Abedi, J. Hofstetter, C., Baker, E., & Lord, C. (2001). NAEP math performance and test accommodations: interactions with student language background. Los Angeles, CA: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
Abedi, J., Leon, S., & Mirocha, J. (2001). Validity of standardized achievement tests for English language learners. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference, Seattle, WA.
ADDA (Attention Deficit Disorder Association). (2001). Accommodations for testing. Retrieved January, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.adda.org/.
AERA, APA, NCME (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education). (1999). Standards for educational and psychological tests. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Algozzine, B. (1993). Including students with disabilities in systemic efforts to measure outcomes: Why ask why? In National Center on Educational Outcomes (Ed.), Views on inclusion and testing accommodations for students with disabilities. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Allen, J., Bulla, N., Goodman, S., Henderson, B., Skutchan, L., Willis, D., & Scott, K. (in press). Test access: Guidelines for computer administered testing. Louisville, KY: American Printing House for the Blind.
Anderson, R.C., Hiebert, E.H., Scott, J.A, & Wilkinson, A.G. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.
Arditi, A. (1999). Making print legible. New York: Lighthouse.
Assistive Technology Act. Public Law 105-394. Enacted November 13, 1998.
Baker, E.L (1999). Technology: Something's coming – something good. CRESST Policy Brief 2. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
Bielinski, J., & Sheinker, A. (2001). Varied opinions on how to report accommodated test scores: Findings based on CTB/McGraw-Hill's framework for classifying accommodations. Paper presented at the Council of Chief State School Officers' Large-scale Assessment Conference, Houston, TX.
Bloodsworth, J.G. (1993). Legibility of print. South Carolina: ERIC Document Number 335497.
Bridgeman, B., Harvey, A., & Braswell, J. (1995). Effects of calculator use on scores on a test of mathematical reasoning. Journal of Educational Measurement, 32, 323-340.
Brown, P.J. (1999). Findings of the 1999 plain language field test. University of Delaware, Newark, DE: Delaware Education Research and Development Center.
Burk, M. (1999). Computerized test accommodations: A new approach for inclusion and success for students with disabilities. Washington, DC: A.U. Software Incorporated.
Bushweller, K. (2000). Electronic exams: Throw away the No. 2 pencils – here comes computerized testing. Electronic School (June), 20-24. Retrieved January, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.electronic-school.com/.
Calhoun, M.B., Fuchs, L., & Hamlett, C. (2000). Effects of computer-based test accommodations on mathematics performance assessments for secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 23, 271-282.
Carter, R., Dey, B., & Meggs, P. (1985). Typographic design: Form and communication. New York: Van Norstrand Reinhold.
Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) (2001). Universal design for learning: An on-line handout. Peabody, MA: CAST. Retrieved January, 2002, from the World Wide Web: www.cast.org.
Center for Universal Design (1997). What is universal design? Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University. Retrieved January, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.design.ncsu.edu/.
Cole, C., Tindal, G., & Glascow, A. (2000). Final report: Inclusive comprehensive assessment system research, Delaware large scale assessment program. Eugene, OR: Educational Research Associates.
Elliott, S.N. (1999). Valid testing accommodations: Fundamental assumptions and methods for collecting validity evidence. Paper presented at CCSSO Conference, Snowbird, UT.
ERIC/OSEP (Educational Resources and Information Clearinghouse & Office of Special Education Programs. (1998, Fall). Topical report. Washington, DC: Author.
Fenton, E. (1996). The Macintosh font book: Typographic tips, techniques and resources (3 rd ed.) Berkeley: Peachpit Press.
Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S., Hamlett, C., Binkley, E., & Crouch, R. (2000). Using objective data sources to enhance teacher judgments about test accommodations. Exceptional Children, 67 (1), 67-81.
Gaster, L., & Clark, C. (1995). A guide to providing alternate formats. West Columbia, SC: Center for Rehabilitation Technology Services. (ERIC Document No. ED 405689)
Geisinger, K.F., & Carlson, J.F. (1992) Assessing language-minority students. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Tests, Measurement, and Evaluation. (ERIC Document No. ED 356232)
Gregory, M., & Poulton, E.C. (1970). Even versus uneven right-hand margins and the rate of comprehension in reading. Ergonomics, 13 (4), 427-434.
