2005 State Policies on Assessment Participation and Accommodations for Students with Disabilities

Synthesis Report 64

Sheryl S. Lazarus • Martha L. Thurlow • Kathryn E. Lail • Kristin D. Eisenbraun • Kentaro Kato

September 2006

Lazarus, S. S., Thurlow, M. L., Lail, K. E., Eisenbraun, K. D., & Kato, K. (2006). 2005 state policies on assessment participation and accommodations for students with disabilities (Synthesis Report 64). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved [today's date], from the World Wide Web: http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Synthesis64/

Table of Contents

Executive Summary
Overview
Need to Update and Analyze
Process Used to Review State Policies
Organization of the Report
Section 1 – Participation Policies
Section 2 – Accommodation Policies
Summary
Conclusions
References
Appendix A. State Documents Used in Analysis of Participation
and Accommodation Policies
Appendix B. Participation and Accommodation Guidelines by State

Executive Summary

The National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) has been tracking and analyzing state policies on assessment participation and accommodations since 1992. The purpose of the current analysis is to update information on these policies that was last reported by NCEO in 2005 (based on 2003 data). The current analysis of states’ 2005 participation and accommodation policies found that state policies on participation and accommodation continue to evolve, and that they have become more detailed and specific than in previous years. Key findings from this analysis include:

Most states now have Web sites where users can access their policies.
Clarifications and specifications attached to specific participation policy variables and to specific accommodations (e.g., what tests accommodations can be used on) are increasing.
The "read aloud questions," "sign interpret questions," and "calculator" accommodations continue to be controversial.
The "spell checker" accommodation, though it continues to be controversial, appears to be more widely accepted than in the past.
Most states now permit the use of extended time with no restriction, though fewer states permit the "testing over multiple days" accommodation than in the past.

This analysis did not attempt to determine the degree to which state policies complied with federal requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 2004 or Title I of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001. Instead, it is a descriptive analysis of the written policies that states have for the participation of students with disabilities in assessments and the use of accommodations during their assessments.

Overview

Given that both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 2004 and Title I of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 require the participation of students with disabilities in state assessments, it is important to study how they will participate and what, if any, accommodations will be used. The National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) has been tracking and analyzing state policies that address participation and accommodations for students with disabilities since 1992, with the most recent analysis examining 2003 policies (Clapper, Morse, Lazarus, Thompson, & Thurlow, 2005). Each time that NCEO has examined state policies (Clapper et al., 2005; Thurlow, House, Boys, Scott, & Ysseldyke, 2000; Thurlow, Lazarus, Thompson, & Robey, 2002; Thurlow, Scott, & Ysseldyke, 1995a, 1995b; Thurlow, Seyfarth, Scott, & Ysseldyke, 1997; Thurlow, Ysseldyke, & Silverstein, 1993), there have been significant changes from the previous analysis. Initially, these updates indicated that increasing numbers of states had policies on participation and accommodation. More recently, there have been qualitative changes as well: (1) increased specificity of the language used in policies, and (2) an increased number of written documents that are not only available online but also include many different parts such as policies, guidelines, and training manuals.

Need to Update and Analyze

The current update, based on 2005 policies and guidelines, sought answers to questions similar to those addressed in previous examinations of state policies. These questions included:

• How many states’ policies reflect participation options, such as selective and combination participation, out-of-level assessments, testing with modifications, and locally selected assessments beyond the three basic ones (i.e., general assessment without accommodations, general assessment with accommodations, and alternate assessment)?

• Have states’ participation and accommodation policies changed substantially since 2003?

• How do accommodation policies address emerging issues (e.g., technology, reliability/validity issues)?

In the current report we have made several additions and adjustments to our analysis; these will be noted in the appropriate sections of the text. One key accommodation that we pulled out to document in this year’s report was the "speech/text" device. These devices, which included both text-to-speech devices (e.g., voice-output systems) and speech-to-text devices (e.g., voice-recognition systems), had previously been subsumed under the "communication device" category.

A major adjustment that was made was the addition of another category of use. In addition to the standard categories of allowed, allowed in certain circumstances, allowed with implications for scoring, and prohibited, we added a special category of allowed accommodations indicated by A*. These were accommodations that the state called "nonstandard" but that did not result in any changes in scores or aggregation procedures.

Process Used to Review State Policies

In general, procedures used for this analysis of states’ written participation and accommodation policies were similar to the procedures used in the past. As was the case in previous years, the information for this report was gathered through the examination and analysis of publicly available written documents. This is in contrast to other approaches that survey informed respondents and that may use a restricted list of accommodations.

Participation and accommodation policies for most states were obtained from states’ Web sites as of January 14, 2005. The initial compilation of data for each state was placed in a single document, referred to as a state profile. The profiles were mailed to states in June 2005. States were then asked to verify the information in their profiles by indicating whether: (1) the information was accurate, (2) they needed additional information in order to decide whether the information contained in their profiles was accurate, or (3) the profiles contained inaccurate information and that changes needed to be made to the profile. If a state requested changes to the profile, we required written documentation as to the source of those changes before accepting the changes. State officials were asked to return their edited profiles to us via mail, e-mail, or fax. The information from the verified state profiles was then placed in the tables contained in this report. A complete list of state documents used to compile information for this report is in Appendix A.

This analysis did not attempt to determine the degree to which state policies complied with federal requirements under IDEA or NCLB. Those determinations would need to be made by the appropriate federal authorities. This report is a descriptive analysis of the written policies that states have for the participation of students with disabilities in assessments and their use of accommodations during assessments.

Organization of the Report

In this update we summarize and categorize the extensive information contained in states’ participation and accommodation policies. As in past reports, presenting information in figures and tables makes it more accessible, but can sometimes obscure the underlying complexities of the individual state policies. For example, it is not apparent in any of the tables that state policies on participation and accommodations range in length from a few pages to hundreds of pages. This complexity is exacerbated by the burgeoning number of state documents addressing participation and accommodations that are currently available. Some states have policies in place with few or no related supporting documents, while others have, in addition to policies, a full complement of related materials such as procedural manuals and training guides. Other states have a wide range of procedural manuals and training guides on their Web sites, but no actual policy documents regarding participation and accommodations are available on the Web.

This report is divided into two sections. Section 1 addresses the information gathered on participation. Section 2 contains the review of states’ accommodation policies.

The full tables are included in Appendix B of this report while the summary figures and tables are provided in the main sections of the report. A comparison was made, where possible, to similar information from previous reports. All information in this report that refers to 2003 policies is from Clapper et al. (2005).

Section 1 – Participation Policies

Additional Testing Options

Some state participation policies included language about additional testing options beyond the three traditional testing options (i.e., general assessment without accommodations, general assessment with accommodations, and alternate assessment). These additional testing options included Selective Participation, Combination Participation, Out-of-Level Assessments, Testing with Modifications or Non-Standard Accommodations, and Locally Selected Assessments. Selective Participation means that students may take certain parts of the assessment without being required to take others, such as taking the math alternate assessment and no other assessments. Combination Participation means that students may take different parts of different tests, such as taking the reading alternate assessment, the math general assessment, and the science assessment with accommodations. Out-of-Level Assessments refers to the practice of allowing a student in one grade to take an assessment designed for another (usually lower) grade. Testing with Modifications or Non-Standard Accommodations is the term used when a state permits the administration of a test with modifications or nonstandard accommodations. These accommodations are typically considered to change what is being tested to an extent that invalidates a student’s score. Locally Selected Assessments are defined as assessments that school district staff select for students who are unable to participate in the general assessment even with accommodations.

Thirty-six state policies indicated that at least one additional testing option was available to students (see Figure 1). The participation policies in the remaining states did not indicate that additional testing options, beyond the traditional three, were available. Details on the policies of specific states are provided in Tables B.1 and B.2 in Appendix B. Figure 2 illustrates the specific type of additional testing option and the number of states that allow it. Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations is the largest category with 23 states allowing this testing option. Combination participation follows closely with 19 states allowing this option. For example, one state policy states that participation by content area is allowed; and, when two or more content areas are being assessed, such as reading, writing, and math, the student may take the general assessment in math but alternate assessments in reading and writing.

Changes Since 2003

It is difficult to compare the 2003 and 2005 data regarding additional testing options because a detailed analysis was conducted for two categories, selective and combination participation, for the first time in this update. This increased the number of states allowing additional testing options. However, if the selective and combination participation categories are removed for the sake of comparison, it appears as though additional testing options have increased from 20 states in 2003 to 33 states in 2005. This is in contrast to a trend from 2001 to 2003 when the number of states allowing additional options decreased from 33 states in 2001 to 20 in 2003.

Figure 1. Summary of Additional Testing Options

Figure 2. Summary of Types of Additional Testing Options

Circumstances in Which Students Are Not Included in any Form of Statewide Assessment

In addition to examining state policies on how students were included in statewide assessment programs, we also looked for circumstances in which students were not included in any form of state assessment.

As shown in Figure 3, 30 states specifically prohibited students from being excluded from statewide testing for any reason. Three states permitted exclusion in the case of parent exemption, 3 states permitted exclusion for emotional distress, and 11 states for medical conditions or illness, and 2 states permitted exclusion for absence during testing. Fourteen states also permitted students to be excluded from any form of statewide assessment in circumstances other than those noted in Figure 3. Examples of "other" circumstances included physician recommendation and family emergency. State specific information and details of "other" variables concerning the exclusion of students from statewide testing are located in Tables B.3 and B.4 in Appendix B.

Changes Since 2003

The number of state policies in 2005 that specifically stated that exclusion from statewide testing was prohibited increased from 16 states in 2003 prohibiting exclusion to 30 states in 2005. No states now permit the use of "Disruptive Behavior" and "Student Refusal" to justify the exclusion of a student from statewide testing; in 2003, the policies of two states indicated that those circumstances were a permissible reason to exclude a student. Eight states permitted "Parent Exemption" in 2003, but only three states allowed it in 2005.

Figure 3. Summary of Circumstances in Which Students Are Not Included in any Form of Statewide Assessment

Participation Decision-making Criteria—Allowed

Figure 4 summarizes the decision-making criteria that states used to determine how students with disabilities participate in statewide assessment systems. The criteria that states cited most frequently were: (1) IEP Determined (50 states); (2) Instructional Relevance/Instructional Goals (35 states); (3) Current Performance/Level of Functioning (34 states); and (4) Student Needs and Characteristics (26 states). Additional participation criteria that states used when making participation decisions are included in Tables B.5 and B.6 in Appendix B.

Changes Since 2003

After comparing the 2003 policy data (Clapper et al., 2005) with the 2005 policy data, several changes were apparent. In 2003, it was reported that all 50 states specifically stated that the IEP team decided how students participated in the statewide assessment and this number remained the same after looking at the 2005 policies. The number of states indicating that current performance/level of functioning could be considered increased from 19 states in 2003 to 34 states in 2005. In 2003, only 6 states permitted consideration of the content/purpose/nature of the assessment, but two years later 11 states permitted consideration of this variable. Fourteen additional states also allowed consideration of student needs and characteristics. More states permitted consideration of a student’s past performance (up from 6 to 10).

Figure 4. Summary of Participation Policy Variables That Can Be Used to Make Decisions about How Students with Disabilities Will Participate in Statewide Assessment

Participation Decision-Making Criteria—Not Allowed

Many states listed criteria that cannot be used to make decisions about how students with disabilities will participate in statewide assessments. As shown in Figure 5, the criteria that were most frequently cited included (1) Presence or Category of a Disability (28 states); (2) Cultural, Social, Linguistic, or Environmental Factors (24 states); and (3) Excessive Absences (23 states). The policies of four states indicate that consideration of whether a student is receiving special education services cannot be used when decisions are made about how students will participate, while seven states indicate that achievement level may not be used. Detailed information on participation decision-making criteria for each state can be found in Tables B.7 and B.8 of Appendix B.

Figure 5. Summary of Participation Policy Variables That Cannot Be Used to Make Decisions About How Students with Disabilities will Participate in Statewide Assessment

Changes Since 2003

The number of states that cited variables that cannot be used to make decisions about how students with disabilities will participate in statewide assessments increased or remained the same from 2003 to 2005 for most categories. The largest increases occurred in the categories of "Cultural, Social, Linguistic, or Environmental Factors" (up from 14 to 24) and "Excessive Absenteeism" (up from 14 to 23).

Section 2 – Accommodation Policies

All states have policies that address issues related to the use of accommodations by students with disabilities in state assessments. This section of the report addresses state policy language concerning groups eligible to receive accommodations, criteria that states can and cannot use to make decisions about a student’s use of an accommodation, guidance for the use of accommodations that are not on an approved list, accommodations involving a third party to administer or record, and the use and impact of various types of accommodations.

Additional Student Groups Eligible for Accommodations

Accommodation policies may apply to students with IEPs, students with 504 plans, students who are both English language learners (ELLs) and have a disability, students who qualify for Title I services, or to all students. Some states also have separate accommodation policies for ELL students, but we did not track those policies for this report. Those readers interested in learning more about ELL policies are referred to Rivera, Collum, Shafer, and Sia (2005).

Figure 6 provides information about the extent to which various categories of students, in addition to ELL students or students with disabilities, used accommodations during statewide assessments. Forty-one states indicated in their policies that accommodations were to be provided to students who had a 504 plan. There were no state policies that indicated that no student groups, other than those students with IEPs or 504 plans, could use accommodations on the statewide assessments.

Two states allowed all students to use any standard accommodation without restrictions. Six states allowed all students to use standard accommodations under certain circumstances and with specific restrictions. For example, students with temporary disabilities (e.g., a broken arm) are permitted to use accommodations in some states.

Figure 6. Summary of Additional Student Groups Eligible for Accommodations

As in 2003, although we did not include ELL accommodation policies in our analysis, we did analyze whether states’ special education accommodation policies addressed students who have both an IEP and are ELLs. That is, in most cases, we could infer from the accommodations policies that the state provides accommodations for students who are ELLs and have an IEP, because ELL accommodations are mentioned within the sections of the document related to students with disabilities. The special education policies of 25 states had information about the use of accommodations for students who had both a disability and are ELL. More detail about additional student groups eligible for accommodations along with information on the extent to which each state included different student groups in their accommodation policies is provided in Tables B.9 through B.10 in Appendix B.

Changes Since 2003

The number of state policies that included students with a 504 plan increased from 33 states in 2003 to 41 states in 2005. In 2005, all states permitted at least one additional group of students, besides students with IEP plans, to use accommodations. This is up from 43 states in 2003. The number of states that had policies addressing accommodations for students who are both ELLs and have a disability increased from 13 states in 2003 to 25 states in 2005.

Accommodations Decision-making Criteria—Allowed

States use a variety of criteria to guide the process for making decisions on student use of accommodations. According to Figure 7, the policies of 47 states indicated that the use of instructional and classroom accommodations are to be considered when making decisions. Two other criteria that many states included in their policies were that the accommodations were selected based on individual student needs and characteristics (34 states) and that the accommodations maintained the validity of the test and the resulting scores (33 states).

Some states differentiated between the types of accommodations that may be provided on exit exams and other large-scale assessments or between norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests. The category of "Purpose/Nature of Assessment," is used to track whether different accommodations were permitted on different types of assessments in a state. In 10 states, the purpose or nature of the assessment was one of the criteria that the IEP team was instructed to consider when making decisions about the use of accommodations. See Tables B.11 and B.12 in Appendix B for more detailed information.

Changes Since 2003

In 2003, the policies of 21 states indicated that individual student needs/characteristics should be considered a criterion for making decisions about which assessment accommodations should be provided. By 2005, the number of states using this criterion increased to 34 states. The number of state accommodation policies specifically requiring that the accommodation maintain the validity of the test and resulting score decreased slightly from 35 states in 2003 to 33 states in 2005. Conversely, the number of states that considered the length of time the accommodation has been used increased from three to six states between 2003 and 2005.

Figure 7. Summary of Accommodation Policy Variables That Can Be Used to Guide the Decision-making Process for Using Accommodations During Statewide Assessment

Accommodations Decision-making Criteria—Not Allowed

States also prohibited basing decisions about accommodations on certain criteria (see Figure 8). Policies generally listed fewer variables that could not be used in the decision-making process as compared to the number of variables that could be used. Twelve states do not permit consideration of the nature or category of a student’s disability. A few states indicated that Instructional Program/Program Setting (3 states), Percent Time/Amount of Services Received (4 states), or Administrative Convenience (1 state) may not be considered when making decisions about accommodations. No states permitted parents to request accommodations. Two states listed other criteria as well (e.g., the availability of an accommodation). State specific information, as well as information about other criteria, is provided in Tables B.13 and B.14 in Appendix B.

Figure 8. Summary of Accommodation Policy Variables That Cannot Be Used to Guide the Decision-making Process for Using Accommodations During Statewide Assessment

Changes Since 2003

For most categories there has been little or no change from 2003 in factors that cannot be used to guide the accommodations decision-making process; however, four additional state policies in 2005 do not allow the nature/category of the disability to be used to guide accommodations decisions (up from 8 to 12). In 2003, one state permitted consideration of parent request for accommodations; in 2005 no states permitted parent request.

Guidance for Using Accommodations That Are Not on the "Approved" List

A summary of the guidance for using accommodations that are not on an "approved" list in state accommodation policies is found in Figure 9. Thirty-three state policies advised IEP team members to seek approval from the State Board or Department of Education when suggesting the use of an accommodation not specifically found on the "approved" list. A committee review of the request to use an accommodation not previously approved was in seven state policies. Eight state policies required IEP team members to contact a specific individual at the state or district level when recommending a non-approved accommodation. No states specifically stated that non-approved accommodations could not be used. Detailed information for each state is located in Tables B.15 and B.16 in Appendix B.

Changes Since 2003

The number of state policies that require IEP team members to seek approval from a State Board or Department of Education when inquiring about accommodations not on the "approved" list increased from 26 states in 2003 to 33 states in 2005. The number of states that require a committee review of the accommodation in question increased by 3 states (up from 4 to 7) from 2003 to 2005. In 2003, four states required the IEP team members to contact a specific person at the state or district level; by 2005 it had increased to eight states.

Figure 9. Summary of Guidelines for Using Accommodations That Are Not on the "Approved" List

Guidelines for the Administration of Accommodations Involving a Third Party

Information was also collected on guidelines for accommodations involving a third party. This information is summarized in Figure 10. It should be noted that we changed the terminology that we used to describe this policy variable in this report. In the 2003 report, it was referred to as "accommodations involving another human to administer or record" (Clapper et al., 2005) while in this report we refer to "accommodations involving a third party." For example, an individual who serves as an intermediary between the student and the mode of access to the test would be considered a third party. A state’s guidelines might then define the role of the scribe when the IEP team had selected dictation of answers as an accommodation, prescribe conditions for reading test items aloud if the IEP team had selected reading test items as an accommodation, or provide guidance to sign language interpreters. For this analysis, we accepted anything the state produced as a written guideline. In other words, no quality criteria were imposed. Thirty-three states provided written guidelines for scribes in their accommodation policies. Guidelines for readers and sign language interpreters were provided in 26 and 20 state policies, respectively. Detailed information for each state is located in Table B.17 in Appendix B.

Changes Since 2003

The number of states that provided guidelines for accommodations involving a third party increased from 30 states in 2003 to 40 states in 2005. The number of states with guidelines for scribes increased from 26 states in 2003 to 33 states in 2005. More states also had guidelines for readers in 2005 (up from 20 to 26). The same number of states (20) included guidelines for sign language interpreters in both years.

