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

Abstract

UniversityThis study examined student, parent, and teacher perceptions of the use of testing accommodations and the relationship between student perceptions of testing accommodations and their disability status and grade level. Students with and without disabilities completed math and reading achievement tests with and without accommodations. Students, parents, and teachers completed a questionnaire to share their views on the use of testing accommodations. Significant differences were found in the proportions of students with and without disabilities who reported that the accommodated test condition was easier, more comfortable, and a better indicator of their knowledge. Most parents and teachers perceived testing accommodations to be fair and valid for students with disabilities. Consequential aspects of testing are an important part of validity evidence for large-scale assessment systems. The perceived positive consequences of testing accommodations provide further evidence of their continued use and their role in facilitating valid test scores.Many students with disabilities (SWD) require testing accommodations to fully participate in large-scale achievement tests. Although a small percentage of children and adolescents with disabilities may be eligible for alternate assessments, most students who receive special education services have the opportunity to take large-scale achievement tests with accommodations. Testing accommodations are designed to increase the validity of the inference made about a test score and are intended to influence the skills needed to access a test, not the skills targeted for measurement by the test (Elliott, Braden, & White, 2001). Accommodations can take different forms, including changes to the setting, test presentation, response format, and timing.The research literature on testing accommodations has increased noticeably since the passage of the IDEA amendments of 1997. Both researchers and practitioners are interested in understanding the effects of accommodations on students' test scores. Such information is valuable not only for making testing decisions for students in special education, but also for understanding the consequences of testing accommodations for these students. The purpose of this study was to identify several consequences of testing accommodations for students by examining student, teacher, and parent reactions to testing accommodations on large-scale achievement tests for students with and without disabilities. Reactions to Testing AccommodationsSeveral researchers have examined student and teacher reactions to the use of testing 50 accommodations. For example, Elliott and Marquardt (2004) documented eighth-grade students' positive reactions to an accommodation of extra time on a math test. Students at risk academically, SWD, and students without disabilities (SWOD), as groups, all preferred the accommodated test condition. Most students indicated that the testing accommodation allowed them to feel more comfortable, interested, and motivated-and less frustra...

Extended Time Testing Accommodations for Students With Disabilities

“…S. N. Elliott and Marquart (2004) and Lang et al (2005) generally found the same effects of accommodations on motivation and comfort in students without disabilities. Lovett (2007) also found evidence for a unique, direct influence of test anxiety.…”

“…Of the students with disabilities, 78% reported feeling more relaxed and 52% reported feeling more motivated during the double time administration. In a similar study, Lang et al (2005) gave students with disabilities (152 fourth graders and 142 eighth graders) math and reading tests under standard and accommodated conditions (here, the accommodations included extended time and other accommodations) and found that 46% of the students felt more comfortable when they took the tests with accommodations, whereas fewer than 10% felt more comfortable without the accommodations; and 62% of the students found the tests easier with accommodations, whereas fewer than 10% felt the opposite to be the case.…”

Screening to Assign Accommodations: Using Data to Make Decisions

“…Although most teachers agreed that response-mode accommodations for students with sensory impairments did not change the tested construct, they perceived accommodations that changed the test format and administration (such as extended time, reducing the number of items per page, and rewording questions) as changing the tested construct. In a similar study with 35 teachers and 43 parents, Lang et al (2005) found that most participants viewed accommodated tests taken by students with disabilities as only somewhat comparable to results from non-accommodated tests taken by students without disabilities. In the event that teachers' and parents' prior perceptions of the appropriateness of accommodations influence their willingness to recommend accommodations, bias may be introduced in the accommodation assignment process.…”

“…Student perception of test accommodations may also impact their willingness to request accommodations during IEP meetings. In a study with students in grades 4 and 8, Lang et al (2005) found that 62% of students with disabilities and 50% of students without disabilities classified the accommodated test as easier than the nonaccommodated test. Similarly, in a later study, Lang, Elliott, Bolt, and Kratochwill (2008) found that just under half of the students with and without disabilities preferred the accommodated condition.…”

Validity Issues and Decisions About Testing Accommodations

“…Even though Lang, Kumke, Cowell, and Ray (2003) reported that while a significant majority of students with and without disabilities preferred taking accommodated tests, &dquo;some students disliked the accommodations because they felt they were unnecessary and slowed down the testing process&dquo; (p. 12) and &dquo;some students [even] resist or refuse accommodations&dquo; (Gibson et al, 2003, p. 4). Citing another unintended consequence of accommodations, Kettler, Niebling, Mroch, Feldman, and Newell (2003) found that 20% of the students with disabilities got lower scores on accommodated tests.…”