Assessment Accommodations and the IEP Team's Decision
Jordan is a tenth grader with ADHD and a specific learning disability in written expression. On the statewide assessment, Jordan's IEP currently lists "extended time" and "separate setting." Last year Jordan used the separate setting but finished within the standard time on most sections; the separate setting seemed to increase anxiety because Jordan was alone with a proctor. Jordan's writing samples show strong ideas but frequent spelling and organization errors. The team is revising the IEP before this year's assessment and debates whether to keep the separate setting, add a scribe, add a word processor with spell-check, or reduce the number of essay prompts.
1. Evaluate each proposed accommodation and recommend which to keep, add, or drop.
Read the worked answer
Evaluate each against Jordan's documented needs and whether it changes access or expectations:
- Separate setting: Last year's data show Jordan finished within standard time and the setting increased anxiety. Without evidence it is needed, drop it-accommodations should be based on need, not habit.
- Extended time: Keep only if data show Jordan needs it; it is low-risk and commonly justified for ADHD, but should be tied to observed need.
- Scribe: This is high-risk for a student with a writing disability because a scribe can bypass the very skill being measured (written expression). Use only if the IEP documents that handwriting/mechanics-not composition-is the barrier, and even then consider alternatives.
- Word processor with spell-check: Strong candidate. It addresses spelling and organization (Jordan's documented weaknesses) while still requiring Jordan to compose and organize ideas-preserving the construct being measured.
- Reducing essay prompts: This is a modification, not an accommodation-it changes what is assessed. It should not be used on a standardized assessment unless the IEP genuinely calls for modified achievement standards, which carries diploma implications.
Recommendation: drop the separate setting, keep extended time if data support it, add the word processor with spell-check, and reject prompt reduction.
2. What evidence should the team gather before finalizing these decisions, and how should it be documented?
Read the worked answer
The team should base decisions on data, not preference. Gather:
- Results from prior statewide and classroom assessments showing where Jordan lost points (mechanics vs. organization vs. time).
- Trials of the word processor and extended time in classroom settings, with comparison data.
- Jordan's and teachers' reports on the separate setting's effect on anxiety and performance.
- Documentation that each accommodation is needed to access the assessment, not to inflate scores.
The IEP should list each accommodation with a brief rationale tied to the data, note who implements it and in what settings, and specify that the same accommodations are used in instruction and classroom testing (so they are not introduced for the first time on the state test). The team should also note that reducing prompts was considered and rejected as a modification, protecting the integrity of the assessment and Jordan's diploma pathway.