Lazarus, S., Thompson, S., & Thurlow, M. (2006). How students access accommodations in assessment and instruction: Results of a survey of special education teachers (EPRRI Issue Brief No. 7). Educational Policy Reform Research Institute. http://www.education.umd.edu/EDSP/eprri/products_research.html#IB7

Report

Lazarus, S., Thompson, S., & Thurlow, M. (2006). How students access accommodations in assessment and instruction: Results of a survey of special education teachers (EPRRI Issue Brief No. 7). Educational Policy Reform Research Institute. http://www.education.umd.edu/EDSP/eprri/products_research.html#IB7

Tags

Educator survey; No age; No disability; U.S. context

URL

http://www.education.umd.edu/EDSP/eprri/products_research.html#IB7

Summary

Accommodation

Use and implementation practices for various accommodations were studied in this teacher survey project.

Participants

Special education teachers (total=798) from elementary (N=426), middle (N=179), high (N=164), and multiple levels (N=29) from 8 school districts throughout California, Maryland, New York, and Texas (U.S.) responded to a survey about accommodations use and decision-making practices.

Dependent Variable

A survey for teachers was designed to inquire about accommodations use and practices. The survey had 9 questions, including those requesting selected response and open-ended response.

Findings

Teachers reported about their frequently providing 22 different assessment accommodations. The largest number of respondents indicated that they frequently provide extended time (73%); other commonly endorsed accommodations include small group/individual administration (62%), test items read aloud (57%), and test directions read aloud (56%). Proportions of teachers at different grade levels were also detailed. Teacher knowledge of whether various accommodations were considered standard or non-standard (inconsistent with state policy) varied.
Factors considered when assigning assessment accommodations were reported, including averages across the 8 school districts: student abilities (60%), accommodations used for instruction (57%), those documented on IEP (29%), students' disability classifications (12%), and student input (1%). Other factors were also reported. Recommendations were offered to state education agencies and school districts to improve the accommodations decision-making process.