Getting the message out: An evaluation of NAEP score reporting practices with implications for disseminating test results

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 359-375

  Zenisky, April L ^a   Hambleton, Ronald K ^a   Sireci, Stephen G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 74949122914     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08957340903221667     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. 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.
2. Goodman, D. P., & Hambleton, R. K. (2004). Student test score reports and interpretive guides: Review of current practices and suggestions for future research. Applied Measurement in Education, 17(2), 145-220.
3. Hambleton, R. K. (1998). Enhancing the validity of NAEP achievement level score reporting. In M. L. Bourque (Ed.), Proceedings of the achievement levels workshop (pp. 77-98). Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
4. Hambleton, R. K. (2002). How can we make NAEP and state test score reporting scale and reports more understandable? In R. W. Lissitz & W. D. Schafer (Eds.), Assessment in educational reform (pp. 192-205). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
5. Hambleton, R. K., & Meara, K. (2000). Newspaper coverage of NAEP results, 1990 to 1998. In M. L. Bourque and S. Byrd (Eds.), Student performance standards on the National Assessment of Educational Progress: Affirmation and improvements. A study initiated to examine a decade of achievement level setting on NAEP (pp. 133-155). Washington, DC: National Assessment Govern-ing Board.
6. Hambleton, R. K., Sireci, S., & Huff, K. (2008). Development and validation of enhanced SAT score scales using item mapping and performance category descriptions (Final Report). Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Center for Educational Assessment.
7. Hambleton, R. K., & Slater, S. C. (1995). Using performance standards to report national and state assessment data: Are the reports understandable and how can they be improved? Paper presented at the Joint Conference on Standard-Setting for Large-Scale Assessments, Washington, DC.
8. Jaeger, R. M. (2003). NAEP validity studies: Reporting the results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (Working Paper 2003-11). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
9. Levine, R., Rathbun, A., Selden, R., & Davis, A. (1998). NAEP's constituents: What do they want? Report of the National Assessment of Educational Progress Constituents Survey and Focus Groups (NCES 98-521). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
10. Mislevy, R. J. (1998). Implications of market-basket-reporting for achievement level setting. Applied Measurement in Education, 11(1), 49-63.
11. National Assessment Governing Board. (2006). Policy statement on reporting, release, and dissemination of NAEP results. Retrieved January 27, 2007, from http://www.nagb.org/release/policy06.doc
12. National Research Council (NRC). (2001). NAEP reporting practices: Investigating district-level and market-basket reporting. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
13. Simmons, C., & Mwalimu, M. (2000). What NAEP's publics have to say. In M. L. Bourque and S. Byrd (Eds.), Student performance standards on the National Assessment of Educational Progress: Affirmation and improvements. A study initiated to examine a decade of achievement level setting on NAEP (pp. 184-219). Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
14. Wainer, H., Hambleton, R. K., & Meara, K. (1999). Alternative displays for communicating NAEP results: A redesign and validity study. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36(4), 301-335.
15. Zenisky, A. L., Hambleton, R. K., & Sireci, S. G. (2007). Comprehensive evaluation of NAEP: Utility study final report. Final Report to Congress. [Also Center for Educational Assessment Report No. 624. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Center for Educational Assessment.]