Most students with literacy difficulties benefit from reasonable adjustments

Reasonable adjustments for students with specific learning difficulties are helpful for most students awarded them, but inequalities persist, especially between state and independent schools, finds the first comprehensive empirical review of exam access arrangements in England, conducted by Liverpool John Moores and University College London.

The new report, funded by the Nuffield Foundation and reported by The Guardian, assessed exam access arrangements offered to secondary students with Specific Learning Difficulties (SpLD), including granting students 25% extra time in exams and the use of a word processor.

Students with identified literacy difficulties showed the largest improvement when using a word processor, with an average 13.9% improvement in test scores and producing 30.98% more words overall compared to handwriting. In comparison, when handwriting with 25% extra time students saw their average scores improve by 8.18% and they wrote 6.05% more text compared to the standard test administration.

However, even with these arrangements in place, students with literacy difficulties still scored significantly below their age-matched peers and almost a third of students with literacy difficulties did not improve their test score with one of the tested exam access arrangements in place.

On the whole, access arrangements provide a fairer testing environment for students with literacy difficulties

Dr Emma Sumner, School of Education, LJMU

Lead author Dr Emma Sumner (UCL Institute of Education and Liverpool John Moores University) said: “The evidence supports the idea that, on the whole, exam access arrangements provide a fairer testing environment for students with literacy difficulties, allowing them the opportunity to more fully demonstrate what they’ve learned. However, care must be taken when granting the use of a word processor to students without literacy difficulties, as this group showed a large performance gain and this type of centre-delegated arrangements is currently unregulated and is not closely monitored.”

Word-processor tests improve scores

The researchers staged a series of mock exams with secondary-aged students to gauge the impact of receiving 25% extra time or using a word processor. They also tested students without literacy difficulties to benchmark the effects of these adjustments. For students without literacy difficulties, using a word processor showed even greater improvements, with their test scores rising 16.88% and writing 52.19% more words when typing compared to handwriting; while 25% more time prompted an increase in test scores by 6.10% and writing 9.35% more words compared to the standard test administration.

To receive exam access arrangements, schools apply to the Joint Councils for Qualifications on behalf of the student and formally provide evidence.

Though widely used, there had been little research into the efficacy of these arrangements. While precise numbers aren’t available, a considerable number of secondary students use exam access arrangements each year, and the total number is thought to be increasing.

To determine attitudes towards the adjustments, and challenges facing their application, the team surveyed 134 practitioners about their experiences of identifying students’ needs. They also conducted in-depth interviews with 35 practitioners and 13 secondary students with SpLD to understand how exam access arrangements are implemented and perceived.

The team found that inequalities persist between students enrolled in independent and state schools in England. Access arrangements can be resource heavy, and disadvantaged schools have a harder time providing a full spectrum of support. While independent schools reported they were typically able to meet the demand, state schools often reported that they needed to be more strategic with their resources, including staff time, the requisite technology, and the space to support these arrangements.

Concerning inequalities

Co-author Dr Catherine Antalek (UCL Institute of Education) said: “These inequalities are concerning, and could lead to students falling through the cracks. Access arrangements are meant to help disadvantaged students, but it’s possible that many are not receiving the full support they need.”

The team found other challenges also persist. Students and practitioners reported a stigma around access arrangements, often leading students to opt out of using them, even though they might benefit. Some practitioners felt that teachers, students and parents would benefit from a greater awareness of the purpose of exam access arrangements to combat the perceived stigma. Students and practitioners also reported that they lacked sufficient support and training to use different exam access arrangements.

Co-author Dr Amelia Roberts (UCL Institute of Education) said: “It’s important that educators in charge of these arrangements are well prepared to provide the needed support. It’s why we created additional materials, including a whole school audit based on our findings, to help people understand what access arrangements are and to help schools to identify areas for improvement.”

The team developed the freely available school audit and an ‘Exam Access Arrangements roadmap’ to help review school policies and practices around access arrangements, self-assess the effectiveness of their student support, and identify how to make the best use of their resources. In addition, the team developed an infographic to explain access arrangements to a wider audience.

The research was funded by the Nuffield Foundation as part of the Practice around Access Arrangements for Students with SpLD (PAASS) project.