Comparability of Student Performance between Regular and Oral Administrations for a High-Stakes Mathematics Test

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 39-57

  Huynh, Huynh ^a   Patrick Meyer, J ^a   Gallant, Dorinda J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 1042302994     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15324818ame1701_3     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Abedi, J. (1999, April). NAEP math test accommodations for students with limited English proficiency. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED431787)
2. American Educational Research Association/American Psychological Association/National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3. Barton, K. E., & Huynh, H. (2003). Patterns of errors made by students with disabilities on a reading test with oral administration. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 602-614.
4. Bielinski, J. (2001). Read-aloud accommodation: Effects on multiple-choice reading & math items (Tech. Rep. No. 31). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
5. Bielinski, J., Ysseldyke, J., Bolt, S., Friedebach, M., & Friedebach, J. (2001). Prevalence of accommodations for students with disabilities participating in a statewide assessment program. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 26(2), 21-28.
6. Bolt, S., & Bielinski, J. (2002, April). The effects of the read aloud accommodation on math test items. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA.
7. Camera, W. J., Copeland, T., & Rothschild, B. (1998). Effects of extended time on the SAT I: reasoning test score growth for students with learning disabilities. College Board Report No 98-7. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Huynh, H. (1985). Assessing mastery through summative testing. In D. U. Levine, Improving student achievement through mastery learning (pp. 185-201). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10. Huynh, H., & Casteel, J. (1983). Technical works for basic skills assessment programs. Unpublished Report to National Institute of Education. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, College of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED230628)
11. Huynh, H., Gleaton, J., & Seaman, S. P. (1992). Technical documentation for the South Carolina High School Exit Examination of reading and mathematics (2nd ed.). Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, College of Education.
12. Kosciolek, S., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (2000). Effects of a reading accommodation on the validity of a reading test. Technical Report 28. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED451643)
13. Lewis, D., Green, D. R., & Miller, L. (1999, June). Using differential item functioning analyses to assess the validity of testing accommodated students with disabilities. Paper presented at the national conference on large-scale assessment of the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), Snowbird, UT.
14. Meloy, L. L., Deville, C., & Frisbie, D. (2000, April). The effect of a reading accommodation on standardized test scores of learning disabled and non learning disabled students. Paper presented at the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED441008)
15. Phillips, S. E. (1994). High-stakes testing accommodations: Validity versus disabled rights. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 93-120.
16. Pomplun, M., & Omar, M. H. (2000). Score comparability of a state mathematics assessment across students with and without reading accommodations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 21-29.
17. Rock, D. A., Bennett, R. E., & Kaplan, B. A. (1987). Internal construct validity of a college admissions test across handicapped and non-handicapped groups. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47, 193-205.
18. Rock, D. A., Bennett, R. E., & Jirele, T. (1988). Factor structure of the Graduate Record Examination's general test in handicapped and non-handicapped groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 383-392.
19. SAS/STAT User's Guide, Version 6. (4th ed.). (Vol. 1). (1990). Cary, NC: SAS.
20. South Carolina Department of Education. (2001). Exit Test Administrator's Manual Spring 2001. Columbia, SC: Author.
21. Tippets, E., & Michaels, H. (1997, March). Factor structure invariance of accommodated and non-accommodated performance assessments. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago.
22. United States Congress. (1973). Rehabilitation Act. 29 U.S.C. § 504. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
23. United States Congress. (1990). The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. PL 101-336. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
24. United States Congress. (1994). Improving America's Schools Act. PL 103-382. Op.lit. § 1115 (b)(2). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
25. United States Congress. (1997). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
26. Willingham, W. W. (1989). Standard testing conditions and standard score meaning for handicapped examinees. Applied Measurement in Education, 2, 97-103.
27. Zuriff, G. E. (2000). Extra examination time for students with learning disabilities: An examination of the maximum potential thesis. Applied Measurement in Education, 31, 99-117.