 |
|
|
Publication prices current through March 31, 2008
Topics
Educational Outcomes (cont.)
NCEO Synthesis Reports
A series of reports published by the Institute’s National Center on Educational Outcomes. Available only on the Web.
Synthesis Report 65: Item-level Effects of the Read-aloud Accommodation for Students with Reading Disabilities
By S. Bolt and M. Thurlow
A report examining data on accommodated and non-accommodated performances of students with specific reading disabilities on various math test items anticipated to be highly sensitive to accommodation effects. (2006)
Synthesis Report 64: 2005 State Policies on Assessment Participation and Accommodations for Students with Disabilities
By S. Lazarus, M. Thurlow, K. Lail, K. Eisenbraun, and K. Kato
A report analyzing states’ 2005 participation and accommodation policies found that state policies continue to evolve, and that they have become more detailed and specific than in previous years. NCEO has been tracking and analyzing state policies on assessment participation and accommodations since 1992 and this report is part of that project. (2006)
Synthesis Report 63: A Comparison of IEP/504 Accommodations Under Classroom and Standardized Testing Conditions: A Preliminary Report on SEELS Data
By N. Bottsford-Miller, M. Thurlow, K. Stout, and R. Quenemoen
A report examining accommodation use across different educational conditions, comparing IEP and 504 Plan accommodations to what students reportedly received in the classroom and on standardized tests. The report uses data from the Special Education Elementary Longitudinal Study (SEELS). (2006)
Synthesis Report 62: Intended and Unintended Consequences of Minnesota’s Basic Standards Tests for Students with Disabilities
By J. R. Nelson
A report examining the intended and unintended consequences of Minnesota’s high stakes graduation exam on students with disabilities. This report evaluates empirical data collected in 1999-2001 through focus groups with parents, special educators, and the Minnesota Association of Educational Assessment and Evaluation, as well as interviews with building administrators, school districts representatives, and a state representative. The point in time picture that these data provide from the early part of the decade can serve as a baseline for further research. This report is a summary of a doctoral dissertation completed by Ruth Nelson, a former graduate research assistant at the Institute’s National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO). (2006)
Synthesis Report 61: Effect of Minimum Cell Sizes and Confidence Interval Sizes for Special Education Subgroups on School-Level AYP Determinations
By M.A. Simpson, B. Gong, and S. Marion
A report summarizing a study addressing three questions: 1) Considering the full group of students and the special education subgroup, what is the likely effect of minimum cell size and confidence interval size on school-level AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) determinations?; 2) What effects do the changing minimum cell sizes have on inclusion of special education students, especially for schools that are declared as “meeting AYP”?; and 3) With the NCLB requirement that schools assess grade levels 3-8 in their AYP calculations beginning in the 2005-2006 academic year, what is the likely effect of including these additional students in school-level AYP determinations? To address these questions, data from five states were used to model confidence interval and cell-size combinations. (2006)
Synthesis Reports 19–60
Top of page
NCEO Technical Reports
A series of reports published by the Institute’s National Center on Educational Outcomes. Available only on the Web.
Technical Report 49: Revisiting Graduation Requirements
and Diploma Options for Youth with
Disabilities: A National Study
By D. R. Johnson, M. Thurlow, and K. Stout
A document reporting on National Center on Educational Outcomes’ (NCEO) fourth study of state graduation requirements for students with disabilities. This national study was designed to describe current variations across states in high school exit exam practices and the use of alternative diploma/credentialing options. The study also examines the intended and unintended consequences for students when they are required to pass exit exams to receive a high school diploma, and the intended and unintended consequences of using single or multiple diploma options for students with disabilities. (2007)
Technical Report 48: Student Think-Aloud Reflections on
Comprehensible and Readable Assessment Items: Perspectives on What Does and Does Not Make an Item Readable
By C. Johnstone, K. Liu, J. Altman, and M. Thurlow
A document reporting on research related to large-scale assessments for students with learning disabilities in reading. The researchers examined the role of “readable and comprehensible” test items that could make assessments more universally designed, using think-aloud methods to better understand how interventions to improve readability affect student performance. Reducing word counts in items and making important words bold did not seem to affect student achievement but vocabulary did. Students had difficulty with non-construct vocabulary in both the stem and answer choices of items as well as with words that have negative prefixes (e.g., dis). This suggests that readability correlates with vocabulary and that construct and non-construct vocabulary must be clearly defined in order to make tests more accessible. (2007)
Technical Report 47: A Summary of the Research on the Effects of Test Accommodations:
2005-2006
By A. Zenisky and S. Sireci
