National Survey of accommodations and alternate assessments for students who are deaf or hard of hearing in the United States

Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 337-359

  Cawthon, Stephanie W ^a,b  

^a Walden University   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; EDUCATION; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MATHEMATICS; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT; QUESTIONNAIRE; READING; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; SCHOOL; SIGN LANGUAGE; STANDARD; STATISTICS; STUDENT; UNITED STATES;

CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; DATA COLLECTION; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; HEARING IMPAIRED PERSONS; HUMANS; MATHEMATICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; READING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SCHOOLS; SIGN LANGUAGE; STUDENTS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33745632384     PISSN: 10814159     EISSN: 14657325     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/deafed/enj040     Document Type: Review

References (49)

1. Abedi, J., Courtney, M., & Leon, S. (2001). Language accommodation for large-scale assessment in science. Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation/ National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
2. Abedi, J., Lord, C., & Hofstetter, C. (1998). Impact of selected background variables on students' NAEP math performance. Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
3. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
4. Braden, J. P. (1992). Intellectual assessment of deaf and hard-of-hearing people: A quantitative and qualitative research synthesis. Psychology Review, 21(1), 82-95.
5. Braden, J. P., & Elliott, S. N. (2003). Accommodations on the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (5th ed). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition, Assessment Service Bulletin No. 2. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
6. Cawthon, S. (2004). Schools for the deaf and the No Child Left Behind Act. American Annals of the Deaf, 149(4), 314-323.
7. Cawthon, S. (in press-a). Schools for the deaf and NCLB: Integration into the accountability framework. In R. C. Johnson, M. Karchmer, & R. Mitchell (Eds.), Assessing the academic achievement of deaf students in an age of accountability. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
8. Cawthon, S. (in press-b). Pebbles in the mainstream: How do we find them? American Annals of the Deaf.
9. Clapper, A. T., Morse, A. B., Lazarus, S. S., Thompson, S. J., & Thurlow, M. L. (2005). 2003 State policies on assessment participation and accommodations for students with disabilities (synthesis report 56). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 3, 2006, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/ OnlinePubs/Synthesis56.html
10. Elliott, S. N., & Braden, J. (2000). Educational assessment and accountability for all students: Facilitating the meaningful participation of students with disabilities in district and statewide assessment programs. Madison, WI: Wisconsin State Department of Public Instruction.
11. Elliott, S. N., Braden, J. P., & White, J. (2001). Assessing one and all: Educational accountability and students with disabilities. Alexandria, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
12. Elliott, S. N., Kratochwill, T. R., & McKevitt, B. (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.
13. Elliott, S. N., McKevitt, B., & Kettler, R. (2002). Testing accommodations research and decision-making: The case of "good" scores being highly valued but difficult to achieve for all students. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 35, 153-166.
14. Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2001). Helping teachers formulate sound test accommodation decisions for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 16(3), 174-181.
15. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S. B., Hamlett, C. L., Binkley, E., & Crouch, R. (2000). Using objective data sources to enhance teacher judgments about test accommodations. Exceptional Children, 67(1), 67-81.
16. 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 sources. School Psychology Review, 29(1), 65-85.
17. Gallaudet Research Institute. (2005, January). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2003-2004 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth. Washington, DC: GRI, Gallaudet University.
18. Horvath, L. S., Kampfer-Bohach, S., & Kearns, J. F. (2005). The use of accommodations among students with deaf-blindness in large-scale assessment systems. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 16(3), 177-187.
19. Huynh, H., Meyer, J. P., & Gallant, D. (2004). Comparability of student performance between regular and oral administrators for a high-stakes mathematics test. Applied Measurement in Education, 17(1), 39-57.
20. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq. (2001).
21. Jarrell, D. (2005). Five commonsense fixes for NCLB. American School Board Journal, 192, 66-67. Retrieved October 7, 2005, from the Academic Search Premier database.
22. Johnson, E. S., Kimball, K., & Brown, S. O. (2001). American sign language as an accommodation during standards-based assessments. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 26(2), 39-47.
23. Johnson, E. S., Kimball, K., Brown, S.O., & Anderson,D. (2001). A state wide review of the use of accommodations in large-scale, high-staked assessments. Exceptional Children, 67(2),251-264.
