Despite expectations for accommodations in inclusive classrooms, little guidance for effective practice is available. Most accommodations policies and evidence-based practices address assessments. High school regular and special educators collaborated in focus groups to articulate a model based on their practices and perceptions of best practice. The model addresses classroom accommodations identification, provision, and evaluation. The model is particularly appropriate for cotaught classrooms with high enrollments of students with high incidence disabilities.
Bottsford-MillerN.ThurlowM. L.StoutK. E.QuenemoenR. F. (2006). A comparison of IEP/504 accommodations under classroom and standardized testing conditions: A preliminary report on SEELS data (Synthesis Report 63). Minneapolis: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.
2.
BoudahD. J. (2011). Conducting educational research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
3.
BoyleJ.ScanlonD. (2010). Methods and strategies for teaching students with mild disabilities: A case-based approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
4.
BrantlingerE.JimenezR.KlingnerJ. K.PugachM.RichardsonV. (2005). Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 195–207.
5.
BrownW. M. (2007). Virginia teachers’ perceptions and knowledge of test accommodations for students with disabilities (Doctoral dissertation). The College of William and Mary. (UMI No. 3254404)
6.
BurnsM. K.YsseldykeJ. E. (2009). Reported prevalence of evidence-based instructional practices in special education. Journal of Special Education, 43, 3–11.
7.
ByrnesM. A. (2008). Educators’ interpretations of ambiguous accommodations. Remedial and Special Education, 29, 306–315.
8.
CharmazK. (1995). Grounded theory. In SmithJ. A.HareR.Van LangenhoveL. (Eds.), Rethinking methods in psychology (pp. 27–49). Thousand Oakes, CA: SAGE.
9.
DenoS. (2003). Developments in curriculum-based measurement. Journal of Special Education, 37, 184–192.
10.
EisenmanL. T.PleetA. M.WandryD.McGinleyV. (2011). Voices of special education teachers in an inclusive high school: Redefining responsibilities. Remedial and Special Education, 32, 91–94.
11.
FletcherJ.M.FrancisD.J.BoudosquieAlCopelandK.YoungV.KalinowskiS.VaughnS. (2006). Effects of accommodations on high-stakes testing for students with reading disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72 (2), 136–150.
12.
FletcherT.BosC.JohnsonL. (1999). Accommodating English language learners with language and learning disabilities in bilingual education classrooms. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14, 80–91.
13.
FraenkelJ. R.WallenN. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed.). San Francisco, CA: McGraw-Hill.
14.
FriendM.BursuckW. D. (2006). Including students with special needs: A practical guide for classroom teachers (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
15.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (2001). Helping teachers formulate sound test accommodation decisions for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 174–181.
16.
GallJ. P.GallM. D.BorgW. R. (2005). Applying educational research: A practical guide (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
17.
HarrisK. R.GrahamS.DeshlerD. D. (1998). Introduction. In HarrisK. R.GrahamS.DeshlerD. D. (Eds.), Teaching every child every day: Teaching and learning in diverse schools and classrooms (pp. vi-xiv). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
18.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108–446. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
19.
JohnsonB.TurnerL. A. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methods research. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 297–320). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
20.
JoyceB.ShowersB. (1995). Student achievement through staff development (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
21.
KozikP. L.CooneyB.VinciguerraS.GradelK.BlackJ. (2009). Promoting inclusion in secondary schools through appreciative inquiry. American Secondary Education, 38, 77–91.
22.
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), 22–31.
23.
LovettB. (2010). Extended time testing accommodations for students with disabilities answers to five fundamental questions. Review of Educational Research, 80, 611–638.
24.
LytleS. L.Cochran-SmithM. (1992). Teacher research as a way of knowing. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 447–474.
25.
MacciniP.GagnonJ. C. (2006). Mathematics instructional practices and assessment accommodations by secondary special and general educators. Exceptional Children, 72, 217–234.
26.
McGuireJ.ScottS.ShawS. (2006). Universal design and its application in educational environments. Remedial and Special Education, 27, 166–175.
27.
