Effects of an oral testing accommodation on the mathematics performance of secondary students with and without learning disabilities

Journal of Special Education

Volumn 40, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 218-229

  Elbaum, Batya ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847065989     PISSN: 00224669     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/00224669070400040301     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Calhoon, M. B., Fuchs, L. S., & Hamlett, C. L. (2000). Effects of computer-based test accommodations on mathematics performance assessments for secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 23(4), 271-282.
2. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Cooper, H. (1998). Synthesizing research: A guide for literature reviews (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4. Dale, E., & O'Rourke, J. (1979). The living word vocabulary: The words we know. Elgin, IL: Field Enterprises Educational Corp.
5. Edgemon, E., Jablonski, B., & Lloyd, J. (2006). Large-scale assessments: A teacher's guide to making decisions about accommodations. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(3), 6-11.
6. Elbaum, B., Arguelles, M. E., Campbell, Y., & Saleh, M. B. (2004). Effects of a student-reads-aloud accommodation on the performance of students with and without learning disabilities on a test of reading comprehension. Exceptionality, 12(2), 71-87.
7. 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.
8. Harcourt Educational Measurement. (1996). Stanford achievement test (9th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Author.
9. Fuchs, L. (2000). The validity of test accommodations for students with learning disabilities: Differential item performance on reading and mathematics tests as a function of test accommodations and disability status. Wilmington: Delaware Department of Education.
10. 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.
11. Helwig, R., Rozek-Tedesco, M., & Tindal, G. (2002). An oral versus a standard administration of a large-scale mathematics test. The Journal of Special Education, 36(1), 39-47.
12. Helwig, R., Rozek-Tedesco, M., Tindal, G., Heath, B., & Almond, P. (1999). Reading as an access to mathematics problem solving on multiple-choice tests for sixth-grade students. The Journal of Educational Research, 93(2), 113-125.
13. Helwig, R., & Tindal, G. (2003). An experimental analysis of accommodation decisions on large-scale mathematics tests. Exceptional Children, 69, 211-225.
14. 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.
15. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. (1997)
16. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. P.L. 108-446. Retrieved January 16, 2006, from: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/ cgibin/getdoc.cgi?dbname= 108_cong_public_laws&docid=f: publ446.108
17. Johnson, E. (2000). The effects of accommodations on performance assessments. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 261-267.
18. 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.
19. Meloy, L., Deville, C., & Frisbie, D. (2000). 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.
20. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. 70 § 6301 et seq. (2002)(Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965)
21. Phillips, S. E. (1994). High stakes testing accommodations: Validity versus disabled rights. Applied Measurement in Education, 7(2), 93-120.
22. Pomplun, M., & Omar, M. H. (2000). Score comparability of a state mathematics assessment across students with and without reading accommodations. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 21-29.
23. Schulte, A. A., Elliott, S. N., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2001). Effects of testing accommodations on students' standardized mathematics test scores: An experimental analysis. School Psychology Review, 30, 527-547.
24. Sireci, S., Scarpati, S., & Li, S. (2005). Test accommodations for students with disabilities: An analysis of the interaction hypothesis. Review of Educational Research, 75(4), 457-490.
25. Thompson, S. J., Johnstone, C. J., & Thurlow, M. L. (2002). Universal design applied to large scale assessments (Synthesis Report 44). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 16, 2006, from: http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/ OnlinePubs/Synthesis44.html
26. Thompson, S. J., Johnstone, C. J., Thurlow, M. L., & Altman, J. R. (2005). 2005 state special education outcomes: Steps forward in a decade of change. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 11, 2006, from: http://education.umn. edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/2005StateReport.htm/
27. Thurlow, M., & Bolt, S. (2001). Empirical support for accommodations most often allowed in state policy (Synthesis Report 41). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota National Center on Educational Outcomes.
28. Thurlow, M., House, A., Scott, D., & Ysseldyke, J. (2000). Students with disabilities in large-scale assessments: State participation and accommodation policies. The Journal of Special Education, 34(3), 154-163.
29. Thurlow, M. L., McGrew, K. S., Tindal, G., Thompson, S. J., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Elliott, J. L. (2000). Assessment accommodations research: Considerations for design and analysis (Technical Report 26). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
30. Tindal, G. (2002). Accommodating mathematics testing using a videotaped, read-aloud administration. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
31. Tindal, G., & Fuchs, L. (1999). A summary of research on test changes: An empirical basis for defining accommodations. Unpublished manuscript, Lexington, KY: Mid-South Regional Resource Center.
32. 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.
33. Weston, T. J. (2002). The validity of oral accommodation in testing (NCES 200306). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.