Siskind, T. G. (1993). Teachers’ knowledge about test modifications for students with disabilities . Diagnostique , 18 (2), 145–157.

Journal Article

Siskind, T. G. (1993). Teachers’ knowledge about test modifications for students with disabilities. Diagnostique, 18(2), 145–157.


Acoustics; At time beneficial to student; Braille; Calculation chart (static); Calculation device or software (interactive); Clarify directions; Dictated response; Dictated response (scribe); Elementary; Enlarged print (on paper); Extended time; High school; Individual; Layout/organization of test items; Lighting; Line reading device or software; Magnification device or software; Manipulatives; Mark answer in test booklet; Middle school; Multiple day; Oral delivery; Oral delivery of directions only; Recorded delivery (audio or video); Signed administration; Small group; Specialized setting; Teacher survey; Text-to-speech device/software; U.S. context; Visual cues; Word processing (for writing)



The accommodations examined were several, and were termed "modifications." These accommodations were sorted into categories: test setting (e.g., small group testing), test scheduling (e.g., extended time), revised test directions (e.g., repeat directions), revised test format (e.g., video cassette), revised answer mode (e.g., dictate answers), and mechanical and non-mechanical aids (e.g., electronic readers, place markers) .


Participants were 60 teachers in South Carolina, including 43 special education teachers and 17 regular education teachers. Demographic data including gender and age were reported. Other data about school setting, level, and teacher experience were also detailed.

Dependent Variable

The survey listing 51 test "modifications" inquired about teachers' knowledge of state policies on these accommodations (such as extended time and small group setting). The primary point was to identify which accommodations were allowed and which were disallowed.


The results of the surveys were reported by accommodation as well as by teacher group (general vs. special education). For instance, 100% were correct about noise buffers, and fewer than 10% were correct about videocassette. On the 51-item test, the mean correct was 29, and more than half of the participants answered 21 items incorrectly. Additional detail was reported on proportion of the accommodations correct in the accommodation categories. Comparison of accuracy by teacher group (general education vs. special education) was analyzed, and yielded that special educators were significantly more correct than regular educators regarding only test scheduling accommodations. Limitations of the analyses were reported.