University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Practices for assigning academic accommodations for students with specific learning disabilities

(USC Thesis Other)

Practices for assigning academic accommodations for students with specific learning disabilities

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 1

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS FOR STUDENTS
WITH SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITIES

by

Scott Jensen

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2018

Copyright 2018 Scott Jensen

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 2

DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this research and work to all of the amazing individuals who
understand, think, and respond to life differently. I myself was, at an early age, identified with a
learning disability, and it was because of this experience that I was able to construct my unique
view and place in the world. My hope is that the efforts dedicated to this work may add to the
discourse of differentiated instruction and provide a bridge for individuals with disabilities to
access information that will help shape their future.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to extend the deepest gratitude to my parents, Paul and Kathi, for charting a path
that has guided me both personally and professionally. Your unconditional support and
encouragement has meant so much to me over the years, and although the course has not always
been easy, your steady guidance and patient reassurance has served as the cornerstone for my
success. Words cannot express how grateful I am for everything that you have provided me.
To my brothers, both named Matt. One determined by blood, while the other was
pronounced by choice. You have both been a tremendous source of encouragement in my life,
and our shared experiences and discussions over the years have challenged me, made me laugh
uncontrollably, and given me space to express ideas and dream. My life is richer by being able to
experience it with the both of you through the years.
To my extended family and friends, you have all shaped my thoughts and beliefs, and
inspired me to be a better human as a result of the amazing individuals you are. I especially
would like to thank the Shaw family, who have invited me in as a part of their own and have
influenced me in so many ways over the years.
To the members of my USC family, I thank you for keeping me inspired and honest. I
hold you all in great esteem and am so grateful that I chose to embark on this journey. We were
all part of an experiment that surpassed my highest expectations. Our work together over the past
few years will live onward as the ideas and methodologies initiated through our discourse will
ultimately begin to take form in our respective professions.
Most importantly, I would like to thank my wife, Kathy, to whom I owe this life as I
know it. You are strong in ways that I am not, and you are able to provide me with what I need
even when I don’t understand why I need it. You are an amazing mother and friend, and you
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 4

have provided me with a safe shelter in which to pursue my goals and dreams; I love you. To
Aidan, who brings such joy and purpose in my life. I offer this work as an example of what you
can do when you match a dream with a plan.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION ....................................................................................................................... 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................... 3
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................. 7
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................... 8
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 10
Introduction of the Problem of Practice ..................................................................... 10
Specific Learning Disability ...................................................................................... 11
Organizational Context and Mission ......................................................................... 15
District Demographics ............................................................................................... 15
Special Education Programs and Demographics ....................................................... 16
Special Education Placement and Services ................................................................ 17
Organizational Performance Status ............................................................................ 18
Related Literature....................................................................................................... 21
Importance of Addressing the Problem ..................................................................... 23
Organizational Performance Goal .............................................................................. 25
Description of the Stakeholder Groups ...................................................................... 25
Primary Stakeholder for the Study ............................................................................. 26
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions ........................................................... 27
Conceptual and Methodological Framework ............................................................. 28
Definitions.................................................................................................................. 28
Organization of the Project ........................................................................................ 29
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................................. 30
Accommodations ....................................................................................................... 30
The Importance of Multiple Means of Assessment and Data Collection ...... 33
Implementation .............................................................................................. 35
Accommodations and the Least Restrictive Environment ............................. 37
Knowledge and Skills ................................................................................................ 38
The Effect of Stakeholder Knowledge ........................................................... 39
The Effect of Stakeholder Motivation ........................................................... 42
Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 45
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY .............................................................................. 47
Purpose of the Study .................................................................................................. 47
Study Procedures ....................................................................................................... 48
Sample and Population .............................................................................................. 49
Potential Benefits to Participants and/or to Society ................................................... 49
Ethical Implications and Considerations ................................................................... 50
Instrumentation .......................................................................................................... 52
Reliability, Validity, Credibility, and Trustworthiness .............................................. 52
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 6

Data Collection .......................................................................................................... 53
Survey ............................................................................................................ 56
Interview ........................................................................................................ 56
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS ................................................................. 59
Findings...................................................................................................................... 60
Research Question 1 ...................................................................................... 61
Research Question 2 ...................................................................................... 78
Summary .................................................................................................................... 88
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................... 92
Introduction ................................................................................................................ 92
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions ........................................................... 92
Recommendations for Practice to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and
Organizational Influences .................................................................................... 93
Knowledge Recommendations ...................................................................... 93
Motivation Recommendations ....................................................................... 99
Organization Recommendations .................................................................... 106
Implementation and Evaluation Framework .............................................................. 113
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations .......................................... 114
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators ........................................................ 115
Level 3: Behavior ........................................................................................... 115
Level 2: Learning ........................................................................................... 120
Level 1: Reaction ........................................................................................... 126
Summary ........................................................................................................ 132
Limitations and Delimitations .................................................................................... 132
Future Research ......................................................................................................... 133
Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 134
REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 138
APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................... 148
APPENDIX A: Informed Consent Form ................................................................... 149
APPENDIX B: Survey Protocol ................................................................................ 152
APPENDIX C: Focus Group Protocol ....................................................................... 159
APPENDIX D: Codebook ......................................................................................... 160
APPENDIX E: Initial Evaluation .............................................................................. 162
APPENDIX F: Program Evaluation .......................................................................... 164
APPENDIX G: Survey Results .................................................................................. 166

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 7

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. District Ethnic Demographics .................................................................................. 16
Table 2. Qualifying Condition Demographics ....................................................................... 16
Table 3. Organizational Performance Goal and Stakeholder Goals ...................................... 26
Table 4. Organizational Mission, Stakeholder Goal, and Knowledge Influences ................. 41
Table 5. Organizational Mission, Stakeholder Goal, and Motivational Influences ............... 44
Table 6. Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations ................................... 94
Table 7. Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations.................................... 101
Table 8. Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations ................................ 109
Table 9. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes................... 117
Table 10. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Education Specialists ...... 119
Table 11. Required Drivers to Education Specialists’ Critical Behaviors ............................. 120
Table 12. Components of Learning for the Program ............................................................. 126
Table 13. Components to Measure Reactions to the Training Program ................................ 128

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 8

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. 2016 SBAC data for English language arts for non-special education (SPED)
students .................................................................................................................................. 18
Figure 2. 2016 SBAC data for English language arts for SPED students ............................. 19
Figure 3. 2016 SBAC data for math for non-SPED students ................................................ 19
Figure 4. 2016 SBAC data for math for SPED students ........................................................ 20
Figure 5. SBAC universal tools, designated supports, and accommodations ........................ 31
Figure 6. Participants of the survey by district. ..................................................................... 58
Figure 7 Conceptual framework.. .......................................................................................... 58
Figure 8. Teacher confidence in implementing accommodations. ........................................ 62
Figure 9. Teacher methods in matching accommodations..................................................... 64
Figure 10. Teacher practice of utilizing pre- and postassessment related to
accommodations. ................................................................................................................... 67
Figure 11. Teacher practice of developing implementation plans specific to student
accommodations. ................................................................................................................... Error!
Bookmark not defined.
Figure 12. Critical aspects of providing accommodations..................................................... 69
Figure 13. Frequency with which accommodations are used throughout the day. ................ 70
Figure 14. Frequency with which accommodations are used during assessments. ............... 71
Figure 15. Practitioners’ perceived barriers to instructional practice. ................................... 73
Figure 16. Types of accommodation recommendations. ....................................................... 86
Figure 17. Collaboration during the recommendation process. ............................................. 86
Figure 18. Dashboard example of Level 1: Reaction. ........................................................... 131
Figure 19. Dashboard example of Level 2: Knowledge. ....................................................... 131
Figure 20. Dashboard example of Level 3: Behavior. ........................................................... 132
Figure 21. Dashboard example of Level 4: Results. .............................................................. 132

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 9

ABSTRACT
This study utilized a mixed-methods approach to analyze and evaluate the current
practice of education specialists when assigning academic accommodations for students with
specific learning disabilities (SLDs). Education specialists who were practicing in a K-8 school
setting and working with students with mild to moderate SLDs at the time of the study
participated in an electronic survey and answered questions about their practice. A small subset
of the practitioners surveyed then participated in a guided interview. Specific data related to
individual education plan (IEP) supports as well as assessment and benchmark data were
analyzed to triangulate the perspectives of the practitioners and provide context for the study.
The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was used to analyze the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational factors that influence education specialists’ practice in making
recommendations for academic accommodations for students with SLDs. The findings suggest
that the education specialists who participated in the survey had a strong understanding of the
importance of academic accommodations and how to analyze, recommend, and implement
accommodations. Organizational factors such as collaboration, administrative support, sufficient
time and space constructs, and ongoing professional development emerged as current barriers
and challenges that inhibit best practices. The findings of this study highlighted the need for
training for all instructional support staff within the organization as well as opportunities to
collaborate and engage in transparent communication among district stakeholders. A summary of
the research findings is provided with recommendations related to proposed best practices for a
systematic approach for the recommendation of effective academic accommodations.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 10

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
Federal law affords students with disabilities the use of “appropriate” and “reasonable
accommodation[s]” to their education protected under both the Individuals With Disabilities Act
(IDEA, 2004, § 1462[b][2][A][ii]) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
(Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap, 2000, § 104.12). Accommodations provide access
to general education curriculum that allows students with learning disabilities an opportunity to
demonstrate their knowledge aligned with their neurotypical peers (Ofiesh, 2007). Expectations
for accommodations are most prevalent in the area of state and districtwide assessments, where
90% of students with disabilities participate in the same standardized assessment measures as
their neurotypical peers (Bolt & Thurlow, 2004). Currently, the California standards assessment
measure is administered through the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC, 2017),
which provides over 50 digitally embedded and nonembedded supports and accommodations
aligned with its assessment platform. Many of these supports are not required to be indicated in
an individual education plan (IEP) to implement. These supports range from breaks, calculators,
and spellcheck to text to speech, translations, and closed captioning (SBAC, 2017). This
increased importance of accessibility as related to state accountability is a direct result of
providing testing environments that allow for students to present their highest levels of
achievement in the hopes of capturing a pure measure of competency (SBAC, 2017).
However, regardless of the heightened awareness related to accessibility, research
suggests that there is little known of how accommodations are recommended (Weis, Dean, &
Osborne, 2014). Furthermore, research has shown that even in the heavy-assessment-laden world
of special education, there is an absence of a systems approach that would provide evidence-
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 11

based practices for making recommendations for student accommodations (Weis et al., 2014). It
is worth exploring this phenomenon, especially since over 85% of the students with disabilities
being served in Monarch School District (MSD, a pseudonym for the district that served as the
focus for this research) are identified as having mild to moderate disabilities and spend most of
their school day in general education classrooms being educated alongside their typical peers,
according to MSD data from 2016. The largest qualifying condition in MSD, according to the
2016 data, for placement in special education is a specific learning disability (SLD). It is within
this population that the research aimed to explore the current practices enlisted by MSD special
education teachers to provide recommendations for academic supports and accommodations that
are critical for the success of student achievement. Therefore, it is important to clearly define and
distinguish the characteristics of SLD and how it directly relates to the problem of practice. The
following section specifically targets SLD and its impact related to academic accommodations.
Specific Learning Disability
The term specific learning disability describes one of the 13 possible qualifying
conditions for a student to be placed into special education and provided with services. It is a
somewhat complex qualification that has a broad reach of effects across subjects and disciplines
(Wong & Butler, 2012). The qualification criteria for SLD are so extensive that it is designated
as the primary qualifying condition for all students receiving special education in the state of
California. According to the California Department of Education (CDE, 2015), there are a
reported 734,422 students ages 3 through 22 identified as having special needs in California. Of
those students, 288,296 are identified with an SLD. This means that SLD accounts for nearly
40% of the total number of students who qualify for special education placement and services
within the state (CDE, 2015).
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 12

The disproportionate number of students qualifying for special education prompted
federal legislators to realign the assessment processes mandated through legislation. Through its
2006 reauthorization, IDEA forbade multidisciplinary teams to use IQ-achievement discrepancy
measures in determining a qualification for SLD (Hauerwas, Brown, & Scott, 2013). Instead, IEP
teams had to rely on multitiered systems of support that would first provide general education
compensatory interventions to better support learning. Additionally, IDEA requires that all
interventions be research based and focus on the students’ academic strengths and weaknesses
rather than solely targeting discrepancies in achievement (Hauerwas et al., 2013). This focus on
student strengths and weaknesses provides an opportunity for practitioners to utilize approaches
that align with individual aptitudes and learning styles to arrive at solutions to help bridge
individual gaps in learning skills. However prescribed, each school district has an obligation to
exhaust the array of academic interventions, supports, and services that are available to all
students in the general education setting before moving to assessments for special education. It is
within this context that students are first introduced to academic accommodations to support
learning. Therefore, it is critical that the types of accommodations recommended for student
success provide support that connects student baseline knowledge with interventions aligned
with individual competency. Once baseline knowledge and competency are calibrated,
practitioners can assign interventions that will yield the greatest effectiveness.
There is a broad understanding of accommodations and an array of interpretations that
can be reached related to how effective they are in providing access and improving student
achievement. Accommodations are not intended to make school easier but to make learning and
assessment accessible to students with disabilities (Byrnes, 2008). In essence, an accommodation
should be a specific and identified support that removes a barrier to performance, reducing the
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 13

impact of a disability so that a student can more accurately demonstrate what he or she knows
and can do (Thurlow & Bolt, 2001; Thurlow, Lazarus, Thompson, & Morse, 2005; Ysseldyke,
2001). IDEA empowers IEP teams to identify accommodations that facilitate access to
instruction. There is a particular focus for IEP teams to consider accommodations for large-scale
assessments (Byrnes, 2008). Nearly 100% of the students who qualify for special education in
MSD have at least one assessment accommodation reflected in their IEPs. However, these
accommodations are not intended to be used in isolation and for assessment purposes only. In
fact, SBAC (2017) policy and procedure reflects that only accommodations that are provided for
students in their everyday instructional environments should be considered for assessment
accommodations. This means that identified accommodations should be used across learning
environments and included in the pedagogy of all instructional support staff.
The subsequent goal for educational practitioners is to provide instructional supports and
systems that will allow for students identified with special needs to have access to standards-
based curriculum and provide academic benefit (Morningstar, Shogren, Lee, & Born, 2015). This
practice requires the students to adapt to their curriculum effectively without the need for
intensive or stratified interventions that reside outside of the general education classroom.
Researchers have emphasized that students with disabilities are most likely to learn grade-level
academic content when in general education classrooms that incorporate instruction and supports
for all students (Wehmeyer, Lattin, & Agran, 2001). Therefore, the aim of providing
instructional accommodations is to allow the students to remain in a general education setting to
be educated alongside their typical peers. This requires intentional planning, which demands the
direct involvement of both a general education teacher and an education specialist, to arrive at
recommendations that help improve the overall academic success of all students (Williams,
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 14

Beachum, Obiakor, & McCray, 2006). It is advantageous for the instructional team to arrive at a
consensus related to systems and compensatory strategies that will provide the students with the
appropriate accommodations to support their learning. It is essential that educators use a shared
vocabulary when working with accommodations so that the intended educational practices can
be implemented (Byrnes, 2008). Furthermore, Salend and Duhaney (2011) emphasized that
inclusive education benefits students with and without disabilities, but only when teachers use
high-quality instruction combined with curricular and instructional accommodations. Moreover,
Verdugo, Navas, Gómez, and Schalock (2012) highlighted the important role that appropriate
individualized accommodations, modifications, and adaptations play in the success of students
with special needs in the inclusive setting.
However, for all the importance placed on accommodations, there seems to be some
confusion on how best to recommend, implement, and even interpret strategies. Bolt and
Thurlow (2004) suggested that the use of accommodations is often accompanied by
inconsistencies in practices and confusion related to interpretations. Therefore, it is important to
make recommendations for academic accommodations as a result of sufficient data collection
based on baseline factors related to learning and motivational factors of the students, as well as
organizational structures and barriers (Clarke & Estes, 2008). How teams arrive at
recommending accommodations should play a crucial role in how they are implemented in the
classroom. This study explored the process and procedures that special education practitioners
employ in providing academic accommodations for students with SLDs that will provide them
with greater access to standards-based curriculum.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 15

Organizational Context and Mission
The organization that served as the focus for this research was MSD (a pseudonym). The
vision and purpose statement of the district is to serve the community, offering an extensive and
dynamic range of educational programming and services to provide for all students. The mission
of MSD is “to empower students so that each actualizes his or her unique potential and
responsibly contributes to a global society, through a system distinguished by rigorous
academics, innovative use of technology, creative exploration, and nurturing learning
experiences.” The board vision expresses that MSD “promotes, expects, and accepts nothing
short of excellence. We have a collective commitment to be the best school district in
California.” The reason behind what MSD does is to provide an education that will produce
effective global citizens.
District Demographics
MSD is a midsized school district composed of an ethnically diverse population of
residents who represent a wide range of social and economic categories. The figures listed in
Table 1 are reflective of the total student population of MSD for the 2014-2015 school year,
when the student population totaled 15,055 (CDE, 2015). Table 1 reflects the district’s ethnic
demographics during the 2014-2015 school year.
MSD is composed of predominantly Hispanic or Latino students and students identified
as Asian or Filipino. Culturally, there are many different languages spoken within the home
environments of the students who attend MSD, and many of them are English language learners
(ELLs). The median household income in the community of MSD is $60,913, and most of the
community members work in private industry (ProximityOne, n.d.). Of the 15,055 students who
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 16

attended schools in MSD in 2014-2015, approximately 1,450 were identified as students with
special needs. Of those students, 80% were identified as having mild to moderate disabilities.

Table 1. District Ethnic Demographics
District Ethnic Demographics

Ethnicity n
Hispanic or Latino of any race 9,363
American Indian or Alaska Native, not Hispanic 114
Asian, not Hispanic 3,007
Pacific Islander, not Hispanic 43
Filipino, not Hispanic 1,190
African American, not Hispanic 385
White, not Hispanic 690
Not reported 139

Special Education Programs and Demographics
The special education programming provided by MSD offers a wide spectrum of
placement and service options that provide an array of support for various qualifying conditions.
In 2014-2015, MSD had a total of 1,440 students identified with special needs who participated
in district-supported specialized programming. Table 2 reflects the 2014-2015 special education
demographics as related to qualifying conditions for services.
Table 2. Qualifying Condition Demographics
District Qualifying Condition Demographics

Disability n
Hard of hearing 15
Deaf >11
Speech and language impairment 368
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 17

Visual impairment 12
Emotional disturbance 20
Orthopedic impairment 25
Specific learning disability 465
Deaf-blindness >11
Multiple disability 23
Autism 248
Other health impairment 140
Traumatic brain injury >11
Intellectual disability 120
Total 1,440

Special Education Placement and Services
The district-provided placements and supports for students qualifying for special
education range from very minimal remedial intervention provided within a general education
setting to self-contained placements that provide specialized academic instruction for the extent
of the school day. Consequently, students’ academic needs regarding placement and services are
unique, and the intent of the district is to provide a continuum of services to meet both the
individual and collective needs of the students it serves. The majority of the students in MSD
identified with SLDs are provided with special education support by licensed education
specialists who possess teaching credentials to instruct students with mild to moderate
disabilities. The primary delivery of specialized instructional support that these students receive
is either through resource specialist support or placement in a special day class. Instruction for
students with SLDs within MSD has a focus on Common Core State Standards (CCSS), but
these students are performing significantly below their assigned grade level. Depending on the
assigned special education delivery model at their respective school sites, students with SLDs
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 18

receive instruction both in general education and specially designed settings. However,
regardless of the setting or the achievement level of the students, the primary focus for the
students who match the above profile is on standards-based curriculum, which is consistent with
the focus for their nondisabled peers.
Organizational Performance Status
MSD is experiencing a performance problem in that current recommendations for
academic accommodations fail to produce satisfactory results in student achievement. The results
have led to a performance gap between students with SLDs and their nondisabled peers, as
evidenced by SBAC testing results. Figures 1 through 4 provide a detailed analysis of student
achievement as related to the SBAC tests in both math and English language arts (ELA).

Figure 1. 2016 SBAC data for English language arts for non-special education (SPED) students.
Data from “California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress: Smarter Balanced
Assessment Test Results for: District: [MSD],” by California Department of Education (CDE),
2016 (https://caaspp.cde.ca.gov/sb2017/Search?lstTestYear=2016).

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 19

Figure 2. 2016 SBAC data for English language arts for SPED students. Data from “California
Assessment of Student Performance and Progress: Smarter Balanced Assessment Test Results
for: District: [MSD],” by CDE, 2016 (https://caaspp.cde.ca.gov/sb2017/Search
?lstTestYear=2016).

Figure 3. 2016 SBAC data for math for non-SPED students. Data from “California Assessment
of Student Performance and Progress: Smarter Balanced Assessment Test Results for: District:
[MSD],” by CDE, 2016 (https://caaspp.cde.ca.gov/sb2017/Search?lstTestYear=2016).

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 20

Figure 4. 2016 SBAC data for math for SPED students. Data from “California Assessment of
Student Performance and Progress: Smarter Balanced Assessment Test Results for: District:
[MSD],” by CDE, 2016 (https://caaspp.cde.ca.gov/sb2017/Search?lstTestYear=2016).

