The number of students identified as having autism increased by 500% in the past 10 years (United States Government Accountability Office, 2005). All students with disabilities are required to be placed in least restrictive environments and to be given access to the general curriculum in the major subjects of math, reading, writing, and science as mandated by federal legislation such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB, 2001). As a result of this legislation, an increasing number of students with autism are being educated in inclusive classrooms. Most studies on general education access and curriculum modifications and/or instructional accommodations center on students with intellectual disabilities (e.g. Soukup, Wehmeyer, Bashinski, & Boviard, 2007; Wehmeyer, Lattin, Lapp-Rincker, & Agran, 2003). Wehmeyer et al. (2003) and Soukup et al. (2007) found included students with intellectual disabilities had more access to the general curriculum than mostly self-contained students. This meant included students were more likely to be working on the general curriculum as mandated by NCLB than those in only self-contained classrooms. This study builds and expands the research of Wehmeyer et al., as well as Soukup et al., by examining how students with autism are given access to the general curriculum through curriculum modifications and instructional accommodations used by general education teachers in three schools. This investigation focused on nine inclusive classrooms for students with autism using a parallel mixed methods design (Newman, Newman, & Newman, 2011). Classroom observations using both an IEP related checklist and field notes, teacher interviews, an archival document review of the Individual Education Plan (IEP) for the selected students with autism were performed. Findings of this study were organized by interview questions and subsequent coding categories. Quantitative data were organized in a nominal scale. Participants asserted that their middle school students with autism functioned well in their classrooms, occasionally exhibiting behavioral differences. Most instructional accommodations on IEPs were being implemented by participants, and participants often provided additional instructional accommodations not mandated by the IEP. The majority of participants credited county workshops for their knowledge of instructional accommodations.

Students with specific learning disabilities (SLD) are educated in general education classrooms. As a result, these students are faced with more challenging instructional curricula. Although some students with SLD perform as well in mathematics as students without disabilities, most perform below state standards despite being provided instructional and testing accommodations. Policy makers have envisioned the implementation of instructional accommodations as a primary means of ensuring an appropriate education (Mcleskey, Hoppey, Williamson & Rentz, 2004; Scalon & Baker, 2012) for students with disabilities in general education classrooms (Mc Guire, Scott, & Shaw, 2006). The researcher implemented a non-experimental ex post facto research design to investigate the research hypothesis to determine the relationship between the five most frequently used accommodations by general education teachers who teach students with SLD and student achievement in Algebra 1. At the beginning of the 2016 – 2017 school year, the collection of data began by emailing the Qualtrics Survey Software (V.23) to 185 general education mathematics teachers in Miami-Dade County Public Schools. Four main instructional accommodation constructs were assessed using a 15-item questionnaire. From the responses to the survey, the five of the most frequently used accommodations were determined. Nine general education Algebra 1 teachers from six high schools across the county who reported using similar accommodations and taught three or more students with SLD in mathematics participated in the study. The researcher and two peer researchers conducted in-class observations on the participants’ fidelity of implementation of accommodations (FOI) using a checklist during the period in which they taught students with SLD. An Algebra I test was used for pre- and post-testing to determine student mathematics achievement. The results of the survey indicated that teachers most frequently provided: (a) sample problems of varying levels, (b) guides or prompts or personal (teacher/peer) assistance, (c) extended access to instructional resources and equipment, (d) provided preferential seating and (e) additional time to complete assignment or class projects. Linear regression analysis revealed a significant positive relationship between teacher FOI of accommodations and student achievement (p < .05).