Author, Subjects, Keywords

Cited Author

 
 
   » By Author or Editor
 » Browse Author by Alphabet
 » By Journal
 » By Subjects
 » Malaysian Journals
 » By Type
 » By Year
 » By Latest Additions
 
 
   » By Author
 » Top 20 Authors
 » Top 20 Article
 » Top Journal Cited
 » Top Article Cited
 » Journal Citation Statistics
 » Usage Since Sept 2007


 
 
 

Login | Create Account

Validity Issues in Accommodating Reading Tests

Sireci, Stephen G., (2008) Validity Issues in Accommodating Reading Tests. Jurnal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, 23 . pp. 81-110. ISSN 0126-7272

[img]
Preview
PDF - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
183Kb

Official URL: http://www.usm.my/education/publication/JPP23-5_VALIDITY%20ISSUES.pdf

Affiliations

University of Massachusetts, USA. School of Education.

Abstract

National Assessments seeks to include all students in the sampling frame from which students are selected to participate in the assessment. However, some students with disabilities (SWD) are either unable to take tests under standard testing conditions or are unable to perform at their best under standard testing conditions. In many testing situations, accommodations to standard testing conditions are given to SWD to improve measurement of their knowledge, skills and abilities. This practice is in the pursuit of more valid test score interpretation; however, it produces the ultimate psychometric oxymoron – an accommodated standardized test. In this paper, I review validity issues related to test accommodations and summarize some empirical studies in this area. The focus of the paper is on accommodations for reading tests because some types of accommodations on these tests are particularly controversial. The specific accommodations emphasized in this review are extended time and oral (read-aloud) accommodations. A review of professional standards, validity theory, and recent empirical research in this area suggests that extended time accommodations may be appropriate for reading tests, but read-aloud accommodations are likely to alter the construct measured. Suggestions for determining when to provide accommodations and how to report scores from accommodated test administrations are provided.

(Pentaksiran Kebangsaan berhasrat melibatkan semua pelajar Amerika Syarikat dalam kerangka pemilihan sampel yang mengambil bahagian dalam pentaksiran. Namun, pelajar yang kurang upaya (SWD) mungkin tidak dapat menduduki ujian atau menunjukkan kebolehan mereka di bawah keadaan piawai ujian. Dalam kebanyakan keadaan, akomodasi diberi kepada SWD untuk memperbaiki pengukuran pengetahuan, kemahiran dan kebolehan. Amalan ini dilakukan supaya pentafsiran skor akan mempunyai kesahan yang lebih baik. Hasilnya ialah satu ujian piawai dengan akomodasi. Dalam kertas kerja ini, saya meninjau isu kesahan berkaitan akomodasi dan merumuskan daripada kajian empirik dalam bidang ini. Fokus kertas kerja ini adalah pada akomodasi untuk ujian membaca yang menimbulkan kontroversi. Jenis akomodasi yang ditumpukan ialah melanjutkan masa ujian dan akomodasi lisan. Tinjauan standard profesional, teori kesahan dan kajian empirik mencadangkan bahawa akomodasi melanjutkan masa mungkin sesuai untuk ujian membaca; tetapi akomodasi lisan akan mengubah gagasan yang diukur. Cadangan tentang cara dan masa yang sesuai untuk melaporkan skor ujian akomodasi juga dibincangkan.)

Item Type:Journal
Additional Information:Center for Educational Assessment Research Report No. 515. Amherst, MA: School of Education, University of ¹Massachusetts, Amherst. This paper was commissioned by the National Assessment Governing Board as part of the Conference on Increasing the Participation of SD and LEP student's in NAEP, February 26–27, 2004.
Keywords:construct validity, reading tests, test accommodations, validity (kesahan binaan, ujian membaca, akomodasi ujian, kesahan)
Subjects:L Education
ID Code:9534

Albus, D., Bielinksi, J., Thurlow, M. and Liu, K. (2001). The effect of a simplified English languange dictionary on a reading test. LEP Projects report 1. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.

Allalouf, A., Hambleton, R. K. and Sireci, S. G. (1999). Identifying the sources of differential item functioning in translated verbal items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 185–198.

American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA) and National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

American Psychological Association (APA), American Educational Research Association (AERA) and National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC : American Educational Research Association.

Anderson, M., Liu, K., Swierzbin, B., Thurlow, M. and Bielinski, J. (2000). Bilingual accommodations for limited English proficient students on statewide reading tests: Phase 2 (Minnesota Report No. 31). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved 24 January 2003 from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/MnReport31.html.

Bielinski, J., Thurlow, M., Ysseldyke, J., Freidebach, J. and Freidebach, M. (2001). Read-aloud accommodations: Effects on multiple-choice reading and math items (Technical Report 31). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Coutcomes. Rerieved 24 January 2004 from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Technical31. htm

Bridgeman, B., Trapani, C. and Curley, E. (2004). Impact of fewer questions per section on SAT I scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 291–310.

Chiu, C. W. T and Pearson, P. D. (1999). Synthesizing the effects of test accommodations for special education and limited English proficient students. Paper presented at the National Conference on Large Scale Assessment, Snowbird, Utah, 13–15 June.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S. B., Hamlett, C. L., Binkley, E. and Crouch, R. (2000). Using objective data sources to enhance teacher judgments about test accommodations. Exceptional Children, 67 (fall), 67–81.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S. B., Hamlett, C. L. and Karns, K. M. (2000). Supplementing teacher judgments of mathematics test accommodations with objective data. School Psychology Review, 29, 65–85.

