Explore the vast range of titles available.

This study examines the underlying mechanisms of ableism and disablism in the assessment of student learning in higher education. Globally, higher education institutions rely strongly on assessment accommodations (e.g., extra time in tests) to ensure disabled students’ participation in assessment. This is also the case in Finland. Even though research on disabled students’ experiences of assessment has repeatedly shown that both assessment and assessment accommodations cause barriers for disabled students’ inclusion, critically oriented research on this topic has been scarce. In this study, the frameworks of ableism and disablism are used to unveil how assessment is predominantly designed for “the ideal, able student” and how disabled students are framed as “the Other” through assessment. This work is based on an analysis of 139 disabled students’ experiences of assessment and assessment accommodations as collected through an open-ended, institution-wide survey at a Finnish university. The findings reveal the profound role of assessment in excluding and marginalizing disabled students as unfit to take part in the testing cultures of academia. The accommodation model is shown to hold disabled people responsible for their own exclusion. Disablism is identified in students’ experiences of outright discrimination, such as teachers denying access to assessment accommodations when they are officially granted. This study offers a novel, critical means of discussing assessment from the viewpoints of diversity and inclusion. It also proposes future trajectories for anti-ableist assessment approaches that understand diversity as enriching, rather than obscuring, assessment.

Educational policies mandate the consideration of accommodations so that students with disabilities become proficient in the objectives outlined by state academic content standards and demonstrate proficiency on high-stakes assessments. However, neither policies nor empirical research provide sufficient guidance for educators to effectively select and implement accommodations. This study reviews the effectiveness of accommodations for students in the special education eligibility category of emotional disturbance and those with diagnoses of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). First, we propose definitions that delineate accommodations from modifications and interventions. Next, we identify strategies that could serve as potential accommodations for this population. Next, we conduct a systematic literature review and calculate effect sizes to evaluate the effectiveness of the included strategies. Finally, we review the evidence to determine whether each included strategy meets the proposed definition of an accommodation. Although several potential strategies are beneficial to youth with ADHD and/or emotional and behavioral disorders, this review indicates that very few purported accommodations actually meet all the criteria in the definition of accommodations, and there is very little evidence supporting the effectiveness of commonly recommended accommodations for youth with behavioral challenges. Our critique of the state of the science on accommodations highlights several important issues that can be used to inform current research and practice in schools.

AIMS: Up to 15% of U.S. higher education students have a learning disability (LD) such as ADHD, dyslexia, or dysgraphia, which impacts academic skill acquisition. Limited research exists on students with LDs in healthcare science programs, and their representation in Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) programs is unknown. This study aimed to explore the presence of students with LDs in Alabama DPT programs and to examine their perceptions of how their LDs impacted them and whether programs provided adequate accommodations. METHODS: A 12-item online survey was distributed to 326 students across five Alabama DPT programs. RESULTS: Ninety-two students completed the survey; these students were mostly female (n=72) and in the age range of 23-24 years old (n=51). Data revealed that students with LDs were present in these programs. Some reported that their LDs influenced their ability to gain admission and that accommodations during enrolment were insufficient. However, most students felt their LDs would not hinder their clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that DPT programs should acknowledge the growing presence of students with LDs, address potential barriers to admission, and ensure effective accommodations are provided. Encouraging students to utilize accommodations offices could enhance their academic experience. The confidence of students with LDs in their clinical abilities should inspire both prospective students and DPT programs to support diversity in physical therapy education.

A recent, widely publicized scandal involved students who obtained fraudulent diagnoses of learning disabilities in an effort to get accommodations on college admissions tests. Although the exact circumstances of the scandal are unusual, the methods used to obtain diagnoses and accommodations illustrate widespread problems with current policies. These problems include certain disability identification methods that overemphasize performance on diagnostic tests, a lack of attention to the unfair advantages that unwarranted accommodations can provide, and a lack of commonly used guidelines for making accommodations decisions based on credible, objective data. The scandal was a rare consequence of these problems, but far more frequent consequences involve unequal treatment of students from different backgrounds and test scores that fail to reflect actual student skill levels.