Grise, P., Beattie, S., & Algozzine, B. (1982). Assessment of minimum competency in fifth grade learning disabled students: Test modifications make a difference. Journal of Educational Research, 76, 35-40.
Hanson, M.R. (1997). Accessibility in large-scale testing: Identifying barriers to performance. Delaware: Delaware Education Research and Development Center.
Hanson, M.R., Hayes, J.R., Schriver, K., LeMahieu, P.G., & Brown, P.J. (1998). A plain language approach to the revision of test items. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, April 16, 1998.
Harker, J.K., & Feldt, L.S. (1993). A comparison of achievement test performance of nondisabled students under silent reading plus listening modes of administration. Applied Measurement, 6, 307-320.
Hartley, J. (1985). Designing instructional text (2 nd Edition). London: Kogan Page.
Heines (1984) An examination of the literature on criterion-referenced and computer-assisted testing. ERIC Document Number 116633.
Heubert, J.P. (2002). Disability, race, and high-stakes testing of students. Teachers College, Columbia University; Columbia Law School: National Center for Accessing the General Curriculum.
Hoerner, A., Salend, S., & Kay, S.I. (1997). Creating readable handouts, worksheets, overheads, tests, review materials, study guides, and homework assessments through effective typographic design. Teaching Exceptional Children, 29, (3), 32-35.
Hollenbeck, K., Tindal, G., Harniss, M., & Almond, P. (1999). Reliability and decision consistency: an analysis of writing mode at two times on a statewide test. Educational Assessment, 6 (1), 23-40.
Kiplinger, V.L., Haug, C.A., & Abedi, J. (2000). Measuring math – not reading – on a math assessment: A language accommodations study of English language learners and other special populations. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, April 24-28, 2000.
Kopriva, R. (2000). Ensuring accuracy in testing for English language learners. Washington DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Koretz, D. (1997). The assessment of students with disabilities in Kentucky (CSE Technical Report No. 431). Los Angeles, CA: Center for Research on Standards and Student Testing.
MacArthur, C.A., & Graham, S. (1987). Learning disabled students' composing under three methods of text production: handwriting, word processing, and dictation. Journal of Special Education, 21 (3), 22-42.
Mace, R. (1998). A perspective on universal design. An edited excerpt of a presentation at Designing for the 21 st Century: An International Conference on Universal Design.
Menlove, M., & Hammond, M. (1998). Meeting the demands of ADA, IDEA, and other disability legislation in the design, development, and delivery of instruction. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education.6 (1), 75-85.
Meyer, A., & O'Neill, L. (2000). Beyond access: Universal design for learning. Exceptional Parent, 30 (3), 59-61.
Muller, D., Calhoun, E., & Orling, R. (1972). Test reliability as a function of answer sheet mode. Journal of Educational Measurement, 9, (4), 321-324.
Muncer, S.J., Gorman, B.S., Gorman, S., & Bibel, D. (1986). Right is wrong: An examination of the effect of right justification on reading. British Journal of Educational Technology, 1 (17), 5-10.
National Research Council. (1999). High stakes: testing for tracking, promotion, and graduation (J. Heubert & R. Hauser editors, Committee on Appropriate Test Use). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Osborne, H. (2001). "In Other Words…Communication across a life span…universal design in print and web-based communication. On Call (January). Retrieved May 14, 2014, from the World Wide Web: http://www.healthliteracy.com/article.asp?PageID=3812.
Popham, W.J. (2001). The truth about testing: An educator's call to action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Popham, W.J., & Lindheim, E. (1980). The practical side of criterion-referenced test development. NCME Measurement in Education, 10 (4), 1-8.
Rakow, S.J. & Gee, T.C. (1987). Test science, not reading. Science Teacher, 54 (2), 28-31.