Geisinger, K. F. (1994). Psychometric issues in testing students with disabilities. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 121–140.

Green, P. and Sireci, S. G. (1999). Legal and psychometric issues in testing students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 12(2), 21–29.

Huesman, R. L. and Frisbie, D. (2000). The validity of ITBS reading comprehension test scores for learning disabled and non learning disabled students under extended-time conditions. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, Los Angeles, 24–28 April.

Koenig, J. A. (ed.). (2002). Reporting test results for students with disabilities and English language learners: Summary of a workshop. Washington, DC: National Research Council.

Koretz, D. and Hamilton, L. (2000). Assessment of students with disabilities in Kentucky: Inclusion, student performance and validity. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22, 255–272.

Kosciolek, S. and Ysseldyke, J. E. (2000). Effects of a reading accommodation on the validity of a reading test (Technical Report 28). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved 6 January 2003, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Technical28.htm

Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 635–694 (Monograph Supplement 9).

McKevitt, B. C., Elliott, S. N. (2003). Effects and perceived consequences of using read-aloud and teacher-recommended testing accommodations on a reading achievement test. School Psychology Review, 32(4), 13–26.

Meloy, L., Deville, C. and Frisbie, D. (2000). The effects of a reading accommodation on standardized test scores of learning disabled and non learning disabled students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, Los Angeles, 24–28 April.

Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. Linn (ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: American Council on Education, 13–100.

Phillips, S. E. (1994). High-stakes testing accommodations: Validity versus disabled rights. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 93–120.

Pitoniak, M. and Royer, J. (2001). Testing accommodations for examinees with disabilities: A review of psychometric, legal, and social policy issues. Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 53–104.

Powers, D. E. and Willingham, W. W. (1988) The feasibility of rescaling. In W. W. Willingham, M. Ragosta, R. E. Bennett, H. Braun, D. A. Rock, and D. E. Powers (eds.). Testing handicapped people. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 133–142.

Rock, D. A., Bennett, R. E., Kaplan, B. A. and Jirele, T. (1988). Construct validity. In W. W. Willingham, M. Ragosta, R. E. Bennett, H. Braun, D. A. Rock and D. E. Powers (eds.). Testing handicapped people. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 99–107.

Runyan, M. K. (1991). The effect of extra time on reading comprehension scores for university students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 104–108.

Scarpati, S. (1991). Current perspectives in the assessment of the handicapped. In R. K. Hambleton and J. N. Zall (eds.). Advances in educational and psychological testing. Norwell, MA: Kluwer, 251–276.

Shepard, L., Taylor, G. and Betebenner, D. (1998). Inclusion of limited-English-proficient students in Rhode Island's grade 4 mathematics performance assessment. Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards and Student Testing.

Sireci, S. G. (2001, December). Equating non-standard and standard administrations of the SAT. Unpublished opinion paper submitted to the Blue Ribbon Panel on Flagging.

Sireci, S. G. (2003). Unlabeling the disabled: A psychometric perspective on flagging scores from accommodated test administrations. Center for Educational Assessment Research Report No. 502. Amherst, MA: School of Education, University of Massachusetts.

Sireci, S. G. and Geisinger, K. F. (1998). Equity issues in employment testing. In J. H. Sandoval, C. Frisby, K. F. Geisinger, J. Scheuneman, and J. Ramos-Grenier (eds.). Test interpretation and diversity. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 105–140.

Sireci, S. G. and Gonzalez, E. J. (2003). Evaluating the structural equivalence of tests used in international comparisons of educational achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago, Illinois, 12–14 April.

Sireci, S. G. and Khaliq, S. N. (2002). An analysis of the psychometric properties of dual language test forms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, Los Angeles, 2–4 April.

Sireci, S. G., Li, S. and Scarpati, S. (2003). The effects of test accommodations on test performance: A review of the literature. Center for Educational Assessment Research Report No. 485. Amherst, MA: School of Education, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Thompson, S., Blount, A. and Thurlow, M. (2002). A summary of research on the effects of test accommodations: 1999 through 2001 (Technical Report 34). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved 6 January 2003 from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Technical34.htm

Thurlow, M. and Weiner, D. (2000). Non-approved accommodations: Recommendations for use and reporting (Policy Directions 11). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

Tindal, G., Heath, B., Hollenbeck, K., Almond, P. and Harniss, M. (1998). Accommodating students with disabilities on large-scale tests: An experimental study. Exceptional Children, 64(4), 439–450.

Walz, L., Albus, D., Thompson, S. and Thurlow, M. (2000 December). Effect of a multiple day test accommodation on the performance of special education students. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved 3 January 2003 from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/MnReport34.html

Weston, T. J. (2002, July). The validity of oral accommodation in testing. NAEP Validity Studies (NVS) Panel (NCES 200306). Washington, DC: National Center of Education Statistics.

Willingham, W. W., Ragosta, M., Bennett, R. E., Braun, H., Rock, D. A. and Powers, D. E. (1988). Testing handicapped people. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Zuriff, G. E. (2000). Extra examination time for students with learning disabilities: An examination of the maximum potential thesis. Applied Measurement in Education, 13(1), 99–117.

Repository Staff Only: item control page
 
 
 
 
 
 
© Copyright 2007 MyAIS Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Malaya – All Rights Reserved. Malaysian Abstracting and Indexing System is powered by EPrints 3 which is developed by the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. More information and software credits.