Search

There has been a paradigm shift from accommodations to the identification of levels of accessibility (e.g., universal features, designated features, and accommodations). A consequence of this shift is that many students with disabilities who previously were assigned accommodations now access many of them as universal or designated features. This Brief highlights what states and Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams can do to avoid possible unintended consequences of the paradigm shift.

Many students with disabilities use accessibility features and accommodations during instruction and when taking assessments. It is important to consider teacher perceptions and experiences when making accessibility decisions. The National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) synthesized and summarized research conducted between 1999 and 2022 on the perceptions of teachers regarding accommodations. Based on this research on teachers' perceptions of accommodations, NCEO suggests several strategies that could improve practice.

This report highlights the findings of the sixteenth survey of states conducted by the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO). It has been administered for more than three decades to collect information from states about the participation and performance of students with disabilities in the assessments that comprise the comprehensive assessment system. Topics addressed included: accessibility and accommodations, alternate assessments based on alternate academic achievement standards (AA-AAAS), interim assessments, accountability, English learners with disabilities, technology, graduation requirements, State Systemic Improvement Plans (SSIPs)/State-identified Measurable Results (SiMRs), family engagement, and technical assistance needs.

This report summarizes an investigation of literature published in 1985-2023 on universal design (UD) of large-scale assessments. State education agencies, K-12 assessment vendors, teacher trainers, and classroom teachers are increasingly applying the principles of UD to the instruction and assessment of students from special populations. In theory, UD ensures that instruction and assessment are created from the beginning to be accessible to the widest population of students possible. Yet, it is unclear how these UD frameworks and their associated principles and elements are being applied, or even which UD framework is used. This obscurity and lack of defined UD principles in the research literature creates obstacles in research replication and in identification of evidence-based practices. This scoping review identifies how the concept of UD has been applied to the broad range of U.S. district and state large-scale academic assessments. We included literature on the application of UD to the broad range of K-12 district and state large-scale academic assessments in the U.S.

Alternate assessments aligned to alternate academic achievement standards (AA-AAAS) are designed and implemented for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities. Historically, these assessments have been described as reflecting reduced "depth," "breadth," and "complexity." Yet, the meaning of these terms is often not defined. The purpose of this report is to provide: (1) an overview of relevant history and legislation that address depth, breadth, and complexity of AA-AAAS; and (2) questions for states to consider as they revise or develop new AA-AAAS. This information also can be useful for states submitting evidence for an existing AA-AAAS to the U.S. Department of Education peer review process.

There continues to be confusion among some educators and staff in State Education Agencies (SEAs) and Local Education Agencies (LEAs) about what is an accommodation and what is a modification. This confusion about accommodations and modifications happens in how these words are used in both instruction and assessment. The confusion is further compounded by the use of the term "modified curriculum" when describing the academic content taught to some students with disabilities. The misunderstandings of these terms affect how Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) are written and then implemented. The purpose of this Brief is to clarify what accommodations and modifications are for both instruction and assessment for students with disabilities. We also disentangle the use of the term "alternate or modified curriculum" from the meaning of modification used for instruction and assessment. Accommodations and modifications can also be appropriate for English learners; however, this Brief is focused on students with disabilities, including English learners with disabilities.

Up to 1.0% of the total tested state student population in a subject area may participate in the alternate assessment based on alternate academic achievement standards (AA-AAAS). This Brief presents the results of analyses of states' AA-AAAS participation rates from 2015-16 through 2018-19. Information is presented on: (a) the number of states meeting the 1.0% participation requirement in each year from 2015-16 through 2018-19 for mathematics (i.e., math) and reading/language arts (i.e., reading), and (b) states with decreasing and states with increasing patterns of participation rates across the four years in math and reading.

This report contains the proceedings of a forum held on June 28, 2023 in New Orleans, Louisiana, to discuss issues surrounding meaningful accessibility of assessments. The forum was a post-session to the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) National Conference on Student Assessment (NCSA) and was a collaboration of the "Assessment, Standards, and Education for Students with Disabilities" (ASES) Collaborative and the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO). A specific goal of the forum was to gather representatives from state education agencies (SEAs), assessment vendors, assistive technology experts, and others to discuss the meaningful accessibility of assessments and to identify possible solutions to the challenges that students face when accessing assessments. [This report is a result of a collaboration with the Assessment, Standards, and Education for Students with Disabilities (ASES) Collaborative.]

This Brief provides an overview of how students' insights on the usefulness and feasibility of various accessibility features and accommodations should be taken into account when identifying accessibility features and accommodations for instruction and assessment. Students are often the best source of information about their strengths and needs, and what helps. This Brief uses synthesized and summarized research NCEO conducted on the perceptions of students with disabilities regarding accommodations between 1999 and 2021, and provides suggestions for soliciting students' perceptions on accommodations and involving them in advocating for their needs.