A report summarizing test accommodations research published from 2005-2006, covering 32 published research studies. It identifies promising directions in research and provides suggestions for future studies. Highlighted points in the report include: researchers conducted primary data collection in over 70% of the studies, rather than using existing data sets; the most commonly studied accommodations were extended time, oral accommodations (e.g., read aloud), and computerized administration; most oral presentation and timing accommodations empirically tested had a positive effect on scores; testing accommodations noted on a student’s IEP do not always match those provided or used in instruction; and almost half of the studies employed experimental or quasi-experimental designs. Some promising trends observed were the span of ages being included in the accommodations studies (from elementary to adult education) and a focus on testing contexts. Areas that could be strengthened in future research are increasing the racial/ethnic diversity of participants in the studies, and the construction of true scientific experiments looking at the effects of accommodations on scores for students with and without disabilities. (2007)
Technical Report 46: Nearing the Target in Disaggregated Subgroup Reporting to the Public on 2004-2005 Assessment Results
By G. VanGetson and M. Thurlow
A report marking the ninth analysis conducted by the Institute’s National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) of the public reporting of state assessment results for students with disabilities. This is the fourth analysis that NCEO has conducted since the passage of the federal No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). Overall, all 50 states and 5 unique states reported some disaggregated assessment results for students with disabilities for the 2004-2005 school year. States continue to improve their public reporting practices, especially for alternate assessments, but there are still improvements to be made. This report discusses the results of the study and provides recommendations for how states can continue to improve their public reporting practices. (2007)
Technical Report 45: A Summary of Research on the Effects of Test Accommodations: 2002 Through 2004
By C. Johnstone, J. Altman, M. Thurlow, and S. Thompson
A report summarizing 49 empirical research studies completed on test accommodations between 2002 and 2004, and providing direction in the design of critically needed future research on accommodations. (2006)
Technical Report 44: Using the Think Aloud Method (Cognitive Labs) To Evaluate Test Design for Students with Disabilities and English Language Learners
By C. J. Johnstone, N. Bottsford-Miller, and S. Thompson
A report providing information on the “think-aloud” methods designed to detect design issues in large-scale assessments. Various design problems may introduce construct-irrelevant variance or hinder students from showing what they know on assessments. The research included a variety of students, including students with learning disabilities, students with hearing impairments, students with cognitive disabilities, English language learners, and students without disabilities who were proficient in English. (2006)
Technical Report 43:
Uneven Transparency: NCLB Tests Take Precedence in Public Assessment Reporting for Students with Disabilities
By
J. Klein, H. Wiley, and M. Thurlow
A report marking the eighth analysis conducted by the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) of the public reporting of state assessment results for students with disabilities. Forty-eight states reported some state-level information about students with disabilities on their state assessments. States are gradually improving their public reporting practices and the report explains how states can further improve these practices. There is a growing percentage of students with disabilities becoming proficient on statewide math and reading tests, but the report still found large performance gaps between them and students without disabilities – and these gaps tended to be larger at higher grades. (2006)
Technical Report 42: Considerations for the Development and Review of Universally Designed Assessments
By S. Thompson, C. Johnstone, M. Anderson, and N. Miller
A report investigating universal design, an approach to accessibility for people with disabilities that has recently been applied to educational assessment. The National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) described seven elements of universally designed assessments in its 2002 report entitled Universal Design Applied to Large Scale Assessments. Since then, Universal Design Project staff have examined research from various fields to determine how those elements can be applied. This report describes the development of a “considerations of universally designed assessments” form that was validated by assessment and content area experts in a Delphi study. Considerations are specific questions for test designers to take into account while designing assessments. The Delphi study revealed expert consensus on some considerations and disagreement on others. The report contains all expert commentary and a revised list of considerations. (2005)
Technical Report 41: Analyzing Results of Large-Scale Assessments to Ensure Universal Design
By C. Johnstone, S. Thompson, R. Moen, S. Bolt, and K. Kato
A report illustrating one method of determining whether items are functioning differentially for students with disabilities in comparison to their non-disabled counterparts. Using various statistical analysis techniques, a large statewide mathematics data set was investigated for items that may have design issues. Multiple methods were used as a means for compensating for the lack of statistical power that is often present when analyzing data for populations with small group sizes. Results indicated that items can be flagged for further review based on differential functioning across disability groups or types of analysis. (2005)
Technical Reports 1–40
The following earlier reports are also available:
Top of page
NCEO Minnesota Assessment Project Reports
A series of reports from the Minnesota Assessment Project, a four-year, federally funded effort awarded to the Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning (now the Minnesota Department of Education) from the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. The project’s goal was to promote and evaluate the participation of students with limited English proficiency and students with disabilities in Minnesota's Graduation Standards. Published by the Institute’s National Center on Educational Outcomes. Available only on the Web.
Top of page
Continue to next page |