As evidenced by the information presented in Figures 1 through 4, there is a significant
achievement gap for students identified with disabilities related to assessments for state-
standards-based curriculum. Although this is only one source of summative data, it is
noteworthy, especially because this is the diagnostic tool with which all students are measured.
The numbers that are most alarming emerge within the two lowest strands of the metric, namely,
“standard not met” (Level 1) and “standard nearly met” (Level 2). In both ELA and math,
students with disabilities fell almost exclusively into one of the aforementioned levels, with 68%
of the students not meeting standards in ELA and 75% of the students not meeting standards in
math. The reason for these lopsided numbers can be assumed from a number of causes; however,
the achievement gap is evident and presents concerns on a large scale.
This enormous gap persists even with accommodations in place for students to have
greater access to their curriculum, which should strengthen academic success. So, why are the
accommodations not proving effective? As described above, considerable energy and focus have
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 21

been dedicated to providing and implementing accommodations for both students with
disabilities and their nondisabled peers. One would hope that the accommodations provided for
students with disabilities would produce better results. It may be that this particular assessment
(SBAC) is too new and that the accommodations are too unfamiliar to students to present a true
gauge of their effectiveness. However, these data are an early indicator of a possible gap between
assigning effective accommodations and student performance. This study analyzed the potential
causes of this gap to provide solutions to assist in closing it.
Related Literature
In the midst of the technology boom, academic accommodations have never been more
abundant and subsequently more complex than they are currently. The primary goal of
implementing accommodations is to provide access for students with disabilities to standards-
based curriculum that allows practitioners to “level the playing field” (Byrnes, 2008). This
implies a paramount need for accommodations to be aligned with individual strengths as well as
specifically individualized to offer the greatest opportunity for student success. However, several
studies have noted that special education teachers are uncertain about the process for choosing
accommodations (Edgemon, Jablonski, & Lloyd, 2006; Fletcher et al., 2006; Thompson,
Lazarus, Clapper, & Thurlow, 2006). In fact, research has suggested that many practitioners
often overlook important diagnostic information when recommending accommodations that may
have a major impact on learning (Weis et al., 2014). Although accommodation decision making
does not necessarily have to follow a rigid formula or specific prescription, it is essential that it
be based on solid data gathered through formative observation or evaluative measures (Gregg,
2012). Ultimately, accommodation decision making requires practitioners to integrate historical,
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 22

diagnostic, functional, and assessment data to understand students’ current abilities (Weis et al.,
2014).
The primary focus for academic accommodations has been targeted to testing
environments, and accommodations have not been provided across all student learning
environments. This allows for a narrow interpretation of accommodations and generally limits
the implementation of accommodations to those supports offered only by the state assessment
platform. The practice of only allowing accommodations to be used for assessment purposes is a
direct contrast to state expectations in California, which require that assessment accommodations
be used in daily instruction (Thurlow, Lazarus, Thompson, & Robey, 2002). Byrnes (2008)
suggested that accurate implementation of accommodations, in both instruction and assessment,
is essential for students with disabilities to acquire and demonstrate knowledge. Ultimately,
academic accommodations have provided much-needed assistance for struggling learners, but
little effort goes into a strategic assessment and analysis of their effectiveness based on
individual student needs. Research has suggested that many special education teachers are
uncertain of the process for choosing accommodations (Edgemon et al., 2006; Fletcher et al.,
2006; Thompson et al., 2006). Furthermore, there seems to be little consideration related to the
primary knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences that should play a crucial part in
guiding recommendations.
The result is an array of academic accommodations that are prescribed by practitioners
haphazardly, in hopes that they will prove effective. The total number of district testing
accommodations in MSD listed for math, ELA, and science is 1,115 (CDE, 2015). Of the 465
students in MSD identified with SLDs in 2014-2015, 95% had speech to text listed on their IEPs
as an accommodation. This accounted for 40% of the total number of accommodations provided
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 23

in the district. However, only a small percentage of the students who receive this accommodation
have been appropriately trained on how to use speech-to-text software or use it during their daily
instruction. Those who do use text-to-speech software as a daily accommodation tool are almost
exclusively served in a special education self-contained classroom, not in the general education
setting. Seemingly, most practitioners make the decision to provide an accommodation based on
discrepancy rather than individual student strengths and weaknesses. Consequently, if a student
struggles in decoding and/or comprehension, for example, then the educational practitioner is apt
to provide that student with an accommodation that will provide greater access to the content and
ultimately assist the student in bolstering this skill. In this case, the student is then assigned a
speech-to-text accommodation with little or no consideration given to the aptitude of the
individual student in using this provision. The practitioner is focused on the problem (decoding
and/or comprehension) instead of the potential effectiveness of the solution (knowledge,
motivation, and access).
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The significance of making effective recommendations for accommodations for students
with SLDs pertains to the impact that these accommodations could have in closing the
achievement gap. Closing the achievement gap for students with SLDs is important because it
presents a very real challenge not only to students with disabilities but also to the community as
a whole. In California, the statewide graduation rate for students with disabilities is 61%, which
is 20% lower than that of their general education counterparts (California Statewide Task Force
on Special Education, 2015). As such, this population of students may require further training,
interventions, and supports to become contributing members of the communities in which they
live. The delay or absence of a high school diploma will significantly decrease the opportunity
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 24

among this demographic of students for employment and/or admittance into postsecondary
education institutions.
What is most concerning is that the majority of students in this particular population do
not present with issues related to IQ. Their primary deficits are the result of processing issues,
poor executive functioning skills, and specific cognitive anomalies. Therefore, these are students
who have the capacity and basic skills required to secure a vocation or continue with their
postsecondary education after graduation. However, in MSD, only 58% of students identified as
special-needs learners obtain a diploma (CDE, 2015).
In addition, individuals with special needs are disproportionately represented in U.S.
juvenile correctional facilities and prison systems. Research has indicated that 85% of the youth
currently serving in juvenile detention facilities are considered individuals with disabilities
(National Council on Disability, 2015). Many of these individuals suffer intensive processing
and sensory disorders in addition to identified behavioral disorders that one would except to find
in a profile of an incarcerated youth. The National Council on Disability (2015) has criticized the
quality of the support that students within the aforementioned demographic receive, suggesting
that it lacks rigor and appropriate interventions to produce satisfactory achievement toward
progress.
It is clear that failing to meet the unique educational needs of students with special needs
not only affects their opportunities for individual success but also places a significant burden on
society in efforts of rehabilitation and support. Therefore, effective systems must be put in place
to meet the needs of students with disabilities by providing them with appropriate interventions
in the least restrictive environment.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 25

Organizational Performance Goal
The organizational goal of MSD is to provide access for students identified with learning
disabilities to general education settings for 70% or more of their school day. At the time of the
study, students with mild to moderate SLDs have a median baseline of 55% of their school day
spent in a general education setting, so the subsequent goal would be a 15% increase. This
increase of time can be attained with a combination of specialized instructional support and
effective academic accommodations and interventions. This goal was determined after a survey
and analysis of district practices was conducted by the CDE as part of a state compliance review.
The CDE determined that MSD should provide more opportunities for students identified with
disabilities to be educated alongside their nondisabled peers. Providing appropriate and effective
accommodations for students with special needs that augment their skills will provide greater
access for participation in a general education setting. This is one factor that will help bridge the
gap for students with SLDs to participate in a nonstratified and general education setting. The
district will be able to monitor this goal through its use of the SIRAS student information system
that houses all of the district’s specific special education data, including the amount of time that
special education students spend outside of special education services.
Description of the Stakeholder Groups
Multiple stakeholder groups exist for this study given the dynamic and wide-ranging
array of individuals this problem affects. These stakeholders cover a wide spectrum of interests,
and their focus varies greatly. While the primary focus of student achievement is consistent, the
definition of achievement is different across the groups. Essentially, the primary stakeholder
groups consist of administrative staff, board members, certificated staff, parent groups, classified
staff, community groups, local politicians, and outside organizations. Each group holds a specific
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 26

stake in the operations and success of the school district, and the members of each group select
the areas of the organization on which they wish to focus their attention. Table 3 identifies
MSD’s organizational mission and performance goal as well as the stakeholder goals that pertain
to this study.

Table 3. Organizational Performance Goal and Stakeholder Goals
Organizational Performance Goal and Stakeholder Goals
Organizational mission
The mission of the Special Education Department of MSD is to provide appropriate
supports and services that promote positive student outcomes provided in generalized
academic settings.
Organizational performance goal
By June 2020, students with special needs will increase their participation in the general
education setting by 15% through the use of district common accommodation systems,
which will allow for greater time spent being educated with their nondisabled peers.
Stakeholder 1 goal Stakeholder 2 goal Stakeholder 3 goal
Education specialists will
identify appropriate evidence-
based accommodations for
students with SLDs to provide
them with access to general
education learning
environments with 70%
accuracy.
Education specialists and
general education
practitioners will have a
shared understanding and
knowledge of individual
student accommodations
with 80% accuracy.
Students will be provided
with access to
recommended
accommodations across all
learning environments
within their school day with
80% accuracy.

Primary Stakeholder for the Study
The primary focus of this study was to understand the current practices that special
education practitioners employ when making recommendations for academic accommodations
for students identified as having SLDs. Most important to the problem of practice was
understanding the assessment and decision-making processes that prompt these practitioners’
decisions. Careful attention was directed to the role that knowledge, motivation, and
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 27

organizational influences play in their decisions. Education specialists play the most critical role
in effectively implementing academic accommodations. Therefore, their input provides the most
influential information in developing a system that will facilitate the most successful outcomes.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to conduct a gap analysis to examine the root causes of the
organizational problem described above, namely, providing effective academic accommodations
for students with SLDs. While a complete gap analysis would focus on all district stakeholders,
for practical purposes, the stakeholders of focus in this analysis were the MSD faculty who
deliver direct instruction to students. An additional local school district named Bramble School
District or BSD (pseudonym) was included in this research to provide a deeper understanding of
the current practices and challenges that Education Specialists face in their daily practice.
Although two school district were sampled in this study, a focus was dedicated to MSD and the
recommendations are aligned with their strategic framework. The analysis focused on causes of
this problem due to gaps in the areas of staff members’ knowledge and skill, motivation, and
organizational issues, and it included an analysis of current student achievement as measured by
available data. The analysis began by generating a list of possible or assumed causes and then
examining these systematically to focus on actual or validated causes. As such, the questions that
guided this study were as follows:
1. What are the knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational causes that influence special
education practitioners’ recommendations related to academic accommodations for students
identified with SLDs in MSD?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational solutions?
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 28

Conceptual and Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model is the most viable model to understand
individual as well as group methodology related to the problem of practice, through the
identification of performance gaps. Clark and Estes identified these factors through an analysis
of the relationships or causes that they referred to as “the big three” (p. 42): (a) staff knowledge
and skills, (b) motivation to achieve a goal, and (c) organizational barriers. Utilizing this model,
the methodological framework assessed the aforementioned areas through a combination of
qualitative surveys, interviews, and quantitative data analysis. The intended result of this study
was to identify potential causes of the problem of practice as well as provide solutions through
the use of the gap analysis. Assumed causes of the performance gap, which include a lack of a
systems approach for making recommendations for academic accommodations, were based on
personal knowledge, quantitative district data, knowledge and motivational theories, and related
literature. These assumed causes were then validated by utilizing research methods that included
a teacher survey, a structured interview, and a data analysis of student performance. All of the
aforementioned methods were used to both validate and invalidate the assumed causes of the
problem of practice. Conclusively, research-based solutions were recommended related to
proposed systems and methodologies that might prove a more effective practice.
Definitions
Academic accommodations: Academic tools that augment and assist student skills to
provide access that may enhance academic performance and achievement.
Education specialist: A teacher who is specifically credentialed and licensed to work
with students with disabilities.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 29

Individual education plan (IEP): A legal document protected under federal law that
specifically details educational expectations for a student with disabilities as they relate to
special programming, interventions, and services.
Specific learning disability (SLD): A developmental disorder that involves difficulties
learning and using academic skills. Specific learning disability has become the umbrella term for
mathematics, reading, and written-expression disorders (Black & Grant, 2014).
Organization of the Project
This study is organized in five chapters. Chapter One outlined the main ideas surrounding
the issue of providing effective academic accommodations for students with SLDs. Chapter Two
provides a literature review of the current research in this area. Chapter Three focuses on the
methodology, participants, data collection, and data analysis of the study. In Chapter Four, the
data and results are analyzed. Chapter Five proposes recommendations based on evidence-based
research and an evaluation process to work concurrently with proposed best practices.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 30

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Chapter Two provides a review of literature that addresses the primary influences that
contribute to the effect of knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors on practitioners’
decisions in recommending effective learning accommodations for students with specific
learning disabilities (SLDs). This chapter contains three major sections. The first section
provides a definition of the problem of practice, supported by the current research related to
effective learning accommodations for students with SLDs. The second section explores
contributing factors that impact the effectiveness of recommending accommodations, such as the
importance of multiple means of assessment along with implementing accommodations in the
least restrictive environment to provide access to standards-based curriculum. Finally, the third
section examines variables of (a) teacher knowledge, (b) teacher and student efficacy, (c) student
motivation, and (d) student achievement and how they influence academic performance related
to achievement.
Accommodations
Academic accommodations are defined as supports that allow students to complete the
same assignments or tests as other students, but with a change in the timing, formatting, setting,
scheduling, response, and/or presentation. Accommodations do not alter testing or assignment
measures in any significant way but offer access to general curriculum information and content
for students with SLDs (PACER Center, 2001). Accommodations are provided in a variety of
ways and are emphasized in assessments. Figure 5, from the Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium (SBAC, 2017), provides a detailed list of the types of accommodations afforded to
students who may need support.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 31

Figure 5. SBAC universal tools, designated supports, and accommodations. From Usability,
Accessibility, and Accommodations Guidelines (p. 4), by SBAC, 2017 (https://portal
.smarterbalanced.org/library/en/usability-accessibility-and-accommodations-guidelines.pdf).

Figure 5 indicates a multitude of accommodations and supports, both technology driven
(embedded) and non-technology driven (non-embedded). Although accommodations and
supports are not entirely limited to the items presented in this figure, the list provides a nice
collection of accommodations, including those that are utilized the most for students with
identified disabilities. Most of the more intensive accommodations are used by only 1% of the
total testing population (SBAC, 2017) whereas more popular supports are listed as extended time
for response, text-to-speech software, and math tools.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 32

Regardless of the type of accommodation, it must prove useful to the student using it;
therefore, educational practitioners must be accurate in appropriately identifying students who
would benefit from such recommendations. Misapplying prescribed accommodations might be
detrimental to some students (Helwig & Tindal, 2003). Therefore, educational practitioners
working with students with SLDs must provide thoughtful analysis when approaching the issue
of recommending accommodations. Research has shown that education specialists tend to over-
recommend accommodations for students with disabilities (Fuchs et al., 2000), taking a general
approach that providing more accommodations to students with disabilities allows them more
access to general education curriculum. Enlisting a more-is-better approach presents a number of
challenges such as implementation, tracking effectiveness, and, most detrimental of all, assigning
accommodations that will adversely affect student performance and achievement (Helwig &
Tindal, 2003). Complicating this practice is the understanding that students with SLDs do not
have identical profiles or factors that contribute to their qualifying condition. For instance,
students with SLDs who present with deficits in reading face a multitude of factors that result in
performance issues. Subsequently, SLDs come in a variety of forms, and it is essential that
educational practitioners take into account the individual needs and skills of students before
making recommendations for accommodations. Making recommendations for accommodations
based on a heterogeneity of the SLD population would not characterize the needs of the
individual learners (Fuchs et al., 2000). This idea is substantiated by further research indicating
that teachers are inconsistent in their recommendations of accommodations and that their
subjective judgment leads to flawed evaluations of justifiable accommodations (Ketterlin-Geller,
Alonzo, Braun-Monegan, & Tindal, 2007).
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 33

Currently, the primary focus for assigning accommodations for students with disabilities
resides in the area of district and statewide standardized assessments. This phenomenon is driven
by the unprecedented number of students with disabilities participating in large-scale and high-
stakes testing (Ketterlin-Geller et al., 2007). The obligation for school districts to include
students with disabilities as a significant subgroup in statewide assessment efforts has heightened
the emphasis on accommodations, but the strategic implementation of these supports is often an
afterthought. Furthermore, there is little generalization of prescribed accommodations across
learning environments to allow for students with disabilities to access general education
curriculum and learning environments (Agran, Alper, & Wehmeyer, 2002). This approach of
implementing accommodations solely as a function of assessment-taking process is insufficient
and is contrary to the intent expressed by the creators of the SBAC test. SBAC clearly refers to
research that suggests that all students who are provided with accommodations be afforded the
opportunity to regularly practice the prescribed supports (Thurlow, Lazarus, & Bechard, 2013).
Therefore, the expectation should be that any and all instructional accommodations or supports
should be provided across all learning environments presented within the students’ school day.
This places responsibility on teachers to raise their expectations for students with learning
disabilities as related to learning outcomes in the general education setting (Agran et al., 2002).
The following section addresses this point and examines the importance of educating students
with special needs alongside their nondisabled peers to the maximum extent possible in the least
restrictive environment.
The Importance of Multiple Means of Assessment and Data Collection
In approaching the complexities of assigning accommodations for students with
disabilities, it is important that educational practitioners apply multiple means of assessment and
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 34

data collection. When qualifying a student for special education, it is required that the IEP team
utilize multiple means of assessment when making their determination, so as not to rely solely on
one method of measurement (Individuals With Disabilities Education Act [IDEA], 2004). The
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) also requires that the IEP team pay
particular attention to data collection within their practices to ensure that they have systems in
place to effectively record student performance. The Council for Exceptional Children provided
a position statement that advocated for individualization of interventions for students with SLDs
based on the best available evidence to help them improve in their specific areas of need to allow
them to successfully access general education curriculum and make progress toward standards
(Vaughn, Zumeta, Wanzek, Cook, & Klingner, 2014). Therefore, it serves the students’ best
interest to employ a system that is based on assessment and data collection to determine how to
best align the present level of performance to individual learning needs. Research has suggested
that interventions for students with disabilities need to not only be individualized but also be
intensive and based on the best evidence available, which includes using ongoing progress-
monitoring methods and data collection (Vaughn et al., 2014). The data collected could then be
combined with other instructional variables, such as learning environment and implementation
fidelity, to determine the overall response and effectiveness of the proposed learning
accommodations and interventions.
Because of the unique nature of the individual learners with SLDs, educational
practitioners would be best served by collecting and curating a wealth of student-produced and
program-driven data in an effort to continually calibrate the effects of the accommodations to
individualized performance. Research has also revealed that practitioners would be best served
by constructing guiding questions that align with the goals and expectations of the students’
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 35

performance. These goals can serve as a consistent measure to gauge the effectiveness of the
accommodations as well as lead the practitioners in the direction in which they go (Vaughn et al.,
2014). When multiple measures have been effectively used and then the data analyzed, the
practitioners can begin to design and implement an effective delivery system across learning
environments.
Implementation
Implementing an accommodation within an established learning environment is an
endeavor that requires careful thought and planning to provide opportunities for the intervention
to be used naturally in the context of lesson design. Research has revealed that the majority of
students with SLDs currently receive services in the general education classroom (MacMillan,
Gresham, Bocian, & Lambros, 1998). Therefore, students with SLDs are actively being educated
alongside their nondisabled peers, which is the preferred environment for them to receive
instruction (Acrey, Johnstone, & Milligan, 2005). The rationale for this trend is to provide a
learning environment based on research that shows that students with disabilities learn best when
they are allowed to remain in general education settings and are exposed to general education
curriculum. The challenge then becomes how to address the determined learning deficits of the
students with SLDs without removing them from the classroom to focus on remediation or some
alternative form of academic intervention. It is in response to this challenge that carefully
prescribed accommodations can provide the best options for students identified with SLDs to
receive the interventions that they need to keep pace in the general education setting without the
need for “pull-out” remediation interventions.
In his work “An Educational Programming Framework for a Subset of Students With
Diverse Learning Needs,” Steven R. Shaw (2008) identified the characteristics of the challenged
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 36

learner in five categories: preference for concrete materials, problems with the organization of
knowledge, difficulty in generalizing materials, the need for increased opportunities for practice,
and deficits in academic motivation. He suggested that in designing a program to meet the needs
of diverse learners, practitioners would be well served to keep the five categories in mind and
then plan accordingly. This can result in the practitioners providing supports for the students
with SLDs such as pre-organizing the information for them so that the students have a better
chance of grasping and generalizing the information so that it makes sense to them. In addition,
providing these students with appropriately paced instruction allows for information to be
processed to the ability of the individuals and, more importantly, allows for multiple attempts at
a particular exercise utilizing multimodal approaches. All of these supports can lead to a program
that will provide a learning environment that can prove highly motivating for the students,
which, according to Shaw, is a major factor in the success of the students related to their
academic performance.
Another strategy to improve the chances for an accommodation to promote success is
allowing it to be utilized in a differentiated learning environment. Many districts throughout the
world have adopted the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), which promotes
learning environments that provide for multiple means of engagement, representation, and
expression for both the students and the teacher (CAST, n.d.). The UDL framework is grounded
in the idea that by providing enough differentiated methods within a given learning environment,
teachers have the best chance for reaching all students and meeting them at their preferred
learning aptitudes and instructional levels. For students with SLDs, accommodations can play a
significant role in this respect by allowing the students to implement a predetermined system in
which to engage, understand, and express their knowledge.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 37

Implementing instructional programs and supports like the examples listed above can
lead to providing accommodations for students with SLDs in a true least restrictive learning
environment, in which they are afforded the opportunity to be educated alongside their
nondisabled peers with access to the full spectrum of general education curriculum.
Accommodations and the Least Restrictive Environment
For decades, students identified with SLDs have been required to master two curriculums
within their school day. One is the standards-based general education curriculum presented
districtwide, and the other is directly related to their areas of deficit and contained in their IEPs.
In many ways, students with SLDs have had more expectations placed on them as a result of
their disability, in a system whose primary objective for these students is to provide supports and
services to alleviate barriers. In fact, research has shown that students with SLDs feel that they
need to study exceedingly hard just to achieve the same level of proficiency as their typical peers
(Lackaye, Margalit, Ziv, & Ziman, 2006). While many researchers and practitioners have
proposed a myriad of systems, interventions, and supports to help best serve these students, the
surrounding issues continue to be as complex and unique as the students that they serve.
Accommodations play a significant role in student achievement and grant students with
special needs access to general education learning environments and standards-based curriculum.
However, educational practitioners have very different perspectives and methods related to
interventions and instruction. With an array of perspectives related to appropriate interventions
and therefore accommodations, it is essential that teams focus on the primary function of the
accommodations. Accommodations should be provided to help remove barriers for students and
allow them access to general education learning environments and standards-based curriculum.
Byrnes (2008) suggested that educational practitioners must think carefully about the
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 38

characteristics of students’ disabilities and, as a result, how those characteristics impact
instructional activities. From this starting point, educational practitioners can establish a baseline
from which to explore possible accommodations. At this point, it is important that the education
specialists begin to focus on the knowledge and motivational factors of the students in order to
begin to match them with the most effective interventions that will bridge the gap between skill
and academic performance. Accommodations should be implemented that provide the students
with the ability to demonstrate what they know, without the intervening factors of their disability
(Byrnes, 2008).
However, despite scant empirical work on the subject of accommodations for students
with SLDs, research has not provided the field with a standard set of accommodation tools, and
no single accommodation has been identified to benefit all students with SLDs (Fuchs & Fuchs,
2001). Furthermore, students with special needs require specific and individualized
accommodations as compared to their nondisabled peers. Therefore, it is essential that
educational practitioners approach the assignment of accommodations on an individual basis.
They must take into consideration the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of
their students and recommend accommodations that are aligned with the students’ individual
profiles.
Knowledge and Skills
To understand how practitioners approach the process of making recommendations for
academic accommodations, it is important to understand their knowledge and skills base as it
relates to this practice. Furthermore, it is also important to understand the motivating factors that
exist related to both the jobs that education specialists do and the organizations in which they
serve. This section of the literature review provides an analysis of the knowledge and
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 39

motivational influences that are necessary to meet the organizational goal of MSD. The
organizational goal reflects that by June 2020, education specialists will be able to appropriately
and effectively identify, with 80% accuracy, individualized and evidence-based instructional
accommodations for students identified with SLDs. This goal will be measured by utilizing a
combination of benchmark achievement data and teacher-created measures and observations.
This literature review explores the current and applicable literature addressing both knowledge
and motivational factors as they relate to the professional influences and practices of
recommending accommodations for students with SLDs.
The Effect of Stakeholder Knowledge
In the literature related to working with students with SLDs, the research suggests that it
is important for practitioners to have a solid understanding of cognitive theory. In fact,
professionals responsible for designing and implementing instructional interventions should pay
particular attention to cognitive load theory and how it relates to the interaction of cognition and
knowledge (Van Merrienboer & Sweller, 2005). The idea of cognitive load plays a critical part in
assigning and providing appropriate accommodations to allow students with SLDs to have access
to the grade-leveled curriculum. Because students with SLDs have a variety of deficits related to
cognition, it is essential that supports are initiated that relieve cognitive load so as to allow these
students to meaningfully participate in the curriculum. In a research study conducted by Sweller,
Van Merrienboer, and Paas (1998), the researchers discovered that providing students with
accommodations through the use of effective instructional schemas reduced extraneous cognitive
load and, as a result, improved student performance. Reducing the extraneous cognitive load of
students with SLDs should be the focus of providing appropriate and efficient academic
accommodations. Therefore, it is imperative that instructional practitioners working with
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 40

students with SLDs understand the relation of cognitive theory and interact them with the unique
skills domain of the individual learners (Van Merrienboer & Sweller, 2005).
Another key component in providing interventions for students with SLDs is to always be
mindful that cognition is not a fixed sequence; it rides through a steady trek of peaks and valleys
that present mastery at various stages (Flynn, O’Malley, & Wood, 2004). Therefore, content
should never be kept from the students based on the idea that it may not be developmentally
appropriate. A better measure in this respect would reflect whether the students mastered the
prerequisite skills needed to engage in the particular curriculum (Willingham, 2009). This focus
on ipsative progress is particularly important for students with SLDs when considering
appropriate interventions and accommodations that would assist in providing access to the
general education curriculum. With this guiding principle in mind, education specialists should
find ways to appropriately and effectively match academic accommodations to allow students
access to grade-level general education curriculum regardless of ability level so as to allow the
students with SLDs the opportunity to participate in “best, first instruction.” This allows students
to access content identical to that of their nondisabled peers, which will provide them with the
opportunity to engage in meaningful dialogue and expand their knowledge base.
Ultimately, teachers should be familiar with cognitive science and be able to recognize
the current trends and common misconceptions that relate to teaching and learning (Deans for
Impact, 2015). Recommendations for academic accommodations should be calculated and
strategic and should match cognitive science to instructional practice. Implementing an
accommodation should not be arbitrary, nor should accommodations be gratuitous. In its truest
form, education should offer the opportunity for all students to be educated (and assessed) in line
with the state-adopted general education curriculum (Elliott, Kettler, Beddow, & Kurz, 2011).
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 41

For students identified with SLDs, this becomes a possibility when appropriate accommodations
are provided to gain the appropriate access that tap into the unique learning styles and talents of
the individual students.
Table 4 relays MSD’s mission and goals as related to achievement expectations for
students identified with SLDs. The stakeholders tied to this mission are currently connected to
three district influencers of knowledge that guide their ongoing practices. These knowledge types
are identified as factual, conceptual, and metacognitive.