Figure 10. Summary of Guidelines for the Administration of Accommodations Involving a Third Party

Types of Accommodations and Impact of Use

In this section of the report, the accommodations that states most often allow, allow with restrictions, and prohibit are reviewed. We organized the accommodations into five categories: presentation accommodations, equipment and materials accommodations, response accommodations, scheduling/timing accommodations, and setting accommodations.

We also analyzed how the states’ policies indicated that the accommodations were to be used: (1) Allowed (A)—if the accommodation is used, the student must be given the score she or he earned, the student’s score must be aggregated, and the score must be used for accountability purposes; (2) Allowed (A*)—an added category for those situations in which an accommodation was called non-standard, but the state either did not provide a definition of what non-standard meant, or did not explicitly state that there were implications for scoring for using that accommodation—often the state indicated that there were no scoring implications; (3) Allowed in certain circumstances (AC)—the accommodation is allowed on some assessments and not others; (4) Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation (AI)—if the accommodation is used, the student automatically receives a certain score (e.g., zero or below basic) or the score is not aggregated; and (5) Prohibited (P)—the use of this accommodation on statewide and district-wide testing is not permitted.

Presentation Accommodations

Presentation accommodations alter the way in which a test is presented to a student. Table 1 provides a summary of the presentation accommodations documented in state accommodation policies. State specific detailed information about these accommodations is included in Tables B.18 through B.20 in Appendix B. The policies of 48 states allow the large print accommodation. Forty-eight states also permit the use of braille, though four states put some restrictions on the braille accommodation.

"Read aloud" is represented in this analysis as two separate accommodations: read aloud directions and read aloud questions. "Read aloud directions" is permitted in all circumstances in 42 states, with one of these states (North Dakota) indicating it is an accommodation that may affect the interpretation of individual tests, but not one that if it is used will affect what is done with the student’s score. An additional state permits read aloud directions in certain circumstances. "Read aloud questions" continues to be one of the more controversial accommodations. That is, there was a lack of consensus across states as to whether this accommodation should be allowed or allowed with restrictions. Although 45 states permitted test questions to be read aloud, only eight states permitted this accommodation without any restrictions; however, six of these states called this accommodation "nonstandard" or something similar, although they treated it the same as an "approved" accommodation (i.e., no scoring or aggregation implications). Twenty-six states permitted questions to be read aloud only in certain circumstances (e.g., on the math test, but not on the reading test). The policies of 11 other states allowed questions to be read aloud in certain circumstances and also indicated that there were implications for scoring and or aggregation if this accommodation was used.

Sign interpretation is also represented in this analysis as two separate accommodations: sign directions and sign questions. Forty-four states permitted directions to be signed without restriction, again with one of these indicating its use may affect interpretation of individual scores, but that nothing will happen regarding scoring or aggregation. One additional state allowed this accommodation in certain circumstances. Thirty-nine states permitted questions to be signed. Fourteen of these allowed this accommodation without restriction, although six states called the accommodation nonstandard without implications for scoring or aggregation. As with the read aloud accommodation, it is more controversial to sign questions than to sign directions (but it is apparently less controversial to sign questions than to read questions aloud). As indicated in Table B.20 in Appendix B there were more limitations placed on sign interpretation of reading tests than sign interpretation of mathematics tests.

As shown in Table 1, 40 states permitted, without restriction (although two called it "nonstandard"), directions to be repeated, re-read, or clarified. Visual cues were permitted in 28 states, administration by someone other than the usual test administrator was permitted in 18 states, and the use of additional examples was permitted in 9 states.

In addition to the accommodations listed in Table 1, 29 states had other presentation accommodations. These accommodations included audiotape presentation of the test directions or items (18 states), reducing the number of test items per page (8 states), and reading aloud of the test by the student (4 states), among others.

Changes Since 2003

In both 2003 and 2005, most states permitted questions to be read aloud with restrictions (e.g., in certain circumstances or with implications or scoring). In general, this was similar for signing questions. In contrast, states generally allowed most of the other presentation accommodations without restrictions in increasing numbers from 2003 to 2005 (e.g., Braille without restrictions increased from 38 states in 2003 to 44 states in 2005).

Equipment and Material Accommodations

Equipment and material accommodations are changes in the conditions of the assessment setting that involve the introduction of certain types of tools and assistive devices. Table 2 provides a summary of the equipment and material accommodations documented in state policies. Most are related to the presentation of the test, but some are related to response, such as using a calculator or abacus. The use of magnification and amplification equipment, templates and graph paper, special lighting and acoustics, adaptive furniture, and noise buffers was permitted in the majority of states. The calculator accommodation was the most controversial. It was mentioned in the policies of 41 states, allowed without restriction in 19 states (although five of these called it "nonstandard"), and allowed in certain circumstances in 14 states. One state allowed the calculator accommodation with implications for scoring. In addition, seven states allowed it both in certain circumstances and with implications for scoring (AC/AI).

Thirty-eight states permitted the use of other equipment and materials accommodations that are not listed in Table 1, such as pencil grips, which were allowed in 19 states, and colored overlays, which were allowed in 11 states. Additional details about the equipment/material accommodations can be found in Tables B.21-B.23 in Appendix B.

Table 1. Number of States that Allow or Prohibit Selected Presentation Accommodations^a

Accommodation	Type of Accommodation/Impact of Use^b
Accommodation	A	A*	AC	AI	AC/AI	P
Large Print	48	0	0	0	0	0
Braille	44	2	1	0	1	0
Read Aloud Directions	41	1	1	0	0	0
Read Aloud Questions	2	6	26	0	11	0
Sign Interpret Directions	43	1	1	0	0	0
Sign Interpret Questions	8	6	19	0	6	0
Repeat/Re-Read/Clarify Directions	38	2	0	0	0	0
Visual Cues	25	1	1	0	1	0
Administration by Others	17	0	1	0	0	0
Familiar Examiner	21	0	1	0	0	0
Additional Examples	8	1	0	0	0	0

^{a In addition to

the presentation accommodations listed

in this table, 29 states have other

presentation accommodations. See Table

B.20 in Appendix B for details.

^b A = allowed; A* =

non-standard, but no implications for

scoring or aggregation; AC = allowed in

certain circumstances; AI = allowed with

implications for scoring; AC/AI =

allowed and certain circumstances and

there are implications for scoring; P=

prohibited

Definitions:

Large Print = all parts of the

assessment are in large print.

Braille = all parts of the assessment

are presented in Braille.

Read Aloud Directions = the directions

portion of the assessment is read to the

student.

Read Aloud Questions = the assessment

items are read to the student items).

Sign Interpret Directions = directions

portion of the assessment presented to

the student via sign language

Sign Interpret Questions = assessment

items presented to the student via sign

language

Read/Re-read/Clarify Directions =

directions may be clarified through

restatement for the student

Visual Cues = additional visual cues are

provided for students, such as arrows or

stickers

Administration by Others = someone other

than regular test administrator gives

test to the student (e.g., special or

regular education teacher)

Familiar Examiner = someone other than

regular test examiner who the student

knows and has worked with in the past

gives the test to the student (e.g.,

special education teacher)

Additional Examples = in response to

student request for more information or

clarification, test administrator can

supply additional examples to assist the

student}

Changes Since 2003

As was the case in previous reports, with the exception of the calculator and abacus accommodations, most of the equipment and material accommodations were considered non-controversial in 2005. For example, in 2005, no states prohibited the use of a calculator, down from one state in 2003. More states allowed the use of templates/graph paper and abacuses without restriction than in 2003.

Table 2. Number of States that Allow or Prohibit Selected Equipment/Material Accommodations^a

Accommodation	Type of Accommodation/Impact of Use^b
Accommodation	A	A*	AC	AI	AC/AI	P
Magnification Equipment	42	0	0	0	0	0
Amplification Equipment	39	0	1	0	0	0
Light/Acoustics	33	0	0	0	0	0
Calculator	14	5	14	1	7	0
Templates/Graph paper	38	1	0	0	0	0
Audio/Video Equipment	17	0	1	0	0	0
Noise Buffer	31	0	1	0	0	0
Adaptive/Special Furniture	32	0	0	0	0	0
Abacus	20	0	6	0	2	0
Manipulatives	12	1	0	1	5	1

^a In addition to the equipment and materials accommodations listed in this table, 38 states have other equipment and materials accommodations. See Table B.32 in Appendix B.23 for details.
^b A = allowed; A* = non-standard, but no implications for scoring or aggregation; AC = allowed in certain circumstances; AI = allowed with implications for scoring; AC/AI = allowed and certain circumstances and there are implications for scoring; P= prohibited

Definitions:
Magnification Equipment = equipment that enlarges the print size of the test.
Amplification Equipment = equipment that increases the level of sound during the test (e.g., hearing aids).
Light/Acoustics = changes to the amount or placement of lighting or special attention to the acoustics of the test setting.
Calculator = standard calculator and special function calculator
Templates/Graph Paper = Place markers or templates used to mark location of focus on the test.
Audio/Video Equipment = audio or video equipment.
Noise Buffer = ear mufflers, white noise, and other equipment used to block external sounds.
Adaptive or Special Furniture = any furniture the student requires (e.g., for sitting upright)
Abacus = abacus or similar counting tools.
Manipulatives = Learning materials that are operated with the hands (e.g., math cubes, counters).

Response Accommodations

Response accommodations are changes in how a student responds to elements of the assessment process. Table 3 summarizes the response accommodations documented by states. There was no general consensus across states for whether many of the response accommodations should be permitted in all circumstances or only with restrictions. For example, as indicated in Table 3, most states permitted the use of a computer or machine to provide responses on state assessments (44 states allowed it in some capacity); however, only 28 states allow it without restrictions (although three of them called it "nonstandard"). When computers were mentioned as an allowed accommodation, it was often with special instructions regarding the availability of the spell checking function. The use of a brailler is also permitted by the majority of states; it is permitted without restriction in 35 states (with one state calling it "nonstandard") and allowed with restrictions in 3 states. Other commonly used response accommodations include writing in test booklets, use of a tape recorder, and pointing. Sixteen states allowed the use of speech/text devices without restriction (with two of these states calling them "nonstandard"), while two states allowed their use only in certain circumstances, and one state allowed them in certain circumstances and with implications for scoring and/or aggregation.

Twenty-one states also permitted the use of other response accommodations that are not listed in Table 3. These included the use of adapted paper (6 states) and a thesaurus (6 states). For additional information on these accommodations as well as more detailed information on the response accommodations, see Tables B.24-B.26 in Appendix B.

Changes Since 2003

In both the 2003 and 2005 reports, there was no general consensus among states regarding which response accommodations should be allowed without restriction, but there was a clear trend toward more states permitting the use of accommodations in this group without restriction. For example, while in 2003 five states allowed the use of spell checkers without restriction, in 2005 this number had more than doubled to12 states. Increases in the number of states allowing accommodations without restriction also occurred with the tape recorder and sign responses accommodations. This is the first report that has had a separate category for speech/text devices. These devices had previously been included under communication devices.

Table 3. Number of States that Allow or Prohibit Selected Response Accommodations^a

Accommodation

Type of Accommodation/Impact of Use^b

A

A*

AC

AI

AC/AI

P

Proctor/Scribe

33

4

6

0

5

0

Computer or Machine

25

3

16

0

0

0

Write in Test Booklets

35

0

4

1

0

0

Tape Recorder

33

0

5

0

0

0

Communication Device

22

2

3

0

1

0

Spell Checker/Assistance

12

4

6

1

6

2

Brailler

34

1

2

1

0

0

Sign Responses to Sign
Language Interpreter

25

2

2

0

1

0

Pointing

18

1

2

0

0

0

Speech/Text Device

14

2

2

0

1

0

^a In addition to the response accommodations listed in this table, 22 states have other response accommodations. See Table B.26 in Appendix B for details.
^b A = allowed; A* = non-standard, but no implications for scoring or aggregation; AC = allowed in certain circumstances; AI = allowed with implications for scoring; AC/AI = allowed and certain circumstances and there are implications for scoring; P= prohibited

Definitions:
Proctor/Scribe = student responds verbally and a proctor or scribe then translates this to an answer sheet; for writing extended responses, specific instructions about how spelling or punctuation may be included.
Computer or Machine = computer or other machine (e.g., typewriter)
Write in Test Booklet = responses may be written in the test booklet rather than on answer sheets
Tape Recorder = student’s verbal responses are tape recorded, generally for later description.
Communication Device = various devices for the student to use in giving responses (e.g., symbol boards).
Spell checker/Assistance = spell checker either as a separate device or within a word-processing program, or print materials (e.g., glossary, dictionary).
Brailler = device or computer that generates responses in Braille.
Pointing = student points to response and staff member translates this onto an answer sheet.

Scheduling/Timing Accommodations

Scheduling/timing accommodations are changes in the timing or scheduling of an assessment and are summarized in Table 4. The most frequently allowed accommodations in this category were extended time and testing with breaks. Forty-one states allowed extended time with no restrictions (with two of these calling it "nonstandard"), three states allowed it in certain circumstances, and one state allowed it in certain circumstances and with implications for scoring. The testing with breaks accommodation was permitted by 42 states without restriction (again, two of these states called it "nonstandard"). One additional state also allowed this accommodation with restriction. The only accommodation in this category that was prohibited by a state was taking the test over multiple days, which was prohibited by one state.

Twenty-two states listed other scheduling/timing accommodations that were not listed in Table 4. Among these other accommodations were administering subtests in a different order (11 states) and flexible scheduling (10 states). Additional information on these other accommodations as well as detailed information about the scheduling/timing accommodations can be found in Tables B.27-B.29 in Appendix B.

Changes Since 2003

The extended time accommodation has become less controversial since 2003, with the number of states allowing extended time on a test without restriction increasing. Over the same time period fewer states allowed test-taking in multiple sessions without restriction.

Table 4. Number of States that Allow or Prohibit Selected Scheduling/Timing Accommodations^a

Accommodation

Type of Accommodation/Impact of Use^b

A

A*

AC

AI

AC/AI

P

Extended Time

39

2

3

0

1

0

With Breaks

40

2

1

0

0

0

Multiple Sessions

23

0

5

0

0

0

Time Beneficial to Student

37

0

0

0

0

0

Over Multiple Days

17

1

3

0

0

1

^a In addition to the scheduling/timing accommodations listed in this table, 22 states have other scheduling/timing accommodations. See Table B.29 in Appendix B for details.
^b A = allowed; A* = non-standard, but no implications for scoring or aggregation; AC = allowed in certain circumstances; AI = allowed with implications for scoring; AC/AI = allowed and certain circumstances and there are implications for scoring; P= prohibited

Definitions:
Extended Time = student may take long than the time typically allowed
With Breaks = time away from test allowed during tests typically administered without breaks, sometimes with conditions about when this can occur (e.g., not within subtests) and how long they can be.
Multiple Sessions = assessments generally given in a single session can be broken into multiple sessions.
Time Beneficial to Student = administered at a time that is most advantageous to the student
Over Multiple Days = administered over several days when it is normally administered in one day.

Setting Accommodations

Setting accommodations are changes in the test location or environment. These accommodations include individual or small group administration, administration in a separate room or carrel, and the proximity of the student’s seat to the test administrator. The results of our analysis are displayed in Table 5.

Forty-five states permitted testing of students in small groups with no states restricting the use of this accommodation. Forty-five states also permitted the testing of students individually with no states restricting its use. The most controversial of the setting accommodations was testing students in their homes. Eighteen states allowed students to be tested in their home with no restrictions, although one state called this a nonstandard accommodation (without implications for scoring or aggregation), and six states allowed it in certain circumstances.

It is important to note that even though we documented that only 13 states allowed the "testing of students in the special education classroom" accommodation with no restrictions, the policies of many additional states implied that this accommodation was permitted. It is likely that individualized or small group testing occurred in the special education classroom, but unless a policy explicitly stated that testing in the special education classroom was allowed as an accommodation, we did not mark it as allowed in this report.

Fourteen states listed other setting accommodations in their policies, such as testing in a hospital (9 states) and freedom/opportunity to move around the room (4 states). See Tables B.30-B.32 for additional information about the other accommodations and for more detailed specifications regarding setting accommodations.

Changes Since 2003

Much like in 2003, in 2005 most of the accommodations in this category were not controversial; however, for all eight setting accommodations that we track, the number of states allowing the use of each without restriction decreased from 2003 to 2005. The most dramatic decreases were in the separate room (38 states in 2003 to 31 states in 2005), minimize distractors (28 states in 2003 to 19 states in 2005), and special education classroom (22 states in 2003 to 13 states in 2005) accommodations.

Table 5. Number of States that Allow or Prohibit Selected Setting Accommodations^a

Accommodation

Type of Accommodation/Impact of Use^b

A

A*

AC

AI

AC/AI

P

Individual

45

0

0

0

0

0

Small Group

45

0

0

0

0

0

Carrel

35

0

1

0

0

0

Separate Room

31

0

1

0

0

0

Seat Location/Proximity

33

0

1

0

0

0

Minimize Distractions

19

0

0

0

0

0

Student’s Home

17

1

6

1

0

0

Special Education Classroom

13

0

1

0

0

0

^a In addition to the setting accommodations listed in this table, 14 states have other setting accommodations. See Table B.32 in Appendix B for details.
^b A = allowed; A* = non-standard, but no implications for scoring or aggregation; AC = allowed in certain circumstances; AI = allowed with implications for scoring; AC/AI = allowed and certain circumstances and there are implications for scoring; P= prohibited

Definitions:
Individual = student assessed separately from other students.
Small Group = student assessed in small group separate from other students.
Carrel = student assessed while seated in a study carrel.
Separate Room = student assessed in separate room
Seat Location/Proximity = student is assessed in a specifically designated seat location, usually in close proximity to the test administrator.
Minimize Distractions/Reduced Noise = student assessed in a quiet environment
Student’s Home = student assessed at home, usually when out of school for illness or other reasons.
Special Education Classroom = student assessed in special education classroom

Summary

The 2005 participation and accommodation policies continue to reflect the conclusion reached by Clapper et al. (2005) for the 2003 policies:

State policies on participation and accommodations continue not only to evolve, but to evolve at a rapid pace. In addition, to the increased rate of change, the volume of both written and online materials regarding participation and accommodations is also increasing. Many states now have a variety of documents available online (e.g., policies, handouts for parents and teachers, training materials, rules and procedures) that provide guidance (p. 23).

There are also a number of additional noteworthy changes since 2003 that are summarized here.

Participation Policies

In many cases the language in the participation policies is becoming more detailed and seeks to clarify when and how students with disabilities participate in statewide assessments. The policies also now focus more on the assessment and on current information about the students rather than on historic data. For example, many more states in 2005 included current performance or level of functioning, content purpose or nature of assessment, and student needs and characteristics as participation policy variables that can be used to make decisions about how students with disabilities participate in statewide assessment than had in 2003. Many more states also now indicate that excessive absences and cultural, social, linguistic, and environmental factors may not be considered in the decision-making process. In 2005, fewer states allowed the consideration of instructional relevance/instructional goals when decisions were made about how students with disabilities will participate than in the past.

