Test accommodations for students with disabilities: An analysis of the interaction hypothesis

Review of Educational Research

Volumn 75, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 457-490

  Sireci, Stephen G ^a   Scarpati, Stanley E ^a   Li, Shuhong ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

Interaction hypothesis; Standardized tests; Students with disabilities; Test accommodations; Validity

Indexed keywords

EID: 29144517640     PISSN: 00346543     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/00346543075004457     Document Type: Review

References (48)

1. Alster, E. (1997). The effects of extended time on algebra tests scores for college students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 222-227.
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3. Bridgeman, B., Trapani, C., & Curley, E. (2004). Impact of fewer questions per section on SAT I scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 291-310.
4. Brown, P. J., & Augustine, A. (2001, April). Screen reading software as an assessment accommodation: Implications for instruction and student performance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
5. Calhoon, M. B., Fuchs, L. S., & Hamlett, C. L. (2000, Fall). Effects of computer-based test accommodations on mathematics performance assessments for secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 23(4), 271-282.
6. Camara, W., Copeland, T., & Rothchild, B. (1998). Effects of extended time on the SAT I: Reasoning Test: Score growth for students with learning disabilities (College Board Research Report 98-7). New York: The College Board.
7. Chiu, C. W. T., & Pearson, P. D. (1999, June). Synthesizing the effects of test accommodations for special education and limited English proficient students. Paper presented at the National Conference on Large Scale Assessment, Snowbird, UT.
8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Dolan, R. P., & Hall, T. E. (2001). Universal Design for Learning: Implications for large-scale assessment. IDEA Perspectives, 27(4), 22-25.
10. Elliott, S. N., Kratochwill, T. R., & McKevitt, B. C. (2001). Experimental analysis of the effects of testing accommodations on the scores of students with and without disabilities. Journal of School Psychology, 39, 3-24.
11. Elliott, S. N., & Marquart, A. M. (2004). Extended time as a testing accommodation: Its effects and perceived consequences. Exceptional Children, 70, 349-367.
12. Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2001). Helping teachers formulate sound test accommodation decisions for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 174-181.
13. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S. B., Hamlett, C. L., Binkley, E., & Crouch, R. (2000, Fall). Using objective data sources to enhance teacher judgments about test accommodations. Exceptional Children, 67, 67-81.
14. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S. B., Hamlett, C. L., & Karns, K. M. (2000). Supplementing teacher judgments of mathematics test accommodations with objective data. School Psychology Review, 29, 65-85.
15. Geisinger, K. F. (1994). Psychometric issues in testing students with disabilities. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 121-140.
16. Geisinger, K. F. (2000). Psychological testing at the end of the millennium: A brief historical review. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31, 117-188.
17. Green, P., & Sireci, S. G. (1999). Legal and psychometric issues in testing students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 12(2), 21-29.
18. Helwig, R., & Tindal, G. (2003). An experimental analysis of accommodation decisions on large-scale mathematics tests. Exceptional Children, 69, 211-225.
19. Huesman, R. L., & Frisbie, D. (2000, April). The validity of ITBS reading comprehension test scores for learning disabled and non-learning disabled students under extended-time conditions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans.
20. Huynh, H., Meyer, P., & Gallant, D. J. (2004). Comparability of student performance between regular and oral administrations for a high-stakes mathematics test. Applied Measurement in Education, 17, 39-57.
21. Johnson, E. (2000). The effects of accommodations on performance assessments. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 261-267.
22. Johnson, E., Kimball, K., Brown, S. O., & Anderson, D. (2001). A statewide review of the use of accommodations in large-scale, high stakes assessments. Exceptional Children, 67, 251-264.
23. Koenig, J. A. (Ed.) (2002). Reporting test results for students with disabilities and English language learners: Summary of a workshop. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
24. Koenig, J. A., & Bachman, L. F. (Eds.). (2004). Keeping score for all: The effects of inclusion and accommodation policies on large-scale educational assessments. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
