Classroom accommodations are a primary means of supporting the appropriate education for students with disabilities. Student involvement in the accommodation process is valuable. Therefore, we need to teach students to be knowledgeable and strategic regarding their accommodations.
Methods
Four high school students with visual impairments were taught the Student Self-Accommodation Strategy (SSA). A comparative case studies approach within a sequential explanatory design was used to investigate their accommodations knowledge and practices.
Results
Participants improved or maintained accommodations knowledge. Their most-used types of accommodations were access accommodations and accommodations for content support. Three of the participants increased advocacy after strategy instruction. The participants’ accommodation practices were influenced by emotional-behavioral regulation, independence, and teacher involvement.
Discussion
Findings from this study relate to existing literature on accommodations support, teacher involvement in the accommodations process, instruction in accommodations advocacy, and the relationship between accommodations and emotional-behavioral dysregulation.
Implications
Findings emphasize the need to be explicit about the accommodations available to students with visual impairments and the need for strategy instruction in the SSA to address emotional-behavioral dysregulation.
AbramoJ. M.PierceA. E. (2013). An ethnographic case study of music learning at a school for the blind. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 195, 9–24. https://doi.org/10.5406/bulcouresmusedu.195.0009
2.
AgranM.HongS.BlankenshipK. (2007). Promoting the self-determination of students with visual impairments: Reducing the gap between knowledge and practice. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 101(8), 453–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X0710100802
BoltS. E.DeckerD. M.LloydM.MorlockL. (2011). Students’ perceptions of accommodations in high school and college. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 34(3), 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885728811415098.
5.
CooperH. L.NicholsS. K. (2007). Technology and early braille literacy: Using the mountbatten pro brailler in primary-grade classrooms. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 101(1), 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X0710100104
6.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L.GutmannM. L.HansonW. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 209–240). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publishing.
7.
D’AndreaF. M. (2012). Preferences and practices among students who read braille and use assistive technology. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 106(10), 585–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1210601003
8.
ErinJ. N.HongS.SchochC.KuoY. (2006). Relationships among testing medium, test performance, and testing time of high school students who are visually impaired. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 100(9), 523–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X0610000904
9.
FarnsworthC. R.LucknerJ. L. (2008). The impact of assistive technology on curriculum accommodation for a braille-reading student. RE: View: Rehabilitation and Education for Blindness and Visual Impairment, 39(4), 171–187. https://doi.org/10.3200/REVU.39.4.171-187
10.
GrahamS.HarrisK. R. (1993). Self-regulated strategy development: Helping students with learning problems develop as writers. The Elementary School Journal, 94(2), 169–181.
11.
HansonW. E.CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L.PetskaK. S.CreswellJ. D. (2008). Mixed methods research designs in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 224–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.224
12.
HerzbergT. S.StoughL. M. (2007). The production of brailled instructional materials in Texas public schools. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 101(8), 465–478. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X0910301015
13.
HornerR. H.CarrE. G.HalleJ.McGeeG.OdomS.WoleryM. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100203
14.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA) 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).
15.
KhanS.VanWynsbergheR. (2008). Cultivating the under-mined: Cross-case analysis as knowledge mobilization. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-9.1.334
16.
LaprairieK.JohnsonD. D.RiceM.AdamsP.HigginsB. (2010). The top ten things new high school teachers need to know about servicing students with special needs. American Secondary Education, 38(2), 23–31.
17.
LeeS.-H.WehmeyerM. L.SoukupJ. H.PalmerS. B. (2010). Impact of curriculum modifications on access to the general education curriculum for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 76(2), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291007600205
18.
LienemannT. O.ReidR. (2006). Self-regulated strategy development for students with learning disabilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 29(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/088840640602900102
19.
LuskK. E. (2012). The effects of various mounting systems of near magnification on reading performance and preference in school-age students with low vision. British Journal of Visual Impairment, 30(3), 168–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0264619612456120
20.
NannemannA. C. (2019). A self-accommodation strategy for students with visual impairments (Publication No. 13813872). [Doctoral dissertation]. Boston College: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
21.
PollowayE. A.EpsteinM. H.BursuckW. D. (2003). Testing adaptations in the general education classroom: Challenges and directions. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 189–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560308220.
22.
RosenblumL. P.HerzbergT. S. (2015). Braille and tactile graphics: Youth with visual impairments share their experiences. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 109(3), 173–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1510900302.
23.
RuleA. C.StefanichG. P.BoodyR. M.PeifferB. (2011). Impact of adaptive materials on teachers and their students with VI in secondary science and mathematics classes. International Journal of Science Education, 33(6), 865–887. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.506619
24.
SappW.HatlenP. (2010). The expanded core curriculum: Where we have been, where we are going, and how we can get there. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 104(6), 338–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1010400604
25.
ScanlonD.BakerD. (2012). An accommodations model for the secondary inclusive classroom. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35(4), 212–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948712451261.
26.
ScanlonD.NannemannA.BakerD. (2021). Lessons from research for implementing an instructional model in secondary inclusion. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Jounral, 26(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2021-V26-I1-10407.
27.
StraussA. L.CorbinJ. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage Publishing.
28.
ThurlowM. L.BoltS. (2001). Empirical support for accommodations most often allowed in state policy (Synthesis Report No. 41). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
29.
WildT. A.HilsonM. P.FarrandK. M. (2013). Conceptual understanding of geological concepts by students with VI. Journal of Geoscience Education, 61(2), 222–230. https://doi.org/10.5408/12-379.1
30.
ZebehazyK. T.WiltonA. P. (2014a). Quality, importance, and instruction: The perspectives of teachers of students with visual impairments on graphics use by students. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 108(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1410800102
31.
ZebehazyK. T.WiltonA. P. (2014b). Straight from the source: Perceptions of students with visual impairments about graphic use. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 108(4), 275–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1410800403