Accommodation Policies

As with participation policies, we found that the language in the accommodation policies has become more specific. Historically, accommodations were sometimes seen as a way to enable some students with disabilities to participate in statewide assessments, and there was often little consideration of when it was appropriate to use a given accommodation. That approach is changing. For example, more states are now distinguishing between accommodations that can be used on a math test (but not a reading test). We also found that there continues to be wide variability in accommodation policies across states. The current research base that seeks to validate accommodations remains limited (although growing); our results indicate that states are continuing to grapple with how to appropriately use accommodations to enable some students with disabilities to meaningfully participate in statewide assessments. According to Thurlow, Thompson, and Lazarus (2006), "states now seem to be honing in on the need to clarify the purpose of the test and the construct being tested, rather than just the goal of providing the student with access to the testing situation" (p. 662).

The read aloud questions accommodation remains very controversial and there is little consensus between states as to how and when it should be used. Between 2003 and 2005 more states also put limitations on the use of the sign interpretation of questions accommodation.

Some of the response accommodations that rely on technology remain controversial; but, at least in some cases, they appear to be more widely accepted than in the past. Sixteen states now allow the use of the spell checker accommodation without restriction (four of these call it nonstandard; even if these are not counted, the remaining 12 are far above the five states that allowed spell checkers in 2003). This is the first time that we have specifically analyzed state policies to see if the use of speech/text devices was an allowed accommodation. This emerging technology was addressed in the policies of 18 states—and allowed without restriction in 15.

The extended time accommodation has become less controversial since the last report and most states now allow this accommodation without restriction. There was, however, less consensus between states on whether or not the administration of tests over multiple days is an acceptable accommodation in 2005 than in previous reports. States apparently see a trade-off between the use of the "extended time" accommodation and the "over multiple days" accommodation. States may be concerned about test security issues when the test is administered over multiple days, though for those students with disabilities who tire easily, testing over multiple days may be a more appropriate accommodation than extended time.

In 2005, the policies of fewer states mentioned some commonly provided accommodations than had been included in the past. Several of the setting accommodations that are not generally considered controversial (e.g., separate room, minimize distractions, special education classroom) were less frequently found in policies in 2005 than in past reports. Perhaps states believe that these accommodations are so generally accepted that there is no need to include specific mention of them in the policies—though there is the risk that, without them being explicitly included in the policy, some students may not have access to an accommodation that may be needed.

Conclusions

Participation and accommodation policies continue to evolve—and as noted above, there have been a number of key changes since 2003—but states appear to have a better understanding of key issues than in the past. States seem to better recognize the need to clarify and specify when and how participation policy variables and various accommodations are used. States, however, need to carefully consider the possible implications of deleting participation and accommodation policy variables from policies that might be assumed to be general knowledge or common practice. Some types of technology (e.g., spell checkers, speech/text devices), though still controversial, seem to be more generally accepted than in the past. It is also notable that most states now permit the use of the extended time accommodation with restriction.

States will continue to grapple with many complex concerns and requirements related to accommodations. This analysis indicates that many states have developed participation and accommodation policies that reflect the grappling they have done and that for the time at least should serve them well.

References

Clapper, A. T., Morse, A. B., Lazarus, S. S., Thompson, S. J., & Thurlow, M. L. (2005). 2003 state policies on assessment participation and accommodations for students with disabilities (Synthesis Report 56). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Rivera, C., Collum, E., Shafer, L., & Sia Jr., J. K. (2005). An analysis of state assessment policies addressing the accommodation of English language learners. In Rivera (Ed.) A national review of state policy and practice for English language learners. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Thurlow, M., House, A., Boys, C., Scott, D., & Ysseldyke, J. (2000). State participation and accommodation policies for students with disabilities: 1999 update (Synthesis Report 33). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Thurlow, M.L., Lazarus, S., Thompson, S., & Robey, J. (2002). 2001 state policies on assessment participation and accommodations (Synthesis Report 46). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Thurlow, M.L., Scott, D.L., & Ysseldyke, J.E. (1995a). A compilation of states’ guidelines for accommodations in assessments for students with disabilities (Synthesis Report 18). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Thurlow, M.L., Scott, D.L., & Ysseldyke, J.E. (1995b). A compilation of states’ guidelines for including students with disabilities in assessments (Synthesis Report 17). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Thurlow, M., Seyfarth, A., Scott, D., & Ysseldyke, J. (1997). State assessment policies on participation and accommodations for students with disabilities: 1997 update (Synthesis Report 29). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Thurlow, M.L., Thompson, S.J. & Lazarus, S.S. (2006). Considerations for the administration of tests to special needs students: Accommodations, modifications, and more. In Downing, S. M. & Haladyna, T. M. (Ed.), Handbook of Test Development (pp. 653-673). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, Inc.

Thurlow, M.L., Ysseldyke, J.E., & Silverstein, B. (1993). Testing accommodations for students with disabilities: A review of the literature (Synthesis Report 4). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Appendix A. State Documents Used in Analysis of Participation
and Accommodation Policies

Table A.1: State Documents Used in Analysis of Participation and Accommodation Policies

State
Alabama	Alabama State Department of Education (2003). Alabama Student Assessment Program Policies and Procedures for Students of Special Populations, Bulletin No. 11. Montgomery, AL. Retrieved 9-14-04 from http://www.alsde.edu/html/doc_download.asp?id=1540&section=65

	Alabama State Department of Education, Division of Student Assessment (August 2004). Update on the Alabama Statewide Assessment Program and Related Issues for Students with Disabilities. Montgomery, AL. Retrieved 9-14-04 from http://www.alsde.edu/html/sections/doc_download.asp?section=65&id=1054
Alaska	Alaska Department of Education & Early Development (August 2004). Participation Guidelines for Alaska Students in State Assessments. Juneau, AK. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.eed.state.ak.us/tls/assessment/participation%20guidelines/participationguidelinesfinal.pdf
Arizona	Arizona Department of Education (December 2004). Administration of AIMS HS, AIMS DPA, TerraNova to Students Requiring Accommodations. Phoenix, AZ.
Arkansas	Arkansas Department of Education (no date). Student Participation in Statewide Assessment: Guidelines for IEP Team Decision-Making (Appendix B). Little Rock, AR.

	Arkansas Department of Education (January 2005). Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment & Accountability Program (ACTAAP): District and School Test Coordinators' Manual. Little Rock, AR.
California	California Department of Education (February 2004). California Alternate Performance Assessment Participation Criteria. Sacramento, CA. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/sr/documents/partcrtra.pdf

	California Department of Education (2003). STAR Program: Testing Students Out-of-Level and/or with Accommodations or Modifications and Returning Answer Documents for Scoring: CSTs and CAT/6, Survey. Sacramento, CA. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.cde.ca.gov/nclb/sr/sa/documents/yr03wb0131attf.pdf

	California Department of Education (July 2004). Questions and Answers about California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) Test Variations. Sacramento, CA. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/hs/documents/qandatestvar.pdf

	California Department of Education (February 2004). STAR Coordinator/Special Education Administrator Web cast Training (power point). Sacramento, CA.

	California Department of Education (November 2004). Matrix of Test Variations, Accommodations, and Modifications of California Statewide Assessments. Sacramento, CA. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sa/documents/matrix5.pdf

	California Department of Education (December 2004). California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) Scribe and Sign Language Guidelines. Sacramento, CA.
Colorado	Colorado Department of Education, Special Education Services Unit (Fall 2002). Accommodations and the CSAP. Denver, CO. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdeassess/csap/acc/qa.pdf

	Colorado Department of Education (no date). Understanding CSAP Accommodations. Denver, CO. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdeassess/csap/acc/handouts.pdf

	Colorado Department of Education, Student Assessment Unit (September 2004). 2004-2005 Procedures Manual for the Colorado Student Assessment Program. Denver, CO. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdeassess/csap/2004/2004_2005CSAPProcManFinal.pdf

	Colorado Department of Education, Special Education Services Unit (Fall 2003). Colorado State Assessments and Students with Disabilities. Denver, CO. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdesped/download/pdf/FF-CSAP2003.pdf

	Colorado Department of Education, Special Education Services Unit (no date). Students with Special Needs and the Colorado Student Assessment Program (CSAP) (brochure). Denver, CO. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdesped/download/pdf/CSAP-spcl_nds_Brochure.pdf
Connecticut	Connecticut Department of Education, Division of Evaluation and Research (December 2002). Assessment Guidelines (9th Edition). Hartford, CT. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.csde.state.ct.us/public/der/s-t/testing/agl/agl_9th_edition.pdf
Delaware	Delaware Department of Education (April 2004). Delaware Student Testing Program: Guidelines for the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities and Students with Limited English Proficiency. Dover, DE. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.doe.state.de.us/aab/2004-2005%20Inlusion%20Guidelines.pdf
Florida	Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services (2003). Accommodations and Modifications: What Parents Need to Know. Tallahassee, FL. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.firn.edu/doe/commhome/fcat/acmodpar.pdf

	Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services (2004). Information for Parents and Teachers-Planning FCAT Accommodations for Students with Disabilities. Tallahassee, FL. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.firn.edu/doe/commhome/fcat/fcat-tea.pdf

	Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services (2004). Information for Parents-FCAT Accommodations for Students with Disabilities. Tallahassee, FL. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.firn.edu/doe/commhome/fcat/fcat-par.pdf

	Florida Department of Education (2005). The IEP Team's Guide to FCAT Accommodations. Tallahassee, FL. Retrieved 1-3-05 from http://www.firn.edu/doe/bin00014/pdf/fcatteam.pdf
Georgia	Georgia Department of Education (August 2004). Georgia Student Assessment Program: Student Assessment Handbook 2004-2005. Atlanta, GA. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/_documents/curriculum/testing/handbook_1.pdf and http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/_documents/curriculum/testing/handbook_2.pdf
Hawaii	Hawaii State Department of Education (2004). Student Participation Information Handbook. Honolulu, HI.
Idaho	Idaho Department of Education (2004). Idaho Statewide Testing Program-Test Coordinator's Guide 2004-2005. Boise, ID. Retrieved 9-1-04 from http://www.sde.state.id/us/instruct/docs/counseling/testcoguide.pdf
Illinois	Illinois State Board of Education (2005). Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT) - Test Administration Manual: Grades 3, 4, and 5 Census Tests. Springfield, IL. Retrieved 9-17-04 from http://www.isbe.net/assessment/PDF/2005_ISAT_TAM_345.pdf

	Illinois State Board of Education (2005). Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT)- District and School Coordination Manual. Springfield, IL. Retrieved 9-17-04 from http://www.isbe.net/assessment/PDF/2005_ISAT_District_Manual.pdf

	Illinois State Board of Education (September 2004). Participation Guidelines Form for the Illinois Alternate Assessment. Springfield, IL. Retrieved 9-17-04 from http://www.isbe.net/assessment/iaapartguide.htm
Indiana	Indiana Department of Education, Center for Assessment, Research, and Information Technology (2004). Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+) Program Manual 2004-2005. Indianapolis, IN. Retrieved 9-17-04 from http://www.doe.state.in.us/istep/progman04-05.html
Iowa	Iowa Department of Education (September 2003). Participation Guidelines. Des Moines, IA. Retrieved 9-17-04 from http://www.state.ia.us/educate/ecese/cfcs/altassess/doc/apg.pdf

	Iowa Department of Education (no date). Guidelines for the Inclusion of English Language Learners (ELLs) in K-12 Assessments. Des Moines, IA. Retrieved 1-11-05 from http://www.state.ia.us/educate/ecese/is/ell/doc/guidelines04.html
Kansas	Kansas Department of Education (July 2001). Kansas Special Education Process Handbook-Participation in General State Assessments and District-Wide Assessments (Chapter 4). Topeka, KS. Retrieved 9-17-04 from http://www.kansped.org/ksde/ph01/ch4.html

	Kansas Department of Education (2004). Kansas Modified Assessments-Eligibility Criteria and Overview. Topeka, KS. Retrieved 9-17-04 from http://www.kansped.org/ksde/assmts/ksmodass05.pdf

	Kansas Department of Education (2001). Kansas Guidelines for Determining State Assessment Accommodations for Students with Disabilities. Topeka, KS. Retrieved 9-17-04 from http://www.kansped.org/ksde/assmts/9assmts.pdf

	Kansas Department of Education (2003). Kansas Alternate Assessment Manual-Administration Guidelines and Procedures for all Participants. Topeka, KS. Retrieved 9-17-04 from http://www.kansped.org/ksde/assmts/kaamanual03.pdf
Kentucky	Kentucky Department of Education (February 2004). Inclusion of Special Populations In the State-Required Assessment And Accountability Programs 703 KAR 5:070. Frankfort, KY. Retrieved 9-17-04 from http://www.education.ky.gov/KDE/Administrative+Resources/Testing+Reporting/default.htm
Louisiana	Louisiana Department of Education (no date). Special Populations Disability Guidelines-Louisiana Educational Assessment Program Guidelines for Selecting Test Accommodations for Students with Disabilities. Baton Rouge, LA. Retrieved 9-17-04 from http://www.doe.state.la.us/lde/uploads/1615.pdf

	Louisiana Department of Education (2005). LEAP/GEE 21 District and School Test Coordinators Manual. Baton Rouge, LA.

	Louisiana Department of Education (May 2004). Louisiana Alternate Assessment (LAA) Participation Criteria. Baton Rouge, LA.
Maine	Maine Department of Education (September 2004). 2004-2005 Policies and Procedures for Accommodations and Alternate Assessment to the MEA. Augusta, ME. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://mainegov-images.informe.org/education/mea/PoliciesProcedures.pdf

	Maine Department of Education (no date). Maximizing Accommodations for Students with Unique Learning Needs. Augusta, ME. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.state.me.us/education/mea/masuln.htm

	Maine Department of Education (August 2000). Accommodations? Modifications? and Other Challenging Questions About Local Assessment Systems. Augusta, ME. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.state.me.us/education/mea/accommodif.htm
Maryland	Maryland State Department of Education (August 2004). Requirements for Accommodating, Excusing, and Exempting Students in Maryland Assessment Programs. Baltimore, MD.

	Maryland State Department of Education (2003). ALT-MSA Participation Guidelines. Baltimore, MD. Retrieved 10-1-04 from http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/testing/alt_msa

	Maryland State Department of Education (May 2003). Test Administration and Coordination Manual. Baltimore, MD.
Massachusetts	Massachusetts Department of Education (2005). Requirements for the Participation of Students with Disabilities in MCAS. Malden, MA. Retrieved 10-1-04 from http://www.doe.mass.edu/mcas/alt/spedreq.pdf
Michigan	Michigan Department of Education (2003). Draft Guidelines for Determining Participation in State Assessment for Students with Disabilities. Lansing, MI. Retrieved 11-1-04 from http://www.michigan.gov/documents/DraftGuidelinesforAssessment_Feb03_59642_7.pdf

	Michigan Department of Education (Winter 2005). MEAP Test Administrator Manual. Lansing, MI. Retrieved 11-1-04 from http://www.michigan.gov/documents/Winter_2005_Test_Administrator_Manual_12-01-04_110837_7.pdf

	Michigan Department of Education (2004). 2004/2005 MI-Access Training Materials. Lansing, MI. Retrieved 11-1-04 from http://www.mi-access.info/training/trainsec2.pdf
Minnesota	Minnesota Department of Education (September 2004). 2004-2005 Guidelines for Accommodations in the Minnesota Assessment System. Roseville, MN. Retrieved 11-1-04 from http://education.state.mn.us/content/080571.pdf
Mississippi	Mississippi Department of Education (April 2004). Mississippi Statewide Assessment System Guidelines for Testing Special Populations: Students with Disabilities and English Language Learners. Jackson, MS. Retrieved 11-1-04 from http://www.mde.k12.ms.us/acad/osa/specpop.html
Missouri	Missouri Department of Education (no date). Missouri Assessment Program: Definitions for Accommodations for Students with Disabilities. Jefferson City, MO. Retrieved 12-14-04 from http://www.dese.state.mo.us/divimprove/assess/MAP_Accommodations_Definitions.pdf

	University of Missouri, Columbia-Center for Innovations in Education (no date). Including Students with Disabilities in the Missouri Assessment Program: Information Packet, Making Decisions about Participation and Accommodation (Chapter 3). Columbia, MO. Retrieved 12-14-04 from http://www.cise.missouri.edu/publications/map/ch03.html

	University of Missouri, Columbia - Center for Innovations in Education (no date). Including Students with Disabilities in the Missouri Assessment Program: Information Packet, Understanding the Missouri Assessment Program (Chapter 2). Columbia, MO. Retrieved 12-14-04 from http://www.cise.missouri.edu/publications/map/ch02.html
Montana	Montana Office of Public Instruction (January 2002). Assessment Handbook, Volume 3, Accommodations and Alternate Assessment Scale. Helena, MT. Retrieved 12-14-04 from http://www.opi.state.mt.us/PDF/Assessment/2002handbookV3.pdf

	Montana Office of Public Instruction (Spring 2004). The Iowa Tests -Montana Guide for Test Coordinators and Administrators. Helena, MT.

	Montana Office of Public Instruction (January 2005). MontCAS, Phase 2, Criterion-Referenced Test (CRT) Test Coordinator's Manual. Helena, MT. Retrieved 12-14-04 from http://opi.state.mt.us/PDF/Assessment/05CRTTCMan.pdf

	Montana Office of Public Instruction (no date) How to Include Students with Disabilities in Montana's Criterion-Referenced Test (CRT). Helena, MT.
Nebraska	Nebraska Department of Education (2004). STARS Update #16, Statewide Writing Assessment for 2004-2005. Lincoln, NE. Retrieved 12-14-04 from http://www.nde.state.ne.us/stars/documents/Update16_001.pdf

	Nebraska Department of Education (November 2004). Accommodations Questions from October 2004 Special Populations Regional Workshop Participants. Lincoln, NE. Retrieved 12-14-04 from http://www.nde.state.ne.us/SPED/documents/QUESTIONSaccommodations.pdf

	Nebraska Department of Education (November 2004). Assessment of Students with Disabilities: ESU 2 Presentation. Lincoln, NE. Retrieved 12-14-04 from http://www.nde.state.ne.us/SPED/documents/Assessmentpres.ESU211.2004forweb.pdf
Nevada	Nevada Department of Education, Office of Assessment, Program Accountability, and Curriculum (2004). 2004-2005 Guidelines for the Nevada Proficiency Examination Program. Carson City, NV. Retrieved 12-14-04 from http://www.doe.nv.gov/sca/testing/appendices.pdf

	Nevada Department of Education, Office of Special Education, Elementary, and Secondary Education and School Improvement Programs (no date). The Skills and Competencies Alternate Assessment of Nevada (SCAAN). Carson City, NV. Retrieved 12-14-04 from http://www.doe.nv.gov/testing_docs/SCAAN.pdf

	Nevada Department of Education (no date). IEP, LEP, and Section 504 Accommodations Forms. Carson City, NV.
New Hampshire	New Hampshire Department of Education (2005). NHEIAP - Alternate Assessment: Deciding Who Should Participate. Concord, NH.