24. Karkee, K., Lewis, D., Barton, K., & Huang, C. (2003). The effect of including or excluding students with testing accommodations on IRT calibrations. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago, IL.
25. Koretz, D., & Barton, K. (2003). Assessing students with disabilities: Issues and evidence. Technical report for the Center for the Study of Evaluation, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards and Student Testing, Los Angeles.
26. Koretz, D., & Hamilton, L. (1999). Assessing students with disabilities in Kentucky: The effects of accommodations, format, and subject (report no. CSE-TR-498). Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation.
27. Koretz, D., & Hamilton, L. (2001). The performance of students with disabilities on New York's revised regents comprehensive examination in English (technical report No. 540). Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation.
28. McDonnell, L.M., McLaughlin, M.J., & Morison,P. (Eds.). (1997). Educating one and all: Students with disabilities and standards-based reform. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
29. McKevitt, B., & Elliott, S. N. (2003). Effects and perceived consequences of using read aloud and teacher-recommended testing accommodations on a reading achievement test. The School Psychology Review, 32(4), 583-600.
30. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741-749.
31. Minnema, J., Thurlow, M., Anderson, M., & Stone, K. (2005). English language learners with disabilities and large-scale assessments: What the literature can tell us (ELLs with disabilities report 6). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 3, 2006, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/ OnlinePubs/ELLsDisReport6.html
32. Minnema, J., Thurlow, M., Bielinksi, J., & Scott, J. (2000). Past and present understandings of out-of-level testing: A research synthesis (out-of-level testing project report 1). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 3, 2006, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/OOLT1.html
33. Mitchell, R. (2004). National profile of deaf and hard of hearing students in special education from weighted survey results. American Annals of the Deaf, 149(4), 336-349.
34. National Center on Educational Outcomes (2005). State policies on out-of-level testing. Retrieved January 3, 2006, from http://education.umn.edu/nceo/TopicAreas/OutOfLevel/StatesOOLT.htm
35. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq. (2002).
36. Phillips, S. E. (1994). High-stakes testing accommodations: Validity versus disabled rights. Applied Measurement in Education, 7(2), 93-120.
37. Popham, W. J. (2005). AYP wriggle room running out. Educational Leadership, 63, 85-87. Retrieved October 7, 2005, from the Academic Search Premier database.
38. Reese, C., Miller, K., Mazzeo, J., & Dossey, J. (1997). 1996 Mathematics report card for the nation and the states. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
39. Roeber, E. (2002). Setting standards on alternate assessments (synthesis report 42). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved March 22, 2006, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Synthesis42.html
40. Shriner, J., & DeStefano, L. (2003). Participation and accommodation in state assessment: The role of individualized education programs. Exceptional Children, 69(2), 147-161.
41. Sullivan, P., & Schulte, L. (1992). Factor analysis of WISC-R with deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Psychological Assessment, 4(4), 537-540.
42. Thompson, S., & Thurlow, M. (2003). 2003 State special education outcomes: Marching on. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 3, 2006, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/2003StateReport.htm
43. Thurlow, M., & Bolt, S. (2001). Empirical support for accommodations most often allowed in state policy (synthesis report 41). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 3, 2006, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/ Synthesis41.html
44. Thurlow, M., & Minnema, J. (2001). States' out-of-level testing policies (out-of-level testing project report 4). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 3, 2006, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/OOLT4.html
45. Thurlow, M., Ysseldyke, J., Bielenski, J., House, A., Trimble, S. Insko, B., & Owens, C. (2000). Instructional and Assessment Accommodations in Kentucky (State Assessment Series, Maryland/Kentucky Report 7). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
46. Tindal, G., & Fuchs, L. (2000). A summary of research on test changes: An empirical basis for defining accommodations. Report for the Mid-South Regional Resource Center, Lexington, KY.
47. Traxler, C. (2000). The Stanford Achievement Test (9th edition): National norming and performance standards for deaf and hard-of-hearing students. Washington, DC: Gallaudet Research Institute.
48. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Special Education Programs. (2003). 25th Annual (2003) Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (Vol. 1). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
49. Wiley, H. I., Thurlow, M. L., & Klein, J. A. (2005). Steady progress: State public reporting practices for students with disabilities after the first year of NCLB (2002-2003) (technical report 40). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 3, 2006, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/ Technical40.htm