To help ensure that assessments are properly administered, states have developed policies about who can administer or proctor assessments, and the training they must have. This report presents the findings of our analysis of states' 2021 policies on the qualifications and requirements for test administrators, proctors, and accommodations providers for general state summative content assessments (e.g., math, language arts, science), specifically as they relate to students with disabilities, English learners, and English learners with disabilities. The individuals who administer or proctor assessments, as well as those who provide accommodations (e.g., scribes, test readers, sign language interpreters, translators), need to be qualified and knowledgeable about how to appropriately administer assessments and how to provide accommodations.

This Brief provides an overview of issues related to the inclusion of students with disabilities and English learners with disabilities in early grade (that is, K-2) assessments and offers strategies for improved practices.

This report provides an update on the state of the research on testing accommodations. Previous reports by the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) have covered research published since 1999. In this report, we summarize the research published in 2020. During 2020, 11 research studies addressed testing accommodations in the U.S. K-12 education system. The research also highlights important emerging issues including the role of technology in facilitating accessibility for students with disabilities through built-in accommodations and in considering needed practices for applying technologies. [For the 2019 report, see ED620540.]

This report outlines the approaches that state education agencies (SEAs) have taken in defining and using formative assessment practices, including practices to explicitly support students with disabilities. At the state level, there have been efforts to develop or adopt formal definitions of formative assessment practices that guide how these practices are used in instruction. Given the different approaches and definitions that might exist for formative assessment practices, this report aims to describe how states are communicating and supporting these practices with their districts and schools.

This report provides an update on the state of the research on testing accommodations. Previous reports by the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) have covered research published since 1999. In this report, we summarize the research published in 2019. During 2019, 11 research studies were published on the topic of testing accommodations in the U.S. elementary and secondary education system. [For the 2018 report, see ED613024.]

This report presents the findings of a survey of states that examined the policies, practices, and procedures State Education Agencies (SEAs) used to monitor IEPs for participation decision making in alternate assessments based on alternate academic achievement standards (AA-AAAS). It is imperative that only students with the most significant cognitive disabilities participate in the AA-AAAS because it has short- and long-term implications. The instruction of students taking the AA-AAAS may be reduced in depth, breadth, or complexity, and this may have implications for graduation as well as reduce post-secondary options.

This report provides a snapshot of how accommodated tests for students with disabilities, accessibility, alternate assessments, and other related issues were addressed in states' test security policies for 2020-21. Strong test security policies and procedures are needed to help ensure the integrity and validity of state assessments, yet some test security measures may affect accessibility. There is a need for thoughtful consideration of ways in which possible test security measures may affect accessibility, and how to balance test security and accessibility. This report is an update of an analysis NCEO of 2013-14 test security policies. [For "Test Security and Students with Disabilities: An Analysis of States' 2013-14 Test Security Policies. Synthesis Report 95," see ED620597.]

This report presents the findings of a study aimed to address the gap between policy and practice for speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who serve students identified with a speech-language impairment, including other co-existing disabilities. The following research questions were addressed: (1) What factors influence how SLPs make accessibility and accommodations decisions for students with disabilities, including English learners with disabilities? (2) How do SLPs participate in the IEP team classroom and assessment accessibility and accommodations decision-making process for students with disabilities, including English learners with disabilities? And (3) Do SLPs have professional development needs about accessibility and accommodations?

This is the 22nd report by the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) that describes how states publicly report assessment data for students with disabilities in K-12 schools in the United States. The purpose of this report is to examine the extent to which states reported 2018-19 assessment data for students with disabilities "to the public with the same frequency and in the same detail as it reports on the assessment of nondisabled children," as required by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). It also describes how states report assessment participation and performance data to the public online. It summarizes these data for grades 4 and 8, and high school, with additional analyses that focus on average performance gaps across years. The report also summarizes the extent to which states report participation and performance for English learners (ELs) with disabilities and examines public reporting of accommodations. [For the 2017-18 report, see ED613027.]

A report analyzing how accommodated tests, and students with disabilities and the assessments they take, are addressed in state test security policies -- a subject about which little is known. This analysis was conducted to partially fill this gap. The report provides a snapshot of how accommodated tests for students with disabilities, alternate assessments, and other related issues were addressed in states' test security policies in 2013-14. The specific research questions were, "What information do states' test security policies contain about students with disabilities and the assessments they take?" and "How are accommodations included in states test security policies?"