	New Hampshire Department of Education (2004). Procedures for Determining How Students Will Participate in the Grade 10 Statewide Assessment of the New Hampshire Educational Improvement and Assessment Program. Concord, NH. Retrieved 1-3-05 from http://www.ed.state.nh.us/education/doe/organization/curriculum/Assessment/2005/ProceduresforDetermining2005_Final.doc

	New Hampshire Department of Education (no date). New England Common Assessment Program - Accommodations, Guidelines, and Procedures: Administrator Training Guide. Concord, NH. Retrieved 1-3-05 from http://www.ed.state.nh.us/education/doe/organization/curriculum/NECAP/NECAP.htm
New Jersey	New Jersey Department of Education (June 2003). Students with Disabilities and the New Jersey Statewide Assessment System. Trenton, NJ. Retrieved 12-20-04 from http://www.state.nj.us/njded/specialed/sas_brochure.htm

	New Jersey Department of Education (no date). Accommodations and Modifications of Test Administration Procedures for Statewide Assessments. Trenton, NJ. Retrieved 12-20-04 from http://www.nj.gov/njded/specialed/accom900.htm
New Mexico	New Mexico Public Education Department (December 2003). Participation of Students with Disabilities in the New Mexico Statewide Assessment Program. Santa Fe, NM. Retrieved 12-20-04 from http://www.ped.state.nm.us/div/acc.assess/assess/index.html

	New Mexico Public Education Department (January 2005). Procedures Manual for The New Mexico Standards Based Assessment Program. Santa Fe, NM.
New York	The University of the State of New York-The State Education Department (August 2004). Test Access and Accommodations for Students with Disabilities. Albany, NY. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/specialed/publications/policy/testaccess/guide.htm

	The University of the State of New York-The State Education Department (March 2001). The State Alternate Assessment for Students with Severe Disabilities. Albany, NY. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/specialed/publications/policy/alterassess.htm
North Carolina	North Carolina State Board of Education, Department of Public Instruction (February 2003). Testing Students with Disabilities, North Carolina Testing Program. Raleigh, NC. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing/alternate/disabilities/testingstudents.pdf

	North Carolina State Board of Education, Department of Public Instruction (September 2004). Guidelines for Making Decisions for the Participation of Students with Disabilities in the North Carolina Testing Program. Raleigh, NC. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing/alternate/Participation&SigCogDis.pdf
North Dakota	North Dakota Department of Public Instruction, Office of Special Education (2004). North Dakota Alternate Assessment (NDALT) Part I. Bismarck, ND. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.dpi.state.nd.us/speced/resource/alternate/manualI.pdf

	North Dakota Department of Public Instruction (September 2004). Students with Disabilities and the North Dakota State and District-Wide Assessments, Information for Parents and Educators. Bismarck, ND. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.dpi.state.nd.us/speced/resource/alternate/brochure.pdf

	North Dakota Department of Public Instruction-Office of Special Education (August 1999). Guidelines: Individualized Education Program Planning Process. Bismarck, ND. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.dpi.state.nd.us/speced/guide/iep/IEPb.pdf

	North Dakota Department of Public Instruction (Fall 2004). North Dakota State Assessment Program Test Coordinator's Manual. Bismarck, ND. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.dpi.state.nd.us/testing/assess/fall04.pdf

	North Dakota Department of Public Instruction (September 2004). Step 10 Document. Bismarck, ND. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.dpi.state.nd.us/testing/assess/step10.pdf
Ohio	Ohio Department of Education, Offices of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment (2004). Ohio State-wide Testing Program Rules Book. Columbus, OH. Retrieved 12-21-04 from http://www.ode.state.oh.us/proficiency/Rules/Rules_Book2004.pdf

	Ohio Department of Education (2005). Ohio Achievement Tests-School Test Coordinator's Manual. Columbus, OH.

	Ohio Department of Education (July 2004). Guidelines for Participation in State-developed Alternate Assessment. Columbus, OH. Retrieved 12-21-04 from http://www.ode.state.oh.us/proficiency/alternate_assessment/AA_Participation_Guidelines_2004.asp

	Ohio Department of Education (May 2002). Rule 3301-13-03. Columbus, OH. Retrieved 12-21-04 from http://www.ode.state.oh.us/proficiency/PDF/3301-13-03Rule.pdf
Oklahoma	Oklahoma State Department of Education-Office of Accountability and Assessments (2004). Special Education and Alternate Testing (power point). Oklahoma City, OK. Retrieved 12-21-04 from http://www.sde.state.ok.us/home/defaultie/html

	Oklahoma State Department of Education (October 2003). Accommodations for Students on an IEP or 504 Plan. Oklahoma City, OK.
Oregon	Oregon Department of Education-Office of Assessment and Information Services (2004). 2004-2005 Knowledge and Skills Test Administration Manual. Salem, OR. Retrieved 12-21-04 from http://www.ode.state.or.us/teachlearn/testing/manuals/2005/ksadminmanual0405_01122005.pdf

	Oregon Department of Education (August 2004). 2004-2005 Accommodations Table. Salem, OR. Retrieved 12-21-04 from http://www.ode.state.or.us/teachlearn/testing/manuals/tables
Pennsylvania	Pennsylvania Department of Education (February 2004). Accommodations Guidelines for Students with IEPs, Students with 504 Plans, and English Language Learners. Harrisburg, PA. Retrieved 12-21-04 from http://www.pde.state.pa.us/a_and_t/lib/a_and_t/2005AccommodationsGuidelines.doc

	Pennsylvania Department of Education (no date). Inclusion of Students with Disabilities in the Statewide Assessment Program. Harrisburg, PA. Retrieved 12-21-04 from ftp://ftp.pattan.k12.pa.us/pattan/Instruction/Assessment.pdf
Rhode Island	Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (2000). Policy on Student Participation and Assessment Accommodations. Providence, RI. Retrieved 1-3-05 from http://www.ridoe.net/standards/stateassessment/policy.pdf

	Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (no date). Alternate Assessment Criteria. Providence, RI. Retrieved 1-3-05 from http://www.ridoe.net/standards/stateassessment/Alternateassessment.htm

	Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (no date). New England Common Assessment Program - Accommodations, Guidelines, and Procedures: Administrator Training Guide. Providence, RI.

	Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (2005). The Rhode Island State Assessment Program - District and School Testing Coordinator's Handbook Spring 2005. Providence, RI.
South Carolina	South Carolina Department of Education, Office of Assessment (January 2003). Testing Students with Disabilities, Guidelines for IEP Teams. Columbia, SC. Retrieved 1-3-05 from http://www.myscschools.com/offices/assessment//Programs/SWD/IEPGuidelines021303.doc

	South Carolina Department of Education (Spring 2004). PACT Test Administration Manual, Guidelines for Testing Students with Documented Disabilities (Appendix C, Section I). Columbia, SC. Retrieved 1-3-05 from http://www.myscschools.com/offices/assessment/Programs/AMC/PACT-C.pdf

	South Carolina Department of Education (2004). HSAP Test Administration Manual, Testing Students with Documented Disabilities (Appendix C). Columbia, SC. Retrieved 1-3-05 from http://www.myscschools.com/offices/assessment/Programs/AMC/HSAPAppendixC080604.pdf
South Dakota	South Dakota Department of Education-Special Education Programs (March 2004). South Dakota Assessment System: How to Include Students with Disabilities. Pierre, SD. Retrieved 1-3-05 from http://www.state.sd.us/deca/Special/forms/index.htm

	South Dakota Department of Education (no date). Frequently Asked Questions on Assessment Accommodations. Pierre, SD. Retrieved 1-3-05 from http://www.state.sd.us/deca/Special/news/docs/FAQonAssessment.pdf

	Harcourt Assessment, Inc. (2005). Tab 4-Students with Disabilities. Retrieved 1-3-05 from http://doe.sd.gov/octa/assessment/handbook/index.asp

	Harcourt Assessment, Inc. (2005). Tab 5-Limited English Proficient Students. Retrieved from 1-3-05 http://doe.sd.gov/octa/assessment/handbook/index.asp
Tennessee	Tennessee Department of Education (June 2004). 2004-2005 TCAP Accommodations Appendix. Nashville, TN. Retrieved 1-4-05 from http://www.state.tn.us/education/speced/seaccadd.pdf

	Tennessee Department of Education (June 2004). 2004-2005 TCAP Accommodations Instructions for Students with Disabilities. Nashville, TN. Retrieved 1-4-05 from http://www.state.tn.us/education/speced/seiepaci04.pdf

	Tennessee Department of Education (2004). 2004-2005 TCAP Alternate Portfolio Assessment -Teacher's Manual. Nashville, TN.

	Tennessee Department of Education (no date). Testing Students Receiving Special Education Services - Questions and Answers. Nashville, TN. Retrieved 1-4-05 from http://www.state.tn.us/education/tsspedstass.htm
Texas	Texas Education Agency (March 2004). Student Assessment Division Technical Digest 2002-2003-Chapter 7: Test Administration. Austin, TX. Retrieved 1-4-05 from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/techdig/chap7.pdf

	Texas Education Agency (October 2004). ARD Committee Decision-Making Process for the Texas Assessment Program-Reference Manual. Austin, TX. Retrieved 1-4-05 from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/admin/sclaa/ardtrain/ARD_manual0405.pdf

	Texas Education Agency (2004). State-Developed Alternative Assessment II (SDAA II) Information Brochure for 2004-2005. Austin, TX. Retrieved 1-4-05 from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/admin/sdaa/index.html
Utah	Utah State Office of Education (October 2004). Requirements for Participation of Utah Students with Special Needs in the Utah Performance Assessment System for Students (U-PASS). Salt Lake City, UT. Retrieved 1-4-05 from http://www.usoe.k12.ut.us/eval/_AlternateAssessment/requiremSpecialNeeds(R).pdf

	Utah State Office of Education - Special Education Services Unit (2004). Participation of Students with Disabilities in Utah's Statewide Assessment Program 2004-2005 - Considerations for IEP Teams. Salt Lake City, UT. Retrieved 1-4-05 from http://www.usoe.k12.ut.us/sars/data/Participation_2004.pdf
Vermont	Vermont Department of Education (Fall 2004). New England Common Assessment Program-Principal/Test Coordinator Manual. Montpelier, VT. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.state.vt.us/educ/new/pdfdoc/pgm_assessments/necap/coordinator_manual.pdf

	Vermont Department of Education (October 2003). Allowable Accommodations Grid for the State Component Standards-Based Assessments -Guidelines to Assessing Students with Special Assessment Needs School Year 2003-2004. Montpelier, VT. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.state.vt.us/educ/new/pdfdoc/pgm_alternate/options/nsre_allowable_101403.pdf

	Vermont Department of Education (September 2004). Participation Guidelines for Students with Special Assessment Needs. Montpelier, VT. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.state.vt.us/educ/new/pdfdoc/pgm_alternate/options/participation_guidelines_092104.pdf

	Vermont Department of Education (no date). New England Common Assessment Program-Accommodations, Guidelines, and Procedures: Administrator Training Guide. Montpelier, VT. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.state.vt.us/educ/new/pdfdoc/pgm_assessment/necap/accommodations_guide.pdf
Virginia	Virginia Department of Education (October 2002). Procedures for Participation of Students with Disabilities in the Assessment Component of Virginia’s Accountability System. Richmond, VA. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.pen.k12.va.us/VDOE/Assessment/SWDparticipation.pdf
Washington	Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (October 2004). Guidelines for Participation and Testing Accommodations for Special Populations in State Assessment Programs. Olympia, WA. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.k12.wa.us/SpecialEd/pubdocs/Guidelines_for_Testing_Accommodations.pdf

	Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (January 2005). How to Choose and Use Accommodations for Students with Disabilities for Instruction and Assessment - Trainer's Notes. Olympia, WA. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.k12.wa.us/SpecialEd/pubdocs/How_to_choose_manual.pdf
West Virginia	West Virginia Department of Education (July 2003). Student with Disabilities: Guidelines for Participation in the West Virginia Measures of Academic Progress. Charleston, WV. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.wvde.state.wv.us/ose/ParticipationGuidelinesAug2003.pdf

	West Virginia Department of Education (January 2005). IEP Addendum Accommodations - Participation in Statewide Assessment. Charleston, WV. Retrieved 1-10-05 from http://www.wvde.state.wv.us/ose/IEPAddAccommodationInstructJan05.doc
Wisconsin	Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (May 2002). Wisconsin Alternate Assessment Participation Checklist. Madison, WI. Retrieved 1-12-05 from http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/dlsea/een/doc/bul02-03at1.doc

	Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (no date). Examples of Test Accommodations for Students with Disabilities. Madison, WI. Retrieved 1-12-05 from http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/oea/accomdis.html

	Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (June 2002). DPI Guidelines to Facilitate the Participation of Students with Special Needs in State Assessments. Madison, WI. Retrieved 1-12-05 from http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/oea/specneed.html

	Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (January 1999). Assessing All Students: What Every Parent of a Student with a Disability Needs to Know About Participation in Assessment Programs and Testing Accommodations. Retrieved 1-12-05 from http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/dlsea/een/doc/assmt_prnt.doc
Wyoming	Wyoming Department of Education (March 2004). The Wyoming Comprehensive Assessment System (WyCAS) Test Coordinator's Manual. Cheyenne, WY. Retrieved 1-12-05 from http://www.k12.wy.us/wycas/archive/TestAdmin/TestCoordManual2004.pdf

	Wyoming Department of Education (January 2005). Policies for the Participation of All Students in District and Statewide Assessment and Accountability Systems. Cheyenne, WY. Retrieved 1-12-05 from http://www.k12.wy.us/WyCAS/allstudent_participation.pdf

Appendix B. Participation and Accommodation Guidelines by State

Table B.1: Additional Testing Options

State	Selective Participation	Combination Participation	Out-of-Level Assessments	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations	Locally Selected Assessments
Alabama
Alaska		X*		X*
Arizona				X*
Arkansas
California			X*	X*
Colorado		X*
Connecticut	X*		X*
Delaware	X*	X*		X*
Florida
Georgia				X*
Hawaii
Idaho		X*
Illinois		X*
Indiana
Iowa		X*
Kansas		X*		X*
Kentucky				X*
Louisiana
Maine				X*
Maryland
Massachusetts	X*			X*
Michigan		X*		X*
Minnesota		X*		X*
Mississippi			X*
Missouri		X*
Montana		X*		X*
Nebraska		P*	X*	X*
Nevada				X*
New Hampshire	X*			X*
New Jersey		X*		X*
New Mexico
New York					X*
North Carolina		X*		X*
North Dakota		X*
Ohio		P*
Oklahoma			X*
Oregon		X*	X*	X*
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina		X*	X*	X*
South Dakota				X*
Tennessee
Texas		X*			X*
Utah	X*			X*
Vermont			X*	X*
Virginia	X*			X*
Washington		X*
West Virginia
Wisconsin		X*
Wyoming
Total (X)	6	19	8	23	2
Note. P: Prohibited. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.2: Descriptions of Additional Testing Options

State
Alaska	Combination Participation - An eligible disabled student may meet state requirements for passing the HSGQE using any combination of testing under standard conditions, testing with the use of accommodations, or passing an approved alternative assessment program; If a student with a disability is not proficient on one or more subtests of the HSGQE, the student is eligible for an alternative assessment program in the subtest(s) in which proficiency was not achieved.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Modified assessment on the High School Graduation Qualifying Examination (HSGQE).
Arizona	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards High School (AIMS HS), AIMS Dual Purpose Assessment (AIMS DPA), and TerraNova with non-standard accommodations.
California	Out-of-Level Assessments - Out-of-level testing only allowed in STAR Program (grades 5-11 only).
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - STAR (Standardized Testing and Reporting) Program and California English Language Development Test (CELDT) with modifications.
Colorado	Combination Participation - Participation by content area is allowed; When two or more content areas are being assessed, such as reading, writing, and math, the student may take the general math CSAP and the reading and writing CSAPA.
Connecticut	Selective Participation - The Planning and Placement Team (PPT) may determine that a child will not participate in a particular state or district wide assessment of student achievement or part of such an assessment.
	Out-of-Level Assessments - Students may be tested on some subtests on grade level and other subtests on a lower level; Students may take subtests on several different lower grade levels; Out-of-level testing allowed on Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT) and Connecticut Academic Performance Test (CAPT).
Delaware	Selective Participation - Students who are dually eligible as disabled and LEP may be exempted from all or part of the DSTP-2 and from the DSTP-1 science and social studies tests if criteria is met.
	Combination Participation - Students may take different content areas for different assessments (e.g. they may take the alternate assessment for English Language Arts and the general assessment for mathematics, science, and social studies).
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Accommodations that change the test construct(s) of the test (e.g. reading or signing passages or texts for the reading test) may be used with implications for scoring.
Georgia	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Non-standard accommodations are permitted based on documented student need.
Idaho	Combination Participation - The student may take relevant portions of the statewide general education assessment as well as any appropriate Idaho Alternate Assessments.
Illinois	Combination Participation - Students may participate in the regular state assessment (ISAT) for some subjects and in the IAA for others.
Iowa	Combination Participation - In some instances, it may be decided that a student should participate in general assessment in one content area but alternate in the other.
Kansas	Combination Participation - A student may participate in any combination of the State assessments with the exception of the State Alternate Assessment; Students who are eligible for the Kansas Alternate Assessment do not participate in any other Kansas assessments.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Modified mathematics, reading, science, and social studies assessments.
Kentucky	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Some students qualify to participate with accommodations or modifications or both.
Maine	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Maine Education Assessment (MEA) with modifications.
Massachusetts	Selective Participation - LEP students in their first year of enrollment in U.S. schools have the option, but are not required to participate in Reading and English Language Arts tests for their grades.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) with non-standard accommodations.
Michigan	Combination Participation - A student can take one general assessment and one of the MI-Access Functional Independence assessments in the content areas of ELA and mathematics.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Michigan Educational Assessment System (MEAS) assessments with non-standard accommodations.
Minnesota	Combination Participation - Eligible students may take the alternate assessment in some areas and the regular assessment in others.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Basic Skills Test (BST) with modifications.
Mississippi	Out-of-Level Assessments - Instructional level assessments are available.
Missouri	Combination Participation - A student with disabilities should participate in all MAP (Missouri Assessment Program) subject area assessments that are instructionally relevant for that student; Decisions must be made independently for each subject area.
Montana	Combination Participation - For the Iowa Tests, the alternate assessment may be applied in any combination of subjects for a student; For the CRT, which is designed for students with significant cognitive delays, the alternate assessment must be administered in both subjects.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - The Iowa Tests and Criterion-Referenced Test (CRT) with nonstandard accommodations.
Nebraska	Combination Participation - The SPED Alternate Assessment is only for those students with most significant cognitive disabilities; If the student is able to participate in the general assessment in some manner, any portion of the SPED Alternate Assessment is more likely not appropriate for that student. (Prohibited)
	Out-of-Level Assessments - Out-of-level testing is allowed on STARS but not on the state-wide writing assessment.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - General Assessment with modifications is allowed; Modifications directly or indirectly alter the curriculum and/or the assessment itself and do change the expectations of the assessment.
Nevada	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - The IEP committee may decide that a student with a disability will participate in the state assessment program in the following way: Under non-standard conditions, using testing modifications which change or alter the content or administration of the assessment and invalidate the test result.
New Hampshire	Selective Participation - A student may be unable to participate in part of an assessment due to a significant and documented medical emergency.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Testing with non-comparable accommodations (i.e. those that do not preserve the validity and comparability of assessment results) is allowed.
New Jersey	Combination Participation - Students with disabilities shall participate in the Alternate Proficiency Assessment in each content area where the nature of the student's disability is so severe that the student is not receiving instruction in any of the knowledge and skills measured by the general statewide assessment and the student cannot a complete any of the types of questions on the assessment in the content area(s) even with accommodations and modifications.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Students with disabilities eligible for special education and related services and those students eligible under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act may have accommodations and/or modifications during the administration of the statewide assessments.
New York	Locally Selected Assessments - This local assessment may be a locally developed test(s) or some other test(s) that measures a student's progress toward the general education curriculum standards.
North Carolina	Combination Participation - Addressing one State test at a time enables the IEP Team or Section 504 Committee to focus on individual student needs for each test; For example, the team/committee may determine that a student is to participate in the end-of-grade reading comprehension test under standard conditions (i.e., without accommodations), and the student is to participate in the alternate assessment academic inventory for mathematics.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Modifications are allowed, but may invalidate the results of the test.
North Dakota	Combination Participation - One content area (reading/language arts or math) may be assessed with the North Dakota State Assessment, and the other content area may be assessed using the North Dakota Alternate Assessment.
Ohio	Combination Participation - If the IEP team believes that the alternate assessment is appropriate, that student will participate in the alternate assessment in all subject areas; If a student can participate in any part of the general assessment, then he or she should take the entire general assessment with accommodations as needed. (Prohibited)
Oklahoma	Out-of-Level Assessments - Out-of-Level Assessments.
Oregon	Combination Participation - In some cases, a student may take the regular mathematics assessment and the extended reading and extended writing assessments.
	Out-of-Level Assessments - A challenge to another grade level assessment refers to the opportunity for some students to take the assessment above or below the grade level typically associated with their grade of enrollment.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - A modification is an alteration in test administration that substantially changes the level, content or performance criteria; Modifications include alterations in test presentation, or in the response format or substance.
South Carolina	Combination Participation - Off-grade-level testing must be considered separately for each content area of PACT (Palmetto Achievement Challenge Tests) and documented in the IEP; An on-grade-level assessment may be appropriate in one content area such as English Language Arts or science, and an off-grade-level test may be recommended in another content area such as mathematics.
	Out-of-Level Assessments - Off-grade-level testing must be considered separately for each content area of PACT and documented in the IEP.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Modifications that are typically used in South Carolina assessments include alternative scoring, extended writing modifications, the use of a poor speller's dictionary and/or a calculator, off-grade-level testing, and oral administration or reading and English language arts tests.
South Dakota	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Modifications invalidate a student's score and should be coded as a non-standard accommodations which will yield a below basic score.
Texas	Combination Participation - If the student is NOT receiving TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge Skills) instruction in reading and/or mathematics at any level, the student will be exempt from SDAA II (State-Developed Alternate Assessment) in that subject area; The student should take an appropriate LDAA (Locally-Determined Alternate Assessment) assigned by the ARD (admission, review, and dismissal) committee.
	Locally Selected Assessments - If the student is NOT receiving TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge Skills) instruction in reading and/or mathematics at any level, the student will be exempt from SDAA II (State-Developed Alternate Assessment) in that subject area; The student should take an appropriate LDAA (Locally-Determined Alternate Assessment) assigned by the ARD (admission, review, and dismissal) committee.
Utah	Selective Participation - Students with disabilities may be exempted from some elements of U-PASS; Decisions to exempt a student from any statewide assessments must be made during an IEP meeting in which the consequences of those decisions are discussed.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Modifications are changes in curriculum, instruction, and/or assessment that are necessary to provide access for a student with a disability to participate, and which DO fundamentally alter or lower the standard or expectations of the curriculum, course, or assessment.
Vermont	Out-of-Level Assessments - On the NSREs, the adapted assessment option is based on out-of-level administrations of the general statewide assessments.
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Students who cannot participate in the general assessment because the specific accommodations they need are either unavailable or not allowed may qualify for a modified assessment.
Virginia	Selective Participation - Students with a 504 plan must participate in the Standards of Learning assessment in at least one of the four content areas at grades 3, 5, and 8; Students with an IEP must participate in the Standards of Learning assessment in at least one of the four content areas at grades 3, 5, and 8 or in the Virginia Alternate Assessment Program (VAAP).
	Testing with modifications or non-standard accommodations - Participation with non-standard accommodations (accommodations that significantly change what a test is measuring and do not maintain standard conditions of the test are referred to as non-standard) is allowed.
Washington	Combination Participation - A student may take the standard WASL test with our without accommodations in certain subjects, but may require alternate assessment in other subjects.
Wisconsin	Combination Participation - Students may need accommodations for some content domains covered by regular assessments and alternate assessment for one or more content domains.

