A National Survey of General Education Teachers' Perceptions of Testing Adaptations

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to survey the perceptions of general education teachers nationwide, particularly as they relate to making testing adaptations for students with disabilities. A survey was sent to 708 general education teachers nationwide. The return rate was 56.6% (N= 401). The specific testing adaptations that were rated as being most helpful for students with disabilities were (a) giving individual help with directions during tests, (b) reading test questions to students, and (c) simplifying wording of test questions. Similarly, the specific testing adaptations that were rated as being most easy to make were (a) using black-and-white copies, (b) providing extra space on tests for answering, (c) giving practice questions as a study guide, (d) giving open-book/notes tests, and (e) giving individual help with directions during tests.In addition, a total of 247 (66.6%) general education teachers indicated that it was not fair to make testing adaptations only for students with disabilities, whereas 124 (33.4%) respondents indicated that it was fair. Other results of the study, limitations of the study, and future research needs are discussed. In recent years, school reform efforts such as the Regular Education Initiative (REI) (Will, 1986) and the inclusion movement (National Association of School Boards of Education, 1992) have paved the way for the integration of students with disabilities into general education classes. Consequently, these reform efforts have increased the likelihood of students with disabilities receiving a significant portion or all of their instruction in general education classrooms. In fact, recent federal data have confirmed this trend toward integration. During the 1990-91 school year, 35% of students with disabilities (ages 3-21) were integrated on a full-time basis into general education classrooms, an increase from the 27% of full-time included students reported in 1987 (U.S. Department of Education, 1994). Practitioners and researchers have expressed some concerns about including students with disabilities in general education classes at a time when the forces of reform (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983; Outcomes, 1993) have been ardently calling for an increased commitment to educational Address: Madhavi Jayanthi, Educational Research and Services Center, 425 Fisk Ave., DeKalb, IL 60115.

Five of the Most Frequently Allowed Testing Accommodations in State Policy

“…Although one study found that a similar factor structure resulted for those receiving the dictated response accommodation (Tippets & Michaels, 1997), which would support the idea that the same underlying construct was being measured, another analysis identified less similar-ity between accommodated and unaccommodated test factor structures (J. Results of surveys suggest that many teachers are aware of this accommodation (Gajria, Salend, & Hemrick, 1994;Hollenbeck, Tindal, & Almond, 1998) but may find it somewhat difficult to provide (Jayanthi, Epstein, Polloway, & Bursuck, 1996), leading to less regular use (Gajria et al, 1994). Results of surveys suggest that many teachers are aware of this accommodation (Gajria, Salend, & Hemrick, 1994;Hollenbeck, Tindal, & Almond, 1998) but may find it somewhat difficult to provide (Jayanthi, Epstein, Polloway, & Bursuck, 1996), leading to less regular use (Gajria et al, 1994).…”

Consequences of Using Testing Accommodations: Student, Teacher, and Parent Perceptions of and Reactions to Testing Accommodations

“…In a national study of 401 general education teachers, Jayanthi, Epstein, Polloway, and Bursuck (1996) found that teachers, either alone or with a special educator, were responsible for making decisions about testing accommodations for their students. Although teachers were responsible for identifying and implementing testing accommodations, they reported that many of the most useful testing accommodations were not feasible for implementation in the classroom.…”

“…Most teachers (67%) in this study reported that providing testing accommodations only for SWD was unfair, citing two primary reasons: First, most teachers (78%) who thought it was unfair to provide testing accommodations only for SWD reported that all students need some accommodations, regardless of whether or not they receive special education services. Second, some teachers indicated that if SWD are included in the general education class, they must adhere to the standards of that class and not be given accommodations that are not part of the general education curriculum (Jayanthi et al, 1996).In another study on teacher perceptions and use of testing accommodations, Gajria, Salend, and Hemrick (1994) surveyed middle and high school general education teachers. Results showed that although the teachers were familiar with many different types of testing accommodations, they were most likely to use those that could be provided to all students and that were not tailored to individual needs.…”

Simple Techniques to Improve Teacher-Made Instructional Materials for Use by Pupils With Disabilities

“…As stated previously, although general education teachers appear to be willing to make accommodations for their pupils with educational disabilities, they express a concern about the time necessary to do so (Baker & Zigmond, 1995). Given that adaptations that are perceived as difficult will most likely not be used (Gajria, Salend, & Hemrick, 1994;Jayanthi, Epstein, Polloway, & Bursuck, 1996), the modifications identified by the resource teachers offer options that require little time or effort for implementation.…”