Shobe, R. E. (2020). Striving for the ideal: Technology’s role in creating accessible tests for students with disabilities (Publication No. 28027579) [Doctoral dissertation, Pepperdine University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2436894569

Pepperdine University (Malibu, CA), Department of Learning Technologies; ProQuest document ID: 2436894569

This qualitative study sought educators' perspectives about a new set of assessments developed with the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and making use of a number of embeded test accessibility features and accommodations in the online test administration platform. Specific accommodations were not singled out for comment, but rather, the focus was on the educators' attitudes toward and use of the SBAC as a whole; however, some accommodative features were discussed in study findings. The description of the process for the development of the SBAC was that it was a set of Technology Enabled Assessments designed with Universal Design principles (TEA-UD).

Interviewees were four educators from three school districts in Oregon (U.S.) who had roles in selecting accommodations for students with disabilities completing Oregon's state assessments on English language arts and mathematics, as developed by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC). The educators included a special education teacher, a speech-language pathologist, a specialist in assistive technology and educational technology, and a person who was both a special education liaison and learning specialist. 

Educators' perspectives pertaining to a new state assessment, designed with the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC), were attained and analyzed through a researcher created interview protocol.

The analysis of the interviews with educators yielded themes describing Oregon's state assessments on English language arts and mathematics, as developed by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC), which employed Technology Enabled Assessment with Universal Design (TEA-UD). Educators in three districts in Oregon characterized the new set of assessments as an improvement over previous computer-delivered standardized assesssments in the degree to which they were accessible to students with disabilities. They identified specific accommodations provided during the SBAC, indicating strengths and concerns about them. Text-to-speech on the SBAC has improved in that the rate and volume can be adjusted by each student to address individual needs and preferences, and students can use this support independently, that is, without needing a live human reader. On color contrast, because the screen's background color can be customized, students with disabilities including students with dyslexia could be supported. For at least one educator, the speech-to-text tool was not working properly, so it required staff support to submit student responses that were transcribed by the software; another educator noted that the predictive text feature was not particularly beneficial. Educators indicated that the accommodations provided through the technology-enabled format addressed accessibility needs of students who had difficulties such as distractibility, test anxiety, and limited perseverance on academic tasks. They also expressed broad positive perceptions that embedded test accommodations influenced accommodations decision-making, especially four of 11 factors: accommodations by type, education of decision-makers, classroom accommodations, and resources. The principles of universal design were reviewed, and educators indicated that the SBAC provides equitable and flexible use, and did not require substantial physical effort, yet did not seem simple and intuitive but rather required students to have familiarity, and even fluency, with technology. For instance, educators noted that the click-and-drag and other task features might not be measuring content but rather might be adding a barrier of higher degree of problem-solving and perseverance on tests that can be more challenging and even frustrating for some students with disabilities. In addition, the icons depicting the available tools—but without auditory explanations—required students to be well-prepared and to have already developed test-taking skills that might not be in elementary students' experience. Limitations of the study were reported, and future research directions were suggested.