Table B.3: Circumstances in Which Students Are Not Included in any Form of Statewide Assessment

State	Exclusion Prohibited	Parent Exemption	Emotional Distress	Medical Condition/ Illness	Student Refusal	Disruptive Behavior	Absence	Other
Alabama	X
Alaska								X*
Arizona	X
Arkansas								X*
California		X
Colorado	X
Connecticut				X				X*
Delaware								X*
Florida	X
Georgia								X*
Hawaii		X						X*
Idaho	X
Illinois	X
Indiana	X
Iowa	X
Kansas	X
Kentucky			X	X
Louisiana	X
Maine	X
Maryland	X		X
Massachusetts								X*
Michigan	X
Minnesota	X
Mississippi	X
Missouri				X			X	X*
Montana								X*
Nebraska	X
Nevada	X
New Hampshire				X
New Jersey	X
New Mexico	X
New York	X
North Carolina				X
North Dakota		X		X			X	X*
Ohio								X*
Oklahoma	X
Oregon	X
Pennsylvania				X				X*
Rhode Island				X
South Carolina	X
South Dakota	X
Tennessee	X
Texas	X
Utah			X	X				X*
Vermont				X				X*
Virginia	X
Washington	X
West Virginia	X
Wisconsin	X
Wyoming				X
Total (X)	30	3	3	11	0	0	2	14
Note. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.4: Specifications and Descriptions of "Other" Circumstances in Which Students Are Not Included in any Form of Statewide Assessment

State
Alaska	A student who has arrived late to the system or experienced a sudden and traumatic event close in time to the his or her final test may be eligible for a wavier from the HSGQE requirement.
Arkansas	A student may be exempt from assessment if all of the following criteria are met: her/his demonstrated cognitive functioning and adaptive behavior in the home, school, and community environments are significantly below age expectations even with program modifications and adaptations, her/his course of study is primarily functional and life-skills oriented, and she/he requires extensive direct instruction and/or extensive supports in multiple settings to acquire, maintain, and generalize skills necessary for application in school, work, home, and community environments.
Connecticut	Students may be exempted from participation in the CMT/CAPT if they have been enrolled in school for 10 school months or less, or have been enrolled in school for more than 10 school months and less than 20 school months and score below the level established by the State Board of Education on the linguistic portion of the designated English mastery standard assessment; Special education students enrolled in approved private out-of-state special education facilities are not required to be tested.
Delaware	Students with disabilities, if they are also LEP, may be exempted one-time only from participation in some tests (DSTP-1 science and social studies tests and parts of all of the DSTP-2).
Georgia	Students who have no means of written communication sufficient to complete the GHSWT due to a severe physical disability may apply for a waiver of the GHSWT graduation requirement.
Hawaii	If a student becomes upset or cries for any reason other than being unable to read and comprehend any session of the on-grade level assessment, he/she should be removed from the testing room so that his/her behavior will not disrupt/distract other students.
Massachusetts	LEP students in their first year of enrollment in U.S. schools have the option, but are not required, to participate in Reading and English Language Arts tests for their grade; They are required to participate in Mathematics and Science and Technology/Engineering Tests for their grade.
Missouri	Physician recommendation.
Montana	On the CRT, home-schooled students, students enrolled in a private non-accredited school, and students enrolled part-time (less than 180 hours) taking a mathematics or reading course may or may not participate in testing, however, if they participate, their scores are excluded from the calculation of averages.
North Dakota	Physician recommendation; Foreign exchange student.
Ohio	Students can be exempted if they are completing a curriculum in a particular subject area that is modified substantially by the IEP from the general curriculum.
Pennsylvania	The only students with disabilities who are exempted from participation in general State and district-wide assessment programs are students with disabilities convicted as adults under State law and incarcerated in adult prisons.
Utah	Students may be excused from participating in statewide assessments in the event of an emergency or if the student is suffering from extreme distress, such as medical or psychological crisis; Students may be exempted from the norm-referenced assessment program if they have significant cognitive disabilities or their instructional level is three years or more below their enrolled grade level.
Vermont	Exemptions are limited to: students who are experiencing a family emergency or student crisis, students who enroll in the school after the testing window, and students who are expelled or suspended for the entire test administration window.

Table B.5: Participation Policy Variables That Can Be Used to Make Decisions About How Students With Disabilities Will Participate in Statewide Assessment

State	IEP Deter-mined	Nature or Category of Disa-bility	Instruc-tional Rele-vance/ Instruc-tion Goals	Past Perfor-mance	Non-pursuit of a Standard Diploma	Degree of Adap-tations Needed	Content/ Purpose/ Nature of Assess-ment	Current Perfor-mance/ Level of Func-tioning	Level of Indepen-dence	Student Needs and Charac-teristics	Other
Alabama	X	X	X				X
Alaska	X		X	X	X			X*	X*	X
Arizona	X		X					X*	X*	X
Arkansas	X		X	X				X*		X
California	X		X					X*
Colorado	X		X				X			X
Connecticut	X		X						X*	X
Delaware	X		X	X				X*	X*	X
Florida	X		X	X				X*		X
Georgia	X		X		X		X	X*
Hawaii	X							X*
Idaho	X							X*	X*
Illinois	X		X			X*	X	X*	X*
Indiana	X	X	X				X	X*
Iowa	X		X							X
Kansas	X	X	X					X*	X*	X	X*
Kentucky	X	X	X
Louisiana	X		X					X*	X*	X
Maine	X
Maryland	X		X						X*	X
Massachusetts	X	X	X			X*			X*	X	X*
Michigan	X							X*	X*
Minnesota	X		X					X*
Mississippi	X						X	X*		X
Missouri	X		X				X
Montana	X						X	X*	X*	X
Nebraska	X
Nevada	X		X					X*
New Hampshire	X			X				X*
New Jersey	X		X
New Mexico	X			X			X	X*		X
New York	X			X				X*		X
North Carolina	X		X	X				X*		X
North Dakota	X		X					X*	X*	X
Ohio	X
Oklahoma	X		X					X*
Oregon	X		X							X
Pennsylvania	X							X*
Rhode Island	X							X*	X*	X
South Carolina	X		X					X*	X*	X
South Dakota	X		X					X*	X*	X
Tennessee	X		X	X				X*	X*
Texas	X		X
Utah	X						X*	X*	X*
Vermont	X		X	X						X	X*
Virginia	X		X*			X*		X*
Washington	X		X							X	X*
West Virginia	X		X		X	X*		X*			X*
Wisconsin	X		X				X	X*		X
Wyoming	X							X*		X
Total (X)	50	5	35	10	3	4	11	34	18	26	5
Note. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.6: Specifications and Descriptions of "Other" and Starred (*) Participation Policy Variables That Can Be Used to Make Decisions About How Students With Disabilities Will Participate in Statewide Assessment

State
Alaska	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's cognitive ability and adaptive skill levels prevent completing the standard academic curricula, even with modifications and accommodations.
	Level of Independence - The student requires extensive direct instruction in multiple settings to apply and transfer skills.
Arizona	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The IEP team should consider whether or not the student is working on learning standards at or near grade-level expectations.
	Level of Independence - The student is receiving intensive, individualized instruction necessary for the student to acquire and generalize knowledge and/or demonstrate skills.
Arkansas	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - IEP team decisions concerning a student's participation in assessment must be based on current data and the student's present levels of educational performance.
California	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's academic/cognitive ability and adaptive behavior must be considered.
Connecticut	Level of Independence - The student requires intensive individualized instruction to acquire, maintain or generalize skills and the student requires direct instruction in multiple settings to successfully generalize skills to natural settings.
Delaware	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student is unable to use academic skills at a minimal competency level when instructed through typical classroom instruction.
	Level of Independence - The student requires extensive direct instruction in multiple settings to accomplish the application and transfer of skills.
Florida	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's cognitive ability must be considered.
Georgia	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - Students who are eligible to participate in the GA Alternate Assessment are those who are three or more standard deviations below the mean in intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior.
Hawaii	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's cognitive abilities must be considered.
Idaho	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's demonstrated cognitive ability and adaptive behavior prevent completion of the general education curriculum even with program modifications.
	Level of Independence - The student is unable to acquire, maintain, or generalize skills in multiple settings and demonstrate performance of those skills without intensive, frequent, and individualized instruction.
Illinois	Degree of Adaptations Needed - The accommodations needed by the student to participate in the regular assessment would compromise the validity of the test.
	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - Performance indicators selected for the student in the designated content area(s) must be considered.
	Level of Independence - The student requires intensive, frequent, individualized instruction in a variety of settings to acquire, maintain, or generalize skills and demonstrate performance of those skills.
Indiana	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's present level of educational performance must be considered.
Kansas	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's demonstrated cognitive abilities and adaptive behavior must be considered.
	Level of Independence - The student primarily requires direct and extensive instruction to acquire, maintain, generalize, and transfer the skills done in the naturally occurring settings of the student's life.
	Other - The student scored at or below the 4th percentile on a nationally or locally normed assessment.
Louisiana	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - Current longitudinal data on the student must be considered.
	Level of Independence - The student requires extensive instruction on functional skills in multiple settings to acquire, maintain, and generalize skills necessary for application in school, work, home, and community environments.
Maryland	Level of Independence - The student requires extensive support to perform and participate meaningfully and productively in daily activities in school, home, community, and work environments.
Massachusetts	Degree of Adaptations Needed - The student is working on standards that have been substantially modified.
	Level of Independence - Student is receiving intensive, individualized instruction in order to acquire, generalize, and demonstrate knowledge and skills.
	Other - Student's ability to demonstrate knowledge and skills on a paper-and-pencil test; Student is presented with unique and significant challenges in demonstrating knowledge and skills on a test of this format and duration.
Michigan	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's cognitive ability and skills and knowledge must be considered.
	Level of Independence - One way for IEP teams to begin determining which assessment the student should take is to identify his or her level of independence, or how independently he or she will function as an adult.
Minnesota	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's academic skills must be considered.
Mississippi	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's present level of performance must be considered.
Montana	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's demonstrated cognitive abilities and adaptive behavior require substantial adjustments to the general curriculum.
	Level of Independence - Student requires direct and extensive instruction to acquire, maintain, generalize, and transfer new skills.
Nevada	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's cognitive ability and adaptive behavior skills must be considered.
New Hampshire	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's level of academic achievement must be considered.
New Mexico	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's present performance in multiple settings must be considered.
New York	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - Current student quantitative documentation including progress and adaptive behavior must be considered.
North Carolina	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's academic performance and adaptive behavior must be considered.
North Dakota	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - For the ND Alternate Assessment, the student's cognitive ability and adaptive behavior prevent completion of part or all of the general education curriculum.
	Level of Independence - For the ND Alternate Assessment, the student requires extensive, frequent, and individualized instruction in multiple settings in order to maintain or generalize skills necessary to function.
Oklahoma	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's demonstrated cognitive abilities and adaptive behavior must be considered.
Pennsylvania	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's cognitive abilities must be considered.
Rhode Island	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - For the alternate assessment, the student's general cognitive functioning and adaptive behavior in home, school, and community are significantly below age expectations, even with program modifications and adaptations.
	Level of Independence - For the alternate assessment, the student requires extensive supports and continuous instruction in multiple settings to acquire, apply, and transfer skills necessary to function in home, school, and community.
South Carolina	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - For the alternate assessment, the student demonstrates cognitive ability and adaptive skills that prevent him or her from completing the state-approved standards even with accommodations.
	Level of Independence - For the alternate assessment, the student has current adaptive skills requiring extensive direct instruction in multiple settings to accomplish the application and transfer of skills necessary for functional application in school, work, home, and community environments.
South Dakota	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's demonstrated cognitive abilities and adaptive behavior require substantial adjustments to the general curriculum.
	Level of Independence - The student primarily requires direct and extensive instruction to acquire, maintain, generalize and transfer the skills done in the naturally occurring settings of the student's life.
Tennessee	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - For the alternate assessment, the student demonstrates cognitive ability and adaptive skills that prevent him full involvement and completion of the state-approved content standards even with program modifications.
	Level of Independence - For the alternate assessment, the student requires intensive, frequent individualized instruction in a variety of settings including school, community, home, or the workplace to acquire, maintain, and generalize functional academics and life skills.
Utah	Content/Purpose/Nature of Assessment - Each test should be considered separately when making decisions about how to administer it to students with special needs.
	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - For the alternate assessment, student must demonstrate cognitive ability and adaptive skill levels that prevent completion of the general academic core curricula even with instructional accommodations.
	Level of Independence - The student requires extensive individualized instruction in multiple settings to transfer and generalize skills.
Vermont	Other - Opportunity for parent input/involvement must be provided.
Virginia	Instructional Relevance/Instruction Goals - IEP team must consider if the student has received instruction in the content covered by the Standards of Learning assessment.
	Degree of Adaptations Needed - IEP team must consider whether the student receives accommodations during instruction or classroom assessments in the content covered by the test.
	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's present level of performance must be considered
Washington	Other - The student's level of participation in classroom assessments must be considered.
West Virginia	Degree of Adaptations Needed - Any accommodations being used for classroom instruction and assessment should be considered.
	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's present levels of educational performance must be considered.
	Other - Any accommodations being used for classroom instruction and assessment should be considered.
Wisconsin	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's present level of educational performance must be considered.
Wyoming	Current Performance/Level of Functioning - The student's current level of functioning must be considered.

Table B.7: Participation Policy Variables That Cannot Be Used to Make Decisions About How Students With Disabilities Will Participate in Statewide Assessment

State	Receiving Special Education Services	Presence or Category of Disability	Instruc-tional Program/ Program Setting	Achieve-ment Level	Excessive Absences	Percent Time Receiving Special Education Services	Cultural, Social, Linguistic, or Environ-mental Factors	Low Expecta-tions for the Student/ Anticipated Low Scores	Other
Alabama			X				X
Alaska		X			X		X
Arizona
Arkansas	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X*
California		X			X	X	X
Colorado		X	X	X	X	X		X	X*
Connecticut		X	X					X
Delaware		X			X		X
Florida			X		X		X
Georgia
Hawaii		X
Idaho	X				X		X
Illinois	X	X	X					X	X*
Indiana	X		X		X		X	X
Iowa		X	X		X	X	X	X	X*
Kansas		X		X	X	X	X
Kentucky
Louisiana		X	X		X		X	X
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota		X	X					X	X*
Mississippi
Missouri		X	X			X
Montana		X		X	X	X	X
Nebraska
Nevada		X			X		X
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico		X			X		X
New York		X			X		X
North Carolina		X	X
North Dakota		X	X		X	X	X
Ohio							X
Oklahoma		X	X	X	X	X	X
Oregon		X
Pennsylvania		X
Rhode Island		X			X		X
South Carolina					X		X
South Dakota		X	X	X	X	X	X
Tennessee		X			X		X
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia		X		X				X	X*
Washington		X	X		X	X	X	X	X*
West Virginia
Wisconsin					X		X
Wyoming		X	X			X
Total (X)	4	28	17	7	23	12	24	10	7
Note. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.8: Specifications and Descriptions of "Other" Participation Policy Variables That Cannot Be Used to Make Decisions About How Students With Disabilities Will Participate in Statewide Assessment

State
Arkansas	Student's IQ; Disruptive behavior; Below average in reading level.
Colorado	Decisions regarding participation in the General Colorado Student Assessment Program (CSAP) must NOT be based on a certain percentage of students or ongoing disruptive behavior by the student.
Illinois	Decision may not be based solely on the fact that the student is expected to experience duress under testing conditions or based solely on the fact that there is high probability that the student will demonstrate disruptive behaviors during the assessment.
Iowa	Participation decisions should not be based primarily on disruptive behavior or student reading level.
Minnesota	Administrative pressure to exclude a student with an IEP.
Virginia	The belief that the student does not need this assessment to be promoted to the next grade or to graduate; The belief that the experience will be too stressful for the student; The student's behavior prohibits taking the test with a group.
Washington	Ongoing disruptive behavior.