25. Koretz, D., & Hamilton, L. (2000). Assessment of students with disabilities in Kentucky: Inclusion, student performance, and validity. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22, 255-272.
26. Koretz, D., & Hamilton, L. (2001, April). The performance of students with disabilities on New York's Revised Regents Comprehensive Examination in English. Center for the Study of Evaluation (CSE Technical Report 540).
27. Kosciolek, S., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (2000). Effects of a reading accommodation on the validity of a reading test (Technical Report 28). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 2003 from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/ Technical28.htm
28. McKevitt, B. C., & Elliott, S. N. (2003). Effects and perceived consequences of using read-aloud and teacher-recommended accommodations on a reading achievement test. School Psychology Review, 32, 583-600.
29. Meloy, L., Deville, C., & Frisbie, D. (2002). The effect of a read aloud accommodation on test scores of students with and without a learning disability in reading. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 248-255.
30. Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
31. Phillips, S. E. (1994). High-stakes testing accommodations: Validity versus disabled rights. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 93-120. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
32. Pitoniak, M., & Royer, J. (Spring 2001). Testing accommodations for examinees with disabilities: A review of psychometric, legal, and social policy issues. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 53-104.
33. Runyan, M. K. (1991). The effect of extra time on reading comprehension scores for university students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 104-108.
34. Scarpati, S. (1991). Current perspectives in the assessment of the handicapped. In R. K. Hambleton & J. N. Zall (Eds.), Advances in educational and psychological testing (pp. 251-276). Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
35. Scarpati, S. (2003). Test accommodations for disabilities. Encyclopedia of psychological assessment (pp. 957-960). London: Sage.
36. Schulte, A. A., Elliott, S. N., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2001, March). Effects of testing accommodations on students' standardized mathematics test scores: An experimental analysis. School Psychology Review, 30, 527-547.
37. Shepard, L., Taylor, G., & Betebenner, D. (1998). Inclusion of limited-English-proficient students in Rhode Island's Grade 4 mathematics performance assessment. Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
38. Sireci, S. G. (2005). Unlabeling the disabled: A psychometric perspective on flagging scores from accommodated test administrations. Educational Researcher, 34(1), 3-12.
39. Sireci, S. G., & Geisinger, K. F. (1998). Equity issues in employment testing. In J. H. Sandoval, C. Frisby, K. F. Geisinger, J. Scheuneman, & J. Ramos-Grenier (Eds.), Test interpretation and diversity (pp. 105-140). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
40. Sireci, S. G., Li, S., & Scarpati, S. (2003). The effects of test accommodations on test performance: A review of the literature. Center for Educational Assessment Research Report No. 485, Amherst, MA: School of Education, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
41. Thompson, S., Blount, A., & Thurlow, M. (2002). A summary of research on the effects of test accommodations: 1999 through 2001 (Technical Report 34). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 2003 from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/ Technical34.htm
42. 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(4), 439-450.
43. Trimble, S. (1998). Performance trends and use of accommodations on a statewide assessment: Students with disabilities in the KIRIS On-Demand Assessments from 1992-93 through 1995-96 (State Assessment Series, Maryland/Kentucky Report). National Center on Educational Outcomes, Minneapolis, MN; Maryland State Department of Education, Baltimore.
44. Weston, T. J. (2002). The validity of oral accommodation in testing (NCES 200306). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
45. Willingham, W. W., Ragosta, M., Bennett, R. E., Braun, H., Rock, D. A., & Powers, D. E. (1988). Testing handicapped people. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
46. Ziomek, R. L., & Andrews, K. M. (1998). ACT Assessment Score gains of special-tested students who tested at least twice (Report No. ACT-RR-98-8). Iowa City, IA: ACT Research Report Series.
47. Zurcher, R., & Bryant, D. P. (2001) The validity and comparability of entrance examination scores after accommodations are made for students with LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(5), 462-471.
48. Zuriff, G. E. (2000). Extra examination time for students with learning disabilities: An examination of the maximum potential thesis. Applied Measurement in Education, 73(1), 99-117.