Table 4. Organizational Mission, Stakeholder Goal, and Knowledge Influences
Organizational Mission, Stakeholder Goal, and Knowledge Influences
Organizational mission
The mission of the Special Education Department of MSD is to provide appropriate supports
and services that promote positive student outcomes provided in generalized academic
settings.
Organizational global goal
By June 2020, students with special needs will increase their participation in the general
education setting by 15% through the use of district common accommodation systems, which
will allow for greater time spent being educated with their nondisabled peers.
Stakeholder goal
Education specialists will appropriately and effectively identify, with 80% accuracy, evidence-
based instructional accommodations for students identified with SLDs.
Knowledge influence Knowledge type
Knowledge influence
assessment
Education specialists do not have a strong
understanding of accommodations and how to
analyze and implement them with fidelity.
Declarative Interviews, surveys,
and focus groups
Education specialists do not have a strong
understanding of cognitive theory and its
effects on the process of knowledge
acquisition.
Declarative Interviews, surveys,
and focus groups
Education specialists do not have a strong
understanding of how to scaffold supports and
devise a systematic approach for building
capacity in relation to student skill acquisition.
Metacognitive Interviews, surveys,
and focus groups
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 42

The Effect of Stakeholder Motivation
Equally important to the success of providing appropriate and effective accommodations
to students with SLDs is the motivation of both staff and scholars alike. The aim of academic
accommodations is to provide students with the opportunity for an education that meets their
unique needs and that provides instruction in the least restrictive environment. It is essential that
both the student and teacher goals be tightly aligned with this notion to ensure success.
Motivation serves as the engine that drives all other aspects of success. Research has shown that
it is far more important for students to believe that they can achieve than it is for them to possess
the capacity to implement the achievement (Pintrich, 2003). This notion also relates to teachers,
and research has suggested that teachers who believe that they can significantly influence and
motivate students tend to have higher achieving students (Tschannen-Moran & Johnson, 2011).
The definition of the “phenomenon of can” is termed self-efficacy, and it is one of the
most powerful factors to influence motivation. Self-efficacy is one’s belief and confidence in
one’s abilities. Historically, students identified with SLDs have had very low self-efficacy. In
fact, the research reflects that students with SLDs have reported that they felt less self-
efficacious, experienced more negative moods, and were less invested in their academic work
than their nondisabled peers (Lackaye et al., 2006). It is understandable that scholars who do not
feel that they are good students in turn do not invest much value in school. In essence, if
individuals believe that they can do something, then they try; but if individuals believe that they
cannot do something, then they simply will not attempt it. From this perspective, cognition is
second to belief and perseverance. Lackaye et al. (2006) expounded further on this belief, stating
that students with SLDs define their academic experience as difficult and often painful.
However, the authors reported that through interventions focused on enhancing self-awareness of
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 43

positive experiences, based on mechanisms of change and empowerment, self-beliefs will be
challenged and changed (Lackaye et al., 2006).
The same motivational indicators that affect student learning also challenge teachers’
instructional beliefs. Schechter and Tschannen-Moran (2006) suggested that teachers who
present with a high degree of self-efficacy tend to be more dynamic in their instruction and more
apt to adequately address unpredictable challenges. The research has also shown that teachers
who have access to supports and materials also show a high degree of self-efficacy, which allows
even newer teachers to exhibit greater confidence in their teaching abilities than their more
seasoned contemporaries who have fewer supports (Schechter & Tschannen-Moran, 2006). It is
essential that students with SLDs have access to instructors who exhibit a high degree of self-
efficacy to be successful in the least restrictive setting. Leyser, Zeiger, and Romi (2011)
suggested that the willingness of teachers to accept and believe that they can instruct students
with disabilities directly relates to the confidence that they have in themselves as teachers.
Furthermore, Leyser et al. (2011) explained that teachers with a high degree of self-efficacy are
more apt to believe that it is appropriate for students with disabilities to be placed in a general
education classroom.
Although the research related to self-efficacy and students with SLDs is limited (Leyser
et al., 2011), it is clear that students with SLDs need supports and instruction that promote their
ability to learn and to gain a sense of achievement. Research has shown that student
conscientiousness is the strongest predictor of academic success for both the secondary and
elementary levels (Caprara, Vecchione, Alessandri, Gerbino, & Barbaranelli, 2011). This is an
important factor that allows practitioners the power to provide accommodations and supports that
draw on the conscientiousness of students and their ability to learn and achieve. As noted above,
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 44

interventions and accommodations must foster a sense of achievement and accomplishment so as
to boost student motivation and promote success. Accommodations that do not promote
achievement and a sense of success will ultimately fall short of their intended purpose, and
neither the students nor the teachers will value their usefulness. This in turn will stagger
motivation for all stakeholders and maintain a sense of low self-efficaciousness related to
academic performance. Table 5 reiterates MSD’s mission and goals as they relate to students
with SLDs and identifies the motivational influences that are needed for stakeholders to produce
effective academic accommodations for learning.

Table 5. Organizational Mission, Stakeholder Goal, and Motivational Influences
Organizational Mission, Stakeholder Goal, and Motivational Influences
Organizational mission
The mission of the Special Education Department of MSD is to provide appropriate supports
and services that promote positive student outcomes provided in generalized academic
settings.
Organizational global goal
By June 2020, students with special needs will increase their participation in the general
education setting by 15% through the use of district common accommodation systems, which
will allow for greater time spent being educated with their nondisabled peers.
Stakeholder goal
Education specialists will appropriately and effectively identify, with 80% accuracy, evidence-
based instructional accommodations for students identified with SLDs.
Assumed motivation influences
Motivational
influence assessment
Self-efficacy: Education specialists need to believe that they are
capable of effectively recommending dynamic substitution and
augmentative academic supports for students with SLDs.
Surveys, interviews,
and focus groups
Unity value: Education specialists need to believe that there is
educational value in recommending dynamic substitution and
augmentative academic supports for students with SLDs.
Surveys, interviews,
and focus groups

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 45

Based on the literature presented in this section, it is clear that learning and motivational
theories play a critical role in understanding the importance of appropriate accommodations to
enhance student performance. The intent of the information provided in Chapter Two was to
identify the significant factors that educational practitioners need to consider when making
recommendations for student accommodations. Today’s classrooms are typified by academic
diversity (Darling-Hammond, Wise, & Klein, 1999), and education specialists are charged with
the task of providing an array of supports that will cater to the unique needs of the students,
which in turn provides them with access to standardized curriculum. To achieve this, it is
important to identify the gaps in teachers’ performance related to their effectiveness in analyzing
student achievement and recommending effective academic accommodations. Addressing these
issues is tantamount to establishing a critical foundation for driving the practice of differentiated
learning. Out of this practice arises a new awareness that drives the classroom and school
community toward critical reflection of current practices and disrupts the inequalities that are
prevalent in schools today (Baglieri & Knopf, 2004).
Conclusion
Over the past several years, there have been increasingly high expectations related to
student achievement for individuals with special needs. From an array of instructional models
designed to provide instruction in the least restrictive environments to participation in high-
stakes assessments, the demands placed on special education students have never been greater.
Research has suggested that students need to be included alongside their nondisabled peers in
educational systems so as to experience the benefits of an improved education that will hopefully
manifest as a result of these systems (Bolt & Thurlow, 2004).
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 46

This chapter explored the way that effective accommodations might be introduced in the
classroom and examined how the recommendation and implementation of academic
accommodations is not an exact science. It is as complex and unique as both the practitioners and
the students who engage in its practice. However, this problem of practice is an important one
and could have significance influence and ramifications to individuals’ success in life. The
potential positive outcomes of providing appropriate and effective accommodations for students
with disabilities are immense. Technology is allowing students to have access to both curriculum
and learning environments in ways that they have never been able to achieve before now. The
effectiveness of implementing these accommodations will rely heavily on aligning the right
accommodations to meet the needs of the individual students. To obtain this objective, a methods
approach would be beneficial to provide a basis on which to build an effective system of
academic support that is grounded in appropriate and effective academic accommodations.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 47

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to conduct a gap analysis to examine the root causes of the
organizational problem described above, namely, providing effective academic accommodations
for students with specific learning disabilities (SLDs). This research study aimed to understand
how students with SLDs receive learning accommodations as part of their individual education
plans (IEPs). I suspect that many of the recommendations for accommodations for students
identified with SLDs are made in the absence of proper assessment and analysis. Furthermore, I
suspect that the implementation of these accommodations lacks a systems approach with which
to maximize their effectiveness in improving student achievement. To address these
assumptions, the following questions guided this study:
1. What are the knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational causes that influence special
education practitioners’ recommendations related to academic accommodations for students
identified with SLDs in MSD?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational solutions?
To determine the factors and explore possible solutions for the aforementioned
phenomena, the researcher utilized a gap analysis approach (Clark & Estes, 2008). This
framework offered a systematic and methodological approach to identify performance gaps in
the domains of knowledge, motivational, and organizational theories. The assumed causes of the
performance gap were based on personal knowledge, learning theories, and related literature.
The causes were validated by the use of a mixed-methods approach that involved administering a
survey and semistructured interviews for assessment.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 48

Study Procedures
A mixed-methods approach involving both qualitative and quantitative research methods
was used for this study. This study was conducted in a public unified school district that serves
students ranging from prekindergarten to postgraduate levels (age 22). The study was conducted
with 25 education specialists who were practicing in two separate school districts at the time of
the study. The participants of the study worked directly with students identified as having mild to
moderate learning disabilities. Participants in this study were asked to complete a 36-item survey
specifically related to the process and rationale for identifying recommendations for
accommodations for students with SLDs. The survey took approximately 15 minutes to
complete, and participants were instructed to answer honestly. The data related to the survey
were then collected and recorded using the Qualtrics software program, which has a partnership
with the University of Southern California (USC). The data collected were then curated and
analyzed to identify themes and concepts resulting from the responses of the participants.
As a follow-up to the survey, seven participants were asked to engage in a small-group
interview session that was audio recorded. The small-group interview session took
approximately 60 minutes to complete and was facilitated by a retired educator who had no
specific ties to the research. All participants who took part in the small-group interview session
were required to have their responses recorded for transcription purposes. However, all personal
identifiers were removed from the transcription. Participants were informed that they were not
required to respond to any questions that they did not feel comfortable answering; however,
participants did agree to be audio recorded. The audio recording was used for transcription
purposes only and was destroyed after the transcription was complete. I then utilized the
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 49

transcript to code data and analyze the results to identify categories and trends that emerged from
the responses of the participants.
Sample and Population
The individuals who made up the sample for this research were all credentialed special
education specialists who, at the time of the study, taught in two separate school districts located
in California. These districts are identified under the pseudonyms of Monarch School District
(MSD) and Bramble School District (BSD) to protect their anonymity. A specific focus is
attached to the responses from the practitioners in MSD, with input from the practitioners from
BSD provided to draw a deeper context. The range of participation was limited to those
practitioners providing instruction for students in Grades 3-8 who present mild to moderate
learning disabilities. As a result, all of the students taught by the practitioners who were included
in this sample had accommodations written into their IEPs. At the time of the study, the sample
of teachers who participated in this study worked with students who were identified as having
mild to moderate learning disabilities, delivering specialized academic instruction in either a
large-group general education setting or a small-group specialized academic setting free of
“typical peers.” All teachers who participated in the study had experience in specialized
instruction, and all recommended and implemented academic and learning accommodations as
part of their IEP process at the time of the study.
Potential Benefits to Participants and/or to Society
The potential benefits to participants included a greater understanding of the current
practice of recommending learning accommodations for students with SLDs. I believe that a
systematic and individualized approach to assigning academic accommodations will
subsequently augment student achievement and address the current achievement gap for students
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 50

with SLDs. As previously stated, SLD is the most identified qualifying condition for students
with disabilities, comprising nearly 40% of the total number of students participating in special
education within MSD. The benefit for both practitioners and society as a whole is that students
with SLDs will learn to use compensatory strategies that will allow them to be educated
alongside their nondisabled peers. Therefore, assigning effective accommodations may provide
students with disabilities greater access to post graduation opportunities such as continuing their
education or joining the workforce.
Ethical Implications and Considerations
It was my ongoing intent to protect the integrity and quality of the research at all times.
Therefore, considerable attention was paid to ethical considerations related to this research and
its related practices. The research study employed a stratified sampling technique, and as such,
the participants were appropriately vetted before soliciting their participation. Once the
participants were identified, I sought their informed consent to participate in the study and
relayed the specifics of the research related to their expected participation. All participants
received and were asked to sign an informed consent form (Appendix A) in an effort to provide a
clear understanding of the research and the expectations related to their contribution to the study.
My intent in providing this information was to establish transparency with the participants from
the onset. In providing this information, it was apparent that I held a high standard of
confidentiality. Subsequently, participants were assured that their participation/responses as well
as their personal information would be kept confidential. Participants were afforded the
opportunity to end their participation in the study at any time they wished, free of penalty or
repercussion.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 51

Because of my affiliation with the organization researched, a thoughtful set of procedural
safeguards was established. I took exceptional measures to ensure that the participants were
provided with a format and environment conducive to candid conversation and responses. I made
it clear to all who chose to participate in this study that the responses they gave would have no
impact on current or future assignments within MSD. Furthermore, I provided a detailed
explanation to the MSD Board of Education as well as district cabinet members as to the exact
extent of the study and how the information would be collected related to the district employees
who chose to participate in the study. It was my intent to be absolutely clear that responses from
both the survey and the focus group interview would be completely anonymous.
The survey was delivered to staff in a mass email directing them to the survey form
provided through the use of a web link that connected them to the Qualtrics database. The names
of participants were not collected or recorded, providing true anonymity to the participants. The
subsequent focus group interview was conducted by an independent interviewer who was
provided with a set of questions and/or prompts to present to the participants, and participants’
responses were recorded through the use of an audio-recording device. The participants in the
focus group were selected randomly, and the responses they provided in the interview were
transcribed by an independent vendor. Consequently, I never had direct contact with the group,
nor did I have an opportunity to discern their voices as a result of listening to the recording of the
interview. These systems were put in place to ensure that I remained unbiased by avoiding the
potential for identifying the participants through their recorded responses and possibly assigning
varying weight to their credibility based on personal experience. The methodology listed above
was specifically expressed to all participants who agreed to take part in this research. My intent
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 52

was to ensure that participants provided genuine and honest feedback in an effort to establish
valid and trustworthy baseline data.
Instrumentation
The process for collecting and analyzing information for this research was intentionally
designed with specific attention focused on validity and reliability. My intent was to construct a
research method that was both user friendly and easily transferable and reproducible. Kirk and
Miller (1986) identified three types of reliability referred to in quantitative research, which relate
to (a) the degree to which a measurement, given repeatedly, remains the same; (b) the stability of
a measurement over time; and (c) the similarity of measurements within a given time period.
These three factors played a key role in this research, and I believe that the survey and interview
instrumentation provide the tools for this research to be conducted in a multitude of
environments and settings without compromising the integrity of the measurement. I believe that
the survey and interview protocols will successfully translate in this sense to other practitioners
faced with issues similar to the aforementioned problem of practice. I anticipated that many of
the responses given by the practitioners would be similar and that a trend may arise in many
ideas related to practice.
The diagnostic measures utilized in this particular study allowed for me to focus on the
core issues surrounding the aforementioned problem of practice. It was my intent to provide
prompts that would allow participants to respond in their own voice while addressing the specific
and relevant issues related to the problem of practice.
Reliability, Validity, Credibility, and Trustworthiness
Both the reliability and validity factors listed above serve as the road map that drives the
concepts of research credibility and trustworthiness. The ideas of credibility and trustworthiness
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 53

as related to research practices are heavily influenced by qualitative studies that encourage active
participation (Dick, 1999). Active participation was the crux of this study; therefore, this study
required the active participation of the contributing practitioners in order to be effective. The
data uncovered through the survey and interview processes were collected through engaged
conversation and active dialogue by educational practitioners who worked directly with students
with SLDs. This, by its very nature, defines the credible nature of the participants in that they
were practicing the issues being discussed in the problem of practice on a daily basis. All of the
aforementioned filters and lenses through which to examine the integrity of the research were
combined with a convergent mixed-methods approach (Creswell, 2014). I then analyzed current
student achievement and assessment data and examined selected IEPs to cross-reference
practitioner input. These quantitative data were then combined with data gathered through
qualitative methods such as surveys and focus group interviews to provide a research method
with a foundation in what is defined as a convergent mixed-methods approach. Consequently, a
convergent mixed-methods approach was used to analyze and then converge both quantitative
and qualitative data (Creswell, 2014). This mixed-methods approach was then used to assemble a
triangulation method that served to better protect and balance the research process.
Data Collection
Data from the participants of this research were collected in accordance with the written
consent of the individuals involved in this study. The data of this research were collected after
institutional review board (IRB) approval was received from MSD, BSD, and USC. All of the
participants met the proposed criteria and were provided with access to the information outlined
below by use of the Qualtrics survey tool. All participants completed the survey electronically,
and consequently, the study was void of paper hard copies. A survey was determined to be
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 54

appropriate for this research as a method to gain an understanding of the underlying prevalence
of behavior of the education specialists who participated in the study as well as to gain insight on
their existing knowledge base (Basil, 2017). An interview was used as a way to introduce an in-
depth and focused discussion using the information collected through the survey to serve as
conversation prompts for the group. Research has suggested that interviews are the most
frequently used method in qualitative research, providing in-depth information related to
participants’ experiences, beliefs, and opinions (Mann, 2016). Combining the information
received from both the survey and the interview provided invaluable data to guide the research
and its findings.
The study drew from two groups of education specialists who, at the time of the study,
were providing instructional support for two independent school districts, referred to by the
pseudonyms of Monarch School District (MSD) and Bramble School District (BSD) to protect
their anonymity. Both survey groups worked exclusively with students identified with mild to
moderate disabilities, and both were fully credentialed as such. The education specialists who
participated in this study worked with students in kindergarten through eighth grade at the time
of the study, and their caseloads primarily comprised students who had the qualifying special
education condition of SLD.
It was assumed that all of the participants in this study had a basic working knowledge of
the unique learning and intervention needs for working with students identified with disabilities.
As evidenced by their ability to successfully complete a state-licensed credentialing program and
obtain employment with a state agency, it was my assumption that the participants in this survey
were considered licensed professionals and were proficient in their instructional practices. I also
assumed that as active practitioners in the area of special education, the participants were
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 55

familiar with academic accommodations and had an established practice in which they engaged
in preparation for providing recommendations for students with whom they worked. Figure 7
displays the number of practitioners from each school district who participated in the survey.

Figure 7. Participants of the survey by district.

As evidenced by Figure 7, there were more respondents from MSD than BSD. The
survey was sent using an independent web-based data collection company, Qualtrics. Individual
identifiers were not used so as to protect the participants’ anonymity. The survey window was
open for a length of 14 days during which participants were allowed to record their responses at
any time and in an environment of their choosing. The survey was distributed to 80 current
education specialists, and 22 responses were received, which provided a 25% total response rate.
An interview session was conducted with a small group of survey participants, and their
identities were kept completely confidential to protect anonymity and omit any potential bias on
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 56

my behalf. Because I had previous knowledge of the participants’ work performance and had
served in an administrative role in both school districts, it was imperative that the identities of
the respondents were protected. This allowed me to analyze the data in the aggregate and without
bias that may have filtered my perspective based on previous experiences with the participants.
The following sections provide the details for the survey and the focus group interview used in
this study.
Survey
The survey for the participants was distributed through Qualtrics in the fall semester of
2017. The anonymous responses to the survey were collected and indexed through Qualtrics, and
a copy of the data was generated and transferred to an external hard drive to provide backup. The
external drive was encrypted, so only those who had knowledge of the correct credentials could
access it. The external drive was housed in a locked cabinet and was not accessible to anyone
without physical access. The survey protocol can be found in Appendix B of this document.
Interview
A panel of research participants engaged in a guided, semistructured interview conducted
by an independent interviewer. The interaction was audio recorded with the consent of the
participants. Seven participants were included in the interview process, all of whom had taken
the aforementioned survey. All participants agreed to have their interaction audio recorded and
signed a waiver of consent. Interviewees who participated in the research were interviewed in
one 60-minute session during which they were given prompts that were constructed based on the
responses collected from the survey. The interview questions were designed to elicit a deeper
discussion related to the current practices of education specialists in assigning accommodations
for students with SLDs. Each member of the interview panel was encouraged to speak freely and
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 57

candidly, and follow-up prompts were kept to a minimum. The interview prompts used for this
activity can be found in Appendix C of this document. The entire 60-minute interview session
was transcribed by an independent transcriber, and the resulting documents were electronically
housed on an external hard drive, with the same safeguards provided as for the survey. Both the
recording of the interview and the resulting transcription were destroyed after the data analysis
for the research was completed.
After careful review of the transcription, a codebook (Appendix D) was created to assist
with the analysis of the data collected as a result of the interview process. This process was
initiated approximately 14 days after the focus group interview was conducted, and I was the
sole creator of the codebook. To construct the codebook, I aligned the responses of the
participants with the conceptual framework presented in Figure 6.
The responses resulting from the focus group interview were categorized using the areas
represented in the conceptual framework to signify the areas where the education specialists
directed their focus. An analysis was then conducted to identify gaps related to the district goals
represented in the conceptual framework and the current practices of the education specialists.
An extension of the coding process highlighted the most common words, phrases, and ideas
expressed by the practitioners during the interview process. This deeper analysis revealed
common practices and tendencies within the group, which provided me with a dynamic

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 58

Figure 6. Conceptual framework.

understanding of the current process for recommending academic accommodations for students
with SLDs. An extension of the convergent mixed-methods framework to a transformative
approach then provided a foundation from which to gain a global understanding of the
information gathered through both the qualitative and quantitative methods listed above. This led
me to explore possible outcomes and offer a proposal of possible action items (Creswell, 2014).
The information gathered through the research practices listed above was used to develop
theoretical concepts that led to a descriptive interpretation of the data, including
recommendations for improved practice.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 59

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The aim of this study was to explore the process and procedures that special education
practitioners employ in providing academic accommodations for students with specific learning
disabilities (SLDs). The objective of these accommodations is to provide the students with an
augmentative advantage that will allow them to access curriculum aligned to the general
education environment. The study provided answers to the following research questions:
1. What are the knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational causes that influence special
education practitioners’ recommendations related to academic accommodations for students
identified with SLDs in MSD?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational solutions?
This study sought to gain a comprehensive understanding of the methods that
practitioners enlist that lead to providing their recommendations for academic accommodations.
To accomplish this, a 36-item survey was sent out to 80 education specialists who worked with
students with mild to moderate SLDs at the time of the study. Of those teachers solicited to
participate, 25 responded to the survey and agreed to have their responses recorded for the
purposes of this study. Additionally, seven education specialists participated in a small focus
group interview and discussed their individual practices related to recommending
accommodations for students with SLDs. The interview lasted approximately 60 minutes and
was guided by a retired educator who served as a moderator in this process and did not
participate in research data analysis or provide any direct feedback related to the responses of the
participants. Both data collection methods were administered with confidentiality being
paramount to the process.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 60

The data collected through the surveys and interviews were processed and analyzed, and
the results are reflected in this chapter. The primary figure responsible for recommending
accommodations for students with SLDs is the classroom teacher or, when related to special
education, the education specialist. Therefore, the responses provided by practitioners in the field
who work every day with students were crucial to truly understanding this practice and how it is
implemented. The information gathered as a result of this study, combined with an extensive
review of the current literature, served as the basis for interpreting and assuming causes of the
effectiveness of current practices aligned with recommending accommodations for students with
SLDs.
These assumed causes took form when fixed within a gap analysis framework developed
to understand the motivational and organizational causes that influence the practices of the
education specialists surveyed as well as to understand their current knowledge base related to
this issue. This chapter provides key findings in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences that serve as the genesis of decision making for the practitioners who
participated in the survey. The overall key findings provided a foundation on which to build a
solution proposal, which is presented in the next chapter.