Table B.9: Additional Student Groups Eligible for Accommodations

State	504 Students	No Additional Student Groups	All Students May Use Without Qualification	All Students May Use With Qualifi-cations	ELL/IEP	Students Receiving Title I Services	Other
Alabama	X				I
Alaska	X				I
Arizona	X*
Arkansas	X
California	X				I		X*
Colorado				X*
Connecticut	X						X*
Delaware	X				X
Florida	X
Georgia	X				I
Hawaii	X				I
Idaho	X				I
Illinois	X
Indiana	X						X*
Iowa					I
Kansas				X*
Kentucky	X				I		X*
Louisiana	X				I
Maine	X				I		X*
Maryland	X				I
Massachusetts	X						X*
Michigan	X				I
Minnesota	X				I		X*
Mississippi	X				I		X*
Missouri
Montana	X			X*
Nebraska	X				I	X
Nevada	X				I
New Hampshire				X*
New Jersey	X
New Mexico	X
New York	X
North Carolina	X
North Dakota	X				I
Ohio	X
Oklahoma	X
Oregon			X*
Pennsylvania	X				I		X*
Rhode Island				X*
South Carolina	X
South Dakota	X				I
Tennessee	X				I		X*
Texas
Utah	X				I
Vermont				X*	I
Virginia	X
Washington	X				I		X*
West Virginia	X
Wisconsin	X				I
Wyoming	X		X*
Total (X)	41	0	2	6	1	1	11
Note. X: Yes; I: Inferred (i.e. it can be inferred from the policy that the state provides accommodations for students who are both ELL/LEP and have an IEP, because ELL/LEP accommodations are mentioned within the sections of the document related to students with disabilities). See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.10: Specifications and Descriptions of "Other" and Starred (*) Additional Student Groups Eligible for Accommodations

State
Arizona	504 Students - Students with a 504 plan may be considered only for standard accommodations.
California	Other - Some test variations (e.g. simplification or clarification of test directions) may be provided to all students; Category 1 test variations (e.g. magnifying equipment) are available to any student provided they are regularly used in the classroom.
Colorado	All Students May Use With Qualifications - Any student is eligible for a standard accommodation; however, the student must have received the same accommodation for instruction and assessment in the content area for at least three months prior to the CSAP administration.
Connecticut	Other - A student who is injured (broken arms, shoulder, fingers, etc.) in the days just prior to or during administration has temporary disabilities and may be eligible for accommodations.
Indiana	Other - School corporations may provide testing accommodations to a student with a temporary disability, such as a broken arm.
Kansas	All Students May Use With Qualifications - Any student may receive an accommodation when it is appropriate for that student; however, that student must regularly receive the accommodation during routine classroom instruction and assessment activities.
Kentucky	Other - Students who become injured (e.g. broken hand) or develop an ailment (e.g. temporary paralysis due to an illness) before or during the testing window may be allowed appropriate accommodations or modifications or both.
Maine	Other - Students who are ill or incapacitated in some way may be considered for accommodations.
Massachusetts	Other - Accommodations may be provided for students with documented disabilities who are not served under an IEP or 504 plan.
Minnesota	Other - Some accommodations (e.g. extended time, individual administration) are available for all students; Modifications are available only to students who have IEPs or 504 plans.
Mississippi	Other - Students with a temporary physical disability resulting from an illness or injury, such as a broken limb or temporary vision loss.
Montana	All Students May Use With Qualifications - On the CRT, any student may use standard accommodations if those accommodations are used by the student individually on a regular basis; On the Iowa Tests, 504 students are eligible for accommodations.
New Hampshire	All Students May Use With Qualifications - All students are eligible to utilize appropriate standard accommodations; however, any accommodations utilized for the assessment of individual students must be consistent with those accommodations used during the student's regular classroom instruction.
Oregon	All Students May Use Without Qualification - Accommodations are available to all students including both students with and without disabilities.
Pennsylvania	Other - Some accommodations (e.g. separate room, visual cues) are available to all students.
Rhode Island	All Students May Use With Qualifications - All students are eligible to utilize appropriate standard accommodations; however, any accommodations utilized for the assessment of individual students must be consistent with those accommodations used during the student's regular classroom instruction.
Tennessee	Other - Some accommodations (e.g. large print, study carrel) are available to all students.
Vermont	All Students May Use With Qualifications - All students are eligible to utilize appropriate standard accommodations; however, any accommodations utilized for the assessment of individual students must be consistent with those accommodations used during the student's regular classroom instruction.
Washington	Other - Highly capable students.
Wyoming	All Students May Use Without Qualification - If any student needs an accommodation and it has been part of the student's regular instruction, the accommodation may be provided.

Table B.11: Accommodation Policy Variables That Can Be Used to Guide the Decision Making Process for Using Accommodations During Statewide Assessment

State	Used for Classroom and Instruction	Length of Time Accommodation Has Been Used	Maintains the Validity of the Test and Resulting Scores	Individual Student Needs/ Characteristics	Purpose/ Nature of the Assessment	Other
Alabama	X	X	X	X
Alaska	X	X	X	X
Arizona	X		X
Arkansas	X			X
California	X		X	X
Colorado	X	X	X	X	X	X*
Connecticut	X		X	X		X*
Delaware	X
Florida	X		X	X
Georgia	X	X	X		X	X*
Hawaii	X			X		X*
Idaho	X		X	X
Illinois	X		X
Indiana	X			X
Iowa	X		X
Kansas	X		X	X		X*
Kentucky	X		X	X		X*
Louisiana	X		X
Maine	X			X
Maryland	X			X		X*
Massachusetts	X		X			X*
Michigan			X
Minnesota	X		X	X
Mississippi	X		X	X	X
Missouri	X		X	X
Montana	X			X	X	X*
Nebraska			X	X
Nevada	X		X
New Hampshire	X		X	X
New Jersey	X				X
New Mexico	X	X	X	X
New York	X		X	X	X
North Carolina	X		X	X	X
North Dakota	X			X		X*
Ohio	X		X
Oklahoma
Oregon	X
Pennsylvania	X			X
Rhode Island	X		X	X	X
South Carolina	X			X		X*
South Dakota	X		X	X
Tennessee	X			X
Texas	X			X
Utah	X			X	X
Vermont	X		X	X		X*
Virginia	X		X
Washington	X
West Virginia	X		X
Wisconsin	X		X	X	X
Wyoming	X	X	X	X
Total (X)	47	6	33	34	10	12
Note. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.12: Specifications and Descriptions of "Other" Accommodation Policy Variables That Can Be Used to Guide the Decision Making Process for Using Accommodations During Statewide Assessment

State
Colorado	Possible effects on the student of allowing the accommodation(s).
Connecticut	Necessity of the accommodation for the student; student's skill in using the accommodation with ease.
Georgia	Student's previous training and practice with the accommodation(s).
Hawaii	The student's ELL needs should be considered.
Kansas	Age-appropriateness of the accommodation; Relatedness of the accommodation to the student's verified disability.
Kentucky	Accommodations or modifications or both must be specified in the student's IEP or 504 plan.
Maryland	Accommodations must be documented in the student's IEP, 504 plan, ELL plan or cumulative record.
Massachusetts	The accommodation is required by the student in order to participate in statewide tests; Accommodations may not alter, simplify, paraphrase, or eliminate any test item, reading passage, writing prompt, or multiple-choice option; Accommodations may not provide verbal or other clues or suggestions that hint at or give away the correct response to the student.
Montana	Consistency with previous accommodation decisions.
North Dakota	Accommodations must be documented in the student's written service plan.
South Carolina	Reports from regular and special education teachers; IEP goals and objectives; Student's present level of performance.
Vermont	Opportunity for parent input/involvement must be provided.

Table B.13: Accommodation Policy Variables That Cannot Be Used to Guide the Decision Making Process for Using Accommodations During Statewide Assessment

State	Nature/ Category of Disability	Instructional Program/ Program Setting	Percent Time/Amount of Services Received	Parent Request	Administrative Convenience	Other
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California	X
Colorado
Connecticut	X
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky	X
Louisiana
Maine	X					X*
Maryland	X	X	X
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi	X		X
Missouri	X	X	X
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico					X
New York	X
North Carolina	X
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina	X
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah	X
Vermont						X*
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming	X	X	X
Total (X)	12	3	4	0	1	2
Note. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.14: Specifications and Descriptions of "Other" Accommodation Policy Variables That Cannot Be Used to Guide the Decision Making Process for Using Accommodations During Statewide Assessment

State
Maine	Accommodations decisions should not be based on the availability of an accommodation or on how a student is performing.
Vermont	Making accommodation decisions on a group basis is not allowed; Decisions about accommodations should not be made by an individual.

Table B.15: Guidance for Using Accommodations That Are Not on the "Approved" List

State	Seek Approval from State Board or Department of Education	Committee Review	Required Contact	Non-approved accommodations may not be used	Other
Alabama		X
Alaska		X*	X*		X*
Arizona	X
Arkansas			X
California	X
Colorado	X*	X*
Connecticut	X
Delaware	X	X
Florida	X
Georgia	X
Hawaii		X	X
Idaho	X
Illinois	X		X
Indiana
Iowa					X*
Kansas	X
Kentucky
Louisiana		X
Maine	X
Maryland	X
Massachusetts	X
Michigan		X
Minnesota	X
Mississippi			X*
Missouri	X
Montana	X
Nebraska
Nevada	X
New Hampshire	X		X
New Jersey	X
New Mexico	X
New York	X
North Carolina			X*
North Dakota					X*
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon	X
Pennsylvania	X
Rhode Island	X
South Carolina	X
South Dakota	X
Tennessee	X
Texas	X
Utah
Vermont	X
Virginia	X
Washington	X		X
West Virginia	X
Wisconsin
Wyoming	X
Total (X)	33	7	8	0	3
Note. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.16: Specifications and Descriptions of "Other" and Starred (*) Guidance for Using Accommodations That Are Not on the "Approved" List

State
Alaska	Committee Review - IEP teams determine whether nonstandard accommodations are appropriate.
	Required Contact - If want to highlight words in directions or reading passages or if student writes responses in test booklet, must communicate with the state to ensure the test is not marked in any manner to cause the test to be unscorable; If administering test over multiple days, must consult with department.
	Other - IEP or 504 teams, schools, and districts may consult with the department at any time when considering new adaptations.
Colorado	Seek Approval from State Board or Department of Education - The instructional team may apply through the District Assessment Coordinator (DAC) for consideration of a nonstandard accommodation to the Colorado Department of Education (CDE).
	Committee Review - Representatives from the Assessment, English Language Acquisition, Title 1 and Exceptional Student Service units (CDE) will review each request.
Iowa	Other - While some states have lists of allowable accommodations, Iowa leaves this decision to the IEP team; Ideally, IEP teams should use individually validated accommodations.
Mississippi	Required Contact - District test coordinator.
North Carolina	Required Contact - LEA.
North Dakota	Other - Although the Department of Public Instruction provides a list of accommodations, local educators have the full opportunity and responsibility to employ accommodations that are educationally appropriate for each individual student.

Table B.17: Guidelines for the Administration of Accommodations Involving a Third Party

State	No Guidelines	Scribe	Reader	Sign Language Interpreter
Alabama		X	X	X
Alaska		X	X	X
Arizona		X	X	X
Arkansas		X	X
California		X		X
Colorado		X	X	X
Connecticut		X	X
Delaware		X
Florida		X	X	X
Georgia
Hawaii			X	X
Idaho	X
Illinois		X
Indiana		X
Iowa
Kansas	X
Kentucky		X	X	X
Louisiana		X	X	X
Maine	X
Maryland
Massachusetts		X	X	X
Michigan
Minnesota		X	X	X
Mississippi	X
Missouri		X
Montana		X	X
Nebraska				X
Nevada			X
New Hampshire		X	X
New Jersey		X	X	X
New Mexico		X
New York		X	X	X
North Carolina		X	X	X
North Dakota	X
Ohio		X
Oklahoma	X
Oregon		X	X
Pennsylvania		X	X	X
Rhode Island		X
South Carolina		X	X	X
South Dakota		X	X	X
Tennessee		X	X	X
Texas		X	X
Utah	X
Vermont		X
Virginia		X	X	X
Washington		X	X
West Virginia	X
Wisconsin	X
Wyoming	X
Total (X)	10	33	26	20

Table B.18: Presentation Accommodations

State

Large Print

Braille

Read Aloud Direc-tions

Read Aloud Ques-tions

Sign Inter-pret Direc-tions

Sign Inter-pret Ques-tions

Repeat/
Re-Read/
Clarify Direc-tions

Visual Cues

Admini-stration by Others

Fami-liar Exa-miner

Addi-tional Exam-ples

Other

Alabama

AC/AI*

AC*

Alaska

AC*

Arizona

AC/AI*

Arkansas

AC*

California

AC/AI*

Colorado

AC*

Connecticut

AC*

Delaware

AC/AI*

Florida

AC*

AC/AI*

Georgia

Hawaii

AC*

Idaho

AC*

Illinois

AC*

Indiana

AC*

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

AC*

Louisiana

AC*

Maine

AC*

Maryland

AC/AI*

Massachusetts

Michigan

AC/AI*

Minnesota

AC*

Mississippi

AC*

Missouri

Montana

AC*

AC/AI*

AC*

Nebraska

AC/AI*

Nevada

AC*

New Hampshire

AC/AI*

AC*

New Jersey

AC*

New Mexico

AC*

New York

AC*

North Carolina

AC*

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

AC*

Oregon

Pennsylvania

AC*

Rhode Island

AC/AI*

AC*

South Carolina

South Dakota

AC*

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

AC/AI*

AC/AI *

Vermont

AC/AI*

Virginia

Washington

AC*

West Virginia

AC*

Wisconsin

AC*

Wyoming

AC*

Note. A: Allowed; A* = Non-standard, but no implications for scoring or aggregation; AC: Allowed in certain circumstances; AI: Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation; AC/AI = Allowed in certain circumstances and there are implications for scoring; P: Prohibited; NA: Not applicable. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.19: Descriptions of "Other" Presentation Accommodations

State
Alaska	Written version of oral directions; Present directions and questions via overhead and transparencies; Writing helpful verbs on the board or on a separate sheet of paper; Checklist of tasks to be completed; Test contractor tape recorded version of tests.
Arizona	Test administrator assists the student in tracking and/or sequencing of test items; Audio tape administration.
California	Markers to maintain place; Audio presentation of test questions.
Delaware	Presenting instructions, test questions, and individual items via an overhead projector and transparencies; Audiotape presentation of test items.
Florida	Student may read the test items to her/himself while working on the assessment; Verbal encouragement (e.g. 'keep working').
Georgia	Explain, clarify, or reword test items; Fewer items per page; Color overlays; Audiotape administration of assessment.
Hawaii	Student may read the test items to her/himself while working on the assessment in an individual setting.
Idaho	Increasing the spaces between the items; Reducing the number of items per page or line; Increase size of answer bubbles; Writing helpful verbs in the directions on the board or on a separate piece of paper; Prompting student to stay focused, move ahead or read entire item; Audio taped administration.
Indiana	Color-coded prompts for math problems.
Kentucky	Graphic organizers; Cue cards; Verbal and written prompts; Audio taped directions.
Maine	Increased space between items; Fewer items per page.
Maryland	Verbatim audiotape presentation of test.
Massachusetts	Student may read the test aloud to her/himself; Track test items.
Michigan	Paraphrase directions; Use of state-produced audio version of the assessment.
Minnesota	Audiotape presentation of directions.
Missouri	Including fewer items per page; Paraphrasing questions to help student understanding in an isolated setting.
New Hampshire	Student reads test aloud to self; Translate directions into other language.
New Jersey	Providing written directions on a separate sheet or transparency.
New Mexico	Tape recording of directions and questions.
New York	Increased spacing between test items; Reduce number of test items per page.
North Carolina	One test item per page.
North Dakota	Increased spacing between items or reduced items per page or line; Increase size of answer bubbles; Provide passages with one complete sentence per line; Wider lines and/or margins; Audiotape presentation of test.
Oregon	Read aloud audio recording of available side-by-side tests in Spanish/English and Russian/English; Limit number of answer choices; Re-word or simplify wording of test items.
Pennsylvania	Audiotape presentation of general directions and verbatim sections of the assessment.
Rhode Island	Audio-tape presentation.
Utah	Increased spacing; Fewer number of items per page; Assist student to focus by pointing; Audiotape of directions.
Virginia	Written directions to accompany oral directions; Audio-tape version of test items.
West Virginia	Tape recording of directions and questions.
Wisconsin	Provide verbal praise or tangible reinforcers to increase motivation; Give practice tests or examples before the actual test is given; Use a tape recording of directions; Audio recording of test items.

