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

904 results.
  • Beddow, P. A. (2011). Effects of testing accommodations and item modifications on students’ performance: An experimental investigation of test accessibility strategies (Publication No. 3479839) [Doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. http://etd.library.vanderbilt.edu/available/etd-02092011-230046/unrestricted/Beddow.pdf

    Detail
  • Ben-Yehudah, G., & Brann, A. (2019). Pay attention to digital text: The impact of the media on text comprehension and self-monitoring in higher-education students with ADHD. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 89, 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2019.04.001
    Detail
  • Bennett, R. E., Braswell, J., Oranje, A., Sandene, B., Kaplan, B., & Yan, F. (2008). Does it matter if I take my mathematics test on computer? A second empirical study of mode effects in NAEP. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 6(9). http://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/jtla/article/view/1639/1472

    Detail
  • Bennett, R. E., Rock, D. A., & Jirele, T. (1987). GRE score level, test completion, and reliability for visually impaired, physically handicapped, and non handicapped groups. The Journal of Special Education, 21(3), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246698702100303

    Detail
  • Bennett, R. E., Rock, D. A., & Kaplan, B. A. (1987). SAT differential item performance for nine handicapped groups. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1987.tb00260.x

    Detail
  • Bennett, R. E., Rock, D. A., & Novatkoski, I. (1989). Differential item functioning on the SAT-M Braille edition. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26(1), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1989.tb00319.x

    Detail
  • Berger, C., & Lewandowski, L. (2013). The effect of a word processor as an accommodation for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Writing Research, 4(3), 300–318. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2013.04.03.2

    Detail
  • Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Augsburger, A., & Garcia, N. (2009). Comparison of pen and keyboard transcription modes in children with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32(3), 123–141. https://journals.sagepub.com/home/ldq
    Detail
  • Bettencourt, G. M., Kimball, E., & Wells, R. S. (2018). Disability in postsecondary STEM learning environments: What faculty focus groups reveal about definitions and obstacles to effective support. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 31(4), 383–396. https://www.ahead.org/professional-resources/publications/jped
    Detail
  • Bielinski, J., Sheinker, A., & Ysseldyke, J. (2003). Varied opinions on how to report accommodated test scores: Findings based on CTB/McGraw-Hill’s framework for classifying accommodations (Synthesis Report No. 49). University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. https://nceo.info/Resources/publications/OnlinePubs/Synthesis49.html
    Detail
  • Bielinski, J., Thurlow, M., Ysseldyke, J., Freidebach, J., & Freidebach, M. (2001). Read-aloud accommodations: Effects on multiple-choice reading and math items (Technical Report No. 31). University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. https://nceo.info/Resources/publications/OnlinePubs/Technical31.htm
    Detail
  • Bielinski, J., Ysseldyke, J. E., Bolt, S., Freidebach, J., & Freidebach, M. (2001). Prevalence of accommodations for students with disabilities participating in a statewide testing program. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 26(2), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/073724770102600205
    Detail
  • Bishop-Temple, C. (2007). The effects of interactive read-alouds on the reading achievement of middle grade reading students in a core remedial program (Publication No. 3287381) [Doctoral dissertation, Florida Atlantic University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://www.proquest.com/docview/304848275
    Detail
  • Blanding, K. M., Richards, J., Bradley-Johnson, S., & Johnson, M. J. (1994). The effect of token reinforcement on McCarthy Scale performance for white preschoolers of low and high social position. Journal of Behavioral Education, 4(1), 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01560507

    Detail
  • Blaskey, P., Scheiman, M., Parisi, M., Ciner, E. B., Gallaway, M., & Selznick, R. (1990). The effectiveness of Irlen Filters for improving reading performance: A pilot study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23(10), 604–612. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949002301007

    Detail
  • Boeltzig-Brown, H. (2017). Disability and career services provision for students with disabilities at institutions of higher education in Japan: An overview of key legislation, policies, and practices. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 30(1), 61–81. https://www.ahead.org/professional-resources/publications/jped
    Detail
  • Bohack, K. (2021). The effect of computer familiarity on computer-based assessment in mathematics (Publication No. 28317900) [Doctoral dissertation, Hofstra University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2494876201
    Detail
  • Bolt, S. E. (2004). Examining empirical evidence for several commonly held beliefs and disputes about testing accommodations (Publication No. 3134567) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://www.proquest.com/docview/305157951
    Detail
  • Bolt, S. E. (2004, April 13). Using DIF analyses to examine several commonly-held beliefs about testing accommodations for students with disabilities [Paper presentation]. Annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Diego, CA, United States. https://nceo.umn.edu/docs/Presentations/NCME04bolt.pdf

    Detail
  • Bolt, S. E., & Thurlow, M. (2004). Five of the most frequently allowed testing accommodations in state policy: Synthesis of research. Remedial and Special Education, 25(3), 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325040250030201

    Detail