Findings
This section relays the findings of both the survey and the interview that served as the
primary research methods to answer the research questions. The focus of this section is to
explore and hypothesize perceived causes of gaps in performance as a result of the current
practices employed by the educational practitioners who participated in this study (Rueda, 2011).
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 61

As a structure, I have sought to answer each of the research questions directly, with excerpts
from both the survey and interview responses to strengthen my assumptions.
Research Question 1
The first research question in the study asked, What are the knowledge and skill,
motivation, and organizational causes that influence special education practitioners’
recommendations related to academic accommodations for students identified with SLDs in
MSD? Although this section aims to explore the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
barriers that influence the current practice of recommending accommodations, there is a specific
focus in analyzing the knowledge-based factors. I will explore deeper the motivational and
organizational influences in narrative provided for question two. As you will see in the
information presented in this section, the practitioners who participated in this study generally
feel that they have a good knowledge base in relation to the practice of making accommodations,
and feel confident in their abilities. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that there are only two
conditions in which knowledge and skill enhancement are required for job performance, which
are a) to help practitioners accomplish their performance goals and b) to continue and advance
their education related to knowledge and skills. For the practitioners who participated in this
study, the data would suggest that they fall in the later of the two aforementioned categories, and
would benefit from enhancing their current knowledge and skill base. Three themes emerged to
provide a deeper analysis of the problem of practice.
1. How teachers understand accommodations and how motivated are they to systematically
implement them
2.. How teachers understand learning theory and the importance that it plays in assigning
accommodations, and
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 62

3. How teachers understand the importance of data collection and student evaluation in creating,
implementing, and monitoring accommodations for students with SLDs, and what
organizational barriers influence their practice.
Understanding and implementing accommodations for students with SLDs. In
exploring the first subcategory of how teachers understand accommodations and how to
implement them, I draw on a collection of survey data retrieved from the sample of responses
from the participating practitioners. The information that follows is an analysis of the survey data
as they relate to the aforementioned subcategory and related research question.
As evidenced by the information in Figure 8, the practitioners surveyed had a level of
high confidence in their perceived ability to recommend and implement accommodations to
enhance student learning.

Figure 8. Teacher confidence in implementing accommodations.
Q1 —Describe your confidence with implementing accommodations to support
student learning.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 63

These data indicate that the practitioners surveyed believed that they had the knowledge and
organizational resources needed to implement the accommodations they felt were appropriate to
allow access for students with SLDs. This is aligned with research that suggests that teachers
with a high degree of efficacy are more likely to explore multiple intervention options and feel
that they have more control and influence over the learning environment (Sharma, Loreman, &
Forlin, 2012). One education specialist who participated in the survey noted,
So, I think accommodations in our field—many of our students receive accommodations,
whether it be testing time, additional testing time, testing in a small group; I think it’s just
something that as special education teachers we’re accustomed to providing.
The sentiment above indicates that assigning and implementing accommodations is a regular
practice for special education practitioners working with students with SLDs and that providing
accommodations is something that they are accustomed to doing as part of their daily
responsibilities. If, then, the confidence level of the practitioners is high, what methods do they
use in matching accommodations to student learning? The question was posed to the participants,
and the results are shown in Figure 9.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 64

Figure 9. Teacher methods in matching accommodations.

As evidenced by Figure 9, practitioners surveyed relied heavily on observation and data
collection to formulate their recommendations. Teachers also reported that they placed a high
value on assessment-generated data to help guide their decisions. This may be a result of the
importance placed on accommodations provided for state testing and ongoing performance
assessment purposes within the classroom. However, the utilization of performance indicators
was shadowed by the importance placed on observational data. The practitioners surveyed
credited the reliance on observation for being able to see how students utilize augmentative
supports in real classroom experiences. One interview response related to the importance of the
observational practice was as follows:
There’s no way to know what will benefit the student until you actually give them the
opportunity to use those accommodations; that in itself, right there, is providing an
evaluation for you, as an educator, to figure out what will benefit the student or not.
Q10 —What methods do you currently employ to match accommodations to student
access and learning? (mark all that apply)
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 65

Another interviewee added, “Not every accommodation is going to benefit the students. You
have to sort them out and classify and categorize.”
This reported value on observation as a key component to analyzing student aptitude
related to utilizing an accommodation is an example of what Clark and Estes (2008) refer to as
an active choice motivational process. In this case practitioners actively pursue the activity of
observation because they place a high importance on its findings. Observation allows
practitioners to introduce a particular accommodation which then provides space for the students
to play and grapple with the support as they choose. It is understandable that a student who is
introduced to a new support may not understand the benefits of the accommodation or even like
using the support(s) provided. Therefore, it is not enough just to align an accommodation based
on an assumption. Practitioners run the danger of recommending the accommodation based on
student deficiencies rather than student strengths. For instance, it is not enough to assign a text-
to-speech support for a student just because he or she is a poor reader. A deeper dive is required
to align with the aptitudes and strengths of the student when recommending effective
accommodations. Text-to-speech is the most assigned embedded augmentative support
prescribed for the students taking the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) test
(California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress [CAASPP], 2016) and is a
dynamic and useful augmentative support for most students. However, for students identified
with SLDs, the accommodations prescribed can be more detrimental than helpful. As a teacher
who was interviewed stated,
My first year, someone from the district came to test out something, more for to see if the
text-to-speech is effective, what was more effective for these students. They did a
reading; first, they would just read it and answer the questions, then it was text-to-speech
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 66

voice and then they answer the questions, and then it was more of like a read-aloud
voice—it sounded a lot more like, with some inflection, it wasn’t so monotone, the text-
to-speech. Then I got something that said how each student did so, it was interesting
because one student scored at a second-grade level on the text-to-speech but on the read
aloud scored it at a fifth-grade level, you could see huge differences for some of the
students. . . . I think when we have them taking the state test and they have all these
accommodations on there that don’t really work for them, it’s more distracting than it is
helpful.
Therefore, this begs the question of where to start. It would be a wonderful advantage to
allow an opportunity for all students to explore and “try out” any and all accommodations while
practitioners observe and collect data on their effectiveness, but realistically there is not enough
time and resources to enable such an endeavor. The issue of time and space provides a
significant organizational barrier, one that was highlighted in the survey presented to the
practitioners. Organizations run the risk of creating organizational gaps when there is a
misalignment between the understood theories of best practices and organizational policies and
materials that seek to support those best practices (Clark & Estes, 2008). In this case best
practices would lead to an assessment process like the one described by the interviewee in the
quote above. The data presented to the organization by the practitioners would suggest that more
time provided to perform careful observation would benefit the current practice, and is aligned
with the motivation of the practitioners. Another challenge, however, is that there are few
assessment tools available for practitioners to utilize other than performance data based on
standardized and non-standardized achievement metrics. Furthermore, once an accommodation
is implemented, how do practitioners employ progress-monitoring strategies to ensure that the
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 67

support is effective for the student and enhancing achievement? I posed this question to the
practitioners surveyed, and their responses are shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Teacher practice of utilizing pre- and post-assessment related to accommodations.

The results listed in Figure 10 indicate that two thirds of the practitioners surveyed
employ this practice either sometimes or seldom. In this respect, the practitioners provide a
recommendation for a student accommodation but then only intermittently provide focused
attention to how that accommodation will be introduced, taught, scaffolded, and then monitored.
This finding is highlighted in the context of the survey responses in which practitioners relayed
their practice of providing an implementation plan for accommodations, as shown in Figure 11.
Q12 —Do you utilize pre and post assessments related to the effectiveness of an
accommodation once it has been implemented?
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 68

Figure 11. Teacher practice of developing implementation plans specific to student
accommodations.

As evidenced by the information reflected in Figure 11, participants placed less importance on
providing an implementation plan in relation to accommodations. It should be noted that
historically, education specialists and special education practitioners have not been required or,
for that matter, formally trained on how to write and apply a systematic accommodation
implementation plan. In fact, the organizational culture of the districts participating in the survey
have not provided an expectation related to providing implementation plans for accommodations,
and therefore the absence of such plans has become an unconscious understanding of current
practitioners. This may attribute to an organizational gap that has fostered organizational
behavior that is in need of change. Currently, this is not a domain that is covered in any of the
teacher credentialing programs in California and therefore would be considered a new
expectation. However, this is an area that needs more research and exploration and is one that
Q14 —Do you develop implementation plans for specific student accommodations?
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 69

would prove to benefit students in providing an effective accommodation program that has a
chance to truly affect the performance and achievement of the students.
The practitioners surveyed believed that accommodations are an integral part of a
student’s individual education plan (IEP). In fact, 73% of the education specialists surveyed
expressed that assigning the right accommodations is extremely important in the overall
academic success of students. When combined with the 18% of those surveyed who responded to
the same question with a rating of very important, the overall percentage of respondents who felt
this was important was 91%. These data align with the ideas of mega-motivation identified by
Clark & Estes (2008), which is the belief that motivation at work is a result of experiences or
prospects that are believed to have proven effective. The survey extended the question further
and asked the participants whether accommodations are the most critical element in providing
access to general education curriculum. The responses are shown in Figure 12.

Figure 12. Critical aspects of providing accommodations.

As evidenced by the information in Figure 12, a strong majority of the education
specialists surveyed found it to be true that accommodations are a “critical element” in providing
Q34 —Accommodations are the most critical element in providing access to general
education curriculum for students with SLD
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 70

access to general education curriculum. This finding highlights the importance of assigning the
right accommodations for students, as well as indicates the motivation this practice has on the
practitioners surveyed as a result of its perceived effectiveness. One of the practitioners
interviewed expressed the following:
I look at it as we all have accommodations somewhat in life, so I think the more we
learned that it’s an avenue that you can look things up and that you have that ability that
you give them [students] the power that they can do it. So, the accommodations are
something that we use throughout our lives and that you want them to have that power so
that they have that in their back pocket.
The question was extended further by asking participants how often students have the
opportunity to use their prescribed accommodations throughout their school day as well as
during formal and nonformalized assessments. The results are represented in Figures 13 and 14.

Figure 13. Frequency with which accommodations are used throughout the day.

Q32 —How often do students use accommodations throughout their day and across all
learning environments?
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 71

Figure 14. Frequency with which accommodations are used during assessments.

The data in Figure 13 indicates that the participants surveyed believe that currently
students have inconsistent access to accommodations throughout their school day, even when
these accommodations have been determined to be critical in allowing students to access their
daily curriculum. One research study suggested that both general education and special education
teachers believe that students’ classroom environment should be adapted to meet their unique
needs and grant them access to curriculum (Carter, Prater, Jackson, & Marchant, 2009). An
accommodation is just that: an adaptation in the learning environment that provides access. A
teacher who participated in the interview process expressed the following:
I think the two hardest components are making sure that we identify the proper
accommodations to offer, and then number two, which is just as important if not more
important, is making sure that everybody’s following through to provide and—to offer
and provide those accommodations, not only in the special education setting but in the
general education setting as well. And we’re not always in the general setting.
Q33 —Students use accommodations during ALL testing opportunities, including
standardized, formal and informal assessments
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 72

However, it should be noted that in most of the IEPs analyzed for this study, the only
accommodation indicators reflected specifically for testing accommodations and did not list
accommodations additionally as an assistive technology or a classroom support.
Figure 14 reflects how the survey participants relayed information about accommodations
during assessment. Education specialists reported that students are inconsistent in their use of
accommodations during assessment opportunities. This finding is highlighted in respect to the
effectiveness of the accommodation related to student performance, especially since testing
accommodations are specifically listed in the IEPs and are expected to be used during
assessments, especially all state standardized assessments.
Concepts of motivation and cognitive theories. The findings presented above beg the
question, with so much importance placed on accommodations, what is the cause of the
inconsistency in assessment and best practices? A number of factors contribute to the current
state of practice, and some of the most important lead to the second subcategory that explores the
domains of knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers that practitioners face on a daily
basis. I asked the participants surveyed to identify the main barriers that they were currently
facing in their professional practice. Figure 15 lists their responses.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 73

Figure 15. Practitioners’ perceived barriers to instructional practice.

As evidenced by the information presented in Figure 15, the main organizational barrier
for education specialists in their professional practice is time. The impact of time is further
supported by the finding that staffing, space, and administrative tasks present significant barriers
as well. In fact, those four domains comprised 77% of the total organizational barriers identified
by the participants surveyed. It is evident that the practitioners surveyed did not feel that they
needed more materials or “stuff” to carry out their professional responsibilities but rather
perceived a need for time and space to address those responsibilities.
Clark & Estes (2008) suggest that while everyone is motivated to be effective in their
work there are both cultural and personal beliefs that influence what actually makes them
effective. In the table above the practitioners surveyed believe that they are knowledgeable and
well trained to perform their job duties. In fact, only 14 percent of the participants surveyed
Q3 —Which of the following are barriers to your instructional practice? (click all that
apply)
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 74

expressed that training was a barrier for them to do their jobs effectively. The motivation for
these practitioners is not knowledge-based. In fact, there may be alignment related to Clark &
Estes (2008) idea of mental effort as it relates to stakeholder motivation in achieving a goal. In
the research Clark & Estes relay that minimal mental effort can be effected by either over-
confidence or under-confidence, which will ultimately influence their motivated performance
(p.81). The authors suggest that people who are challenged by a task but are not either over or
under-confident have the greatest aptitude for increased motivation and as a result, increased
performance.
Factoring in the learning theory concepts related to assigning accommodations for
students with SLDs also plays a critical role in assigning effective supports. The participants
surveyed were asked to indicate the importance of both cognitive theory and motivational theory
when recommending accommodations. Of the practitioners surveyed, 79% rated motivational
theory as either extremely important or very important in influencing recommendations for
academic support. One education specialist who was interviewed stated,
I think the motivation theory is at making sure you’re meeting the need of some sort.
Starts off with the need, right? And then, once you figure out what their need is, you can
figure out how to motivate the student, because the need will produce some type of
behavior, whether it could be positive or negative, but if you focus on those particular
little details, for those—whatever student you’re having a difficult time with—that pretty
much tells you, “Okay, then this would be a motivator for the student, because this is
what they need.”
However, only 65% of the practitioners surveyed responded that they were very familiar
or moderately familiar with the formal tenets of motivational theory as a practice, with 20% of
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 75

the participants stating that they were only slightly familiar. This finding would suggest that
there needs to be more training provided for staff as well as time to analyze student behavior in
the respect.
Additionally, cognitive theory also plays a part in the equation, with 74% of the
participants surveyed rating it as either extremely important or very important. Subsequently,
roughly the same number of practitioners believed that they were either very familiar or
moderately familiar with the formal practices of cognitive theory at 67%, but a higher percentage
of 29% stated that they were only slightly familiar with cognitive theory. In fact, of the
participants surveyed, only 4% stated that they were extremely familiar with cognitive theory,
and 8% were extremely familiar with motivational theory. Again, training, ongoing coaching,
and time for practitioners to refine their craft would be beneficial to strengthen best practices.
Using data to inform decision-making practices. Building a framework that ties
together all of the aforementioned components must be substantially rooted in something. It is
my assumption that the touchstone for this work must originate with information. This is
addressed in the third subcategory of the problem of practice, which aimed to understand the
importance that education specialists assign to data collection and progress monitoring when
making their recommendations, and what were the perceived organizational barriers that
influence their practice.
In analyzing the responses of the participants surveyed, it was clear that they were
familiar with the data analysis process and had consistencies in their approach. Of the
stakeholders who participated in the survey, 80% stated that they always reviewed the student
IEP as a part of their recommendation practice whereas 20% of the participants stated that they
only sometimes did. Nearly 90% of the practitioners surveyed stated that they considered
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 76

psychoeducational assessments when recommending accommodations, and 100% of the
participants stated that the analysis of student data was either extremely important or very
important in their practice. It is clear that the participants surveyed took a thoughtful approach
related to data analysis and sought out multiple measures to assist in their decision making.
Furthermore, the education specialists who participated in this study suggested that they took an
even deeper approach to data collection and analysis by integrating various forms of
achievement diagnostics to guide their process. One participant who was interviewed stated,
I think when you look at numbers and data and information, you have to look at it
holistically; you can’t just take the test scores and base your accommodations or base all
of your assessments and information off of that information only. I think, as a good
teacher, you have to go ahead and collect data on an ongoing process, work samples, and
you have to modify your—or change your instruction depending on the needs of the
student. When I was teaching my class, I could not rely on my test scores, I couldn’t rely
on benchmarks, because I knew that it was going to set my kids off, they were—or they
were just going to guess, no matter how much external motivators or how much Chili
Cheetos I offered them, they were just going to blow through the test, and they were not
going to try. I would have to assess their needs based on the ongoing work samples and
my observations, my discussions, my one-on-one interactions with them.
Of the practitioners surveyed, 75% reported that they believed that an evaluation process
is either extremely important or very important. This finding indicates that the education
specialists placed importance on providing a systematic approach to the recommendation
process, although that process differed between practitioners, with observation and
individualization being the constant and shared themes among the participants. However, nearly
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 77

half of the participants surveyed (48%) expressed that they felt very familiar with the analysis
process whereas 22% stated that they were only moderately familiar. Seventeen percent of the
practitioners felt that they were extremely familiar with an analysis process. As evidenced by the
data, there is a misalignment between the value that the survey participants placed on an
evaluation process that is rooted in data analysis and their understanding of and ability to fully
execute a model consistent with best practices. An assumption of the root cause of this
misalignment is once again related to organizational culture and the ability to use time and space
effectively. Special Education is heavily immersed in assessment and therefore has an abundance
of data to draw from. A challenge is that many organizations have not provided an expectation
for a systemic approach as it relates to recommending accommodations, nor has it received much
focus as a component to the student IEP. It is often regarded as an addition to the supports
outlined by the student’s annual goals and objectives, and seldom is looked to as a separate
domain. The organizational culture continues to promote this practice by often exclusively
focusing on student present levels, proposed goals, and subsequent progress monitoring included
in the IEP with little mention or guidance related to how staff should approach the practice of
recommending and implementing accommodations. Furthermore, as noted in earlier sections of
this study, the time and space needed to perform such an in-depth analysis of accommodations
has to be addressed to allow practitioners the appropriate time and methods to make a thoughtful
recommendation based on observation and data. A focus would be to provide additional training
and coaching for practitioners to provide them with a solid foundation on which to build data-
driven recommendations.
Research Question 1 findings. The results of the study indicated that the education
specialists who participated in the survey and the interview process valued and had a strong
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 78

understanding of how and what accommodations should be introduced within a learning
environment. However, the findings revealed some inconsistencies in practices along with
assessment measures. The practitioners who participated in this study agreed that assessment is a
critical part of the practice of recommending accommodations for students with SLDs, but it is
clear that they could use more coaching and training related to the specific concepts and learning
theories that would make those accommodations more effective. Also, it is clear that the
participants in the study felt that they did not have enough time to accomplish a practice that
would meet all of the desired competencies.
It is also clear that there need to be efforts made to include the general education
practitioners more in the implementation process. It appears that there is a misalignment between
the accommodations that should be used in the educational setting and what is actually being
implemented to support student success. As discussed in this section, this issue is related to
organizational culture and the collective expectancies shared by the stakeholders. MSD and BSD
should explore ways to provide ample time and space for practitioners to refine their practices in
relation to accommodations and provide tools that will assist them in their recommendation
process. Ideally, each district should explore ways to further automate this practice to allow
education specialists to record and analyze student data more efficiently.
Research Question 2
So far, this chapter has focused on the influences and practices of education specialists
and how they apply their own unique systems to their individual practice. This section addresses
the second research question, which asked, what are the recommended knowledge and skill,
motivation, and organizational solutions?
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 79

To begin to explore this problem of practice, it is important to take into account all of the
information gathered in the analysis of the first question and expand the scope of focus to include
the culture and the community in which these practices are active in the students’ everyday
academic structure. As expressed in previous chapters, it is the expectation that students with
special needs be included within the least restrictive learning environments. Therefore, it is not
enough for the education specialists to work on and with academic accommodations in isolation
and only in specialized academic instruction environments. For students with special needs to be
successful, there must be an agreed-upon expectation that assigned accommodations will be
provided throughout the school day and across learning environments. To accomplish this, there
must be consensus, collaboration, transparency, and consistency. In essence, there must be a
culture in which practitioners are not only accepting of accommodations to augment student
learning but are also actively engaged advocates of the use of these accommodations as a critical
tool to give students with disabilities access to general education curriculum. Clark & Estes
(2008) state that organizations develop cultures over time. Historically, general education
curriculum instruction and special education intervention practices have been provided for
students in separate learning environments. This has resulted in an organizational culture that
does not have a clear expectation of how to integrate the two practices, or have a true
understanding of how the they differ in their pedagogical methods. For the purposes of this
research the problem of practice is addressed by exploring the importance of the following
subcategories: (a) collaboration, (b) school culture, and (c) the role of the education specialist.
Collaboration. Based on an analysis of the responses provided by both the survey
participants and the practitioners who took part in the interview process, it is clear that all
stakeholders placed high importance on collaboration with their peers who teach in the general
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 80

education setting. Many of the participants surveyed expressed that they perceived significant
inconsistencies when implementing accommodations across learning environments, and they felt
that training for general education teachers needs to be implemented to raise both the awareness
and the competency levels of all instructional support staff. This is consistent with research that
suggested that many general education teachers feel that teaching diverse learners presents a real
challenge because they feel unprepared to help students with special needs succeed (Gotshall &
Stefanou, 2011). One education specialist who participated in the survey expressed,
In recommending accommodations, it is important that educators in the general setting
have proper training and knowledge of students with IEPs and the importance of
accommodations. If teachers don’t implement or use accommodations that are
recommended or appropriate, students will not have access to the general curriculum.
Sadly, this is a common practice.
Another practitioner echoed this response, stating,
Implementing accommodations throughout the school day in the general education
classroom does not happen often. Some teachers feel “it’s a way of cheating.” Training
general education teachers on implementing appropriate accommodations for students
with SLD is needed.
The intent of training general education teachers in how to effectively work with
accommodating students with disabilities is to raise their competency level in this respect,
resulting in a higher degree of self-efficacy. Research has suggested that teachers with higher
degrees of self-efficacy are more likely to see past students’ deficiencies and focus instead on
their abilities so that learning can occur given the proper instruction (Woolfson & Brady, 2009).
Conversely, research has suggested that teachers without high self-efficacy in this regard are
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 81

more likely to rely on the education specialist or other support staff to provide intervention
strategies (Gotshall & Stefanou, 2011). The idea of self-efficacy is aligned with Clark & Estes
(2008) research related to motivational factors, which suggests that when practitioners decide to
actively pursue a goal that they are working towards they will be more persistent in their efforts
which results in increased performance. This increased performance is a result of enhancing
motivation by increasing knowledge and skills of all practitioners so that work more effectively
and develop habits and solutions that manifest in achieving the goal of the organization. If then,
the goal of the organization is to provide access to prescribed accommodations across all
learning environments for students with SLD, then consistent and ongoing training is essential
for all practitioners to improve performance and make progress towards that goal.
School culture. It is clear that the general sentiment among participants was that there
should be training provided for general education teachers in how to implement and utilize
accommodations in their learning environment. However, there was a recurring theme within the
research indicating that teacher training is just one component. A bigger factor is how the issue
of accommodations and use of augmentative supports fits within the school culture as a whole.
The culture of the school is manifested through the practices of the instructional support staff,
but it should be driven by the school site administrator. As one participant expressed,
In order for special education teachers to provide accommodations, administrators need
to enforce a collaboration time between general education and special education teachers
. . . special education teachers will become familiarized with the technology and be able
to offer accommodations within the general education classrooms for special education
students as well as students who are at risk. Special education teachers need time to meet
to share accommodation ideas.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 82