Table B.20: Specifications and Descriptions of "Certain Circumstances" and "Implications for Scoring" for Presentation Accommodations

State
Alabama	Braille - Considered a nonstandard administration on Stanford 10. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Read Aloud Directions - Not allowed on Alabama Reading and Mathematics Test (ARMT) or Stanford 10. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on any reading tests or on Stanford 10. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Directions - Interpreter may only interpret directions and may not clarify or offer interpretation of items. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Alaska	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on reading tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed on reading tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Arizona	Read Aloud Questions - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on reading portions of Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS). (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the reading portions of AIMS. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Arkansas	Read Aloud Questions - No portion of the reading test may be read to any student. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
California	Read Aloud Questions - Allowed with implications for scoring on the reading, language, and spelling subtests of the Standardized Testing and Reporting Program (STAR). (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Allowed with implications for scoring on the reading, language, and spelling subtests of the Standardized Testing and Reporting Program (STAR). (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Colorado	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on reading tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed on reading tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Connecticut	Read Aloud Questions - Allowed only on math and science tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Allowed only on math and science tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Delaware	Read Aloud Questions - Allowed with implications for scoring if used on the reading test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Florida	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on reading tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed on reading tests. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Georgia	Braille - Considered non-standard on the NRT (procedures and directions included in the administration manual are not followed exactly and the student's answer documents must be coded to reflect a non-standard administration). (Allowed)
	Read Aloud Questions - Considered non-standard if used on any content area, subtest, or prompt on the CRCT and NRT (procedures and directions included in the administration manual are not followed exactly and the student's answer documents must be coded to reflect a non-standard administration). (Allowed)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Considered non-standard if used on any content area, subtest, or prompt on the CRCT and NRT (procedures and directions included in the administration manual are not followed exactly and the student's answer documents must be coded to reflect a non-standard administration). (Allowed)
	Repeat/Re-Read/Clarify Directions - Explaining or paraphrasing directions for clarity is considered non-standard on the NRT (procedures and directions included in the administration manual are not followed exactly and the student's answer documents must be coded to reflect a non-standard administration). (Allowed)
Hawaii	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on reading tests; Mathematics problems and related test items may be read aloud if a student raises her/his hand for each one. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed on reading tests; Mathematics problems and related test items may be signed if a student raises her/his hand for each one. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Idaho	Read Aloud Questions - Not to be used on sections measuring reading ability. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Illinois	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on the reading test. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed on the reading test. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Indiana	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on test questions that measure reading comprehension. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Kentucky	Administration by Others - Examiners must be trained. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Louisiana	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on the 'Reading and Responding' session of the English Language Arts Test on LEAP 21 and GEE 21, 'Reading Comprehension' on ITBS and the old GEE, and 'Ability to Interpret Literary Materials' on ITED. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed on the 'Reading and Responding' session of the English Language Arts Test on LEAP 21 and GEE 21, 'Reading Comprehension' on ITBS and the old GEE, and 'Ability to Interpret Literary Materials' on ITED. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Maine	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed for reading passages. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed for reading passages. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Maryland	Read Aloud Questions - Not permitted on the Maryland Functional Reading Test; Allowed with implications for scoring if used for grades 3 and 4 general reading processes tests. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Massachusetts	Read Aloud Questions - Reading the ELA Language and Literature Test or Reading Test is considered non-standard (may alter what the test measures). (Allowed)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Signing the ELA Language and Literature Test or Reading Test is considered non-standard (may alter what the test measures). (Allowed)
Michigan	Read Aloud Questions - Considered a nonstandard accommodation if used on reading test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Considered a nonstandard accommodation if used on reading test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Minnesota	Read Aloud Questions - Allowed only on mathematics tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Allowed only on mathematics tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Mississippi	Read Aloud Questions - Allowed only on the Language Arts Section and Mathematics Test of the Mississippi Curriculum Test (MCT). (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Allowed only on the Language Arts Section and Mathematics Test of the Mississippi Curriculum Test (MCT). (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Montana	Braille - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Read Aloud Questions - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the Reading Comprehension or Vocabulary tests. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the Reading Comprehension or Vocabulary tests. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Visual Cues - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Familiar Examiner - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Nebraska	Read Aloud Questions - Considered a modification if used on a reading assessment. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Nevada	Read Aloud Questions - Not permitted on the reading test. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
New Hampshire	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed for reading passages and related questions of the English language arts tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
New Jersey	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed for reading passages. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed for reading passages. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
New Mexico	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on reading/language tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed on reading/language tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
New York	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on grade 4 and grade 8 English language arts tests that measure reading comprehension. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
North Carolina	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on reading tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed on reading tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
North Dakota	Braille - Considered a 'category 3' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests and may also change what is being measured). (Allowed)
	Read Aloud Directions - Considered a 'category 2' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests). (Allowed)
	Read Aloud Questions - Considered a 'category 2' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests); If used on a reading comprehension test, considered a 'category 3' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of the test and may also change what is being measured). (Allowed)
	Sign Interpret Directions - Considered a 'category 2' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests). (Allowed)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Considered a 'category 2' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests); If used on a reading comprehension test, considered a 'category 3' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of the test and may also change what is being measured). (Allowed)
	Repeat/Re-Read/Clarify Directions - Clarifying directions is considered a 'category 3' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests and may also change what is being measured). (Allowed)
	Visual Cues - Considered a 'category 3' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests and may also change what is being measured). (Allowed)
	Additional Examples - Considered a 'category 3' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests and may also change what is being measured). (Allowed)
Oklahoma	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on reading tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed on reading tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Oregon	Read Aloud Questions - Considered a modification if reading/literature passages, items, and distractors are read aloud; Modifications are not considered part of standard administration; scores obtained under modified conditions do not allow students to meet content and achievement standards and the scores will appear in school and district group statistics. (Allowed)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Considered a modification if reading/literature passages, items, and distractors are signed; Modifications are not considered part of standard administration; scores obtained under modified conditions do not allow students to meet content and achievement standards and the scores will appear in school and district group statistics. (Allowed)
Pennsylvania	Read Aloud Questions - Questions may only be read on the Mathematics and Writing assessments. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Questions may only be signed on the Mathematics and Writing assessments. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Rhode Island	Sign Interpret Questions - Not allowed on the English Language Arts Examination. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
South Carolina	Read Aloud Questions - Considered a modification if used on an English Language Arts test; Modifications compromise the validity and alter the meaning and comparability of test scores. (Allowed)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Considered a modification if used on an English Language Arts test; Modifications compromise the validity and alter the meaning and comparability of test scores. (Allowed)
South Dakota	Read Aloud Questions - Not allowed on tests of reading comprehension. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Utah	Read Aloud Questions - Considered a modification if used on the Reading/Language or Science Core Assessments, Iowa Tests, or Basic Skills Competency Test in Reading. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Considered a modification if used on the Reading/Language or Science Core Assessments, Iowa Tests, or Basic Skills Competency Test in Reading. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Vermont	Read Aloud Questions - Allowed with implications for scoring if used on reading tests. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Virginia	Read Aloud Questions - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the English: reading test; Non-standard accommodations are those that significantly change what a test is measuring and do not maintain standard conditions of the test. (Allowed)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the English: reading test; Non-standard accommodations are those that significantly change what a test is measuring and do not maintain standard conditions of the test. (Allowed)
Washington	Read Aloud Questions - Allowed only on mathematics and science items. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Allowed only on mathematics and science items. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
West Virginia	Read Aloud Questions - WESTEST Reading and Language Arts Test questions may not be read aloud. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - WESTEST Reading and Language Arts Test questions may not be signed. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Wisconsin	Read Aloud Questions - Allowed for WKCE tests in mathematics, science, and social studies only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Wyoming	Read Aloud Questions - Math only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Interpret Questions - Math only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)

Table B.21: Equipment and Material Accommodations

State	Magnifi-cation Equip-ment	Amplifi-cation Equip-ment	Light/ Acoustics	Calcu-lator	Tem-plates/ Graph Paper	Audio/ Video Equip-ment	Noise Buffer	Adaptive/ Special Furniture	Abacus	Manipu-latives	Other
Alabama	A	A	A		A		A	A	A		X*
Alaska	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A			X*
Arizona	A	A	A	AC/AI*	A	A	A	A	AC/AI*	AC/AI*	X*
Arkansas	A						A		A
California	A	A	A	AI*			A	A		AI*
Colorado	A	A					A			A	X*
Connecticut		A	A	AC*		A	A	A	A
Delaware	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	X*
Florida	A	A	A	AC*	A		A	A	AC*	P	X*
Georgia	A	A	A	A*	A		A	A	A	A*	X*
Hawaii				AC*	A	AC*					X*
Idaho	A	A	A	AC*	A	A	A	A	AC*		X*
Illinois
Indiana	A	A	A	A			A	A			X*
Iowa						A
Kansas
Kentucky	A	A		A	A	A	A		A	A
Louisiana	A	A		A	A				A		X*
Maine	A	A	A	A	A		A	A	A		X*
Maryland		A		AC*	A	A				A
Massachusetts	A	A		A*	A		A		A	A	X*
Michigan	A	A	A	AC/AI*	A	A	A	A			X*
Minnesota	A		A	AC*	A	A		A	AC*		X*
Mississippi	A	A	A	A	A			A			X*
Missouri	A	A	A	A	A				A		X*
Montana	A	AC*		AC/AI*	A		AC*			AC/AI*	X*
Nebraska	A	A			A		A				X*
Nevada	A	A	A	AC*	A		A				X*
New Hampshire	A	A	A	AC/AI*	A		A	A	A	A	X*
New Jersey		A	A	A	A			A		A	X*
New Mexico	A	A	A	AC*	A	A	A	A		A	X*
New York	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A		X*
North Carolina	A	A	A	A	A	A		A	A		X*
North Dakota	A	A	A	A*	A*		A	A			X*
Ohio	A				A						X*
Oklahoma	A	A	A	A	A		A	A	A		X*
Oregon	A	A	A	A		A	A	A	A	A	X*
Pennsylvania	A			AC*	A			A	AC*
Rhode Island	A	A	A	AC/AI*	A		A	A		AC/AI*	X*
South Carolina	A	A	A	A*	A	A		A	A	A	X*
South Dakota	A	A	A	AC*	A	A	A	A	AC*		X*
Tennessee	A	A		AC*	A		A		A	A	X*
Texas				AC*	A						X*
Utah	A	A	A	AC/AI*	A			A		AC/AI*	X*
Vermont	A	A	A	AC/AI*	A		A	A	AC/AI*	AC/AI*
Virginia	A	A	A	A*	A		A	A	A		X*
Washington	A	A	A	AC*		A	A	A	AC*	A	X*
West Virginia	A	A	A	AC*	A			A	A
Wisconsin	A
Wyoming	A	A	A	A	A		A	A	A		X*
Note. A: Allowed; A* = Non-standard, but no implications for scoring or aggregation; AC: Allowed in certain circumstances; AI: Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation; AC/AI = Allowed in certain circumstances and there are implications for scoring; P: Prohibited; NA: Not applicable. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.22: Descriptions of "Other" Equipment and Material Accommodations

State
Alabama	Slant board or wedge; Secure paper with magnet/tape; Pencil grip; Large-diameter soft-lead pencil; Colored overlay.
Alaska	Securing paper to work area with tape/magnets; Shield to reduce glare; Large diameter special grip pencil; Adaptive keyboard.
Arizona	Color overlay.
Colorado	Pencil grips.
Delaware	Arithmetic tables.
Florida	Reading stand; Colored transparencies or overlays; Masks.
Georgia	Magnets or tape to secure papers to work area; Slant board or wedge; Pencil grips; Large diameter pencil; Arithmetic tables; Photograph; Contrast and tactile cues.
Hawaii	Highlighting film placed on test booklet page.
Idaho	Masks to maintain place; Pencil grips or large diameter pencil; Slant board or wedge.
Indiana	Slant board; Pencil grip.
Louisiana	Grip for a pencil; Mask to maintain place; Electronic reader.
Maine	Arithmetic tables; Pencil grip; Paper secured to work area.
Massachusetts	Colored visual overlays; Graphic organizer, checklist, reference sheet; Arithmetic tables; Electronic text reader.
Michigan	Page turner; Masks or overlays; Rulers; Pencils adapted in size or grip; Secure paper to desk.
Minnesota	Highlighters; Colored plastic overlays.
Mississippi	Secure paper to work area with magnets/tape; Transparent color overlays.
Missouri	Arithmetic tables.
Montana	Slant boards.
Nebraska	Graphic organizers; Tactile representation of charts and pictures.
Nevada	Mask to cover portions of the test; Pencils adapted in size or grip diameter.
New Hampshire	Larger diameter or modified, special grip number 2 pencil.
New Jersey	Masking a portion of the test booklet; Large diameter or modified special grip number 2 pencil.
New Mexico	Pencils adapted in size or grip.
New York	Masks to maintain place; Papers secured to work area with tape/magnets; Arithmetic tables.
North Carolina	Arithmetic tables.
North Dakota	Secure paper to work area with tape/magnets; Provide dark, heavy, or raised lines or pencil grips; Dycem pad; Head rest; Pointer stick.
Ohio	Special paper; Highlighters.
Oklahoma	Slant board or wedge for positioning; Pencil grip; Colored overlays; Secure paper to work area with tape or magnets; Masks to maintain place.
Oregon	Stabilize test materials/papers with tape or magnets.
Rhode Island	Pencil grips; Large diameter pencil; Paper secured to work area with tape/magnets; Special paper.
South Carolina	Color overlays; Pencil grips; Large-diameter pencil.
South Dakota	Special pencil, pen, pencil grip; Rulers; Multiplication chart.
Tennessee	Masks or pointers.
Texas	Colored transparency.
Utah	Acetate overlays.
Virginia	Masks to maintain place; Arithmetic tables; Large diameter/special grip pencil; Pencil grip.
Washington	Easel; Arm or stabilizer guide; Slant board; Wedge; Mask; Screen reader; Graphic organizer.
Wyoming	Secure paper to work area with tape/magnets; Masks to maintain place; Large diameter, special grip pencil.

Table B.23: Specifications and Descriptions of "Certain Circumstances" and "Implications for Scoring" for Equipment and Material Accommodations

State
Arizona	Calculator - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the math portion of Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS). (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Abacus - Allowed only on math portion of the test by a student who is blind; Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the math portion of AIMS. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Manipulatives - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the math portion of AIMS where, under standard conditions, manipulatives are not allowed. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
California	Calculator - Allowed with implications for scoring if used on a math or science STAR or CAHSEE test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Manipulatives - Allowed with implications for scoring if used on a math or science test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Connecticut	Calculator - May not be used on any math subtests where computation skills are being assessed. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Florida	Calculator - Only allowed in grades 7-10. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Abacus - Allowed for students with visual impairments only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Georgia	Calculator - Considered nonstandard on the CRCT (procedures and directions included in the administration manual are not followed exactly and the student's answer documents must be coded to reflect a non-standard administration). (Allowed)
	Manipulatives - Considered non-standard on the ITBS and NRT (procedures and directions included in the administration manual are not followed exactly and the student's answer documents must be coded to reflect a non-standard administration). (Allowed)
Hawaii	Calculator - Student must have documented dyscalculia. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Audio/Video Equipment - Allowed only on the mathematics sessions. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Idaho	Calculator - Not to be used on sections measuring math computation skills. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Abacus - Not to be used on sections measuring math computation skills. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Maryland	Calculator - Allowed for mathematics testing for special education or Section 504 students only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Massachusetts	Calculator - Considered non-standard (may alter what the test measures) if used on non-calculator sections of the Mathematics Test. (Allowed)
Michigan	Calculator - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on any MEAP assessment other than mathematics assessments. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Minnesota	Calculator - Allowed except where specifically prohibited in the test. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Abacus - Allowed except where calculators are specifically prohibited in the test. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Montana	Amplification Equipment - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Calculator - Considered a nonstandard accommodation if used. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Noise Buffer - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Manipulatives - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on non-calculator sections of the mathematics test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Nevada	Calculator - Considered a modification if used on the math computation section of the ITBS or ITED or on part 2 of the math concepts and estimation section of the ITBS or ITED. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
New Hampshire	Calculator - Only if in student's IEP; Considered a modification if used on Session 1 of the Mathematics test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
New Mexico	Calculator - Allowed only when computation skills are not being measured (i.e. in grades 8, 9, and 11); Calculators are prohibited on Mathematics tests in grades 3-7. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
North Dakota	Calculator - Considered a 'category 2' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests); If used for math computation problems, considered a 'category 3' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests and may also change what is being measured). (Allowed)
	Templates/Graph Paper - Considered a 'category 2' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests). (Allowed)
Pennsylvania	Calculator - Not permitted on the non-calculator portion of the Mathematics test. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Abacus - Not permitted in the non-calculator portion of the Mathematics test. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Rhode Island	Calculator - Considered a modification if used on Session 1 of the Mathematics Test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Manipulatives - Considered a modification if used on Session 1 of the Mathematics Test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
South Carolina	Calculator - Considered a modification if used on a non-calculator section of a test; Modifications compromise the validity and alter the meaning and comparability of test scores. (Allowed)
South Dakota	Calculator - Allowed on mathematics problem solving subtest for grades 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 11. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Abacus - For visually impaired students only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Tennessee	Calculator - Not allowed on items that measure computation. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Texas	Calculator - Not allowed on the mathematics test at grades 3-8 or on the science test at grade 5. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Utah	Calculator - Considered a modification if used outside test specifications. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Manipulatives - Considered a modification if used on the Iowa tests. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Vermont	Calculator - Allowed with implications for scoring if used on non-tool math items (session 2). (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Abacus - Allowed with implications for scoring if used on non-tool math items (session 2). (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Manipulatives - Allowed with implications for scoring if used on non-tool math items. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Virginia	Calculator - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the grade 3 mathematics test or on the computation section of the grade 5 mathematics test; Non-standard accommodations are those that significantly change what a test is measuring and do not maintain standard conditions of the test. (Allowed)
Washington	Calculator - If a student's disability affects math calculation but not reasoning, he or she may request to use a calculator. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Abacus - If a student's disability affects math calculation but not reasoning, he or she may request to use an abacus. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
West Virginia	Calculator - Not allowed on sections of the WESTEST Mathematics Test that do not permit the use of a calculator. (Allowed in certain circumstances)

Table B.24: Response Accommodations

State	Proctor/ Scribe	Computer or Machine	Write in Test Booklets	Tape Recor-der	Commu-nication Device	Spell Checker/ Assis-tance	Brailler	Sign Respon-ses to Sign Lan-guage Inter-preter	Point-ing	Speech/ Text Device	Other
Alabama	AC*	AC*	AI*		AC*	P		AC*	AC*
Alaska	A	A	A	A	A	AC/AI*	A	A	A		X*
Arizona	AC/AI*	A	A	A		AC/AI*	A	A	A	AC/AI*	X*
Arkansas	AC*		AC*
California	AC/AI*	AC*	AC*	A		AC/AI*	A	AC/AI*		A	X*
Colorado	A	A			A		A	A	A
Connecticut		AC*	AC*				A	AC*		AC*
Delaware	A	A	A	AC*		AC*	A	A		A	X*
Florida	A	AC*	A	A			A	A	A	A
Georgia	A	A*	A	A	AC/AI*		A*	A	A*		X*
Hawaii	AC/AI*	A	A			A	AI*
Idaho	A	AC*	A	A	A	A	A	A	A
Illinois	A		A	A
Indiana	A						AC*	A	A	A	X*
Iowa	A		A	A		A			A		X*
Kansas
Kentucky	A	A		A	A	A	A	A		A
Louisiana	A	A	A	A	A		A
Maine	AC*	A	A	A	A	A	A				X*
Maryland	A	A	A	A	A	AC*	AC*	A	A
Massachusetts	A*	AC*	A	A		A*		A*		A*
Michigan	A	AC*	A	A	A	AI*	A	A		A	X*
Minnesota	A	A	A	A			A			A
Mississippi	A	A	A	A	A	AC*	A
Missouri	A	A	A	A	A		A	A	A		X*
Montana	A	AC*	AC*		A						X*
Nebraska	A	A		A	A	A	A				X*
Nevada	AC*	A	A			AC/AI*	A
New Hampshire	AC*	AC*		A	A		A		A
New Jersey	A	AC*	A		A		A	A			X*
New Mexico	AC*	AC*	A	AC*	AC*	AC*	A	A	AC*
New York	A	A	A	A		A	A	A			X*
North Carolina	A	A	A	AC*	AC*	A	A	A	A	AC*	X*
North Dakota	A*	A	A	A	A	A*	A	A	A	A	X*
Ohio	A	A
Oklahoma	A	AC*	A	AC*	A		A	A
Oregon	A*	A*	A	A	A*	A*	A	A*	A		X*
Pennsylvania	A	AC*	A	A	A	P	A	A		A
Rhode Island	A	A		A	A	AC*	A	A			X*
South Carolina	A	A*	A	A	A*	A*	A	A	A	A*	X*
South Dakota	A	A	A	A	A		A	A
Tennessee	A		A
Texas	A	A	A	A		A
Utah	AC/AI*	AC*	A	A		AC/AI*	A	A	A	A	X*
Vermont	AC/AI*	AC*		A		AC/AI*	A			A
Virginia	A*	A	A	A	A	A	A		A		X*
Washington	A	AC*	A	A		A	A	A	A	A	X*
West Virginia	A	A	A	AC*	A	AC*				A
Wisconsin	A	A		A						A
Wyoming	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A
Note. A: Allowed; A* = Non-standard, but no implications for scoring or aggregation; AC: Allowed in certain circumstances; AI: Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation; AC/AI = Allowed in certain circumstances and there are implications for scoring; P: Prohibited; NA: Not applicable. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.25: Descriptions of "Other" Response Accommodations

State
Alaska	Scratch paper; Provide student with additional room to write response.
Arizona	Thesaurus; Translation dictionary.
California	Word books are allowed and have implications for scoring if used on a reading, language, or spelling test.
Delaware	Electronic thesaurus.
Georgia	Bilingual dictionary.
Indiana	Circle answers rather than bubble.
Iowa	Reference aids.
Maine	Bilingual dictionary; Large-spaced paper.
Michigan	Lined or grid paper.
Missouri	Lined paper.
Montana	Bilingual dictionary.
Nebraska	Increased spacing, wider lines, and/or margins; Bilingual dictionary.
New Jersey	Dictionary for those students who are identified as non or limited English proficient.
New York	Additional paper for math calculations.
North Carolina	Thesaurus.
North Dakota	Large print answer document; Dictionary.
Oregon	Thesaurus; Dictionary
Rhode Island	Thesaurus.
South Carolina	Bold-line paper.
Utah	Check student's alignment and completeness of response bubbles; Adapted paper.
Virginia	Enlarging the answer document.
Washington	Thesaurus.

