The application of universal design evaluation for fair testing children with reading disorders



The article describes the principles of development of psychological tests and achievement tests that are referred to as «universal design evaluation». It reveals the main elements of this approach. The authors introduce the concept of accommodation as a shift in testing procedure without changing the measurable construct. They illustrate how to create a test in the paradigm of the universal evaluation design through the development of accommodation of testing procedures for children with reading difficulties.

General Information

Keywords: reading, fair assessment, universal design training, accommodation

Journal rubric: Psychology of Special and Inclusive Education

Article type: scientific article


For citation: Braginets E.I. The application of universal design evaluation for fair testing children with reading disorders [Elektronnyi resurs]. Sovremennaia zarubezhnaia psikhologiia = Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 2018. Vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 28–37. DOI: 10.17759/jmfp.2018070303. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)


  1. Ob utverzhdenii sostava Soveta Ministerstva obrazovaniya i nauki Rossiiskoi Federatsii po voprosam obrazovaniya lits s ogranichennymi vozmozhnostyami zdorov'ya i invalidov [Elektronnyi resurs] [On the approval of the Council of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation on the education of persons with disabilities and disabled people]: Prikaz Minobrnauki Rossii ot 16 noyabrya 2016 g. № 1430. In The Ministry of education and science of the Russian Federation. Available at: https://минобрнауки.рф/документы/9134 (Accessed 13.07.2018). (In Russ.).
  2. Pevzner M.S., Yavkin V.M. Rezul'taty obsledovanii neuspevayushchikh uchashchikhsya nachal'nykh klassov obshcheobrazovatel'nykh shkol [The results of inspections of underachieving primary school pupils in general education schools]. Defektologiya [Defectology], 1977, no. 2, pp. 19–23. (In Russ.).
  3. Tindal G. et al. Accommodating students with disabilities on large-scale tests: An empirical study. Exceptional Children, 1998, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 439–450. doi:10.1177/001440299806400401
  4. Bolt S. E., Ysseldyke J. Accommodating students with disabilities in large-scale testing: A comparison of differential item functioning (DIF) identified across disability types. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 2008, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 121–138. doi:10.1177/0734282907307703
  5. Calhoun M.B., Fuchs L., Hamlett C. Effects of computer-based test accommodations on mathematics performance assessments for secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2000, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 271–282. Available at: doi:10.2307/1511349
  6. Crawford L., Tindal G. Effects of a read-aloud modification on a standardized reading test. Exceptionality, 2004, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 89–106. doi:10.1207/s15327035ex1202_3
  7. Cromer W. The difference model: A new explanation for some reading difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1970, vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 471–483. doi:10.1037/h0030288
  8. National Center for Education Statistics. Digest of Education Statistics 2001 [Elektronnyi resurs]. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 2002. 597 p. Available at: (Accessed 13.07.2018).
  9. Gandhi A.G. et al. Enhancing Accessibility for Students With Decoding Difficulties on Large-Scale Reading Assessments. Journal of learning disabilities, 2018, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 540–551.  doi:10.1177/0022219417714774
  10. Nielsen K. et al. Evidence-based reading and writing assessment for dyslexia in adolescents and young adults. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2016, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 38–56. doi:10.18666/LDMJ-2016-V21-I1-6971
  11. Gaster L., Clark C. A guide to providing alternate formats [Elektronnyi resurs]. Washington, DC: Center for Rehabilitation Technology Services, 1995. 24 p Available at: (Accessed 13.07.2018).
  12. Gross J. The long term costs of literacy difficulties [Elektronnyi resurs]. 2d ed. London: Every Child a Chance Trust. 2009. 52 p. Available at:  (Accessed 13.07.2018).
  13. Harker J.K., Feldt L.S. A comparison of achievement test performance of nondisabled students under silent reading plus listening modes of administration. Applied Measurement, 1993, vol. 6 no. 4, pp. 307–320. doi:10.1207/s15324818ame0604_4
  14. Holland P. W., Wainer H. Differential item functioning. New York; London: Routledge, 2012. 437 p.
  15. Hollenbeck K., Tindal G., Almond P. Teachers’ knowledge of accommodations as a validity issue in high-stakes testing. Journal of Special Education, 1998, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 175–183. doi:10.1177/002246699803200304
  16. Jones R.N., Gallo J.J. Education and sex differences in the mini-mental state examination: effects of differential item functioning. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 2002, vol. 57, no. 6, pp. P548–P558. doi:10.1093/geronb/57.6.P548
  17. Ketterlin-Geller L.R. Knowing what all students know: Procedures for developing universal design for assessment [Elektronnyi resurs]. The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 2005, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 4–22. Available at: (Accessed 13.07.2018).
  18. Ketterlin-Geller L.R., Johnstone C. Accommodations and Universal Design: Supporting Access to Assessments in Higher Education [Elektronnyi resurs]. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 2006, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 163–172. Available at: (Accessed 13.07.2018).
  19. McCardle P., Scarborough H.S., Catts H.W. Predicting, explaining, and preventing children's reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 2001, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 230–239. doi:10.1111/0938-8982.00023
  20. Pitoniak M.J., Royer J.M. A review of psychometric, legal, and social policy issues. Special Educational Needs and Inclusive Education: Assessment and teaching strategies, 2004, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 53–104.
  21. Reading Results [Elektronnyi resurs]: The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) measures the progress of our nation’s fourth- and eighth-graders in reading, mathematics, and various other subjects. 2017. In The Nation’s Report Card. Available at: (Accessed 13.07.2018).
  22. Reynolds M., Wheldall K., Madelaine A. Components of effective early reading interventions for young struggling readers. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 2010, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 171–192. doi:10.1080/19404150903579055
  23. Rose D.H., Meyer A. Teaching every student in the digital age [Elektronnyi resurs]: Universal design for learning. ASCD, 2002. 11 p. Available at: (Accessed 13.07.2018).
  24. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1985. 100 p.
  25. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1999. 194 p.
  26. Story M.F., MuellerJ.L., Mace R.L. The universal design file: Designing for people of all ages and abilities [Elektronnyi resurs]. Raleigh, NC: NC State University, The Center for Universal Design, 1998. 172 p. Available at: (Accessed 13.07.2018).
  27. Thompson S.J., Johnstone C.J., Thurlow M.L. Universal Design Applied to Large Scale Assessments. Synthesis Report [Elektronnyi resurs]. Minneapolis: National Center on Educational Outcomes, 2002. 38 p. Available at: (Accessed 13.07.2018).
  28. Van de Vijver F., Tanzer N.K. Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: An overview. European Review of Applied Psychology, 2004, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 119–135. doi:10.1016/j.erap.2003.12.004
  29. Wiener M., Cromer W. Reading and reading difficulty: A conceptual analysis. Harvard Educational Review, 1967, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 620–643. doi:10.17763/haer.37.4.7701k0020072hh81
  30. Zumbo B.D. A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (DIF) [Elektronnyi resurs]. Ottawa: National Defense Headquarters, 1999. 57 p. Available at: (Accessed 13.07.2018).

Information About the Authors

Ekaterina I. Braginets, PhD Student, Center for Education Quality Monitoring, Institute of Education, National Research University «Higher School of Economics», Moscow, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:



Total: 1575
Previous month: 13
Current month: 6


Total: 856
Previous month: 5
Current month: 1