One of the education specialists who participated in the interview process also expressed the
following:
I’ve been working really hard, but I think it’s got to come from their principals, and
saying that we can do it, and it really does have to come from the administration. I get it,
it’s like there’s a negative proponent going on, and not that I—I don’t think I’m not just
like—but it’s just a matter of, it needs to come from administration.
Another interview participant stated,
So, we have work to do, because we are getting these resources, but we’re not realizing
we’re coming up with different problems. I do think the administration tries, but it has to
come from them, and [they must] know that we are trying our best, and I think they do, I
just—it’s hard.
It is clear from these responses that the special education practitioners felt that they have
the resources needed to implement and provide accommodations; however, they believed that
oftentimes their general education counterparts experience their own unique challenges that
make it difficult to implement accommodations as prescribed. It is also clear that the participants
interviewed believed that the school site administration needs to be a driving force in setting the
tone and the expectation of accommodations being implemented across learning environments.
Administrators need to provide support for both the special education and the general education
instructional staff who practice at their respective school sites. The challenge for many school
site administrators is that special education is not a familiar area for them, and they are often
unsure how to provide support in this area. The result is an administration that provides shared
administrative responsibilities between the school site and the district office. This can lead to
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 83

confusion and frustration experienced by the instructional support staff. One education specialist
explained his/her own perspective in this regard:
I think the school culture, it—the schools are different throughout our school district.
Even though they’re [in] the same school district, there are some schools across the
tracks, so to speak, that have a very low budget, and those teachers don’t have the same
resources to possibly acquire the accommodations that they need in the classroom or, as
some of our other schools, have all the supplies that they need and a robust budget. So, it
just—it varies throughout the school district, and sometimes as special education
teachers, I know how difficult it is to get supplies from [the] school site administrators.
The school site administrators in many cases will say, “Contact special ed.,” then you call
special ed. and the specialist says, “Hey, that’s your school site administrator’s
responsibility. Call them,” and you’re bouncing around like a yo-yo. Some schools, it’s
more pronounced than others. It’s not like that at every school, but some of the schools
that I have visited or worked with, those are—what the teachers—those are some of the
concerns that they’ve shared with me.
Research has suggested that when teachers have appropriate support and training, they
feel confident in the work that they do, especially when working with students who struggle
academically and for whom accommodations must be made and adjusted over time. The effects
of this might be seen in more students meeting grade-level expectations within their general
education classroom (Gotshall & Stefanou, 2011). It is assumed, then, that coaching and training
needs to be provided for school site administrators that is specifically designed to assist them in
supporting the practices of instructional support staff at their school sites. They need to be
knowledgeable of accommodations and how to support best practices of their respective school
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 84

staff to ensure equity for all students that will help to foster achievement. Furthermore, the
Education Specialists need to be included in the “we” of the organization, and not perceived as
something separate. Clark & Estes (2008) express that a culture at times can be categorized by a
“I” belief system in which practitioners can be focused primarily on their individual efforts to the
organization, engaging in adopting personal best practices apart from the collective goals of the
organization. Conversely, “we” cultures value the collective efforts of the team and tend to have
a broader scope of the potential effectiveness of their work. For the organization to become a
culture of “we”, administrators must help guide their practitioners in a systems approach that will
result in more effective best practices for all stakeholders.
The role of the education specialist. For their part, education specialists are looked to as
the experts in special education practices at their school sites and therefore should be counted on
to assist in providing knowledge and support to their general education counterparts. While
education specialists advocate for more collaboration and training for both administration and
general education practitioners, they too should be required to stretch outside their bubble of
specialized instruction to better understand the rigor and instructional practices being
implemented in the general education setting. Often special education teachers tend to practice in
isolation, with little time available to observe and integrate their strategies across the learning
environments of the students they support. They too can be susceptible to the aligning their
practice with an “I” belief system in which they are more committed to their individual
initiatives rather than the goal of the organization.
An analysis of the research gathered in this study suggested that education specialists
generally seek out their general education teaching peers to assist with particular students on
their caseload. Many of the participants in this study relayed that they had regular meetings with
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 85

their general education teachers, and some even included them in the IEP process. One special
education practitioner expressed,
Our team has a staffing meeting with [the] general education teacher to discuss
accommodations and [the] teacher’s input before the actual IEP to make sure we are all
on the same page. Usually, it is before school and several days before the scheduled IEP
with [the] parent.
However, additional information provided by the participants of the survey suggested some
interesting findings. Seventy-nine percent of the participants surveyed expressed that they always
took into consideration the learning environment of the students when recommending
accommodations, with 21% reflecting that they only sometimes considered the learning
environment. Therefore, it is my assumption that all of the practitioners surveyed believed that
the learning environment plays a significant role in recommending accommodations. A follow-
up question was then posed to the participants regarding whether their recommendations were
for accommodations to which only they had access. Figure 16 illustrates the responses.
The information in Figure 16 suggests that majority of education specialists only
recommended accommodations that they had access to, regardless of the classroom makeup or
individualized needs of the students. Another question was posed to the participants regarding
seeking input from other educational practitioners when recommending accommodations. The
results are shown in Figure 17.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 86

Figure 16. Types of accommodation recommendations.

Figure 17. Collaboration during the recommendation process.
As evidenced by Figure 17, the majority of education specialists surveyed (60%)
expressed that they either sometimes or seldom solicited the opinions of other teachers or
Q29 —Do you ask the opinion of other educational practitioners and therapists when
recommending accommodations?
Q26 —Do you exclusively recommend accommodations that you only have access to?
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 87

therapists involved with students’ IEPs when making recommendations for accommodations.
Furthermore, only 9% of the participants reported that they always considered student input
when providing accommodations, and 17% of the practitioners relayed that they considered
parent input. Most of the responses that reflected practices of seeking student and parent input
landed in the sometimes to seldom domains of the survey, with only a small percentage of
participants responding that they never considered these factors as part of their practice.
Research has suggested that general education teachers’ philosophical beliefs about
disability have an effect on their willingness to advocate and, in some cases, allow an
accommodation to be provided within their class (Carter et al., 2009). Many times, the
accommodations challenge the general education teachers’ teaching philosophies and therefore
threaten to influence their classroom practices. Therefore, it would be beneficial for education
specialists to include the general education teachers, as well as other practitioners working with
the students, in the accommodation decision-making process. Not including them may present a
hardship for the students in that they are not provided with the accommodations needed for
access. Again, the research suggests that an organization that can transition from an “I’ culture to
a “we” culture will benefit from the cooperation of its stakeholders. This motivational factor will
then enhance in increased performance that build off of active choice, persistence, and mental
effort (Clark & Estes, 2008).
An analysis of the data in this subcategory led to the assumption that education specialists
need more training and coaching on effective collaboration practices as well as professional
development related to the expectations and rigor of both district-adopted curriculum and
statewide assessments.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 88

Research Question 2 findings synthesis. Similar to the findings for Research Question
1, the data gathered related to Research Question 2 indicated that the district practitioners valued
the implementation and use of accommodations to promote student access and support
achievement. According to the practitioners, both surveyed and interviewed, there appears to be
varied degrees of support and effective collaboration among the stakeholders who deliver
instructional support within the district. It is clear that the participants of this study felt that all
district instructional staff would benefit from training and a sense of agreed-upon expectations in
relation to how best to recommend, implement, and monitor accommodations. Again, both MSD
and BSD should provide time and space for stakeholders to collaborate and plan as well as
provide opportunities for joint training to enhance the dialogue among practitioners and
strengthen the practice and utilization of accommodations districtwide.
Summary
It is clear from the findings from both of the analysis instruments utilized in this study
that the education specialists felt that to establish an effective system for recommending
accommodations, they need ongoing and continued supports. They need buy-in from both the
school site administration and, most importantly, their general education peers. The potential for
student success lies in the effectiveness of the instructional strategies presented by the IEP team.
Therefore, it is essential that all members of that team provide input related to the
accommodations proposed in order to maximize their effectiveness. Sole reliance on the
education specialists to provide recommendations on instructional accommodations with little or
no influence of the other team members is a practice that carries serious risk to the students and
their success. If the intent of the accommodations is to provide access to curriculum that the
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 89

students would not otherwise have, then it is of the utmost importance that the team members
clearly define their roles in implementing and monitoring those accommodations.
For their part, education specialists would benefit from a rich working knowledge of the
state standards as well as familiarity with the grade-level curriculum that is required of the
students they serve. For many special education practitioners, the focus of their instruction
centers on specialized intervention methods that specifically attend to the areas of deficiency
determined by the IEP team. Therefore, education specialists tend to focus on the remediation
skills outlined in the IEP goals and objectives instead of directly aligning those skills to grade-
level state standards. It is critical that student IEP goals and objectives are aligned with state
standards and that the efforts of the special education team always tie back to access to general
education curriculum.
Education specialists must have a deep understanding of the universal tools, designated
supports, and accommodations (both embedded and nonembedded) that are allowed for the
SBAC and in other assessment settings. It is clear that the education specialists who participated
in the study felt overwhelmed by the vast number of augmentative supports now available for
students within the classroom, and these practitioners would benefit from understanding exactly
what these supports are and, more importantly, how they can assist students in accessing
curriculum to improve performance. This is of critical importance, especially because education
specialists are charged with both the implementation of the supports and training the students on
how to use them. In addition to having a strong working knowledge of accommodations, it is
essential that both special education practitioners and their general education counterparts have a
clear delineation of the difference between an accommodation and a modification and that all
instructional practitioners agree on its implementation.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 90

Looking at the results through the lens of a KMO analysis, it is clear that there are
currently gaps that would benefit from being addressed by both organizations. The practitioners
who participated in this study report to have a strong basal knowledge of accommodations and
how to recommend them. They express that they have the fundamental skills needed to
appropriately identify and implement accommodations for students with SLD that will provide
them access to curriculum and augment academic performance. Although the practitioners
surveyed would benefit from continued training to advance and refine their skills, it is my
assumption that the primary gaps are identified within the motivational and organizational
influences of the practitioners, both with the education specialists as well as the general
education teachers and administrators. As discussed throughout this section all stakeholders
would benefit from specific and ongoing training, which would ultimately assist in increasing the
self-efficacy and confidence in their practice of working with students identified with SLD. This
increased confidence is part of the Clark & Estes (2008) facets of motivated performance that
relates to mental effort. The three facets of motivated performance are active choice, persistence,
and mental effort. When all three domains are clear and aligned, there is a greater chance for
increased performance, which ultimately leads to effective practices that produce progress
towards organizational goals. Another identified gap would be that of the organizations
expectations and culture. The practitioners surveyed expressed that they felt they had a strong
arsenal of materials in which to provide both an appropriate accommodation recommendation as
well as implement that recommendation. The areas in which the practitioners needed more
organizational support were in the areas of time and space management, and organizational
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 91

culture. Both of these issues require a dedicated focus to analyze and establish frameworks and
systems that look to close gaps and strengthen practice.
Chapter Five extends this conversation and provides recommendations for how to address
the aforementioned obstacles and challenges in providing a framework for district practitioners
that will promote districtwide best practices.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 92

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
The following chapter explores discusses the recommendations that have arisen as a
result of the research presented in chapter four. It is my assumption that all practitioners would
benefit from continued and ongoing training to increase their knowledge and skill base to
enhance confidence and self-efficacy. A special focus should be dedicated to both district
administrators as well as general education teachers to provide them with the knowledge and
skills necessary to implement and monitor accommodations for students with SLD. This
increased knowledge will serve as the foundation for increased understanding of
accommodations and their effectiveness in enhancing student performance. As stated in the
previous chapter, it is my assumption that an increased skill base for all practitioners will lead to
increased motivation, which will then assist in providing a space in which to improve
performance and change the organizational culture. The following sections provide a proposed
plan in which address the KMO gaps that currently exist in the organization.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to conduct a gap analysis to examine the root causes of the
organizational problem described above, namely, providing effective academic accommodations
for students with SLDs. While a complete gap analysis would focus on all district stakeholders,
for practical purposes, the stakeholders of focus in this analysis were the MSD faculty who
deliver direct instruction to students. The analysis focused on causes of this problem due to gaps
in the areas of staff members’ knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational issues, and it
included an analysis of current student achievement as measured by available data. The analysis
began by generating a list of possible or assumed causes and then examining these systematically
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 93

to focus on actual or validated causes. As such, the questions that guided this study were as
follows:
1. What are the knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational causes that influence special
education practitioners’ recommendations related to academic accommodations for students
identified with SLDs in MSD?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational solutions?
Recommendations for Practice to Address Knowledge, Motivation,
and Organizational Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. Table 6 reflects a list of assumed knowledge influences that were gathered
by the collection of informal data. Therefore, the data reflected in Table 6 are influences that
were expected to have a high probability of being validated and subsequently be a high priority
for realizing the goals of the organization. Table 6 also provides recommendations for these
highly probable influencers based on speculative concepts.
The intent of this research was to identify the obstacles and challenges that educational
practitioners face when recommending academic accommodations for students with SLDs. The
following information is a culmination of findings as a result of the research that was conducted
in this respect. Along with the findings, context-specific recommendations are provided related
to how to bridge the identified gaps.
Declarative knowledge solutions. One of the most challenging factors that teachers face
related to making appropriate recommendations for academic accommodations is that they are
not aware of all of the accommodations that can be provided for students with SLDs.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 94

Table 6. Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed knowledge
influence: cause,
need, or asset
Validated
(V, HP,
N)
Priority
(Y, N) Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Education specialists
are not aware of the
extensive list of all
available
accommodations.
(D)
HP Y Several studies have
noted that special
education teachers are
uncertain about the
process for choosing
accommodations
(Edgemon, Jablonski, &
Lloyd, 2006; Fletcher et
al., 2006; Thompson,
Lazarus, Clapper, &
Thurlow, 2006).
Help individuals identify
and understand
important points
(McCrudden, Schraw, &
Hartley, 2006).
Provide a resource
guide that identifies
the types of
accommodations and
how best to match
them with student-
specific needs.
Education specialists
are not masters of
grade-level
standards and
expectations that
align with general
education
curriculum. (D)
HP Y In its truest form,
education should offer
the opportunity for all
students to be educated
(and assessed) in line
with the state-adopted
general education
curriculum (Elliott,
Kettler, Beddow, &
Kurz, 2011).
Provide training and
coaching for
teachers in this
respect, and offer
online resources for
reference and
support.
Education specialists
and general
education teachers
lack a shared
understanding of
what an
accommodation is.
(D)
HP Y Unless people believe
that their actions can
produce the outcomes
they desire, they have
little incentive to act or
to persevere in the face
of difficulties (Schunk &
Pajares, 2009).
Provide training and
coaching for
teachers in this
respect, and offer
online resources for
reference and
support.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 95

Table 6 (continued)
Assumed knowledge
influence: cause,
need, or asset
Validated
(V, HP,
N)
Priority
(Y, N) Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Education specialists
lack a consistent
systems approach to
assigning academic
accommodations for
students with
disabilities. (P)
HP Y Of primary importance is
the positive transfer of
training, or the extent to
which the learning that
results from training
transfers to the job and
leads to relevant changes
in work performance
(Goldstein & Ford, 2002).
Model effective strategy
use, including how and
when to use particular
strategies (McCrudden et
al., 2006).
Provide professional
development,
coaching, and
training to support
teachers in creating
effective systems to
support this
approach.
Education specialists
need a stronger
ability to navigate
academic
accommodations for
students with
disabilities. (P)
HP Y “Application knowledge
must be very specific in
order to have value for
most people at work”
(Clark & Estes, 2008,
p. 65).
Provide online
modules, references,
and training that
provide steps for
practitioners to take
in this respect. The
modules will keep
data regarding who
has participated in
the online training
so as to be clear on
expectations.
Provide guidance,
modeling, coaching,
and other
scaffolding during
performance.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 96

Table 6 (continued)
Assumed knowledge
influence: cause,
need, or asset
Validated
(V, HP,
N)
Priority
(Y, N) Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Education specialists
need a stronger
ability to effectively
analyze historical
data and assessment
reports before
making
recommendations
for academic
accommodations for
students with
disabilities. (M)
HP Y “When your analysis
indicates that knowledge
and skills are required to
close a performance gap,
you must determine the
solution that will close
the gap” (Clark & Estes,
2008, p. 63).
Provide a step-by-
step reference guide
to assist
practitioners in
identifying the
appropriate
historical data to
make informed
decisions related to
recommendations
for
accommodations.
Education specialists
need stronger skills
related to
scaffolding and
fading supports. (P)
HP N Not an immediate
priority
Note. D = declarative; P = procedural; M = metacognitive; V = validated; HP = high probability;
N = no; Y = yes.

Research has suggested that it is important to help practitioners identify and understand
important points (McCrudden, Schraw, & Hartley, 2006). Therefore, it is paramount that
practitioners have a deep understanding of available options before attempting to recommend
supports for students with disabilities. A possible solution for this gap in practice would be to
provide a resource guide that identifies the types of accommodations and how best to match
them to the specific needs of individual students. This would provide practitioners with the
opportunity to engage in continued practice, which in turn promotes automaticity and takes less
capacity in working memory (McCrudden et al., 2006)
In addition to knowing what accommodations to recommend, it is imperative that
educational practitioners know how those accommodations augment specific skills that are
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 97

needed to access grade-level standards and curriculum. Currently, most education specialists do
not know how grade-level standards align with academic skills. This results in a disconnect in
aligning skills to standards, which ultimately contributes to an ongoing performance gap for
students with SLDs. According to McCrudden et al. (2006), to develop mastery, individuals must
acquire component skills, practice integrating them, and know when to apply what they have
learned. It is also important that the district provide an opportunity for its practitioners to be
trained, to be coached, and to develop mastery related to understanding skills and how they align
with state standards. Therefore, creating a job reference guide that provides a step-by-step
process for how to align grade-level standards to specific skills would be of benefit to
educational practitioners and help strengthen their practice.
Another challenge facing educational practitioners related to student accommodations is
in inconsistent definitions of accommodations between special education and general education
teachers. Research has suggested that there is little generalization of prescribed accommodations
across learning environments to allow for students with disabilities to access general education
curriculum and learning environments (Agran et al., 2002). This generates an instructional
program that provides a duality for the students in which supports are not provided consistently
across learning environments. To minimize this phenomenon, I recommend that the district
provide training and coaching for teachers in this respect and offer online resources for reference
and support.
Certain resources could provide a unified systems approach that contributes to the belief
that staff actions can produce the outcomes they desire (Schunk & Pajares, 2009). Acquiring the
knowledge and skills related to effectively recommending academic accommodations for
students with SLDs would provide the staff with a content-based understanding of what to
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 98

recommend, but there also needs to be considerable attention dedicated to how recommendations
are provided. Currently, education specialists lack a consistent systems approach to assigning
academic accommodations for students with disabilities. Research has suggested that learners
need to have effective strategy use appropriately modeled for them, including how and when to
use particular strategies (McCrudden et al., 2006). Therefore, I believe that it is important for the
district to provide professional development, coaching, and training to support teachers in
creating effective systemic processes related to making recommendations for accommodations.
These recommendations should follow a similar framework but be flexible in their construct to
allow for the practitioners to meet the unique needs of individual students.
Procedural knowledge solutions. Once an accommodation is determined, it is important
to know how to master the utilization of the supports so as to effectively instruct others on how
to use them. Currently, education specialists do not understand how to navigate academic
accommodations for students with disabilities. Clark and Estes (2008) suggested that
“application knowledge must be very specific in order to have value for most people at work”
(p. 65).
It is imperative that practitioners understand how to effectively navigate accommodations
and can seamlessly implement them so as to provide immediate access to curriculum for students
with SLDs. Furthermore, practitioners would benefit from implementing a system of
accommodations that allow both students and teachers to be immersed in the augmentative
supports being offered to improve student learning. Just as an individual learning a second
language accelerates their learning through being immersed within the culture of that language,
so too will the culture of the organization accelerate their practices of effectively providing
accommodations by allowing them to permeate throughout the organization and be accessible in
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 99

all learning environments. It is my recommendation that the district provide online modules,
references, and training that provide steps for practitioners to take in this respect. The modules
will keep data regarding who has participated in the online training so as to be clear on
expectations. The aforementioned supports are aligned with research that has indicated that
learners need to be provided with the opportunity for guidance, modeling, coaching, and other
scaffolding during performance (Mayer, 2011).
Metacognitive knowledge solutions. It is important that staff rely on a multimodal
approach when recommending accommodations. This requires the utilization of more than one
assessment measure when approaching this issue. At this time, education specialists spend some
time analyzing historical data and assessment reports before making recommendations for
academic accommodations for students with disabilities. However, it is important that staff focus
on data analysis in more detail because that analysis might reveal knowledge and skills that are
required to close a performance gap (Clark & Estes, 2008).
My recommendation to help close the gap in this respect is to provide a step-by-step
reference guide to assist practitioners in identifying the appropriate historical data to make
informed decisions related to recommendations for accommodations. This guide will provide
practitioners with a list of assessment and report types that will allow staff to build a historical
narrative that will reveal the unique support needs of the students.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. Motivational factors in addressing change in an organization are of
paramount concern. Of the three components that make up the knowledge, motivation, and
organization (KMO) framework, the concept of motivation plays the biggest role in influencing
behavior and ultimately change (Clark & Estes, 2008). Because specific data were not collected
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 100

for this particular problem of practice, I have provided an analysis of presumed motivating
factors that result in current outcomes of the organization (see Table 7). The primary assumed
motivating factors relate to three motivational performance issues: self-efficacy, task value, and
expectancy outcome. The following recommendations are based on the perceived motivational
influences that are currently driving district practices.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 101

