Using objective data sources to enhance teacher judgments about test accommodations

One hundred eighty-one students with learning disabilities (LD) and 184 students without LD completed four brief, parallel tests under four conditions (standard, extended time, large print, students reading aloud). We (a) examined whether students with LD benefited from accommodations more than students without LD; (b) estimated "typical" accommodation boosts among nondisabled students; and (c) awarded accommodations to students with LD whose boosts exceeded the "typical" boost. Teachers provided independent accommodation judgments, and students with LD completed a large-scale assessment with and without accommodations. Students with LD, as a group, profited differentially from reading aloud, not from extended time or large print, teachers' decisions did not correspond to benefits students derived; the data-based assessment predicted differential performance on large-scale assessment better than teacher judgments.