ABOUT WCER NEWS Events Cover Stories Research News International Research Press WHAT'S THE RESEARCH ON...? PROJECTS All Active Projects All Completed Projects PUBLICATIONS LECTURE SERIES PEOPLE Staff Directory Project Leaders ERG - EVALUATION RESOURCES GROUP RESOURCES Conference Rooms Equipment GRANT SERVICES GRADUATE TRAINING SERVICE UNITS Director's Office Business Office Technical Services Printing & Mail EMPLOYMENT CONTACT INFO MyWCER WORKSPACE LOGIN

Read-aloud accommodations on a standardized reading test, when used in addition to those recommended by the teacher, positively and significantly affect test scores for students with disabilities and students without disabilities.

UW–Madison education professors Stephen N. Elliott, Thomas R. Kratochwill, and graduate student Brian McKevitt (2001) studied the effects of testing accommodations on standardized reading test scores and the consequences of using accommodations on score validity and teacher and student attitudes about testing.

The study tested these predictions: (a) teachers would select accommodations they consider valid and fair for use on standardized reading tests; (b) individualized packages of testing accommodations, including a read-aloud accommodation, would have a positive impact on the reading test scores of students with disabilities, but not on the scores of students without disabilities; (c) students with disabilities would score higher when the test was read aloud to them versus when other accommodations were used; and (d) students would perceive the accommodations to be helpful and teachers would have a positive attitude about testing and accommodations.

As predicted, teachers selected accommodations they considered valid and fair for use on a standardized test. They did not recommend using a read-aloud accommodation, as this accommodation would interfere with the purpose of the test (i.e., to measure reading ability) and thus would invalidate resulting test scores.

Next, the accommodations that teachers recommended did not significantly affect test scores for either group of students.

While read aloud accommodations helped both groups compared to their own performance without accommodations, there was not a significant effect from the read aloud when groups receiving the read aloud were compared to those receiving only the teacher-recommended accommodations.

That there was no differential benefit from the read-aloud accommodation indicates overall score boosts for both groups of students, rather than the boost only for students with disabilities which was predicted.

The study contributes to the increasing evidence that accommodations may have positive or negative effects for individual students with and without disabilities. It also lends support to the popular belief that reading aloud a reading test to students as an accommodation invalidates test scores. One may not conclude, however, just by this evidence that the accommodations were invalid. The accommodations still may have served to remove a disability-related barrier for the student tested, yet still did not have a significant effect on scores. Thus, evidence to support the validity of accommodations needs to come from multiple sources, examining student factors, test factors, and the accommodations themselves.

For more information, see http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/testacc/publications.html.