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/
Also located on ERIC at https://eric.ed.gov/?q=ED455287
Students with disabilities received a variety of accommodations according to their individual needs. These included extended-time, separate location, reading/clarifying directions, having the entire test read-aloud, spelling and/or grammar checker, and a scribe or tape-recorder, and "other accommodations." Many students received more than one of these accommodations.
Participants were 8,750 grade 12 students from three samples of New York (U.S.) schools used in a field test of the Regents Examination. Schools were chosen such that there were equal numbers of students of different performance categories in each sample. A variety of community types and geographic regions in New York were also included in each sample of schools. 563 (6.4%) of the students who participated had at least one disability. The authors suggest that many students with disabilities from the sample schools may have been excluded from the field test. A variety of disabling conditions were included in the sample (learning disability, hearing impairment, other health impairment, visual impairment, emotional disability, etc.). The majority of students with disabilities had learning disabilities, and results for this group of students were frequently provided separately in the results section of this report.
The New York Regents Comprehensive Examination in English was used as the dependent variable. This included multiple-choice and open-response items.
Overall, performance was roughly similar for students with disabilities regardless of whether they received accommodations. Extended-time was found to benefit students with disabilities on open response items. Accommodated scores did not appear implausibly high. A variety of limitations of the study are discussed (e.g., small sample, potential of exclusion of students with disabilities from field test, etc.)