Table 7. Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed motivation
influence: cause,
need, or asset
Validated
(V, HP,
N)
Priority
(Y, N) Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Education specialists
believe that
recommending
dynamic substitution
and augmentative
academic supports
for students with
SLDs may provide
access to CCSS.
(TV)
HP Y Focusing on mastery,
individual
improvement, learning,
and progress promotes
positive motivation
(Meece, Anderman, &
Anderman, 2006).
Designing learning
tasks that are novel,
varied, diverse,
interesting, and
reasonably challenging
promotes mastery
orientation (Meece et
al., 2006).
Provide ongoing
training and coaching
throughout the school
year, where special
education practitioners
are provided with
instruction and
support materials in a
variety of formats
(both digitally and
hands-on), which will
allow them to work as
individuals and in
collaborative small
groups.
Education specialists
are discouraged by
viewing the
recommendation
process as one more
thing on their
already full list of
expectancies. (EO)
HP Y Managing intrinsic load
by segmenting complex
material into simpler
parts and pretraining,
among other strategies,
enables learning to be
enhanced (Kirschner,
Paas, & Kirschner,
2009).
Rationales that include
a discussion of the
importance and utility
value of the work or
learning can help
learners develop
positive values (Eccles,
2009; Pintrich, 2003).
Provide a systems
approach and develop
an easily understood
process for
practitioners to follow.
Also, provide an
abundance of
resources and
materials for
practitioners to draw
from that are located
in an easily accessible
digital database.
All of the above
supports should be
organized into small
and manageable
chunks.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 102

Table 7 (continued)
Assumed motivation
influence: cause,
need, or asset
Validated
(V, HP,
N)
Priority
(Y, N) Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Education
specialists have a
primary focus on
specialized
instruction to
address learning
deficits rather than
grade-level
alignment to CCSS.
(SE)
HP Y Goals motivate and
direct students
(Pintrich, 2003).
Social interaction,
cooperative learning,
and cognitive
apprenticeships (such
as reciprocal
teaching) facilitate
construction of new
knowledge (Scott &
Palincsar, 2006).
Learning tasks that
are similar to those
that are common to
the individual’s
familiar cultural
settings will promote
learning and transfer
(Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001).
Provide a reference guide
and SPED-to-CCSS
“crosswalk” through
which practitioners can
clearly map where skill
acquisition leads to
CCSS performance
benchmark expectancies.
Education
specialists view
their work as
specifically unique
and apart from their
collaborative peers.
(SE)
HP Y Learning and
motivation are
enhanced when
learners have positive
expectancies for
success (Pajares &
Valiante, 2006).
High self-efficacy
can positively
influence motivation
(Pajares & Valiante,
2006).
Provide a reference guide
and “crosswalk” to
identify how intervention
and differentiated
learning is a primary
focus of CCSS and how
it frames lesson design.
Universal Design for
Learning (UDL) also
impacts CCSS, and
ongoing training and
available resources are
necessary for both SPED
and gen. ed. practitioners
to establish common
ground for instruction.
Note. CCSS = Common Core State Standards; TV = task value; EO = expectancy outcome; SE =
self-efficacy; V = validated; HP = high probability; N = no; Y = yes; SPED = special education.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 103

Task value. Currently, education specialists within MSD believe that recommending
dynamic substitution and augmentative academic supports for students with SLDs may provide
access to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). However, the current practitioners are
inconsistent in both their implementation of such accommodations and their ongoing analysis of
their effectiveness. Education specialists must believe that the recommendations they offer will
provide true supports for the students they serve, and they must ensure that those
recommendations are aligned with solid pedagogical practices. Meece, Anderman, and
Anderman (2006) expressed that focusing on mastery, individual improvement, learning, and
progress promotes positive motivation. This is an important motivating factor in allowing special
education practitioners to have the opportunity to grow from an already well-established
perspective related to instructional accommodations.
To strengthen the current practice of the practitioners and offer them the ability to further
build capacity, I recommend that the district provide ongoing training and coaching throughout
the school year through which special education practitioners are provided with instruction and
support materials in a variety of formats (both digitally and hands-on), which will allow them to
work as individuals and in collaborative small groups. Research has suggested that designing
learning tasks that are novel, varied, diverse, interesting, and reasonably challenging promotes
mastery orientation (Meece et al., 2006). By offering professional development for the staff that
is dynamic and multimodal, the district will be able to provide individual learning experiences
that are driven by its practitioners.
Another challenge facing MSD is that its practitioners do not currently have a common
understanding of an accommodation amongst general education and special education
educational practitioners. This motivational factor is characterized as a task-value influence and
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 104

has the potential to greatly influence the practice of district instructional staff. Often, education
specialists feel that it is their responsibility to reimagine intervention and curriculum so that the
students will be successful in working through it. This, however, is not the case for most students
with mild to moderate disabilities; the goal for the practitioners should be to ensure that these
students simply have access to intervention and curriculum. Whether they are successful or not is
completely up to the students and will be contingent on their efforts. The goal is to allow access
to general education curriculum without compromising the integrity or the rigor of the content.
Pintrich (2003) expressed that adaptive attributions and control beliefs motivate individuals.
With this in mind, the district can look for ways to strengthen this motivating factor by providing
a gentle shift in clearly differentiating practices of assigning modification and accommodation
supports while holding on to its core beliefs of providing effective interventions for students with
learning disabilities.
Therefore, I recommend that the district provide a reference guide to establish the
difference between curriculum modifications and instructional accommodations, and provide
examples and “if, then” scenarios for practitioners to draw from. It is important to provide a step-
by-step and easy-to-follow guide that clearly delineates the distinguishable differences between
accommodations and modifications. This, in turn, would provide practitioners with confidence to
clearly identify the difference between the two aforementioned practices and provide appropriate
recommendations as a result. Research has suggested that learning and motivation are enhanced
when learners have positive expectancies for success (Pajares & Valiante, 2006). By providing
an errorless support guide for teachers to reference, practitioners will be motivated to continue to
improve their practice and be confident in their decisions.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 105

Expectancy outcome. Education specialists are discouraged in their current practice by
the limitation of time and space to address their work, and thus they view the recommendation
process as one more thing on their already full list of expectancies. In attempting to design and
implement a system for practitioners to employ when assigning instructional accommodations, it
is important to remember that many education specialists feel that they are already overburdened
with individual education plan (IEP) paperwork, assessment information, and data collection.
Encouraging these practitioners to employ yet another practice when they already feel stretched
to capacity may create a feeling of discouragement that could lead to abandonment. Kirschner,
Paas, and Kirschner (2009) expressed that managing one’s intrinsic load by segmenting complex
material into simpler parts and pretraining, among other strategies, enables learning to be
enhanced. It is important for the district to provide supports and implement systems that will not
prove to be an extraneous cognitive load on its practitioners.
Therefore, I recommend that the district provide a systems approach and develop an
easily understood process for practitioners to follow. The district should also provide an
abundance of resources and materials for practitioners to draw from that are located in an easily
accessible digital database that is organized into small and manageable chunks so as not to
overwhelm its practitioners throughout this process.
Self-efficacy. Another motivational gap related to special education practitioners within
MSD is that they do not believe that their focus is on CCSS but rather on specialized instruction.
This concept is tricky because it is partly true. Special education teachers are called on to
imagine educational plans for students that offer opportunities for addressing deficits as they
relate to educational performance. However, to effectively achieve this, they must first
understand how academic skills tie into standards, which produce the deficits in the first place.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 106

Ultimately, the standards are the starting point for goal setting in the least restrictive
environment. Once the CCSS goal is established, practitioners can then begin a process of
working backwards to plug in goals and benchmarks according to student baseline data.
Research has stated that goals motivate and direct students (Pintrich, 2003). This suggests that by
having clearly defined goals, the district would be able to motivate both students and
practitioners to build capacity and enhance their current performance.
Therefore, I recommend that the district provide a reference guide and special education
(SPED)-to-CCSS “crosswalk” through which practitioners can clearly map where skill
acquisition leads to CCSS performance benchmark expectancies. This would provide a step-by-
step guide for practitioners to plug in baseline data that would then provide a link to a state
standard that will meet the students at their instructional level and begin to build capacity.
Practitioners in the district are already familiar with this process as the district provides many of
these guides already in other domains. Having familiarity with organizational systems is of
benefit because research has shown that learning tasks that are similar to those that are common
to an individual’s familiar cultural settings will promote learning and knowledge transfer
(Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). This method should prove to facilitate a smooth transition in
providing a systematic approach to appropriately connecting accommodations to standards.
A current challenge for the culture of the organization is that education specialists view
their work as specifically unique and apart from that of their collaborative peers. This creates a
variety of issues, the most important being that special education practitioners feel that they do
not have a common focus on which to collaborate. While most school site staff have time to
build and plan together, education specialists often work independently and apart from the
overall instructional vison of the site and its instructional leaders. Many times, the reason for this
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 107

lack of collaboration is that education specialists do not feel confident in their abilities to
effectively contribute to collaborative efforts because of their lack of understanding CCSS and
curriculum. Research has suggested that high self-efficacy can positively influence motivation
(Pajares & Valiante, 2006). Therefore, it is important that education specialists believe that they
have valuable information to contribute to collaboration teams, information that draws on their
expertise and talents. This is particularly critical for the site teams since all education specialists
are experts in the area of differentiated instruction, which is a major part of the framework for
CCSS.
Therefore, I recommend that the district provide a reference guide and “crosswalk” to
identify how intervention and differentiated learning is a primary focus of CCSS and how it
frames lesson design. Universal Design for Learning (UDL) also impacts CCSS, and ongoing
training and available resources are necessary for both special education and general education
practitioners to establish common ground for instruction.
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. Table 8 represents the complete list of assumed organizational influences
and their probability of being validated based on the organizational influences for achieving the
stakeholders’ goal that were most frequently mentioned during informal interviews and
supported by the literature review and the review of organization and culture theory. Clark and
Estes (2008) suggested that when an organization insufficiently supports its stakeholders on
multiple levels, those stakeholders begin to lose faith and focus related to the mission, vision,
and goals of the organization. Therefore, it is imperative that the organization consistently
monitor itself and its implementation strategies to ensure that they are aligned with both the
goals of the organization and the expected outcomes of its stakeholders (Kirkpatrick &
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 108

Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 8 also shows the recommendations for these influences based on
theoretical principles.
Cultural model: Use of time and space. Many of the special education practitioners in
MSD perceive that there is not enough time to engage in a lengthy training or coaching process.
The time that education specialists have to dedicate to building their professional capacity is
limited due to the myriad of other responsibilities that they must address on a regular basis,
which include creating and implementing IEPs as well as delivering direct instruction. Because
of all the complexities related to the job duties required of the education specialists, it is easy for
practitioners to become overwhelmed and be less inclined to make time to engage in activities
that will improve their practice. Clark and Estes (2008) wrote that because all organizations are
complex systems, many performance gaps tend to be interconnected. This interconnectedness
could be explained by the many hats that education specialists are required to wear.
A recommendation to improve in this area would be to provide a hybrid training
approach that utilizes online multimedia modules, in-person coaching, small-group
collaborations, online department meetings, and group trainings. This approach would allow for
practitioners to identify the training dynamic that best fits their schedules and personal learning
style. This would present the opportunity for practitioners to have professional development
opportunities available to them on demand and in a way that would fit into their busy schedules.
Not providing the necessary resources in this respect could lead to the education specialists
becoming disenfranchised with the organization, which could in turn lead to performance issues.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 109

Table 8. Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
organization
influence: cause,
need, or asset
Validated
(V, HP,
N)
Priority
(Y, N) Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Practitioners do
not have
enough time to
engage in a
lengthy training
process.
(Cultural
model)
HP Y Because all organizations
are complex systems, many
performance gaps tend to
be interconnected (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
When people fail to get the
necessary resources that
were promised for a high-
priority work goal or when
policy is not supported by
effective work processes or
procedures, one of the
possible causes is a conflict
between some aspect of
organizational culture and
the current performance
goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Provide a hybrid
training approach that
will utilize online
multimedia modules, in-
person coaching, small-
group collaborations,
online department
meetings, and group
trainings. This approach
will allow for
practitioners to identify
the training dynamic
that best fits their
schedules and personal
learning style.
The culture of
the
organization
has been to
treat SPED as a
separate entity.
(Cultural
model)
HP Y Social interaction,
cooperative learning, and
cognitive apprenticeships
(such as reciprocal
teaching) facilitate
construction of new
knowledge (Scott &
Palincsar, 2006).
Include SPED classes,
students, and programs
in the larger tapestry of
both the site and district.
Showcase
accomplishments and
offer opportunities for
students with special
needs to be included in
academics and activities
with their nondisabled
peers to the maximum
extent possible.
SPED has
historically
worked in
isolation rather
than
collaboratively.
(Cultural
model/setting)
HP Y Organizational
performance increases
when individuals
communicate constantly
and candidly to others
about plans and processes
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Include SPED
practitioners as
participants in their site
professional learning
communities to provide
opportunities for
collaboration and
professional growth.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 110

Table 8 (continued)
Assumed
organization
influence: cause,
need, or asset
Validated
(V, HP,
N)
Priority
(Y, N) Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Site administration
has deferred to the
direction and
support of the
SPED department
for site staff rather
than directly
supporting
education
specialists on site.
(Cultural model)
HP Y Organizational
performance increases
when processes and
resources are aligned
with goals established
collaboratively (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
Provide ongoing
professional
development to district
administrative staff on
best practices related to
SPED instruction,
intervention, and
support methods, as
well as training on
SPED compliance
(hybrid approach that
includes learning
modules, in-person
coaching, and group
training).
Funding for SPED
materials and
supplies has been
consistently
deferred to the
department.
(Cultural model)
HP Y “When . . . processes
are inadequate or
misaligned with
business goals, the risk
of failure is great. . . .
Even [employees] with
adequate knowledge,
skills, and top
motivation will not
succeed to close [the
achievement] gaps and
achieve business goals
when faced with
insufficient work
processes” (Clark &
Estes, 2008, p. 104).
Engage in an ongoing
dialogue with site
administration to
provide a clear
understanding of the
fiscal role of the SPED
department.
Create and initiate a
system in which school
site administration can
request specific supports
and materials from the
SPED department after
the site resources have
been exhausted.
Note. V = validated; HP = high probability; N = no; Y = yes; SPED = special education.

According to research, when people fail to receive the necessary resources that were promised
for a high-priority work goal or when policy is not supported by effective work processes or
procedures, one of the possible causes is a conflict between some aspect of organizational culture
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 111

and the current performance goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). It is important to align the needs of the
staff with the vision and mission of the organization so that both will be allowed to thrive.
Cultural model: Collaboration and participation. It has been a long-standing practice
of MSD to treat special education as a separate entity and address it apart from the culture of the
school sites and the district as a whole. Special education comprises 10% of the total number of
students within MSD. Within that 10%, only 15% of students spend the majority of their school
day being educated in a specialized and separate educational setting. The reality is that both site
administration and general education teaching staff are unfamiliar with the methods and practices
of working with a student with special needs. This leaves the organization with an overreliance
on its special education practitioners to directly handle anything related to special education,
without the opportunity to cross-pollinate between departments and build capacity. Ultimately,
the students are the ones who miss out because they are not provided with an opportunity to
actively participate alongside their nondisabled peers in activities that would benefit all and grow
the culture of the community.
I recommend that the district include special education classes, students, and programs in
the larger tapestry of both the site and district vision and activities. The district should showcase
accomplishments and offer opportunities for students with special needs to be included in
academics and activities with their nondisabled peers to the maximum extent possible. Research
has suggested that social interaction, cooperative learning, and cognitive apprenticeships (such as
reciprocal teaching) facilitate construction of new knowledge (Scott & Palincsar, 2006). A strong
collaboration between all departments will strengthen the capacity of the professionals while
providing opportunities for families and students.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 112

Cultural model: Collaboration and professional learning communities. A subsequent
result of the practice listed above has been that the special education practitioners have created a
culture that has historically allowed them to work in isolation rather than collaboratively. This
has been the case for most education specialists related to the interactions with both their general
education and special education peers. This disconnect from the educational practitioners within
the school site places the special educators at a disadvantage as they are not able to contribute to
the conversation related to the instructional vision and direction of their respective learning
communities. Research has shown that organizational performance increases when individuals
communicate constantly and candidly to others about plans and processes (Clark & Estes, 2008).
A recommendation to help remedy this would be to include special education
practitioners as participants in their site professional learning communities to provide
opportunities for collaboration and professional growth. By allowing special education
practitioners the opportunity to contribute to the greater learning community, the overall
effectiveness of that community would be strengthened, and consequently, the community will
produce better practices and results for the students and families served.
Cultural model: Administrative support. One of the main challenges from the
leadership standpoint is that site administration has deferred to the direction and support of the
special education department administration for site staff rather than directly supporting
education specialists on site. This creates a faction in which the special educators are overseen by
two administrative arms of the district and are confused as to which one is the authority. The site
administrators should provide direction and support to all instructional staff within their school
site to ensure that the vision of the site is carried out consistently among all stakeholders. By
doing this, the stakeholders at the site create an inclusive culture that truly is designed to work as
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 113

an integrated structure of programs and people. The challenge is that many of the site
administrators lack the knowledge to provide their education specialists with the support that
they need. Therefore, they consistently defer to the district office to support their special
education staff and guide practice.
In an effort to build capacity for the site administrators, I recommend that the district
provide ongoing professional development to district administrative staff on best practices
related to special education instruction, intervention, and support methods as well as training on
special education compliance. This hybrid approach would include learning modules, in-person
coaching, simulators, and group training. Clark and Estes (2008) relayed that organizational
performance increases when processes and resources are aligned with goals established
collaboratively. Therefore, it would be essential that the goals and vision of the respective school
sites include the unique perspective and needs of their special education practitioners. This can
be developed when both the administration and the education specialists begin to understand
each other by beginning a dialogue that uses common language. To learn that language, district
administration must build its capacity and bridge the knowledge gap that exists within its current
culture.
In addition to building the capacity of site administrators related to best practices and
policy, it is essential that there is an understanding of fiscal responsibilities as well. Currently,
funding for special education site materials and supplies has been consistently deferred to the
special education department and not included in the discretionary dollars that the sites receive as
a residual of their average-daily-attendance formula. This phenomenon again causes confusion
with stakeholders and creates a feeling of unfairness for the special education practitioners, who
are marginalized because of the demographic of students they serve. Although there are a variety
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 114

of materials that need to be provided by the district office, those materials are expected to be
above and beyond the basic level of support that is afforded to all school site personnel. The
special educators are the ones who really suffer in this respect because they constantly have to
make requests to both site and district administration for basic supplies that their peers have
already received. Research has suggested that when processes are inadequate or misaligned with
business goals, the risk for failure is great. Even employees with adequate knowledge, skills, and
top motivation will not succeed in closing the achievement gaps and achieving business goals
when faced with insufficient work processes (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Therefore, I recommend that the district (a) engage in an ongoing dialogue with site
administration to provide a clear understanding of the fiscal role of the special education
department and (b) create and initiate a system in which school site administration can request
specific supports and materials from the special education department after the site resources
have been exhausted. This will notify the special education department administration of the
direct requests of the site administration, which can begin a dialogue in which administrators
from both the department and the site can problem solve to provide the best utilization of
resources and funding.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The model that I will use for implementation of my evaluation plan is the Kirkpatrick
new world model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), which is based on a four-level approach.
Like the gap analysis model developed by Clark and Estes (2008), the Kirkpatrick model
suggests that the evaluation plan begin with first establishing an organizational goal and then
working backwards. To begin this process, it is important to identify the intended outcomes so as
to begin to create a metric that will monitor the organization’s effectiveness in realizing the goal.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 115

Targeting organizational outcomes is the crux of Level 4, which serves as a starting point. Once
the intended outcome is identified, it is necessary to work in reverse and bridge the levels
together in a thread to create a streamlined plan of action. Ultimately, the outcomes will be the
result of application (Level 3), which will be the result of knowledge and skills (Level 2), which
will be affected by the degree to which participants find enjoyment in and relevance to the
training and implementation of the initiative (Level 1). Again, much like the Clark and Estes
model, I will identify and monitor motivation, knowledge, and organizational influences, which
will provide benchmarks that gauge how well the organization is implementing the new
initiatives and where to interject support along the way.
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The organizational goal of MSD is to provide access for students identified with learning
disabilities to general education settings for 70% or more of their school day. This will provide a
learning environment for students with disabilities to be afforded first, best instruction alongside
their nondisabled peers. This practice will allow students with disabilities to have greater
exposure and ultimately greater access to the critical content of general education curriculum that
is required to receive a high school diploma. This research examined the knowledge and skill,
motivational, and organizational barriers that prevent special education practitioners from
engaging in a thoughtful and effective analysis of aligning academic accommodations to the
specific learning styles and unique individual needs of the learners. The proposed system is to
provide a dynamic multimodal training approach for the education specialists working within
MSD in order to increase their knowledge and build capacity within their practice.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 116

Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 9 reflects the proposed Level 4 outcomes, metrics, and methods that align with the
leading indicators that will produce an impact as it relates to the organizational goal of MSD.
Subsequently, if the internal outcomes of the plan are supported and met, the external outcomes
should be present as a result.
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The stakeholders of focus are the education specialists who will be
completing a selected course of trainings for appropriately and effectively assigning instructional
accommodations for students with disabilities. The first critical behavior is that education
specialists must conduct individual assessment inventories for students with special needs so as
to match them with appropriate augmentative tools. The second critical behavior is that
education specialists must understand the technologies and supports that they are recommending.
The third critical behavior is that they must establish an implementation plan based on the unique
learning style and needs of each student. The fourth and final critical behavior is that they must
provide an ongoing system for data collection to ensure that the accommodations are improving
performance. The specific metrics, methods, and timing for these outcomes are presented in
Table 10.
Required drivers. Education specialists require ongoing support of administration as
well as a wealth of resources from the organization to strengthen practice as a result of the
knowledge that they have gained through training. The organization has an obligation to
encourage its practitioners to apply the strategies that they have learned and adopt a method of
assessing students’ abilities and preferences to best align them with a preferred academic

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 117

Table 9. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes

Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External outcomes
1. Increase the number of students
participating within general
education settings for >70% of
their school day
Run diagnostics to identify this
information from student IEPs
through SPED student
database (SIRAS)
Analyze data, and
identify trends and
areas of suspected
support
2. Effective academic
accommodations throughout their
school day
Run diagnostics to identify this
information from student IEPs
through SPED student
database (SIRAS)
Analyze data, and
identify trends and
areas of suspected
support
3. Consistent implementation plans
for how to provide and support
accommodations within the
educational setting
3a. Run diagnostics to identify
this information from
student IEPs through
SPED student database
(SIRAS)
3a. Log and compare
survey results
3b. Ongoing field visits and
observations
3b. Log and compare
observation notes
3c. Consistent and ongoing
needs assessment surveys
3c. Log and compare
survey results
Internal outcomes
4. Reference materials and tools to
assist practitioners in engaging in
best practices
Capture and log data related to
the frequency with which
practitioners are interfacing
with the supports and materials
Analyze data to
identify trends, and
cross-reference the
number of times the
staff has accessed
support materials to
the effectiveness of
their performance
5. Provide ongoing training through
a hybrid training approach that
will utilize online multimedia
modules, in-person coaching,
small-group collaborations,
online department meetings, and
group trainings, an approach that
allows for practitioners to
identify the training dynamic that
best fits their schedules and
personal learning style
Document training dates, and
provide methods and
opportunities to capture
feedback from stakeholders on
the effectiveness of the
training
Review and analyze
data collected and
identify areas for
growth and/or support
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 118

Table 9 (continued)

Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
Internal outcomes (cont’d)
6. Increased employee
confidence/satisfaction
7a. Consistent and ongoing
needs assessment
surveys
7a. Log and compare
survey results
7b. Ongoing field visits and
observations
7b. Log and compare
observation notes
7c. Quarterly “job-alike”
and community-of-
practice meetings to
gather stakeholder
feedback
7c. Log and reflect on
notes from
meeting(s)

accommodation. Rewards and incentives should be established to drive the achievement of
performance goals as well as to strengthen the organizational support system for new
practitioners to the district. Table 11 reflects the recommended drivers to support critical
behaviors of the district education specialists.
Organizational support. MSD is committed to providing ongoing support for the
initiatives presented to its practitioners to provide the opportunity to establish a strong
foundation for success. The district will provide all learning materials related to the training,
including recordings of presentations, PowerPoint slides, documents and hard-copy materials,
and a list of frequently asked questions that can be accessed on the district learning management
system (LMS). This information will be available to all practitioners any time as long as they are
employed with the district. District administration will also provide ongoing observation and
coaching opportunities through which staff will assist to improve performance by guiding
education specialists through a reflective process where they will be able to analyze their own

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 119

Table 10. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Education Specialists
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Education Specialists

Critical behavior Metric(s) Method(s) Timing
1. Ed. specialists
conduct individual
assessment
inventories for
students with special
needs so as to match
them with appropriate
augmentative tools.
1a. Diagnostics identified
through student IEPs
through SPED student
database (SIRAS)
1b. Teacher assessment logs
and diagnostic tools
School
psychologist
and/or
program
specialist shall
review prior to
IEP meeting.
To be conducted
during the first
60 days of
school for new
plan, and aligned
with annual IEP
dates for existing
ones
2. Ed. specialists must
understand the
technologies and
supports that they are
recommending.
Staff must demonstrate
knowledge of accommodation
by completing a district-
provided microcredential
module in which they will
show mastery of any given
accommodation.
Program
specialist shall
review prior to
the IEP
meeting.
Throughout the
year and as
needed, as IEPs
are held during
the course of the
regular school
year
3. Ed. specialists
establish an
implementation plan
based on the unique
learning style and
needs of each student.
3a. Diagnostics identified
through student IEPs
through SPED student
database (SIRAS)
3b. Teacher assessment logs
and diagnostic tools
School
psychologist
and/or
program
specialist shall
review prior to
IEP meeting.
Throughout the
year and as
needed, as IEPs
are held during
the course of the
regular school
year
4. Ed. specialists provide
an ongoing system for
data collection to
ensure that the
accommodations are
improving
performance.
4a. Diagnostics identified
through student IEPs
through SPED student
database (SIRAS)
4b. Teacher data logs and
formative assessment and
benchmark tools
School
psychologist
and/or
program
specialist shall
review prior to
IEP meeting.
Ongoing, with
the obligation to
report student
progress
quarterly
throughout the
school year

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 120

Table 11. Required Drivers to Education Specialists’ Critical Behaviors
Required Drivers to Education Specialists’ Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical
behaviors
supported
(1, 2, 3, 4)
Reinforcing
Job aid, including online reference materials for policies and
procedures as related to academic accommodations and
performance monitoring/data collection
Ongoing 1, 2, 3, 4
Job aid, including a step-by-step checklist aligned with the
assessment process for effectively matching a student with a
specific instructional accommodation
Ongoing 1, 2, 3, 4
Team meetings with “job-alike” groups to establish goals and
review current data and student progress
Monthly 1, 2, 3, 4
Utilize Google applications, such as Google Hangout,
Google Docs, Google Forms, and Google Drive, to provide
alternative means of communication outside the standard
team meetings
Ongoing 1, 2, 3, 4
Provide materials, including modules and recordings of
presentations, so that practitioners always have access to the
materials provided at the training (to be housed in the
learning management system [LMS])
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Encouraging
Collaboration and peer modeling during team meetings Monthly 1, 2, 3, 4
Feedback and coaching from lead teachers, psychologists,
and program specialists
Ongoing 1, 2, 3, 4
Rewarding
Performance incentive when accommodations are effectively
aligned, student performance increases, and time to dedicate
toward progress reporting decreases
Quarterly or
project based
1, 2, 3
Public acknowledgement, such as a mention in “job-alike”
meetings as well as acknowledgement in the department
monthly newsletter
Quarterly 1, 2, 3

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 121

Table 11 (continued)
Method(s) Timing
Critical
behaviors
supported
(1, 2, 3, 4)
Monitoring
Supervisor can create opportunities for practitioners to share
success stories at “job-alike” and department meetings
Quarterly 1, 2, 3
Ongoing needs and progress assessments that can calibrate
the success and need for support of the strategies
implemented
2 months
after training
1, 2, 3, 4
Ongoing observations by program specialists, lead teachers,
psychologists, and other district administration to assess the
effectiveness of the implementation of strategies
Monthly 1, 2, 3, 4
Ongoing analysis of IEP paperwork and teacher-created data
collection related to instructional accommodations being
implemented in the classroom
Quarterly 1, 2, 3, 4

performance. The district will calibrate its effectiveness by conducting ongoing analyses of data
provided by the education specialists that are housed in the district special education student
database, known as SIRAS. The district is confident that with the implementation of these
supports, it will afford its practitioners the opportunity to build their professional capacity while
reinforcing the district’s overall goals and initiatives as they relate to supporting students with
special needs within the least restrictive environment.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. Following completion of the recommended solutions, the stakeholders
will be able to do the following:
1. understand and be knowledgeable of learning theories, especially the concept of cognitive
load theory (Declarative knowledge);
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 122

2. understand how to appropriately and effectively review and interpret data, including
assessment and diagnostic tools (Declarative knowledge);
3. understand and be knowledgeable of a variety of academic accommodations and be able to
instruct students on how to use them (Declarative knowledge);
4. understand how to appropriately scaffold and phase out accommodations to allow for
students to experience independent practice (Declarative knowledge);
5. understand the prompting hierarchy (Declarative knowledge);
6. understand and be knowledgeable of the CCSS and how they align among grade levels
(Declarative knowledge);
7. understand and be knowledgeable of effective lesson design and know how to differentiate
instruction (Declarative knowledge);
8. plan and monitor student performance and adjust support when needed (Procedural and
metacognitive knowledge);
9. understand and have knowledge of the IEP process, and implement steps needed to reflect
accommodations with fidelity (Declarative and procedural knowledge);
10. indicate confidence that they can assess, recommend, implement, and review academic
accommodations accurately and effectively (Confidence);
11. value the process of effectively making recommendations for academic accommodations and
understand that they subsequently improve student performance as a result (Value);
12. value the planning and monitoring of their work (Value).
Training program. The learning goals listed above will be achieved with a dynamic and
multimodal training program that explores in depth the best practices as well as policies and
procedures related to academic accommodations. The participants will be exposed to a wide
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 123

range of topics such as learning theory, Individuals With Disabilities Act (IDEA) and
regulations, CCSS, standardized assessments, differentiating instruction, IEP policies and
procedures, and effective data collection. The program is blended, consisting of e-learning
modules, face-to-face training, and multiple coaching sessions. The total time for completion is
15 hours.
After a careful analysis of possible solutions to address the alternative approaches for
providing a more efficient and cost-effective model of professional development, I have arrived
at the following proposal. The professional learning landscape has shifted greatly with web-
based technologies offering the opportunities for anytime, self-generating, and on-demand
learning (Simonson, Schlosser, & Orellana, 2011). The solution of a “flipped” model of
professional development, where the participants would receive the bulk of their training over an
LMS platform, would offer an attractive alternative to the traditional model of professional
development that MSD currently employs. The initial model would be provided for special
education teachers currently working with both the mild to moderate and moderate to severe
populations of students who qualify for special education placement and services throughout the
district.
Structure of the proposed approach. The information or material delivered in various
professional development sessions would be organized through the use of several instructional
modalities, such as video presentations, relevant readings, discussion opportunities or posts,
quizzes, and other effective online training tools. This model would prove to be effective based
on research stating that flipped instructional models address the challenges of traditional lecture
by allocating time for active learning approaches and by leveraging accessibility to advanced
technologies to support a blended learning approach (Kim, Kim, Khera, & Getman, 2014).
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 124

Aligned with this approach, participants would be required to complete a predetermined
portion of instructional material and then engage in online activities that would check for
understanding. Participants would also have an opportunity to work in small online collaborative
groups or professional learning communities (PLCs) to encourage discussion of the materials and
support learning. The PLC component would be critical in light of research that has suggested
that teacher professional development that is classroom situated and supported by a school-based
learning community is most effective (Liu, 2013). At the conclusion of the online training
portion of the professional development, the group or cohort members would then meet in small
groups to share out and further explore how the material will influence their practice. The
participants would be prepared to actively engage in meaningful group conversation related to
the material presented on the LMS. A group coach would then facilitate a conversation on how
best to translate the information learned into meaningful best practices. Research has stated that
the three main components for effective engagement in professional development are
investigation, reflection, and constructive dialogue, which provides a space for teachers to
challenge and rebuild their beliefs and practices (Tondeur, Forkosh-Baruch, Prestridge, Albion,
& Edirisinghe, 2016). This model, then, would allow for the participants to engage in best
practice strategies for professional development while providing the district with an opportunity
to cut the drastic costs associated with traditional in vivo training.
The LMS platform is a critical component for the success of a flipped model approach.
Currently, the district has a partnership with an outside LMS vendor, Schoology. This particular
LMS provides a learning/instructional platform to complement all of the abovementioned
activities, with the exception of providing a small online discussion group. Therefore, the district
will utilize Google Hangouts to provide an online platform that would serve as a virtual meeting
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 125

space. A coach or facilitator would then be housed in a central location, and participants could
choose to (a) attend the follow-up session in vivo, (b) attend virtually by themselves, or
(c) attend virtually as a site group or grade cluster. This method will allow for the participants to
engage in both individual and group work, with an opportunity to take a deep dive into the
material. Research has suggested that by moving professional development into a context that is
not limited by time, place, or the need for face-to-face communication, the professional
development can become an embedded part of teachers’ everyday practice and provide greater
opportunities for and from learning communities (Tondeur et al., 2016). This model serves as a
platform for this and allows staff ultimate flexibility in controlling their learning experience.
Components of learning. Demonstrating declarative knowledge is a necessary first step
before applying any new knowledge to solve current problems. Therefore, it is necessary to
evaluate the learning of the individuals who will be participating in the training so as to establish
a baseline of knowledge and begin to drive instruction. It is essential that participants have a
basic understanding of the material that is to be covered and that they have an opportunity to
convey their grasp of the material using multiple means of expression, including reflective
narratives. This practice will prove to strengthen their knowledge and practice and allow for a
better opportunity for implementing the strategies proposed with fidelity. Subsequently, the
practitioners must have confidence in their abilities to transfer the knowledge that they have
gained into an ongoing practice that they are committed to. Table 12 reflects a list of evaluation
methods and timing for these components of learning.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 126

Table 12. Components of Learning for the Program
Components of Learning for the Program

Method(s) or activity(ies) Timing
Declarative knowledge: “I know it.”
Knowledge checks using multiple choice In the asynchronous portions of the
course during and after participants
have viewed the recorded presentations
Knowledge checks through reflective posts on the
LMS
In the asynchronous portions of the
course after each module presentation
Discussion and small-group work during “job-
alike” collaborative times
In person with district support team
(once a month)
Procedural skills: “I can do it right now.”
During the asynchronous portions of the course
using scenarios or simulation exercises with
either/or-choice items
In the asynchronous portions of the
course at the end of each module/lesson/
unit
Reflective post explaining how the information
learned will influence the participant’s current
practice
In the asynchronous portions of the
course at the end of each module/lesson/
unit
Demonstration in groups and individually of
using the job aids to successfully implement the
new strategy procedures
During the in-person training and small-
group work
Quality of the feedback from peers during group
sharing
During the in-person training and small-
group work
Retrospective pre- and posttest assessment survey
asking participants about their level of
proficiency before and after the training
At the end of the in-person training
Attitude: “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Instructor’s observation of participants’
statements and actions demonstrating that they
see the benefit of what they are being asked to do
related to the proposed process
During the in-person training and as a
result of analysis of the participants’
reflections posted on the LMS
Discussions of the value of what they are being
asked to do related to the proposed process
During the training workshop as well as
in small-group work
Reflection and Likert rating scale provided as a
pre- and posttest assessment item
After the course

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 127

Table 12 (continued)

Method(s) or activity(ies) Timing
Confidence: “I think I can do it on the job.”
Likert scale survey items using scaled items Following each module/lesson/unit in
the asynchronous portions of the course
Discussions following practice and feedback During the training workshop
Reflection and Likert rating scale provided as a
pre- and posttest assessment item
After the course
Commitment: “I will do it on the job.”
Discussions following practice and feedback During the training workshop
Create an individual action plan During the training workshop
Reflection and Likert rating scale provided as a
pre- and posttest assessment item
After the course

Level 1: Reaction
To measure the focus and attention of the participants involved in the training, it will be
essential to understand their reaction to the subject matter as well as the material that they will be
asked to navigate and digest. This is important because it allows the district administration to
measure the level of interest and engagement related to the training. Subsequently, the
administration can adjust and revise the program where necessary as a result of the information
provided by the participants. Table 13 lists the tools and methods that will be used to measure the
reaction and engagement of the participants involved in the training program.
Evaluation tools.
Upon implementation of the program. As practitioners participate in the asynchronous
coursework aligned with the training program, the LMS will collect real-time data that will
reflect the level of engagement that each participant presents in the program. These analytics will

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 128

Table 13. Components to Measure Reactions to the Training Program
Components to Measure Reactions to the Training Program

Method(s) or tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Analysis of data collected as a result of the practitioners’
engagement in the LMS (including assessments and
reflections)
Ongoing during asynchronous
portion of the course
Completion of online modules/lessons/units Ongoing during asynchronous
portion of the course
Observation by instructor/facilitator During the training workshop
Frequent group polling and surveying through the
utilization of e-polling application
Throughout the training
workshop
Attendance for all sessions During the training workshop
Course evaluation 2 weeks after the course
Relevance
Likert scale survey (online) for participants, with the
opportunity to post thoughts and ideas to the community of
participants through Google and LMS
After every module/lesson/
unit and the workshop
Course evaluation 2 weeks after the course
Customer satisfaction
Likert scale survey (online) for participants, with the
opportunity to post thoughts and ideas to the community of
participants through Google and LMS
After every module/lesson/
unit and the training
workshop
Course evaluation 2 weeks after the course

measure duration of time spent on modules (including start and completion times) as well as
indicate how many times a participant reviewed dedicated resources and/or presentations. The
LMS will provide opportunities for participants to reflect on the coursework material by
providing text boxes in which practitioners can respond to a prompt (see Appendix E). The LMS
will also use thought prompts to elicit thoughts from the participants to be placed in a discussion
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 129

thread that will be posted on the course wall. All of this information will be reviewed, analyzed,
and ultimately used to drive instruction and monitor progress along the way.
This type of formative assessment is designed to target Levels 1 and 2 of the participants’
engagement in the training as it unfolds during the course of their learning. According to
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016), by evaluating these levels of reaction and learning,
administrators will have an opportunity to see how well the information presented is being
received and understood. In the training model recommended as a result of this research, it is
important that the administration offers a blended approach and evaluates multiple levels at once
instead of just focusing on individual levels in isolation. This is particularly important because
the recommended training will be implemented by the use of a multimodal approach in which
the information provided to the participants will be presented in both electronic and in vivo
formats.
Assessment to be presented after the first quarter of program implementation.
Approximately 12 weeks after the initial training and subsequent implementation of the materials
and processes presented, the administration will send out a follow-up evaluation survey
comprised of open and scaled rating items using a blended evaluation approach. This measure
will address the full scale of the Kirkpatrick model, including Levels 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the
process. Similar to the previous evaluation tool, the measure will ask participants to both rate and
explain their experiences in implementing the information gained from the training and how they
have used their newly acquired knowledge to initiate change in their programs and practices (see
Appendix F).
Data analysis and reporting. It is expected that the training outlined in this document
will build the necessary capacity to meet all of the following Level 4 goals:
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 130

 Increase the number of students participating within general education settings for more than
70% of their school day,
 Provide effective academic accommodations for students throughout their school day,
 Establish consistent implementation plans for how to provide and support accommodations
within the educational setting, and
 Increase employee confidence/satisfaction.
The data collection and measurement tools listed above will serve as the standard that
will drive the analysis of the training’s effectiveness. Once the information has been analyzed, it
will be reported to the identified stakeholders so as to identify trends and reveal potential
challenges as well as bright spots. It is the intention of the special education department to
provide a reporting platform that is easy to understand and interpret for all stakeholders,
regardless of their individual levels of mastery related to the subject matter. Therefore, the
department will utilize a combination of narrative summaries and information presented in
graphic or table form to provide the stakeholders with an intuitive and user-friendly report
experience.
The reporting tool will also provide information related to the effectiveness of the
training from the participants’ standpoint, and it will relay how the employees are implementing
the information that was learned as a result of attending the training. An active dashboard
reflecting all of this information will be kept open and up-to-date during the first year after the
conclusion of the initial training initiative (see Figures 18-21).

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 131

Figure 18. Dashboard example of Level 1: Reaction.

Figure 19. Dashboard example of Level 2: Knowledge.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 132

Figure 20. Dashboard example of Level 3: Behavior.

Figure 21. Dashboard example of Level 4: Results.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 133

Summary
The information outlined in this chapter provides a systematic and analytically sound
method for identifying specific needs for professional development that are unique to the cultural
makeup and distinctive drivers of the stakeholders of MSD. The framework presented is intended
to identify training needs and prescribe a training model to meet those needs. The prescribed
framework is based on the Kirkpatrick new world model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) and
draws inspiration from the expectations provided as a result of its suggestions. It is my intention
and the intention of the special education department to see significant results related to Levels 1,
2, 3, and 4 as defined by the Kirkpatrick framework that has been reviewed in this chapter. The
department is confident that the district and its practitioners as well as its stakeholders will
benefit from the analysis and subsequent training that has been outlined in this chapter.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study used a mixed-methods approach that included the use of a survey and a focus
group interview as well as an analysis of the resulting data. As noted in Chapter Three, because
of my direct involvement with and possible influence on the education specialists who
participated in the survey, I took extreme measures to protect the anonymity of all of the
participants. Therefore, as the primary researcher, I did not have direct contact with any of the
participants who took part in the study.
Because all of the information that was presented to me was anonymous, I did not have
the opportunity to follow up with the practitioners and conduct any further investigation or seek
clarification related to the information that was provided. It would have been a benefit to have
the opportunity to investigate further with the education specialists involved in the study and to
probe some of their responses in more detail. Although it was necessary to protect the anonymity
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 134

of the participants involved in the study, the inability to follow up with the practitioners proved
to be a limitation of the study.
Furthermore, the information and data provided were limited to responses from only
special education teachers who were working directly with students. As evidenced by the
findings of this research, the participants involved were critical of other stakeholders who
influence the implementation and utilization of accommodations in the classroom. Education
specialists expressed specific thoughts and opinions related to the role that both administrators
and general education teachers play in the effective use of accommodations within the district.
The study would have benefited from the perspectives of all stakeholder groups including
administrators, general education teachers, students, and parents. Additionally, this study was
limited to just two school districts and focused on students assigned to Grades K-8. It would be
of benefit to widen the scope of the study to focus on a greater population of students and include
other district climates and cultures for a more robust outcome.
Future Research
Because of the limitations and delimitations of the study, it would be of benefit to
conduct a more in-depth longitudinal study that would include a more comprehensive scope of
stakeholders as well as other local districts to provide a more comprehensive result. This study
focused heavily on the knowledge and skill influences for providing recommendations for
accommodations. The benefit of a more in-depth longitudinal study would be that it would allow
for researcher(s) to examine in greater detail the motivation and organizational culture to identify
and recommend true systemic change. The psychology of both the individual and the group (the
“I” and the “we”) would be of tremendous benefit to the organization as they look for avenues to
identify gaps and initiate change.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 135

Also, the accommodations and augmentative supports highlighted in this study were
primarily limited to the supports that are reflected on the Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium (SBAC) test. Surveying a wider scope of practitioners providing support in districts
using other assessment measures would be useful in gaining a greater understanding of the types
of accommodations and augmentative supports that are being used throughout multiple learning
environments. Furthermore, the participants in this study were limited to only those practitioners
working with students identified with mild to moderate learning disabilities. A benefit for further
research would be to include other education specialists who are currently working with students
at all ability levels to provide a more in-depth account of the practice of recommending
accommodations in various learning environments to meet the unique and diverse needs of
students with special needs.
Conclusion
This study was conducted to gain a greater understanding of the current practices that
education specialists employ when making accommodations for students with SLDs. The
findings that were presented revealed that the education specialists who participated in the
research believed that accommodations play a critical role in both students’ access to curriculum
and their overall academic success in school. Using the gap analysis framework of Clark and
Estes (2008), the study identified knowledge, motivation, and organizational challenges that
influence this practice. Subsequently, it is clear that the practitioners involved in the study had a
solid understanding of accommodations and how to effectively use augmentative supports.
However, they need further, ongoing professional development to refine their skills and require
time and space in which to carry out their professional responsibilities.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 136

MSD, like many districts throughout the state of California, is grappling with finding a
balance between attending to the myriad components needed to execute best practices and
having the time and opportunity to meet those demands. The landscape of education is changing
so rapidly that it is hard to catch up with expectations, let alone stay current with best practices.
The administration needs to be mindful of this and find avenues through which to provide
supports for district practitioners that will allow them to focus more on the art of pedagogy and
less on lists of compliance procedures. Based on the data revealed in my research, I believe that
MSD finds itself uniquely positioned to build on its strong foundation of knowledge factors and
improve its overall practice of assigning and implementing accommodations throughout the
organization. The culture of the organization will strengthen as general education teachers,
administrators, and education specialists work together to provide academic accommodations for
all students who need them across all learning environments throughout the district. Furthermore,
every year, a new set of practitioners will enter the organization with different knowledge base
and expectancies related to augmentative supports as a result of their teacher preparation and
credentialing programs. The teacher preparation standards increasingly place higher value on the
idea of differentiated instructional methods as well as acknowledge that the academics supports
provided for students are constantly changing and becoming more dynamic every year.
Education is on the precipice of some of the greatest innovations that the profession has ever
seen, and the augmentative tools that are being offered to students have the ability to truly
change lives. My hope with this study is to continue a dialogue on how best to identify,
implement, and harness these technologies to allow students to achieve all that is possible. The
augmentative tools that are being presented in the classroom should mirror the tools that are
being presented in the workplace. This way, the students never have to lose the augmentative
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 137

support; they just become more proficient with it over time. The focus of student work is shifting
from knowing the what to knowing the how. It will take a generation of educators, in both
general education and special education, to successfully usher in this paradigm shift.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 138

REFERENCES
Acrey, C., Johnstone, C., & Milligan, C. (2005). Using universal design to unlock the potential
for academic achievement of at-risk learners. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(2), 22-
31.
Agran, M., Alper, S., & Wehmeyer, M. (2002). Access to the general curriculum for students
with significant disabilities: What it means to teachers. Education and Training in Mental
Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37(2), 123-133.
Baglieri, S., & Knopf, J. H. (2004). Normalizing difference in inclusive teaching. Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 37(6), 525-529.
Basil, M. (2017). Survey for formative research. In K. Kubacki & S. Rundle-Thiele (Eds.),
Formative research in social marketing (pp. 251-263). Singapore: Springer.
Black, D. W., & Grant, J. E. (2014). DSM-5 guidebook: The essential companion to the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition. Washington, DC:
American Psychiatric Association.
Bolt, S. E., & Thurlow, M. L. (2004). Five of the most frequently allowed testing
accommodations in state policy: Synthesis of research. Remedial and Special Education,
25(3), 141-152. doi:10.1177/07419325040250030201
Byrnes, M. (2008). Educators’ interpretations of ambiguous accommodations. Remedial and
Special Education, 29(5), 306-315. doi:10.1177/0741932507313017
California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress. (2016). Retrieved from the CASSP
website: https://ca.sso.airast.org/auth/XUI/#login/&realm=/california&forward=true
&spEntityID=SP_CALIFORNIA_ORS_PROD&goto=%2FSSORedirect%2FmetaAlias
%2Fcalifornia%2Fidp%3FReqID%3DS2FAA5B7AAF2BD0796DC0142036DB8560713
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 139