This study examined the predictive role of learning difficulties in the academic self-efficacy of students enrolled in higher education institutions and the serial multiple mediation of inner and external resources. The sample consisted of 2,113 students (age range = 18–35 years) at 25 higher education institutions in Israel. Participants were divided into four groups: (a) 668 typical students (without learning difficulties or attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder [ADHD]), (b) 370 students with self-reported but undiagnosed academic difficulties, (c) 372 students diagnosed with specific learning disabilities (SLDs), and (d) 703 students diagnosed with attention-deficit disorders (ADHD). Implicit theories on accommodations, perceptions of social support, hope, and academic self-efficacy were examined. Results demonstrated that students with SLD and ADHD had higher beliefs in the value of expectations, yet they experienced lower levels of academic self-efficacy than their typical peers. These implicit theories did not predict directly the academic self-efficacy, but external resources (perceptions of support) and internal resources (hope) mediated these relationships. The results focused on the accommodations and beliefs in their value for predicting academic self-efficacy, and the importance of social support and hope.

Many postsecondary institutions have begun their own Autism-Specific College Support Programs (ASPs) to integrate the emergence of autistic students into college and offer supports aiding their success (Longtin in J Postsecond Educ Disabil 27(1):63–72, 2014), yet little is known about these programs. We conducted an exhaustive, year-long search of all postsecondary institutions in the United States to identify all ASPs. Although we identified a total of 74 programs located in 29 states, our analyses suggest these are unavailable to students in large portions of the country. When they are available, these programs appear to be disproportionately located at 4-year institutions, public institutions, and in the Mid-East. Our study highlights inequities based on institutional type and geography, as well as offers a complete public list of ASPs.

Including English language learners (ELLs) in large-scale assessments raises questions about the validity of inferences based on their scores. Test accommodations for ELLs are intended to reduce the impact of limited English proficiency on the assessment of the target construct, most often mathematic or science proficiency. This meta-analysis synthesizes research on the effectiveness and validity of such accommodations for ELLs. Findings indicate that none of the seven accommodations studied threaten the validity of inferences. However, only one accommodation—providing English dictionaries or glossaries—has a statistically significant effect on ELLs' performance, and this effect equates to only a small reduction in the achievement score gap between ELLs and native English speakers. Findings suggest that accommodations to reduce the impact of limited language proficiency on academic skill assessment are not particularly effective. Given this, we posit a hypothesis about the necessary role of academic language skills in mathematics and science assessments.

Extended time is one of the most common testing accommodations provided to students with disabilities. It is also controversial; critics of extended time accommodations argue that extended time is used too readily, without concern for how it changes the skills measured by tests, leading to scores that cannot be compared fairly with those of other students. Advocates argue, instead, that many students with disabilities are only able to demonstrate their skills with extended time. This article reviews a wide variety of empirical evidence to draw conclusions about the appropriateness of extended time accommodations. The evidence reviewed raises concerns with the way that extended time accommodations are currently provided, although the same literature also points to potential solutions and best practices.

When large-scale assessment programs are developed and administered in a particular language, students from other native language backgrounds may experience considerable barriers to appropriate measurement of the targeted knowledge and skills. Empirical work is needed to determine if one of the most commonly-applied accommodations to address language barriers, namely extended test time limits, corresponds to score comparability for students who use it. Prior work has examined score comparability for English learners (ELs) eligible to use extended time on tests in the United States, but not specifically for those who more specifically show evidence of using the accommodation. NAEP process data were used to explore score comparability for two groups of ELs eligible for extended time: those who used extended time and those who did not. Analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) was applied to examine potential item bias for these groups when compared to a reference group of native English speakers. Items showing significant and large DIF were identified in both comparisons, with slightly more DIF items identified for the comparison involving ELs who used extended time. Item location and word counts were examined for those items displaying DIF, with results showing some alignment with the notion that language-related barriers may be present for ELs even when extended time is used. Overall, results point to a need for ongoing consideration of the unique needs of ELs during large-scale testing, and the opportunities test process data offer for more comprehensive analyses of accommodation use and effectiveness.

Despite growing enrollment of university students with disabilities, they have not achieved academic parity with their non-disabled peers. This study matched 71 first-year university students with disabilities and students without disabilities on three variables: high school average when admitted to university, gender, and program of study. Both groups of students were compared on three measures of academic performance: GPA, failed courses, and dropped courses after first year of university. The relationship between accommodations and academic performance was also analyzed for students with disabilities. Evenwhen matched on admission average, gender, and program of study, students with disabilities had a significantly lower GPA and were more likely to fail courses in their first year than their peers without disabilities. While note-taking in the classroom was associated with being less likely to drop a course, it was also associated with poorer academic performance, as was using a calculator or alternate format during exams. The more accommodations students lost in the transition from high school, the worse they performed academically at university. Students who lost human assistant support in the classroom and theuse of a computer or a memory aid during exams had a significantly lower GPA and were more likely to fail courses in their first year of university compared with students who did not lose these accommodations. These findings have implications for accessibility offices and universities in supporting the access needs and academic success of students with disabilities.