Test accommodations for postsecondary students: The quandary resulting from the ADA's disability definition

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 83-108

  Ranseen, John D ^a   Parks, Gregory S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 13844298067     PISSN: 10768971     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/1076-8971.11.1.83     Document Type: Review

References (108)

1. Adelman, P. B., & Vogel, S. A. (1998). Adults with learning disabilities. In B. Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities (pp. 657-701). San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace.
2. Albertsons, Inc. v. Kirkingburg, 527 U.S. 555 (1999).
3. American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
4. Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (1994).
5. Anderson, C. L. (2000). "Deserving disabilities": Why the definition of disability under the Americans With Disabilities Act should be revised to eliminate the substantial limitation requirement. Missouri Law Review, 65, 83-150.
6. Argen v. New York State Board of Law Examiners, 860 F. Supp. 84 (W.D.N.Y. 1994).
7. Barkley, R. A. (1997). Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: Constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 65-94.
8. Bartlett v. New York State Board of Law Examiners, 970 F. Supp. 1094 (S.D.N.Y. 1997).
9. Bartlett v. New York State Board of Law Examiners, 156 F.3rd 321 (2d Cir. 1998).
10. Bartlett v. New York State Board of Law Examiners, 527 U.S. 1031 (1999).
11. Bartlett v. New York State Board of Law Examiners, 226 F.3rd 69 (2d Cir. 2000).
12. Bartlett v. New York State Board of Law Examiners, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11926 (S.D.N.Y. August 15, 2001).
13. Blaxter, M. (1976). The meaning of disability: A sociological study of impairment. London: Heinemann.
14. Bogdan, R., & Taylor, S. (1994). The social meaning of mental retardation: Two life stories. New York: Teachers College Press.
15. Brackett, J., & McPherson, A. (1996). Learning disabilities diagnosis in postsecondary students: A comparison of discrepancy-based diagnostic models. In N. Gregg, C. Joy, & A. Gay (Eds.), Adults with learning disabilities: Theoretical and practical perspectives (pp. 68-84). New York: Guilford Press.
16. Breimhorst v. Educational Testing Service, No. C-99-3387 (N.D. Cal. March 27, 2001).
17. Brennan, R. L., & Saleh, D. (2002). Flagging scores for extended time on College Board standardized tests: A minority report. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
18. Burgdorf, R. L., Jr. (1997). "Substantially limited" protection from disability discrimination: The special treatment model and misconstructions of the definition of disability. Villanova Law Review, 42, 409-585.
19. Burgoyne, R. A. (1995). ADA update: Litigation and enforcement actions involving testing accommodations, fitness inquires and other issues of interest to bar examiners. Bar Examiner, 64, 6-25.
20. Burgoyne, R. A. (1999). News & events: Bartlett decision vacated and remanded. Bar Examiner, 68, 27-28.
21. Burgoyne, R. A., & Mew, C. (2001). ADA update: Bartlett V, Gonzales, Garrett, Buckhannon, and Edwards. Bar Examiner, 70, 31-38.
22. Camara, W., Copeland, T., & Rothschild, B. (1998). Effects of extended time on the SAT I: Reasoning test score growth for students with learning disabilities (College Board Research Rep. No. 98-7). New York: College Board.
23. Case, S. M. (2002). The testing column. Bar Examiner, 71, 36-38.
24. Centers for Disease Control, National Center for Health Statistics. (2002). International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF), ICF Clearinghouse News-letter. Retrieved November 2002, from www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/otheract/icd9/icfhome.htm
25. Coudroglou, A., & Poole, D. L. (1984). Disability, work, and social policy. New York: Springer.
26. Cwikel, J. (1999). Different strokes for different folks: Is one standard of disability possible? Disability and Rehabilitation, 21, 379-381.
27. D'Amico v. New York State Board of Law Examiners, 813 F. Supp. 217 (W.D.N.Y. 1993).
28. Danforth, S. (1997). On what basis hope? Modern progress and postmodern possibilities. Mental Retardation, 38, 93-106.
