Assessment concessions for learners with impairments (original) (raw)

Academic Assessment and Students with Disabilities

Assessment and the need to record academic achievement are an integral part of the higher education experience for all students. For disabled students it is essential that they are assessed in such a way so as not to disadvantage them, and equally, in a way that does not give them an advantage over other students. This paper highlights some of the issues that academic staff should consider and indicates the resources that are available to help them. This paper looks at the planning of assessment, physical environments in which assessments take place, alternative formats and timings and discusses how technology can be both an opportunity and a barrier for students to participate in assessments.

ISSN 2347-9493 (Print) Challenges of Assessment of Students with Special Learning Needs

The paper presents challenges of assessment of students with special learning needs. Challenges faced by teachers in classroom situations in identifying and assessment of special learning needs in learners include among many other needs, hearing impairment and deafness, visual impairment and blindness, dyslexia, mental retardation, gifted learners. The paper establishes that students who miss assessment are unable to access specific educational programs including modified classroom instruction, curriculum, tests and examinations. Learners with special needs can access these benefits only if they have been diagnostically assessed. The assessment of learners with special learning needs has deeply rooted problems, stemming from unclear policies, development of sustainable teacher training and teacher support mechanisms in dealing with the many forms of learning needs that the students have. There is also need for legal frameworks to be in place to protect the learners with special needs from neglect, social stigma and prejudice if the problems of assessment of these learners are to be effectively dealt with and the learners empowered to reach their individual maximum potentials in life.

Accessibility to NAPLAN Assessments for Students With Disabilities: A ‘Fair Go’

Australasian Journal of Special Education, 2012

A National Assessment Program for Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) that requires assessment of all students in Years 3, 5, 7, and 9 is now firmly established on the Australian educational landscape. Australian legislation and policies promote inclusive assessments for all; however, in relation to NAPLAN, almost 5% of students, many of whom have disabilities, are either exempt or withdrawn. Those students with disabilities that are assessed are provided only basic testing accommodations under special considerations, and the achievement levels of these students are not accurately benchmarked. Lessons from experiences in the United States can assist in the development of a more effective and inclusive assessment regime. A range of strategies, including testing accommodations and modifications, needs to be applied to ensure access to NAPLAN assessment for all students.

Challenges of Assessment of Students with Special Learning Needs

Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2016

Guidelines for Assessment in Special Education

Focus on Exceptional Children

Assessment in special education is useful when it helps us make decisions that promote appropriate and effective services to students. In particular, assessment should assist us in making two general types of decisions: (I) who should be served? (classification decisions); and (2) how should eligible students be served? (programming decisions). Although all of us involved in special education recognize that assessment is crucially involved in our efforts to make appropriate classification and programming decisions, we are often much less sure about how to provide helpful assessment services. We ask questions such as: How should we organize our assessment program? How can we assess all the students who need it and still ensure quality assessment work? What assessment techniques should be used with different types of students? The specific suggestions in this article may be more easily applied in some school systems than in others. This caution reflects several important points. One is that assessment requires integration of a number of factors including goals of assessment, legal requirements, ethical responsibilities, and available assessment techniques (Helton, Workman, & Matuszek, 1982, pp. 1-2). Partly because of the need to integrate so many factors, assessment is a complex activity, subject to varied emphases and interpretations. It is also an activity that generates much controversy about specific theoretical and applied issues. Hence, each professional involved in assessment and each school system must ultimately make judgments about the varied emphases, interpretations, and viewpoints, rather than depending on others for "packaged" answers. And, of course, a genuine concern for our students and honest teamwork are necessary in any assessment program.

Assessing Students With Disabilities: Issues and Evidence

Educational Assessment, 2004

Until recently, many students with disabilities were excluded from large-scale assessments, such as those mandated by states. Recent federal and state policy initiatives, including the most recent reauthorization of IDEA, require that the large majority of students with disabilities be included in the statewide assessments used in accountability systems. Most observers agree that educational outcomes for students with disabilities were inadequate before the new policies were implemented; however, the research undergirding the new policies is limited. The reforms have spurred a rapid increase in relevant research, but more and improved research is needed. This paper reviews the status of research on some classification and assessment issues that are central to the new reforms and recommends directions for future research.

Accessibility of tests for individuals with disabilities within a validity framework

System, 2005

There is a great need to ensure that language tests are accessible to individuals with disabilities. Yet accessibility features can sometimes conflict with the validity of test scores. In some cases the nature of the conflict seems obvious, yet in other cases there is controversy, such as that concerning the use of a ''readaloud'' accessibility feature on tests of reading. What is needed is a more rigorous approach for reasoning about the validity implications of accessibility features. The approach described in this article seeks to integrate thinking about accessibility, task design, and validity-all in a framework of sharable terminology, concepts, and knowledge representations. We believe that such a framework can allow one to more accurately and quickly identify the validity-related consequences of design changes that are intended to improve accessibility for individuals with disabilities. Such a framework may

Improving Assessment Validity for Students With Disabilities in Large-Scale Assessment Programs

Educational Assessment, 2005

A test designed with built-in modifications and covering the same grade-level mathematics content provided more precise measurement of mathematics achievement for lower performing students with disabilities. Fourth-grade students with disabilities took a test based on modified state curricular standards for their mandated statewide mathematics assessment. To link the modified test with the general test, a block of items was administered to students with and without disabilities who took the general mathematics assessment. Item difficulty and student mathematics ability parameters were estimated using item response theory (IRT) methodology. Results support the conclusion that a modified test, based on the same curricular objectives but providing a more targeted measurement of expected outcomes for lower achieving students, could be developed for this special population.

Identifying Appropriate Test Accommodations for Students With Learning Disabilities

Focus on Exceptional Children

Accountability is a prominent issue in public education. A great deal of time, money, and student and teacher effort is spent on testing students' academic achievement and progress to evaluate the educational outcomes of schools, school systems, and states. Students enrolled in public schools sometimes take eight or more sets of standardized tests throughout their school career. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) requires that all students enrolled in public schools take a reading and math assessment each year in grades 3 through 8, and to be tested at least once during grades 10 through 12. By the 2007-08 school year, the NCLB also will require testing in science at least once during grades 3 through 5, 6 through 9, and 10 through 12. As of June 10, 2003, all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico had federally approved statewide accountability plans in accordance with the NCLB (Webb & Aspey, 2003). Despite broad implementation of assessment plans, testing varies widely within states, in terms of the amount and type of accountability. Often, outcomes measured by high-stakes assessments are tied to funding, which makes the results important to local and state school administrators. The NCLB holds states and schools accountable for their effectiveness and continuous improvement. Schools that fail to meet performance objectives can lose federal funds, and Title 1 funds can be diverted to allow students in failing schools to transfer to higher-performing schools. NCLB also has provisions for rewarding bonuses to successful schools. Because of the nature of their academic difficulties, students with disabilities often present particular challenges for administrators and educators when standardized high-stakes assessments are concerned. In the past, states have not always included students with disabilities in their assessment systems and analyses. Low participation rates of students with disabilities continued despite mandates for their being included in accountability programs required by 1997 amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2001). In essence, the scores of these students and their outcomes did not count (Fuchs & Fuchs, 1999; Fuchs, Fuchs, Eaton, Hamlett, & Karns, 2000). In an effort to gain full information regarding the educational outcomes for all students, the NCLB requires that students with disabilities be included in tests to the fullest extent possible. This further commitment to gaining information about outcomes for students with disabilities recognizes the importance of this population of students and requires Dr. Lynn Fuchs and Dr. Doug Fuchs are with the special education faculty of

Assessment concessions for learners with impairments (original) (raw)

Related papers