The Effects of Accommodations on Performance Assessments

Abstract

Most states in the United States are implementing standards-based reform. A key component of this type of reform is the notion that higher standards are intended for all students, including students with disabilities. Performance on these higher standards is typically measured through large-scale assessment systems, from which many students with disabilities have been excluded. Without these students' participation in the standards movement, states will be lacking critical information on the efficacy of instructional programs for all students. In order to participate, some students with disabilities may require accommodations on these assessments. The issue of accommodations presents many challenges, from legal to psychometric. Given the high-stakes nature of these assessments when used as part of the state accountability system in which financial, legal, and instructional decisions are made, these challenges need to be addressed. This study examined the effects of providing the accommodation of reading the mathematics items to students on the fourth-grade version of the Washington Assessment of Student Learning. Specifically this study addressed the question, Does reading the mathematics items allow students with learning disabilities to demonstrate their knowledge without affecting the validity of the test? Results provide support for the continued use of this accommodation for students with disabilities that affect reading. Further research is needed in this area, especially as stakes increase for both schools and individual students.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Center for Policy Research on the Impact of General and Special Education Reform. (1996). Standards-based school reform and students with disabilities. Alexandria, VA: Office of Special Education Programs.

Fisher, D. , Roach, V. , & Kearns, J. (1998). Statewide assessment systems: Who's in and who's out? Policy, Research, Practice Issue Brief 3(1), Consortium for Inclusive Schooling Practices.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. § 1415.

Kimball, K. , Olson Brown, S. , & Johnson, E. (1999). Creating accommodations policy: How hard is it? Unpublished manuscript, University of Washington.

Koretz, D. (1997). The assessment of students with disabilities in Kentucky. Los Angeles: CRESST/ RAND Institute on Education and Training.

McLaughlin, M. , & Shepard, L. (1996). Improving education through standards-based reform . Washington, DC: National Academy of Education, Panel on Standards-Based Education Reform.

Phillips, S.E. (1994). High-stakes testing accommodations: Validity versus disabled rights. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 93-120.

Sharp, L. (1996). Assessment policy as it impacts special populations: Modifications and accommodations in student assessment. Seattle: University of Washington, Institute for the Study of Educational Policy.

Thurlow, M. , Erickson, R. , Spicuzza, R. , Vieburg, K. , & Ruhland, A. (1996). Accommodations for students with disabilities: Guidelines from states with graduation exams. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

10.

Thurlow, M. , Ysseldyke, J. , Erickson, R. , & Elliot, J. (1997). Increasing the participation of students with disabilities in state and district assessments. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

11.

Tindal, G. (1998). Models for understanding test comparability in accommodated testing. Eugene: University of Oregon State Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standards.

12.

Tindal, G. , Heath, B. , Hollenbeck, K. , Almond, P. , & Harniss, M. (1998). Accommodating students with disabilities on large-scale tests: An experimental study. Exceptional Children, 64, 439-450.

13.

Ysseldyke, J. , & Thurlow, M. (1994). Guidelines for inclusion of students with disabilities in large-scale assessments. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

14.

Ysseldyke, J. , Thurlow, M. , & Bruininks, R. (1992). Expected educational outcomes for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 13(6), 19-30.

15.

Ysseldyke, J. , Thurlow, M. , & Geenan, K. (1994). Educational accountability for students with disabilities . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota , National Center on Educational Outcomes.