Rogers, W.T. (1983). Use of separate answer sheets with hearing impaired and deaf school age students. BC Journal of Special Education, 7 (1), 63-72.
Russell, M., & Haney, W. (1997). Testing writing on computers: a follow-up study comparing student performance on tests conducted via computer and via paper-and-pencil. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 5 (3). Retrieved May 14, 2014, from the World Wide Web: http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ580763.
Schiffman, C.B. (1995). Visually translating materials for ethnic populations. Virginia: ERIC Document Number ED 391485.
Schriver, K.A. (1997). Dynamics in document design. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Schutz, H.G. (1961). An evaluation of methods for presentation of graphic multiple trends – Experiment III. Human Factors, 31, 108-119.
Sharrocks-Taylor, D., & Hargreaves, M. (1999). Making it clear: A review of language issues in testing with special reference to the National Curriculum Mathematics Tests at Key Stage 2. Educational Research, 41 (2), 123-136.
Shiffrin, R.M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84 (2), 127-190.
Silver, A.A. (1994). Biology of specific (developmental) learning disabilities. In N.J. Ellsworth, C.N. Hedley, & A.N. Barratta, (eds.) Literacy: A redefinition. New Jersey: Erlbaum Associates.
Smith, J.M., & McCombs, M.E. (1971). Research in brief: The graphics of prose. Visible Language, 5 (4), 365-369.
Szabo, M., & Kanuka, H. (1998). Effects of violating screen design principles of balance, unity, and focus on recall learning, study time, and completion rates. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 8 (1), 23-42.
Thompson, D.R. (1991). Reading print media: The effects of justification and column rule on memory. Paper presented at the Southwest Symposium, Southwest Education Council for Journalism and Mass Communication, Corpus Christi, TX. (ERIC Document Number 337 749)
Thompson, S.J., Blount, A., & Thurlow, M.L. (2002). A summary of research on the effects of test accommodations—1999 through 2001. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Thurlow, M., & Bolt, S. (2001). Empirical support for accommodations most oftenallowed in state policy. (Synthesis Report 41). Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Thurlow, M., Lazarus, S., Thompson, S., & Robey, S. (2002). State participation and accommodation policies for students with disabilities: 2001 update. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Thurlow, M., Quenemoen, R., Thompson, S., & Lehr, C. (2001). Principles and characteristics of inclusive assessment and accountability systems (Synthesis Report 40). Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Tindal, G., & Fuchs, L.S. (1999). A summary of research on test changes: An empirical basis for defining accommodations. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky, Mid-South Regional Center.
Tindal, G., Heath, B., Hollenbeck, K., Almond, P., & Harniss, M. (1998). Accommodating students with disabilities on large-scale tests: An empirical study. Exceptional Children, 64 (4), 439-450.
Tinker, M.A. (1963). Legibility of print. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
Trotter, A. (2001). Testing computerized exams. Education Week, 20 (37), 30-35.
Viet, D.T., & Scruggs, T.E. (1986). Can learning disabled students effectively use separate answer sheets? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 63, 155-160.
West, T.G. (1997). In the mind's eye: Visual thinkers, gifted people with dyslexia and other learning difficulties, computer images, and the ironies of creativity. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Willingham, W.W. (1998). Testing handicapped people – the validity issue. In H. Weiner & H.I. Brown (eds.) Test validity (pp. 89-103). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Willingham, W.W., Ragosta, M., Bennett, R.E., Braun, H., Rock, D.A., & Powers, D.E. (1988). Testing handicapped people. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Wise, S.L, Plake, B.S., Eastman, L.A., & Novak, C.D. (1987). Introduction and training of students to use separate answer sheets: Effects on standardized test scores. Psychology in the Schools, 24, 285-288.
Worden, E. (1991). Ergonomics and literacy: More in common than you think. Indiana. (ERIC Document Number 329 901)
Zachrisson, G. (1965). Studies in the legibility of printed text. Stockholm: Almquist and Wiskell.
This document is provided for the user's convenience. Inclusion does not constitute an endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any views, products or services offered or expressed.