Accommodations for Students with Disabilities Bibliography: Database

Search Filters

Keywords
% of Sample with Disability
Intended audience
Data collection instrument(s)
Technique(s) used in data analysis

Search Results

935 results.

  • Kim, D. H., Schneider, C., & Siskind, T. (2009). Examining the underlying factor structure of a statewide science test under oral and standard administrations. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27(4), 323–333. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282908328632

    Detail

  • Kim, D., & Huynh, H. (2007). Comparability of computer and paper-and-pencil versions of algebra and biology assessments. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 6(4). https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/jtla/issue/archive

    Detail

  • Kim, D., Schneider, C., & Siskind, T. (2009). Examining equivalence of accommodations on a statewide elementary-level science test. Applied Measurement in Education, 22(2), 144–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957340902754619

    Detail

  • Kim, J. S. (2012). The effect of “read-aloud” as a test accommodation for students with visual impairments in South Korea. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 106(6), 356–361. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1210600605

    Detail

  • Kim, W. H., & Lee, J. (2016). The effect of accommodation on academic performance of college students with disabilities. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 60(1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034355215605259

    Detail

  • Kim, Y. S. G. (2016). Do live versus audio-recorded narrative stimuli influence young children’s narrative comprehension and retell quality? Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 47(1), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_LSHSS-15-0027

    Detail

  • Kingston, N. M. (2009). Comparability of computer- and paper-administered multiple-choice tests for K–12 populations: A synthesis. Applied Measurement in Education, 22(1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957340802558326

    Detail
  • Kisanga, S. E., & Kisanga, D. H. (2022). The role of assistive technology devices in fostering the participation and learning of students with visual impairment in higher education institutions in Tanzania. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 17(7), 791–800. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2020.1817989
    Detail

  • Klehm, M. (2014). The effects of teacher beliefs on teaching practices and achievement of students with disabilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37(3), 216–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406414525050

    Detail
  • Knoth, S. K. (2006). Essential accommodations for students with sensory impairments: Perceptions from the field (Publication No. 3238405) [Doctoral dissertation, Ball State University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://www.proquest.com/docview/305357845
    Detail
  • Ko, S., & Petty, L. S. (2022). Assistive technology accommodations for post-secondary students with mental health disabilities: A scoping review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 17(7), 760–766. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2020.1815087
    Detail

  • Kobrin, J. L., & Young, J. W. (2003). The cognitive equivalence of reading comprehension test items via computerized and paper-and-pencil administration. Applied Measurement in Education, 16(2), 115–140. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324818AME1602_2

    Detail

  • Koegel, L. K., Koegel, R. L., & Smith, A. (1997). Variables related to differences in standardized test outcomes for children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 27(3), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025894213424

    Detail

  • Koller, E. Z., & Mulhern, T. J. (1977). Use of a pocket calculator to train arithmetic skills with trainable adolescents. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 12(4), 332–335. http://www.daddcec.com/etadd.html

    Detail

  • Kong, X., Davis, L. L., McBride, Y., & Morrison, K. (2018). Response time differences between computers and tablets. Applied Measurement in Education, 31(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2017.1391261

    Detail
  • Koretz, D. (1997). The assessment of students with disabilities in Kentucky (CSE Report No. 431). University of California, Los Angeles, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California, Los Angeles. https://cresst.org/publications/cresst-publication-2803/
    Detail
  • Koretz, D., & Hamilton, L. (1999). Assessing students with disabilities in Kentucky: The effects of accommodations, format, and subject (CSE Report No. 498). University of California, Los Angeles, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST). https://cresst.org/publications/cresst-publication-2870/
    Detail

  • Koretz, D., & Hamilton, L. (2000). Assessment of students with disabilities in Kentucky: Inclusion, student performance, and validity. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(3), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737022003255

    Detail
  • Koretz, D., & Hamilton, L. (2001). The performance of students with disabilities on New York’s Revised Regents Comprehensive Examination in English (CSE Report No. 540). University of California, Los Angeles, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST). https://cresst.org/publications/cresst-publication-2912/
    Detail
  • Kosciolek, S., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (2000). Effects of a reading accommodation on the validity of a reading test (Technical Report No. 28). University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. https://nceo.info/Resources/publications/OnlinePubs/Technical28.htm
    Detail