29. Duckworth, D. (1995). Measuring disability: The role of the ICIDH. Disability and Rehabilitation, 17, 338-343.
30. Eakin, P. (1985). The definition of disability. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 48, 106-108.
31. Eichhorn, L. (1997). Reasonable accommodations and awkward compromises: Issues concerning learning disabled students and professional schools in the law school context. Journal of Law and Education, 26, 31-63.
32. Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States & the National Board of Medical Examiners. (1997). Request for test accommodations for examinees with disabilities taking United States Medical Licensing Examination Steps 1 and 2. Philadelphia: Author.
33. Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States & the National Board of Medical Examiners. (1999). USMLE bulletin of information on computer-based testing (CBT). Philadelphia: Author.
34. Feinstein, J. (2001, May 30). Casey on the cart. The Washington Post, p. A19.
35. Feldblum, C. R. (1991). The Americans With Disabilities Act: Definition of disability. Labor Lawyer, 7, 11-26.
36. Ferrin, S. E. (2000). Seeing through a glass darkly: The Supreme Court's narrowed definition of disability. Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal, 2000, 221-224.
37. Foote, W. E. (2000). A model of psychological consultation in cases involving the Americans With Disabilities Act. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31, 190-196.
38. French, S. (1993). Disability, impairment or something in between? In J. Swain, V. Finkelstein, S. French, & M. Oliver (Eds.), Disabling barriers: Enabling environments (pp. 17-25). London: Sage.
39. Friedland, M. T. (1999). Not disabled enough: The ADA's "major life activity" definition of disability. Stanford Law Review, 52, 171-203.
40. Gonzales v. National Board of Medical Examiners, 225 F.3d 620 (6th Cir. 2000).
41. Goodman-Delahunty, J. (2000). Psychological impairment under the Americans With Disabilities Act: Legal guidelines. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31, 197-205.
42. Gordon, M., Lewandowski, L., & Keiser, S. (1999). The LD label for relatively well-functioning students: A critical analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 485-490.
43. Gordon, M., Murphy, K. R., & Keiser, S. (1998). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and test accommodations. Bar Examiner, 67, 26-36.
44. Gregg, N., Mather, N., Shaywitz, S., & Sireci, S. (2002). The flagging test scores of individuals with disabilities who are granted the accommodation of extended time: A report of the majority opinion of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Flagging. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
45. Hallowell, E. M., & Ratey J. J. (1994). Driven to distraction. New York: Random House.
46. Heywood, S. S. (1999). Without lowering the bar: Eligibility for reasonable accommodations on the bar exam for learning disabled individuals under the Americans With Disabilities Act. Georgia Law Review, 33, 603-637.
47. Joslyn, E. (1999). Disability and the health care expenditure data: A wide range of user experience is more important than standard definitions of disability. Disability and Rehabilitation, 21, 382-384.
48. Kane, M. T. (1982). The validity of licensure examinations. American Psychologist, 37, 911-918.
49. Keiser, S. (1998). Test accommodations: an administrator's view. In M. Gordon & S. Keiser (Eds.), Accommodations in higher education under the Americans With Disabilities Act: A no-nonsense guide for clinicians, educators, administrators, and lawyers (pp. 46-69). New York: Guilford Press.
50. Lanctot, C. J. (1997). Ad hoc decision making and per se prejudice: How individualizing the determination of "disability" undermines the ADA. Villanova Law Review, 42, 327-344.
51. Leo, J. (2001, June 11). Duffers in the court: The Supremes shouldn't bend rules for a disabled golfer. U.S. News and World Report, pp. 16.
52. Locke, S. S. (1997). The incredible shrinking protected class: Redefining the scope of disability under the Americans With Disabilities Act. Colorado Law Review, 68, 107-146.
53. Mayerson, A. B. (1997). Restoring regard for the "regarded as" prong: Giving effect to congressional intent. Villanova Law Review, 42, 587-612.