771CDA%26index%3Dnull%26acsURL%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fca.reports.airast.
org%252FCLS%252FCLSLogin.aspx%26spEntityID%3DSP_CALIFORNIA_ORS_PR
OD%26binding%3Durn%253Aoasis%253Anames%253Atc%253ASAML%253A2.0%2
53Abindings%253AHTTP-POST&AIRSSO-ORD3-PROD3-prod-AUTH=
California Department of Education. (2014). Special education enrollment by age and disability:
Statewide report. Retrieved from http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/SpecEd/SpecEd1.asp
?cChoice=SpecEd1&cYear=2014-15&cLevel=State&cTopic=SpecEd&myTimeFrame
=S&submit1=Submit&ReptCycle=December
California Department of Education. (2015). DataQuest: Special education data, by disability
type and age range. Retrieved from https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
California Department of Education. (2016). California Assessment of Student Performance and
Progress: Smarter Balanced Assessment test results for: District: [MSD]. Retrieved from
https://caaspp.cde.ca.gov/sb2017/Search?lstTestYear=2016
California Statewide Task Force on Special Education. (2015). One system: Reforming education
to serve all students. Retrieved from http://www.smcoe.org/assets/files/about-
smcoe/superintendents-office/statewide-special-education-task-force
/Task%20Force%20Report%205.18.15.pdf
Caprara, G. V., Vecchione, M., Alessandri, G., Gerbino, M., & Barbaranelli, C. (2011). The
contribution of personality traits and self-efficacy beliefs to academic achievement: A
longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 78-96.
Carter, N., Prater, M. A., Jackson, A., & Marchant, M. (2009). Educators’ perceptions of
collaborative planning processes for students with disabilities. Preventing School
Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 54(1), 60-70.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 140

CAST. (n.d.). Homepage. Retrieved from http://www.cast.org/
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wise, A. E., & Klein, S. P. (1999). A license to teach: Raising standards
for teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Deans for Impact. (2015). The science of learning. Austin, TX: Author.
Dick, B. (1999, July). Sources of rigour in action research: Addressing the issues of
trustworthiness and credibility. Paper presented at the Association for Qualitative
Research Conference, Melbourne, Australia.
Eccles, J. (2009). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from http://www.education
.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Edgemon, E. A., Jablonski, B. R., & Lloyd, J. W. (2006). Large-scale assessments: A teacher’s
guide to making decisions about accommodations. TEACHING Exceptional Children,
38(3), 6-11.
Elliott, S. N., Kettler, R. J., Beddow, P. A., & Kurz, A. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of accessible
achievement tests for all students. New York, NY: Springer.
Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Boudosquie, A., Copeland, K., Young, V., Kalinowski, S., &
Vaughn, S. (2006). Effects of accommodations on high-stakes testing for students with
reading disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72(2), 136-150.
Flynn, E., O’Malley, C., & Wood, D. (2004). A longitudinal, microgenetic study of the
emergence of false belief understanding and inhibition skills. Developmental Science,
7(1), 103-115.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 141

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2001). Helping teachers formulate sound test accommodation
decisions for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research &
Practice, 16, 174-181.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S. B., Hamlett, C., Binkley, E., & Crouch, R. (2000). Using
objective data sources to enhance teacher judgments about test accommodations.
Exceptional Children, 67(1), 67-81.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45-56.
Goldstein, I. L., & Ford, J. K. (2002). Training in organizations: Needs assessment,
development, and evaluation. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Gotshall, C., & Stefanou, C. (2011). The effects of on-going consultation for accommodating
students with disabilities on teacher self-efficacy and learned helplessness. Education,
132(2), 321-331.
Gregg, N. (2012). Increasing access to learning for the adult basic education learner with
learning disabilities: Evidence-based accommodation research. Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 45, 47-63.
Hauerwas, L. B., Brown, R., & Scott, A. N. (2013). Specific learning disability and response to
intervention: State-level guidance. Exceptional Children, 80(1), 101-120.
doi:10.1177/001440291308000105
Helwig, R., & Tindal, G. (2003). An experimental analysis of accommodation decisions on
large-scale mathematics tests. Exceptional Children, 69(2), 211-225.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 142

Individuals With Disabilities Education Act. (2004). Retrieved from http://uscode.house.gov
/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title20/chapter33&edition=prelim
Ketterlin-Geller, L. R., Alonzo, J., Braun-Monegan, J., & Tindal, G. (2007). Recommendations
for accommodations: Implications of (in)consistency. Remedial and Special Education,
28(4), 194-206.
Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped
classrooms in an urban university: An exploration of design principles. The Internet and
Higher Education, 22, 37-50.
Kirk, J., & Miller, M. L. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
Kirkpatrick, J., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P. A. (2009). A cognitive load approach to collaborative
learning: United brains for complex tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 21(1), 31-42.
Lackaye, T., Margalit, M., Ziv, O., & Ziman, T. (2006). Comparisons of self‐efficacy, mood,
effort, and hope between students with learning disabilities and their non‐LD‐matched
peers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21(2), 111-121.
Leyser, Y., Zeiger, T., & Romi, S. (2011). Changes in self-efficacy of prospective special and
general education teachers: Implication for inclusive education. International Journal of
Disability, Development and Education, 58(3), 241-255.
Liu, S. H. (2013). Teacher professional development for technology integration in a primary
school learning community. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 22(1), 37-54.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 143

MacMillan, D. L., Gresham, F. M., Bocian, K. M., & Lambros, K. M. (1998). Current plight of
borderline students: Where do they belong? Education and Training in Mental
Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 33(2), 83-94.
Mann, S. (2016). The research interview. London, United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Does styles research have useful implications for educational practice?
Learning and Individual Differences, 21(3), 319-320.
McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., & Hartley, K. (2006). The effect of general relevance
instructions on shallow and deeper learning and reading time. The Journal of
Experimental Education, 74(4), 291-310.
Meece, J. L., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2006). Classroom goal structure, student
motivation, and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 487-503.
Morningstar, M. E., Shogren, K. A., Lee, H. & Born, K. (2015). Preliminary lessons about
supporting participation and learning in inclusive classrooms. Research and Practice for
Persons With Severe Disabilities, 40(3), 192-210.
National Council on Disability. (2015). Breaking the school-to-prison pipeline for students with
disabilities. Retrieved from https://www.ncd.gov/publications/2015/06182015
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal
Financial Assistance, 34 C.F.R. pt. 104 (2000). Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov
/policy/rights/reg/ocr/edlite-34cfr104.html
Ofiesh, N. S. (2007). Math, science, and foreign language: Evidence-based accommodation
decision making at the postsecondary level. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,
22(4), 237-245.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 144

PACER Center. (2001). School accommodations and modifications. Retrieved from Writeslaw
website: http://www.wrightslaw.com/info/sec504.accoms.mods.pdf
Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (2006). Self-efficacy beliefs and motivation in writing development.
In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research
(pp. 158-170). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). Motivation and classroom learning. In W. M. Reynolds & G. E. Miller
(Eds.), Handbook of psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 103-122). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
ProximityOne. (n.d.). Homepage. Retrieved from http://proximityone.com/
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Salend, S. J., & Duhaney, L. M. G. (2011). Historical and philosophical changes in the education
of students with exceptionalities. In A. F. Rotatori, F. E. Obiakor, & J. P. Bakken (Eds.),
Advances in Special Education: Vol. 21. History of special education (pp. 1-20). Bingley,
United Kingdom: Emerald Group.
Schechter, C., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2006). Teachers’ sense of collective efficacy: An
international view. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(6), 480-489.
Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2009). Self-efficacy theory. In K. R. Wenzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.),
Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 35-53). New York, NY: Routledge.
Scott, S., & Palincsar, A. (2006). Sociocultural theory. Retrieved from http://dr-hatfield.com
/theorists/resources/sociocultural_theory.pdf
Sharma, U., Loreman, T., & Forlin, C. (2012). Measuring teacher efficacy to implement
inclusive practices. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(1), 12-21.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 145

Shaw, S. R. (2008). An educational programming framework for a subset of students with
diverse learning needs: Borderline intellectual functioning. Intervention in School and
Clinic, 43(5), 291-299.
Simonson, M., Schlosser, C., & Orellana, A. (2011). Distance education research: A review of
the literature. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 23(2-3), 124.
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. (2017). Usability, accessibility, and accommodations
guidelines. Retrieved from https://portal.smarterbalanced.org/library/en/usability-
accessibility-and-accommodations-guidelines.pdf
Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional
design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296.
Thompson, S. J., Lazarus, S. S., Clapper, A. T., & Thurlow, M. L. (2006). Adequate yearly
progress of students with disabilities: Competencies for teachers. Teacher Education and
Special Education, 29(2), 137-147. doi:10.1177/088840640602900206
Thurlow, M., & Bolt, S. (2001). Empirical support for accommodations most often allowed in
state policy (Synthesis Report No. 41). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National
Center on Educational Outcomes.
Thurlow, M. L., Lazarus, S. S., & Bechard, S. (Eds.). (2013). Lessons learned in federally funded
projects that can improve the instruction and assessment of low performing students with
disabilities. Retrieved from University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational
Outcomes website: https://nceo.umn.edu/docs/OnlinePubs/LessonsLearned.pdf
Thurlow, M. L., Lazarus, S. S., Thompson, S. J., & Morse, A. B. (2005). State policies on
assessment participation and accommodations for students with disabilities. The Journal
of Special Education, 38(4), 232-240.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 146

Thurlow, M. L., Lazarus, S., Thompson, S., & Robey, J. (2002). 2001 state policies on
assessment participation and accommodations (Synthesis Report No. 46). Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Tondeur, J., Forkosh-Baruch, A., Prestridge, S., Albion, P., & Edirisinghe, S. (2016).
Responding to challenges in teacher professional development for ICT-integration in
education. Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 110-120.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Johnson, D. (2011). Exploring literacy teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs:
Potential sources at play. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(4), 751-761.
Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning:
Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147-
177.
Vaughn, S., Zumeta, R., Wanzek, J., Cook, B., & Klingner, J. K. (2014). Intensive interventions
for students with learning disabilities in the RTI era: Position statement of the Division
for Learning Disabilities Council for Exceptional Children. Learning Disabilities
Research & Practice, 29(3), 90-92.
Verdugo, M. A., Navas, P., Gómez, L. E., & Schalock, R. L. (2012). The concept of quality of
life and its role in enhancing human rights in the field of intellectual disability. Journal of
Intellectual Disability Research, 56(11), 1036-1045.
Wehmeyer, M. L., Lattin, D., & Agran, M. (2001). Achieving access to the general curriculum
for students with mental retardation: A curriculum decision-making model. Education
and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36(4), 327-342.
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 147

Weis, R., Dean, E. L., & Osborne, K. J. (2014). Accommodation decision making for
postsecondary students with learning disabilities: Individually tailored or one size fits all?
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49(5), 484-498.
Williams, D., Beachum, F. D., Obiakor, F. E., & McCray, C. R. (2006). Administering
successful multicultural special education programs. In F. E. Obiakor, A. F. Rotatori, &
S. Burkhardt (Eds.), Advances in Special Education: Vol. 17. Current perspectives in
special education administration (pp. 43-54). Bingley, United Kingdom: Emerald.
Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1016/S0270-4013(06)17003-8
Willingham, D. T. (2009). Why don’t students like school?: A cognitive scientist answers
questions about how the mind works and what it means for the classroom. Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons.
Wong, B. Y. L., & Butler, D. L. (2012). Learning about learning disabilities. Academic Press.
Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=2mE4ynrBWBIC
Woolfson, L. M., & Brady, K. (2009). An investigation of factors impacting on mainstream
teachers’ beliefs about teaching students with learning difficulties. Educational
Psychology, 29(2), 221-238.
Ysseldyke, J. (2001). Reflections on a research career: Generalizations from 25 years of research
on assessment and instructional decision making. Exceptional Children, 67(3), 295-309.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 148

APPENDICES

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 149

APPENDIX A
Informed Consent Form
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Pkwy Suite 1100, Los Angeles, CA 90089

INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

Process for Making Recommendations for Learning Accommodations for Students with
Specific Learning Disabilities

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Scott Jensen MA Ed. (Chief
Investigator), Dr. Kathy Stowe (Research Chair), Frank Donovan (Research Committee Member),
and Dr. Margo Pensavalle (Research Committee Member) at the University of Southern
California, because you are Credentialed Education Specialist, working with students with mild to
moderate Specific Learning Disabilities or “SLD”.

You should read the information below, and ask questions about anything you do not understand,
before deciding whether to participate. Please take as much time as you need to read the consent
form. You may also decide to discuss participation with your family or friends. If you decide to
participate, you will be asked to sign this form. You will be given a copy of this form.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to analyze and understand the current process educational practitioners
undergo when providing recommendations for learning accommodations related to students with
a Specific Learning Disability or “SLD”. This research study aims to understand how students
with Specific Learning Disability receive learning accommodations as part of their Individual
Education Plan or “IEP”.

STUDY PROCEDURES
Participants in this study will be asked to fill out a 36-item survey that specifically relates to the
process and rationale for identifying recommendations for students with SLD. The survey should
take approximately 30 minutes to complete, and participants should answer honestly. As a follow-
up to the survey, approximately 8 participants will be asked to engage in a small group interview
session that will be audio-taped. The small group interview session will take approximately 45
minutes to complete. All participants who take-part in the small group interview session will be
required to have their responses recorded for transcription purposes. However, any and all personal
identifiers will be removed from the transcription. You do not have to answer any questions you
don’t want to; if you don’t want to be taped, you cannot participate in this study.

POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no identified potential risks or discomforts resulting from participating in this study.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 150

The potential benefits to participants is a greater understanding of the current practice of
recommending learning accommodations for students with SLD. SLD is the most identified
qualifying condition for students with disabilities, and comprises nearly 40% of the total number
of students participating in Special Education. The benefits for both practitioners and society as a
whole is that students with SLD will learn to use compensatory strategies that will allow them to
be educated alongside their non-disabled peers. This allows for greater students with disabilities
greater access to post-graduation opportunities, such as continuing their education or joining the
workforce.

POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OF THE INVESTIGATOR
The investigator must disclose that they serve in an administrative role in the department being
researched. The investigator has an active role and interest in the current practice being researched,
and thusly has certain biases that will need to be suspended as the role of objective researcher.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential. Your
responses will be coded with a false name (pseudonym) and maintained separately. The audio-
tapes will be destroyed once they have been transcribed.

CERTIFICATE OF CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential,
except if necessary to protect your rights or welfare (for example, if you are injured and need
emergency care). A Certificate of Confidentiality has been obtained from the Federal Government
for this study to help protect your privacy. This certificate means that the researchers can resist
the release of information about your participation to people who are not connected with the study,
including courts. The Certificate of Confidentiality will not be used to prevent disclosure to local
authorities of child abuse and neglect, or harm to self or others.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.

PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
Your participation is voluntary. Your refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of
benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may withdraw your consent at any time and
discontinue participation without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies
because of your participation in this research study.

INVESTIGATOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact the Chief
Investigator, Scott Jensen at scottjen@usc.edu or the Research Chair, Dr. Kathy Stowe at
kstowe@usc.edu.

RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT – IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the
research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone
independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 151

(UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT

I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions. My
questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have
been given a copy of this form.

Name of Participant

Signature of Participant Date

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR

I have explained the research to the participant and answered all of his/her questions. I believe
that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely consents to
participate.

Name of Person Obtaining Consent

Signature of Person Obtaining Consent Date

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 152

APPENDIX B
Survey Protocol

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 153

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 154

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 155

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 156

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 157

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 158

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 159

APPENDIX C
Focus Group Protocol

Q: How do you define accommodations within your work?
Q: Talk about the biggest challenges you face in implementing accommodations.
Q: How important are learning theories (e.g., motivation & cognition) in recommending
accommodations?

Q: Do you have a specific formal or informal evaluation process when recommending
accommodations? Explain.

Q: Do you have a specific method of collecting data? What is it?
Q: How do use teacher created assessments in recommending accommodations?
Q: Do you believe that fade-out plans and scaffolding are necessary?
Q: Do you develop an implementation plan when introducing accommodations?
Q: How often do you adjust your recommendations?
Q: How important are accommodations related to student achievement for students with SLD?
How so?

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 160

APPENDIX D
Codebook
Codes Aligned With Accommodations Interview Transcript

Confidence (highlight blue)

Implementation (I) IIIIIIIII
Recommendation (R) III
Aligned with Expectations (AE) IIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Consistency of Practice (CP) IIIIIIIIIII
Modeling (M) III

Learning Theory (highlight green)

Motivation (Mo) II
Cognitive (Cg) IIII
Agreement and Coherence Around Expectations (AE) IIIIII
Environment used to Shape Student Learning (SST) II

Evaluation and Assessment Process (highlight yellow)

Data Analysis (DA) II
Transfer of Knowledge Strategies (TKS) IIII
Scaffolding Techniques (ST) I
Collaboration (C) IIIIIII
Training (T) IIIIIIIII

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 161

Training and Implementation (highlight purple)

Effectiveness (E) IIIII
Additional Training Opportunities (AO) IIII
Transfer of Knowledge (TOK)

Factors (highlight pink)

Student Achievement (SA) IIIIIIIIIIIII
Learning Preferences (LP) IIIIIIIII
Qualifying Conditions (QC) IIIIIIIIIIIIII

Analysis (highlight orange)

Input of Others (IOP) IIIII
Confidence (Con) III
Types of Recommendations (TR) IIIIIII

Effectiveness (highlight red)

Progress Monitoring (PM) IIIIIIIII
Accommodations Across Learning Environments (AALE) IIIIII
Access to General Curriculum (AGC) IIIII

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 162

APPENDIX E
Initial Evaluation
This evaluation is intended to serve as a tool to provide feedback related to the training that you
have recently begun. Please answer honestly, as your feedback is a very important factor in
refining and improving our practice. Thank You!
I appreciated and learned from the multimodal approach of the course material (e.g., a mix
between online and in-person instructional approaches)
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
The coursework was clear, as were the learning objectives of the material(s)
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
The content was interesting to me
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
The information that I learned from this training will help me in my practice
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
I am clear on how to implement these ideas in my work
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
I felt that my needs as a learner were considered and addressed in this program
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
I would recommend this program to other professionals in my field
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
I took responsibility for being involved in today’s training
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
What are the major concepts and themes that you learned in this program?

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 163

How might this information influence your practice?

How might this information influence your assessment or evaluation procedures as they relate
to recommending accommodations?

I believe that what I have learned is worthwhile
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
I am confident that I can take this information and successfully utilize it within my practice
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
What else might you need to implement this information with fidelity?

I am excited to use this new information and these new strategies in my practice
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
I am committed to implement these strategies within my practice
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
What is the first thing that you plan to implement in your current practice and why?

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 164

APPENDIX F
Program Evaluation
This evaluation is intended to serve as a tool to provide feedback related to the training that you
have recently completed. Please answer honestly, as your feedback is a very important factor in
refining and improving our practice. Thank You!
I find value in the information that I learned from the training, and I currently use the
information in my practice
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
The information presented in the training is useful to my practice
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
How has the information that you learned from the training influenced your practice?

What additional information would be useful to strengthen the content that you learned during
the training?

Have you been able to build on your experiences that you have gained through training? If so,
how?

Have you been able to make the information that you learned from the training your own?
Have you personalized it? If so, how?

I have successfully applied what I have learned in the training to my current practice
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 165

I feel that I implement the information learned from the training with fidelity
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
What information that you gained from the training has had the most impact? How?

I have seen positive results in my practice as a result of the training
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
My students have benefited from the implementation of the new strategies that I have gained
as a result of the training
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
Please give an example of how this practice has made a positive impact regarding student
performance.

Please provide any additional comments that you feel would benefit administration as we look
to improve our content and instructional practices.

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 166

APPENDIX G
Survey Results

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 167

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 168

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 169

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 170

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 171

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 172

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 173

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 174

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 175

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 176

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 177

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 178

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 179

PRACTICES FOR ASSIGNING ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATIONS 180

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study utilized a mixed-methods approach to analyze and evaluate the current practice of education specialists when assigning academic accommodations for students with specific learning disabilities (SLDs). Education specialists who were practicing in a K-8 school setting and working with students with mild to moderate SLDs at the time of the study participated in an electronic survey and answered questions about their practice. A small subset of the practitioners surveyed then participated in a guided interview. Specific data related to individual education plan (IEP) supports as well as assessment and benchmark data were analyzed to triangulate the perspectives of the practitioners and provide context for the study. The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was used to analyze the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that influence education specialists’ practice in making recommendations for academic accommodations for students with SLDs. The findings suggest that the education specialists who participated in the survey had a strong understanding of the importance of academic accommodations and how to analyze, recommend, and implement accommodations. Organizational factors such as collaboration, administrative support, sufficient time and space constructs, and ongoing professional development emerged as current barriers and challenges that inhibit best practices. The findings of this study highlighted the need for training for all instructional support staff within the organization as well as opportunities to collaborate and engage in transparent communication among district stakeholders. A summary of the research findings is provided with recommendations related to proposed best practices for a systematic approach for the recommendation of effective academic accommodations.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Instructional differentiation and accommodations to support student achievement in SLD and ADHD secondary school populations: an evaluation study

PDF

Assessing the meaning and value of traditional grading systems: teacher practices and perspectives

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for students with disabilities: a focus on instructional differentiation - an evaluation study

PDF

Evaluating technical support provided in online education for students with disabilities

PDF

Studying the impact of a career academy on Chicano/Latino students in a specific high school: a quantitative case study

PDF

The knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that shape a special education teacher’s ability to provide effective specialized academic instruction

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for marginalized students using the college-going culture: a promising practices study

PDF

Physical activity interventions to reduce rates of sedentary behavior among university employees: a promising practice study

PDF

Graduation rates in college of students with disabilities: an innovation study

PDF

Academic coaching practices for students with learning disabilities and differences

PDF

The barriers and facilitators of academic success for Black male students at a community college: a gap analysis

PDF

Going through it all: an evaluation of medical leave policy impact on persistence rates for students with disabilities

PDF

Disability, race, and educational attainment - (re)leveling the playing field through best disability counseling practices in higher education: an executive dissertation

PDF

Collaborative instructional practice for student achievement: an evaluation study

PDF

The examination of the perceptions of general education teachers, special education teachers, and support personnel on the inclusion of students with special needs

PDF

Academic coaching for Pell-eligible, academically at-risk freshmen: an evaluation study

PDF

A gap analysis of homeless student school attendance in a large urban school district

PDF

Overcoming urban challenges: a succesful case study

PDF

Student engagement in online education: an evaluation study

PDF

Examining the underemployment of persons with disabilities in the workplace

Asset Metadata

Creator Jensen, Scott Michael (author)

Core Title Practices for assigning academic accommodations for students with specific learning disabilities

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 05/07/2018

Defense Date 03/16/2018

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag accommodations,achievement gap,intervention,OAI-PMH Harvest,Special Education,specific learning disabilities

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Stowe, Kathy (committee chair), Donavan, Frank (committee member), Pensavalle, Margo (committee member)

Creator Email scottjen@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-501804

Unique identifier UC11266617

Identifier etd-JensenScot-6316.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-501804 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-JensenScot-6316.pdf

Dmrecord 501804

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Jensen, Scott Michael

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA