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. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2000.12085998

Students completed various math curriculum-based measures (CBMs) under a variety of conditions. Computation CBMs were administered in standard fashion and with extended-time. Concepts and applications CBMs were administered in standard fashion, with extended-time, with calculators, and with reading text aloud to students (read-aloud). Problem-solving CBMs were administered in standard fashion, with extended-time, with calculators, with reading text aloud (read-aloud) to students, and with encoding (writing responses for students upon request). Some of the conditions included more than one accommodation at a time (e.g. calculator and extended-time, extended-time and read-aloud). In another phase of the study, students were either randomly assigned to accommodations or accommodations were provided that were based on The Dynamic Assessment of Test Accommodations (DATA).

Four-hundred students in grades 4 and 5 participated, including 200 without a learning disability (LD) and 200 with LD (50% of sample) from 20 different schools in an unidentified state (U.S.). Of the students without LD, 52% were male, 39% were African American, 55% were European American, and 6% were Asian American. Demographics on students with LD are provided in charts in the article; that is, demographic information is nested within conditions of the experiment for students with LD.

Two alternate forms of computation CBMs, four alternate forms of concepts and applications CBMs, and five alternate forms of problem-solving CBMs, all at the third grade level, were used as dependent variables. Data were also collected in the form of teacher questionnaires, and large-scale achievement tests—Stanford Achievement Test (SAT) and Iowa Test of Basic Skills.

Students with learning disabilities profited significantly more than students without LD from the extended-time, read-aloud, and encoding accommodations on problem-solving CBMs, but did not profit from accommodations on conventional CBMs (i.e., computations, concepts and applications). Effects for calculators on problem-solving CBMs were marginally significant. Students without LD profited nearly significantly more than students with LD from extended-time on both computations and concepts and applications CBMs. Teachers were found to over-provide accommodations, and CBM accommodation boosts (assessed through DATA) predicted differential performance on large-scale assessments and supplemented teacher judgments in important ways.