004, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Policy16.htm
11.
Lewis, D., Green, D.R., & Miller, L. (1999, June). Using di ferential item functioning analyses to assess the validity of testing accommodated students with disabilities . Paper presented at the National Conference on Large-Scale Assessment, Snowbird, UT.
12.
MacArthur, C.A., & Graham, S. (1987). Learning disabled students' composing under three methods of text production: Handwriting, word processing, and dictation. The Journal of Special Education, 21(3), 22—42.
13.
Marquart, A. (2000, June). The use of extended time as an accommodation on a standardized mathematics test: An investigation of e fects on scores and perceived consequences for students of various skill levels. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Council of the Chief State School Officers, Snowbird, UT.
14.
McDonnell, L., McLaughlin, M., & Morrison, P. (1997). Educating one & all: Students with disabilities and standards-based reform. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
15.
McGrew, K.S., Thurlow, M.L., & Spiegel, A.N. (1993). An investigation of the exclusion of students with disabilities in national data collection programs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 339—352.
16.
Meloy, L.L., Deville, C., & Frisbie, C. (2000, April). The e fect of a reading accommodation on standardized test scores of learning disabled and non-learning disabled students . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA.
17.
Munger, G.F., & Loyd, B.H. (1991). Effect of speededness on test performance of handicapped and nonhandicapped examinees. Journal of Educational Research , 85(1), 53—57.
18.
Quenemoen, R., Thompson, S., & Thurlow, M. (2003). Measuring academic achievement of students with significant cognitive disabilities: Building understanding of alternate assessment scoring criteria (Synthesis Report 50). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
19.
Sireci, S.G., Li, S., & Scarpati, S. (n.d.). The e fects of test accommodations: A review of the literature (Research Report 485). Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Center for Educational Assessment.
20.
State Accountability for All Students Project. ( 2003). Preliminary findings. Columbus, OH : University of Dayton.
21.
Thompson, S., Blount, A., & Thurlow, M. (2002). A summary of research on the e fects of test accommodations: 1999 through 2001 (Technical Report 34). Minneapolis: National Center on Educational Outcomes.
22.
Thompson, S., & Thurlow, M. (2001). 2001 state special education outcomes: A report on state activities at the beginning of a new decade. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
23.
Thurlow, M. (2002). Positive educational results for all students . Remedial and Special Education, 23(4), 195—202.
24.
Thurlow, M., & Bolt, S. (2001). Empirical support for accommodations most often allowed in state policy (Synthesis Report 41). Minneapolis : University of Minnesota National Center on Educational Outcomes.
25.
Thurlow, M., House, A., Boys, C., Scott, D., & Ysseldyke, J. (2000). State participation and accommodation policies for students with disabilities: 1999 update (Synthesis Report 33). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
26.
Thurlow, M., Lazarus, S., Thompson, S., & Robey, J. (2002). 2001 state policies on assessment participation and accommodations (Synthesis Report 46). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
27.
Thurlow, M., Minnema, J., Bielinski, J., & Guven, K. (2003). Testing students with disabilities out of level: State prevalence and performance results (Out-of-Level Testing Project Report 9). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
28.
Thurlow, M.L., Scott, D.L., & Ysseldyke, J.E. (1995a). A compilation of states' guidelines for accommodations in assessments for students with disabilities (Synthesis Report 18). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
29.
Thurlow, M.L., Scott, D.L., & Ysseldyke, J.E. (1995b). A compilation of states' guidelines for including students with disabilities in assessments (Synthesis Report 17). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
30.
Thurlow, M., Seyfarth, A., Scott, D., & Ysseldyke, J. (1997). State assessment policies on participation and accommodations for students with disabilities: 1997 update (Synthesis Report 29). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
31.
Thurlow, M.L., Ysseldyke, J.E., & Silverstein, B. (1993). Testing accommodations for students with disabilities: A review of the literature (Synthesis Report 4). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
32.
Tindal, G., Heath, B., Hollenbeck, K., Almond, P., & Harniss, M. (1998). Accommodating students with disabilities on large-scale tests: An empirical study of student response and test administration demands . Exceptional Children, 64(4), 439—450.
33.
Tippets, E., & Michaels, H. (1997, March). Factor structure invariance of accommodated and non-accommodated performance assessments. Paper presented at the National Council on Measurement in Education annual meeting, Chicago.
34.
Trimble, S. (1998). Performance trends and use of accommodations on a statewide assessment (Maryland/Kentucky Report Number 3). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
35.
Ziomek, R.L., & Andrews, K.M. (1998). ACT assessment score gains of special tested Students (ACT Research Report Series). Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc.