54. McGuire, J (1998). Educational accommodations: A university administrator's view. In M. Gordon & S. Keiser (Eds.), Accommodations in higher education under the Americans With Disabilities Act (pp. 20-45). New York: Guilford Press.
55. McKinney, M. K. (1996). The impact of the Americans With Disabilities Act on the bar examination process: The applicability of Title II and Title III to the learning disabled. Cumberland Law Review, 26, 669-689.
56. Mehlman, M. J., & Neuhauser, D. (1999). Alternative definitions of disability: Changes in a dichotomous v. continuous system. Disability and Rehabilitation, 21, 385-387.
57. Mehrens, W. A. (1987). Validity issues in teacher licensure tests. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 7, 195-229.
58. Mehrens, W. A., Millman, J., & Sackett, P. R. (1994). Accommodations for candidates with disabilities. Bar Examiner, 63, 33-47.
59. Morrissey, F. D. (1992). President's page. Bar Examiner, 63, 9-22.
60. Morrissey, F. D. (1993). The Americans With Disabilities Act: The disabling bar examination process? Bar Examiner, 63, 9-22.
61. Murphy v. United Parcel Service, 527 U.S. 576 (1999).
62. Murphy, K., & Gordon, M. (1997). ADHD as a basis for test accommodations: A primer for clinicians. ADHD Report, 5, 10-11.
63. Nadeau, K. G. (1995). Life management skills for the adult with ADD. In K. G. Nadeau (Ed.), A comprehensive guide to attention deficit disorder in adults (pp. 191-217). New York: Brunner/Mazel.
64. Neath, J. (1997). Social causes of impairment, disability and abuse: A feminist perspective. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 8, 195-230.
65. Oliver, M. (1983). Social work with disabled people. London: Macmillan.
66. Olsen, T. H., & Mathison, M. S. (1999). Who qualifies? Defining "individual with a disability" under the ADA. Bench and Bar of Minnesota, 56, 41-45.
67. Overton, G. R. (1991). Accommodation of disabled persons. Bar Examiner, 60, 6-10.
68. Pandazides v. Virginia Board of Education, 804 F. Supp. 794 (E.D. Va. 1992).
69. Pazer v. New York State Board of Law Examiners, 849 F. Supp. 284 (S.D.N.Y. 1994).
70. Pfeiffer, D. (1998). The ICIDH and the need for its revision. Disability and Society, 13, 503-523.
71. Pfeiffer, D. (1999). The problem of disability definition: Again. Disability and Rehabilitation, 21, 392-395.
72. PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin, 532 U.S. 661 (2001).
73. Phillips, S. E. (1994). High-stakes testing accommodations: Validity versus disabled rights. In B. S. Plake & J. C. Impara (Eds.), Applied measurement in education (pp. 93-120). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
74. Price, Singleton, & Morris v. National Board of Medical Examiners, 966 F. Supp. 419 (S.D.W.V. 1997).
75. Quinn, P. O. (1993). ADD and the college student. New York: Magination Press.
76. Quinn, P. O. (1995). Neurobiology of attention deficit disorder. In K. G. Nadeau (Ed.), A comprehensive guide to attention deficit disorder in adults (pp. 18-31). New York: Brunner/Mazel.
77. Ranseen, J. D. (1998). Lawyers with ADHD: The special test accommodation controversy. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 29, 450-459.
78. Ranseen, J. D. (2000). Reviewing ADHD accommodation requests: An update. Bar Examiner, 69, 6-19.
79. Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 701-797b (1988).
80. Reisine, S., & Fifield, J. (1992). Expanding the definition of disability: Implications for planning, policy, and research. Milbank Quarterly, 70, 491-508.
81. Richard, M. M. (1995). Students with attention deficit disorders in postsecondary education. In K. G. Nadeau (Ed.), A comprehensive guide to attention deficit disorder in adults (pp. 284-307). New York: Brunner/Mazel.