Table B.26: Specifications and Descriptions of "Certain Circumstances" and "Implications for Scoring" for Response Accommodations

State
Alabama	Proctor/Scribe - Not allowed on Alabama Direct Assessment of Writing (ADAW). (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Computer or Machine - Not allowed on Stanford 10 or Alabama Reading and Mathematics Test (ARMT); On ADAW, spell and grammar checker as well as dictionary programs are prohibited. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Write in Test Booklets - Considered non-standard administration if used on the Stanford 10. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Communication Device - Not allowed on ADAW. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Responses to Sign Language Interpreter - Not allowed on ADAW. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Pointing - Not allowed on ADAW. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Alaska	Spell Checker/Assistance - Allowed only on the modified High School Graduation Qualifying Examination (HSGQE). (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Arizona	Proctor/Scribe - Dictating to a scribe is considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the writing portion of Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS). (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the writing portion of AIMS. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Speech/Text Device - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the writing portion of AIMS. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Arkansas	Proctor/Scribe - Must be done in an individual setting. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Write in Test Booklets - Must be done in an individual setting; Student may not have extra paper. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
California	Proctor/Scribe - Allowed with implications for scoring if used on the CST, CAHSEE, or CELDT. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Computer or Machine - Spell and grammar check tools must be turned off for writing/essay responses. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Write in Test Booklets - Allowed only for grades 2,3, and 4-11; Marks must be erased to avoid scanning interference. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Allowed with implications for scoring if used on the writing portion of a test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Sign Responses to Sign Language Interpreter - Allowed with implications for scoring if scribe provides spelling, grammar, and language conventions. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Connecticut	Computer or Machine - Spell-check and grammar-check must be disabled. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Write in Test Booklets - Students may not respond to open-ended items in the test booklet. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Sign Responses to Sign Language Interpreter - Allowed only on multiple-choice and griddable items. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Speech/Text Device - Not allowed for students who have slow or labored handwriting or fine-motor problems, but are otherwise capable of providing a handwritten or typed response. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Delaware	Tape Recorder - Student must be tested individually. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Allowed only when use is permitted for other students. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Florida	Computer or Machine - Spell or grammar check must be turned off. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Georgia	Computer or Machine - Considered non-standard on the ITBS and NRT (procedures and directions included in the administration manual are not followed exactly and the student's answer documents must be coded to reflect a non-standard administration); Grammar and spell check devices must be disabled. (Allowed)
	Communication Device - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used on the ITBS; Grammar and spell check devices must be disabled. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Brailler - Considered non-standard on the ITBS and NRT (procedures and directions included in the administration manual are not followed exactly and the student's answer documents must be coded to reflect a non-standard administration). (Allowed)
	Pointing - Considered non-standard on the ITBS and NRT (procedures and directions included in the administration manual are not followed exactly and the student's answer documents must be coded to reflect a non-standard administration). (Allowed)
Hawaii	Proctor/Scribe - Must be in an individual setting; Allowed with implications for scoring if used on any test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Brailler - If a brailler is used, stanine and percentile rank scores will be provided using separate national norms. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Idaho	Computer or Machine - Spell checker not allowed if spelling is being tested. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Indiana	Brailler - Spell or grammar check must be turned off. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Maine	Proctor/Scribe - Not allowed on writing tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Maryland	Spell Checker/Assistance - Not permitted on the High School Assessment (HSA) English test. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Brailler - Spell or grammar check must be blocked. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Massachusetts	Proctor/Scribe - Considered non-standard if used on the ELA Composition Test (may alter what the test measures). (Allowed)
	Computer or Machine - For the ELA Composition Test, spell or grammar checking devices must be turned off. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Considered non-standard if used on the ELA Composition Test (may alter what the test measures). (Allowed)
	Sign Responses to Sign Language Interpreter - Considered non-standard if used on the ELA Composition Test (may alter what the test measures). (Allowed)
	Speech/Text Device - Considered non-standard on the ELA Language and Literature Test and Reading Test (may alter what the test measures). (Allowed)
Michigan	Computer or Machine - Spell check, thesaurus, and grammar check must be disabled. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Considered a non-standard accommodation if used. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Mississippi	Spell Checker/Assistance - Not allowed on writing assessments. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Montana	Computer or Machine - Allowed on the CRT only; Spellchecker must be deactivated. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Write in Test Booklets - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Nevada	Proctor/Scribe - Considered a modification if used on a writing assessment. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Considered a modification if used on a writing assessment. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
New Hampshire	Proctor/Scribe - Considered a standard accommodation if used on math and reading tests; NHDOE approval required for scribing writing tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Computer or Machine - Spell/grammar check may not be used. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
New Jersey	Computer or Machine - Must be listed in student's IEP; Spelling and grammar tools are not permitted. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
New Mexico	Proctor/Scribe - For selected response items only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Computer or Machine - Spell and grammar check mechanisms must be deactivated on writing tests; Voice output mechanisms must be deactivated on reading/language tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Tape Recorder - Not allowed on writing test. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Communication Device - Not allowed on reading/language tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Not allowed on writing assessments. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Pointing - Allowed on multiple choice items only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
North Carolina	Tape Recorder - If used on writing assessments, student must transcribe response. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Communication Device - Not allowed on tests that measure reading comprehension. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Speech/Text Device - Not allowed on tests that measure reading comprehension. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
North Dakota	Proctor/Scribe - For constructed-response items, considered a 'category 2' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests); If used on a writing test, considered a 'category 3' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests and may also change what is being measured). (Allowed)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - On tests where spelling will not be scored, considered a 'category 2' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests); If used on tests where spelling will be scored, considered a 'category 3' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests and may also change what is being measured). (Allowed)
Oklahoma	Computer or Machine - Allowed on English II and writing test only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Tape Recorder - Allowed on English II and writing test only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Oregon	Proctor/Scribe - Considered a modification if used on writing test (not considered part of standard administration; scores obtained under modified conditions do not allow students to meet content and achievement standards and the scores will appear in school and district group statistics). (Allowed)
	Computer or Machine - Considered a modification (not considered part of standard administration; scores obtained under modified conditions do not allow students to meet content and achievement standards and the scores will appear in school and district group statistics) if automated features are enabled. (Allowed)
	Communication Device - Considered a modification (not considered part of standard administration; scores obtained under modified conditions do not allow students to meet content and achievement standards and the scores will appear in school and district group statistics). (Allowed)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Considered a modification (not considered part of standard administration; scores obtained under modified conditions do not allow students to meet content and achievement standards and the scores will appear in school and district group statistics). (Allowed)
	Sign Responses to Sign Language Interpreter - Considered a modification (not considered part of standard administration; scores obtained under modified conditions do not allow students to meet content and achievement standards and the scores will appear in school and district group statistics). (Allowed)
Pennsylvania	Computer or Machine - Spell and grammar checkers must be turned off. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Rhode Island	Spell Checker/Assistance - Allowed only on mathematics tests. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
South Carolina	Computer or Machine - Considered a modification if spell- or grammar-checker is enabled; Modifications compromise the validity and alter the meaning and comparability of test scores. (Allowed)
	Communication Device - Considered a modification if spell- or grammar-checker is enabled; Modifications compromise the validity and alter the meaning and comparability of test scores. (Allowed)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Considered a modification if used on certain portions of the PACT and the BSAP Exit Examination; Modifications compromise the validity and alter the meaning and comparability of test scores. (Allowed)
	Speech/Text Device - Considered a modification if spell- or grammar-checker is enabled; Modifications compromise the validity and alter the meaning and comparability of test scores. (Allowed)
Utah	Proctor/Scribe - Considered a modification on all tests except for the Iowa tests. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Computer or Machine - Spell and grammar check must be turned off. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Considered a modification if used (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Vermont	Proctor/Scribe - Allowed with implications for scoring if used on the writing test. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
	Computer or Machine - Spell and grammar checks must be turned off. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Allowed on science and math assessments but not on ELA. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Virginia	Proctor/Scribe - Considered a non-standard accommodation (significantly changes what a test is measuring and does not maintain standard conditions of the test). (Allowed)
Washington	Computer or Machine - Spell check or student-created dictionaries are not allowed on the WASL writing tasks. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
West Virginia	Tape Recorder - Not allowed on writing test. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Spell Checker/Assistance - Not allowed on tests for which spelling or writing will be scored. (Allowed in certain circumstances)

Table B.27: Scheduling/Timing Accommodations

State	Extended Time	With Breaks	Multiple Sessions	Time Beneficial to Student	Over Multiple Days	Other
Alabama	AC*	A	A	A		X*
Alaska	A	A		A	A
Arizona	A	A	A		A
Arkansas	AC*			A
California	A	A		A	A
Colorado	A	A	AC*	A		X*
Connecticut	A	A	A	A
Delaware	A	A	A		A
Florida	A	A	A	A	A
Georgia	A*	A*		A		X*
Hawaii	AC/AI*	A	A	A	P
Idaho	A	A	A	A	A	X*
Illinois	A	A
Indiana	A	A	A	A
Iowa	A	A				X*
Kansas
Kentucky	A
Louisiana	A	A	AC*	A	AC*
Maine	A	A	A	A	A	X*
Maryland	A	A		A	A
Massachusetts	A	A	A	A
Michigan	A	A		A		X*
Minnesota	A			A
Mississippi	A	A	AC*	A	AC*	X*
Missouri	A	A	A	A	AC*	X*
Montana	A	AC*	AC*	A		X*
Nebraska	A	A		A
Nevada	A	A		A
New Hampshire	A	A	A	A		X*
New Jersey	A	A				X*
New Mexico	A	A		A	A	X*
New York	A	A	A	A	A
North Carolina	AC*	A	A		A
North Dakota	A*	A*			A*	X*
Ohio
Oklahoma	A	A	A	A		X*
Oregon	A	A	AC*	A		X*
Pennsylvania	A	A	A
Rhode Island	A	A	A	A	A	X*
South Carolina	A	A	A	A	A
South Dakota		A	A	A
Tennessee	A		A	A		X*
Texas
Utah	A	A		A	A	X*
Vermont	A	A		A
Virginia		A	A	A		X*
Washington	A	A		A	A	X*
West Virginia	A	A		A
Wisconsin	A	A	A	A	A
Wyoming	A	A	A		A	X*
Note. A: Allowed; A* = Non-standard, but no implications for scoring or aggregation; AC: Allowed in certain circumstances; AI: Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation; AC/AI = Allowed in certain circumstances and there are implications for scoring; P: Prohibited; NA: Not applicable. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.28: Descriptions of "Other" Scheduling/Timing Accommodations

State
Alabama	Testing allowed until, in the administrator's judgment, the student can no long sustain the activity; Flexible scheduling.
Colorado	Scheduling of sessions in a different order, except for the writing assessment.
Georgia	Subtests in a different sequence; Flexible schedule.
Idaho	Subtests in a different order.
Iowa	Flexible scheduling.
Maine	Using flexibility in the order in which content area tests are given.
Michigan	Subtests in a different order.
Mississippi	Testing allowed until, in the test administrator's judgment, the pupil can no longer continue the activity.
Missouri	Changing the order of the administration to reflect student's individual learning characteristics.
Montana	Subtests given in a different order.
New Hampshire	Test administered until, in the administrator's judgment, the student could no longer sustain the activity.
New Jersey	Terminating a section of the test when a student has indicated that she or he has completed all items she or he can.
New Mexico	Flexible schedule.
North Dakota	Subtests taken in a different order; Flexible schedule.
Oklahoma	Flexible schedule.
Oregon	Flexible schedule.
Rhode Island	Subtests in a different order.
Tennessee	Flexible scheduling of subtests.
Utah	Flexible scheduling of tests without exceeding total time allowances.
Virginia	Order of test administration.
Washington	Change schedule or order of activities.
Wyoming	Provide flexible schedule.

Table B.29: Specifications and Descriptions of "Certain Circumstances" and "Implications for Scoring" for Scheduling/Timing Accommodations

State
Alabama	Extended Time - Allowed on Alabama Direct Assessment of Writing (ADAW) only; Must be approved by SDE and not exceed double the specific limit. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Arkansas	Extended Time - All testing scheduled for a given day must be completed by the conclusion of that school day. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Colorado	Multiple Sessions - Must be completed in a single day. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Georgia	Extended Time - Considered non-standard on the NRT (procedures and directions included in the administration manual are not followed exactly and the student's answer documents must be coded to reflect a non-standard administration). (Allowed)
	With Breaks - Considered non-standard on the NRT (procedures and directions included in the administration manual are not followed exactly and the student's answer documents must be coded to reflect a non-standard administration). (Allowed)
Hawaii	Extended Time - Any student may be given extended time to complete standards-based sessions; Allowed with implications for scoring if used on the Stanford 9. (Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation)
Louisiana	Multiple Sessions - Sessions must be completed within the allotted test dates. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Over Multiple Days - Sessions must be completed within the allotted test dates. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Mississippi	Multiple Sessions - Must be pre-arranged and student may not change responses to questions from the previous administration or preview questions that will be administered in a future session. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Over Multiple Days - Must be pre-arranged and student may not change responses to questions from the previous administration or preview questions that will be administered in a future session. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Missouri	Over Multiple Days - Dates for taking the MAP must occur within the MAP testing window. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Montana	With Breaks - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Multiple Sessions - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
North Carolina	Extended Time - Must be within same testing day. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
North Dakota	Extended Time - Considered a 'category 2' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests). (Allowed)
	With Breaks - Considered a 'category 2' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests). (Allowed)
	Over Multiple Days - Considered a 'category 2' accommodation (may effect the interpretation of individual tests). (Allowed)
Oregon	Multiple Sessions - Allowed on Knowledge and Skills Test only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)

Table B.30: Setting Accommodations

State	Individual	Small Group	Carrel	Separate Room	Seat Location/ Proximity	Minimize Distractions	Student’s Home	Special Ed. Classroom	Other
Alabama	A	A	A		A		AC*	A
Alaska	A	A	A	A	A	A	A		X*
Arizona	A	A	A	A	A
Arkansas	A	A			A
California	A	A	A	A			A
Colorado	A	A			A
Connecticut	A	A	A	A			AC*	A
Delaware	A	A			A
Florida	A	A	A	A		A			X*
Georgia	A	A	A	A	A		A	A
Hawaii	A	A			A
Idaho	A	A	A	A	A	A
Illinois	A			A
Indiana	A	A			A
Iowa	A	A	A	A
Kansas
Kentucky				A
Louisiana	A	A
Maine	A	A	A	A	A	A	A		X*
Maryland	A	A	A		A		A		X*
Massachusetts	A	A	A	A	A
Michigan	A	A	A	A	A	A	AC*	A	X*
Minnesota	A	A
Mississippi	A	A	A	A	A		AC*	A
Missouri	A	A	A		A	A
Montana	A	A	AC*	AC*	AC*		AC*	AC*
Nebraska
Nevada	A	A	A	A				A
New Hampshire	A	A	A	A	A		A		X*
New Jersey	A	A	A	A	A		A	A	X*
New Mexico	A	A	A		A		A		X*
New York	A	A	A	A	A	A
North Carolina	A	A	A	A	A		A		X*
North Dakota	A	A		A	A	A	A
Ohio
Oklahoma	A	A	A	A		A		A
Oregon	A	A	A	A	A	A	A*
Pennsylvania		A	A	A	A	A	A		X*
Rhode Island	A	A	A	A	A	A	AC*	A
South Carolina	A	A	A	A	A	A
South Dakota	A	A	A	A	A	A	A		X*
Tennessee	A	A	A	A	A		A	A
Texas	A	A
Utah	A	A	A		A	A	A	A	X*
Vermont	A	A	A	A	A	A	A	A
Virginia	A	A	A		A	A	A		X*
Washington	A	A	A	A	A	A	A		X*
West Virginia	A	A	A
Wisconsin	A	A	A	A	A			A
Wyoming	A	A	A	A		A
Note. A: Allowed; A* = Non-standard, but no implications for scoring or aggregation; AC: Allowed in certain circumstances; AI: Allowed with implications for scoring and/or aggregation; AC/AI = Allowed in certain circumstances and there are implications for scoring; P: Prohibited; NA: Not applicable. See subsequent table(s) for detailed descriptions for the starred (*) items.

Table B.31: Descriptions of "Other" Setting Accommodations

State
Alaska	Opportunity for movement.
Florida	Opportunity for movement.
Maine	Opportunity for movement.
Maryland	Support staff assistance in general education classroom; Hospital.
Michigan	Care facility; Freedom to move, stand, or pace; Soft, calming music.
New Hampshire	Non-school setting.
New Jersey	Hospital.
New Mexico	Hospital.
North Carolina	Hospital.
Pennsylvania	Hospital.
South Dakota	Hospital.
Utah	Hospital.
Virginia	Hospital.
Washington	Hospital.

Table B.32: Specifications and Descriptions of "Certain Circumstances" and "Implications for Scoring" for Scheduling/Timing Accommodations

State
Alabama	Student’s Home - Homebound students only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Connecticut	Student’s Home - Special education students who are homebound due to illness or on homebound instruction as a result of a suspension or expulsion can be administered the test at home. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Michigan	Student’s Home - Test must be administered by school district professional. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Mississippi	Student’s Home - For homebound students only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Montana	Carrel - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Separate Room - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Seat Location/Proximity - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Student’s Home - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
	Special Ed. Classroom - Allowed on the CRT only. (Allowed in certain circumstances)
Oregon	Student’s Home - Considered a modification (not considered part of standard administration; scores obtained under modified conditions do not allow students to meet content and achievement standards and the scores will appear in school and district group statistics). (Allowed)
Rhode Island	Student’s Home - Test administrator must be school personnel. (Allowed in certain circumstances)

Top of page