McLeskeyJ.HoppeyD.WilliamsonP.RentzT. (2004). Is inclusion an illusion? An examination of national and state trends toward the inclusion of students with learning disabilities in regular education classrooms. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 19, 109–115.
28.
McLeskeyJ.LandersE.HoppeyD.WilliamsonP. (2011). Learning disabilities and the LRE mandate: An examination of national and state trends. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 26, 60–66.
29.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
30.
MurawskiW. W.SwansonH. L. (2001). A meta-analysis of co-teaching research: Where are the data?Remedial and Special Education, 22, 258–267.
31.
NelsonJ. S.JayanthiM.EpsteinM. H.BursuckW.D. (2000). Students preferences for adaptations in classroom testing. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 41–52.
32.
PearlC. E.MillerK. J. (2007). Co-taught middle school mathematics classrooms: Accommodations and enhancements for students with specific learning disabilities. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 29(2), 1–20.
33.
PollowayE. A.EpsteinM. H.BursuckW. D. (2003). Testing adaptations in the regular education classroom: Challenges and directions. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 189–192.
34.
ReaP. J.McLaughlinV. L.Walther-ThomasC. (2002). Outcomes for students with learning disabilities in inclusive and pullout programs. Exceptional Children, 68, 203–222.
35.
SalendS. J. (2010). Creating inclusive classrooms: Effective and reflective practices. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
ScarpatiS. E.WellsC. S.LewisC.JirkaS. (2001). Accommodations and item-level analyses using mixture differential item functioning models. Journal of Special Education, 45, 54–62.
38.
ScarpatiS. E.WellsC. S.LewisC.JirkaS. (2011). Accommodations and item-level analyses using mixture differential item functioning models. Journal of Special Education, 45, 54–62.
39.
SchummJ.VaughnS. (1991). Making adaptations for mainstreamed students: General classroom teachers’ perspectives. Remedial and Special Education, 12(4), 18–27.
40.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A.McDuffieK. A. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms: A metasynthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children, 73, 392–416.
41.
ThompsonS. J.MorseA. B.SharpeM.HallS. (2005). Accommodations manual: How to select, administer, and evaluate use of accommodations for instruction and assessment of students with disabilities (2nd ed.). Washington DC: CCSSO State Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standards Assessing Special Education Students.
42.
ThurlowM. L. (2001). Use of accommodations in state assessments: What databases tell us about differential levels of use and how to document the use of accommodations (Tech. Rep. 20). Minneapolis: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.
43.
ThurlowM. L.BoltS. (2001). Empirical support for accommodations most often allowed in state policy (Synthesis Rep.). Minneapolis: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.
44.
ThurlowM. L.LazarusS.ThompsonS.RobeyJ. (2002). 2001 state policies on assessment participation and accommodations (Synthesis Rep. 46). Minneapolis: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.
45.
ThurlowM. L.LiuK. (2001). State and district assessments as an avenue to equity and excellence for English language learners with disabilities (LEP Project Rep. 2). Minneapolis: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.
46.
ThurlowM. L.QuenemoenR. F. (2011). Standards-based reform and students with disabilities. In KauffmanJ. M.HallahanD. P. (Eds.), Handbook of special education (pp. 134–146). New York, NY: Routledge.
47.
ThurlowM. L.ThompsonS. J.LazarusS. S. (2006). Considerations for the administration of tests to special needs students: Accommodations, modification, and more. In DowningS. M.HaladynaT. M. (Eds.), Handbook of test development (pp. 653–673). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
48.
VallecorsaA. L.deBettencourtL. U.ZigmondN. (2000). Students with mild disabilities in general education settings: A guide for special educators. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
49.
WoodC. L.KelleyK. R.TestD. W.FowlerC. H. (2010). Comparing audio-supported text and explicit instruction on students’ knowledge of accommodations, rights and responsibilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 33, 115–124.
50.
YsseldykeJ.ThurlowM.BielinskiJ.HouseA.MoodyM.HaighJ. (2001). The relationship between instructional and assessment accommodations in an inclusive state accountability system. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 212–220.
51.
ZigmondN.KlooA.VoloninoV. (2009). What, where, and how? Special education the climate of full inclusion. Exceptionality, 17, 189–204.
