Submitted by Jo Anne Simon, Nov 23, 2007 16:01

The SUN misplaces it's focus again. Last August, Elizabeth Green engendered unfounded suspicions among high schoolers about their peers receiving test accommodations on the SAT. Now she is stirring the pot about NAEP results.

As I noted at that time, students with disabilities face serious challenges scaling the barriers built into standardized testing--not because of what they don't know, but because of how what they do know is tested by these exams.

It is not easy to get accommodations nor, despite the Kentucky policy expert's comment, are schools simply calling students learning disabled to increase their pass rates. The number of students served in special education as a proportion of the population is still far below what would be predicted. It is simply fallacious to assume that schools are giving away accommodations like candy.

And even if they were, extra time does not give an unfair "boost" to students with disabilities. Repeatedly, studies have shown that students without disabilities do not perform significantly better with extended time. For example, a study by Cohen, Gregg and Deng (2005) "The Role of Extended Time and Item Content on High Stakes Mathematics Test," Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20, 225-233, found that extended time does not improve scores unless the test-taker has a disability and sufficient mastery of content. A review of such studies by Nicole S. Ofiesh, et al, reports that, the results of all studies indicated that under time constraints, students with LD scored significantly lower than their normally achieving peers. When provided with extra time, significant score differences were not found between students with LD who received extended time, and their normally achieving peers who received no extra time. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, Vol. 23, No. 1, 35-53 (2005).

Accommodations do not improve results, they facilitate the demonstration of knowledge by students who are disadvantaged by the test's mechanics. Aren't we are supposed to be testing what students know? Why are we suspicious when they can show it?

Whether English language learners are artificially helped by the accommodations provided may be unclear. Two things however, are:

First, data on English language learners cannot be lumped in with disabled students willy-nilly. Both groups have legitimate needs, but they are not necessarily the same, nor will they best addressed by the same interventions, so we shouldn't report them as if they are the same. And some students will undoubtedly labor under the yoke of both disability and newness to the English language.

Second, there is no definitive research demonstrating that the NAEP validly assesses academic achievement. Along with other problems inherent in data-driven policy making, may be our Nation's Report Card is not reporting what the public thinks it is.

Jo Anne Simon, Esq.

President-Elect

New York Branch- International Dyslexia Association

71 West 23rd Street, #1527

New York, New York 10010

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.