82. Rohrer, S. S. (2001, June 7). Disability and human decency. The Washington Post, p. A31.
83. Rotunda, R. D. (1997). The Americans With Disabilities Act, bar examinations and the Constitution: A balancing act. Bar Examiner, 66, 6-20.
84. Schur, L. A. (1999). But is it still a disability? Judicial views of mitigating measures under the ADA. Labor Law Journal, 50, 146-155.
85. Shearer, A. (1981). Disability: Whose handicap? Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
86. Silvers, A. (1996). (In)equality, (ab)normality, and the Americans With Disabilities Act. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 21, 209-224.
87. Smith, K. H. (1999). Disabilities, law schools, and law students: A proactive and holistic approach. Akron Law Review, 30, 1-85.
88. Smith, P. (2001). Inquiry cantos: Poetics of developmental disability. Mental Retardation, 39, 379-390.
89. Sparboe, S. O. (1995). Must bar examiners accommodate the disabled in the administration of bar exams? Wake Forest Law Review, 30, 391-426.
90. Spinelli, C. G. (1997). Accommodating the adolescent with attention deficit disorder: The role of the resource center teacher. Journal of Attention Disorders, 1, 209-216.
91. Stefan, S. (2001). Unequal rights: Discrimination against people with mental disabilities and the American With Disabilities Act. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
92. Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc., 527 U.S. 491 (1999).
93. Tepper, S., Sutton, J., Beatty, P., & DeJong, G. (1997). Alternative definitions of disability: Relationship to health-care expenditures. Disability and Rehabilitation, 19, 556-558.
94. Torgeson, J. K. (1998). Learning disabilities: An historical and conceptual overview. In B. Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities (pp. 3-34). San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace.
95. Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams, 534 U.S. 184 (2002).
96. Tucker, D. E. (2002). Accommodations for psychiatric disabilities on the bar examination: Perspectives from an expert reviewer. Bar Examiner, 71, 14-19.
97. United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (1992). Americans With Disabilities Act: A technical assistance manual on the employment provisions (Title 1). Washington, DC: Author.
98. Vellutino, F. R. (1994). Documenting the existence of "dyslexia." Bar Examiner, 63, 6-14.
99. Verbrugge, L. M. (1990). The iceberg of disability. In S. M. Stahl (Ed.), The legacy of longevity: Health and health care in later life (pp. 55-78). London: Sage.
100. Verbrugge, L. M., & Jette, A. M. (1993). The disablement process. Social Science Medicine, 38, 1-14.
101. Weiss, K. R. (2000, January 9). New test-taking skill: Working the system - More and more college-bound students are requesting extra time on the SAT, citing learning disabilities but in disproportionate numbers, they are rich, white and male. Los Angeles Times, p. A1.
102. Wightman, L. A. (1993). Test takers with disabilities: A summary of data from special administrations of the LSAT (LSAC Research Rep. No. 93-03). Newton, PA: Law Services.
103. Williams, W. R. (2001). Article hand-up or handout? The Americans With Disabilities Act and "unreasonable accommodation" of learning disabled bar applicants: Toward a new paradigm. Creighton Law Review, 34, 611-674.
104. Willingham, W., Ragosta, M., Bennett, R., Braun, H., Rock, D., & Powers, D. (1988). Testing handicapped people. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
105. World Health Organization. (1980). The consequences of disease. In International classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps: A manual of classification relating to the consequences of disease (pp. 23-46). Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
106. World Health Organization. (2001a). ICF checklist. Retrieved December 16, 2002, from www.who.int/icidh/
107. World Health Organization. (2001b). International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF), endorsed by the fifty-fourth World Health Assembly for international use. Retrieved December 16, 2002, from www.who.int/icidh/
108. Zuriff, G. E. (2000). Extra examination time for students with learning disabilities: An examination of the maximum potential thesis. Applied Measurement in Education, 13, 99-117.