Estimating trends from censored assessment data under no child left behind

Educational and Psychological Measurement

Volumn 70, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 760-776

  Furgol, Katherine E ^a   Ho, Andrew D ^a   Zimmerman, Dale L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

censored data; effect size; large scale reporting; No Child Left Behind (NCLB); trend analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956946425     PISSN: 00131644     EISSN: 15523888     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0013164410366692     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Aboueissa, A.A., & Stoline, M.R. (2006). Maximum likelihood estimators of population parameters from doubly left-censored samples. Environmetrics, 17, 811-826.
2. Burridge, J. (1981). A note on maximum likelihood estimation for regression models using grouped data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological), 43, 41-45.
3. Center on Education Policy. (2007). Answering the question that matters most: Has student achievement increased since No Child Left Behind? Retrieved from http://www.cep-dc.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=document.showDocumentByID1200.
4. Cohen, A.C. (1959). Simplified estimators for the normal distribution when samples are singly censored or truncated. Technometrics, 1, 217-237.
5. Cohen, A.C. (1965). Maximum likelihood estimation in the Weibull distribution based on complete and on censored samples. Technometrics, 7, 579-588.
6. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Glass, G.V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M.L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
8. Gleit, A. (1985). Estimation for small normal data sets with detection limits. Environmental Science and Technology, 19, 1201-1206.
9. Hamasaki, T., & Kim, S.Y. (2007). Box and Cox power-transformation to confined and censored nonnormal responses in regression. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 51, 3788-3799.
10. Hedges, L.V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
11. Ho, A.D. (2008). The problem with "proficiency": Limitations of statistics and policy under No Child Left Behind. Educational Researcher, 37, 351-360.
12. Ho, A.D. (2009). A nonparametric framework for comparing trends and gaps across tests. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 34, 201-228.
13. Holland, P. (2002). Two measures of change in the gaps between the CDFs of test-score distributions. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27, 3-17.
14. Kentucky Department of Education. (2007). 2007 CATS reports. Retrieved from http://apps.k-de.state.ky.us/securecatsreports07/index.cfm?fuseaction=main.displayregionstate.
15. Kolen, M.J., & Brennan, R.L. (2004). Test equating, scaling, and linking: Methods and practices. New York, NY: Springer.
16. McGraw, K.O., & Wong, S.P. (1992). A common language effect size statistic. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 361-365.
17. Millard, S.P., & Neerchal, N.K. (2001). Environmental statistics with S-PLUS. New York, NY: CRC Press.
18. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115 Stat. 1425 (2002). Text from United States Public Laws. Available from LexisNexis Congressional.
19. R Development Core Team. (2008). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
20. Spencer, B.D. (1983). On interpreting test scores as social indicators: Statistical considerations. Journal of Educational Measurement, 20, 317-333.
21. Swanson, C.B. (2008). State of the states. Education Week, 27(18), 36-57.
22. Wilk, M.B., & Gnanadesikan, R. (1968). Probability plotting methods for the analysis of data. Biometrika, 55, 1-17.
23. Wolynetz, M.S. (1979). Algorithm AS 138: Maximum likelihood estimation from confined and censored normal data. Applied Statistics, 28, 185-195.