References

Abedi, J. (2001). Assessment and accommodation for English language learners: Issues and recommendation (Policy Brief 4). Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, Center for the Study of Evaluation/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.

Abedi, J., Courtney, M., Mirocha, J., Leon, S., and Goldberg, J. (2001). Language accommodation for large-scale assessment in science. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.

Abedi, J., Hofstetter, C., Baker, E., and Lord, C. (1998). NAEP math performance and test accommodations: Interactions with student language background (Draft Report). Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.

Abedi, J., and Lord, C. (2001). The language factors in mathematics tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 14(3), 219–234.

Abedi, J., Lord, C., and Hofstetter, C. (1998). Impact of selected background variables on students’ NAEP math performance. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, Center for the Study of Evaluation/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.

Abedi, J., Lord, C., Hofstetter, C., and Baker, E. (2000). Impact of accommodation strategies on English language learners’ test performance. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 19(3), 16–26.

Abedi, J., Lord, C., Kim, C., and Miyoshi, J. (2000). The effects of accommodations on the assessment of LEP students in NAEP. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, Center for the Study of Evaluation/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.


Camilli, G., and Shepard, L.A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 80
Reporting Test Results for Students with Disabilities and English-Language Learners: Summary of a Workshop References Abedi, J. (2001). Assessment and accommodation for English language learners: Issues and recommendation (Policy Brief 4). Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, Center for the Study of Evaluation/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Abedi, J., Courtney, M., Mirocha, J., Leon, S., and Goldberg, J. (2001). Language accommodation for large-scale assessment in science. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Abedi, J., Hofstetter, C., Baker, E., and Lord, C. (1998). NAEP math performance and test accommodations: Interactions with student language background (Draft Report). Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Abedi, J., and Lord, C. (2001). The language factors in mathematics tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 14(3), 219–234. Abedi, J., Lord, C., and Hofstetter, C. (1998). Impact of selected background variables on students’ NAEP math performance. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, Center for the Study of Evaluation/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Abedi, J., Lord, C., Hofstetter, C., and Baker, E. (2000). Impact of accommodation strategies on English language learners’ test performance. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 19(3), 16–26. Abedi, J., Lord, C., Kim, C., and Miyoshi, J. (2000). The effects of accommodations on the assessment of LEP students in NAEP. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, Center for the Study of Evaluation/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Camilli, G., and Shepard, L.A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

OCR for page 80
Reporting Test Results for Students with Disabilities and English-Language Learners: Summary of a Workshop Cohen, J., and Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Crocker, L.M., and Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. New York: CBS College Publishing. Elliott, S.N., Kratochwill, T.R., and McKevitt, B.C. (2001). Experimental analysis of the effects of testing accommodations on the scores of students with and without disabilities. Journal of School Psychology, 39(1), 3–24. Golden, L., and Sacks, L. (2001). An overview of states’ policies for reporting the performance of English-language learners on statewide assessments. Paper prepared for workshop on Reporting Test Results for Accommodated Examinees: Policy, Measurement, and Score Use Considerations, November 28, Washington DC. Gorsuch, R.L. (1983). Factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Hambleton, R. (1994). Guidelines for adapting educational and psychological tests: A progress report. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 10(3), 229–244. Hambleton, R., Swaminathan, H., and Rogers, H.J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Helwig, R., Stieber, S., Tindal, G., Hollenbeck, K., Heath, B., and Almond, P.A. (1999). Comparison of factor analyses of handwritten and word-processed writing of middle school students. Eugene, OR: RCTP. Hollenbeck, K., Tindal, G., Stieber, S., and Harniss, M. (1999). Handwritten versus word processed statewide compositions: Do judges rate them differently? Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, BRT. Holland, P.W., and Wainer, H. (1993). Differential item functioning. Newbury Park, NJ: Erlbaum. Kopriva, R. (2000). Ensuring accuracy in testing for English language learners. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers. Kopriva, R.J., and Lowrey, K. (1994). Investigation of language sensitive modifications in a pilot study of CLAS, the California Learning Assessment System (Technical Report). Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education, California Learning Assessment System Unit. Koretz, D. (1997). The assessment of students with disabilities in Kentucky (CSE Technical Report 431). Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Koretz, D., and Hamilton, L. (1999). Assessing students with disabilities in Kentucky: The effects of accommodations, format, and subject (CSE Technical Report 498). Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Koretz, D., and Hamilton, L. (2000). Assessment of students with disabilities in Kentucky: Inclusion, student performance, and validity. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(3), 255–272. Lord, F.M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Malouf, D. (2001). Discussion and Synthesis. Paper prepared for Workshop on Reporting Test Results for Accommodated Test Examinees: Policy Measurement and Score Use Considerations, November 28, Washington, DC.

OCR for page 80
Reporting Test Results for Students with Disabilities and English-Language Learners: Summary of a Workshop Marquart, A., and Elliott, S.N. (2000). Extra time as an accommodation. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. Mazzeo, J., Carlson, J.E., Voelkl, K.E., and Lutkus, A.D. (2000). Increasing the participation of special needs students in NAEP: A report on 1996 NAEP research activities. Available: <http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs>. [May 17, 2002]. McKevitt, B.C., and Elliott, S.N. (2001). The effects and consequences of using testing accommodations on a standardized reading test. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. National Assessment Governing Board. (2001, May). Report of the joint meeting of reporting and dissemination committee and committee on standards, design, and methodology. Washington, DC: Author. National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). Becoming a more inclusive NAEP. Available: <http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs>. [May 17, 2002]. National Institute of Statistical Sciences. (2000). NAEP inclusion strategies: The report of a workshop at the National Institute of Statistical Sciences, July 10–12. National Research Council. (1997). Educating one and all: Students with disabilities and standards-based reform. Committee on Goals 2000 and the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities, L.M.McDonnell, M.J.McLaughlin, and P.Morison (Eds.). Washington DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (1999). Grading the nation’s report card. Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, J.W.Pellegrino, L.R.Jones, and K.J.Mitchell (Eds.). Washington DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2000). Testing English-language learners in U.S. schools. Committee on Educational Excellence and Testing Equity, K.Hakuta and A.Beatty (Eds.). Washington DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2001). NAEP reporting practices: Investigating district level and market-basket reporting. Committee on NAEP Reporting Practices, P.J.DeVito and J.A. Koenig, (Eds.). Washington DC: National Academy Press. Olson, J.F., and Goldstein, A.A. (1997). The inclusion of students with disabilities and limited English proficiency students in large-scale assessments: A summary of recent progress (NCES 97–482). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Pedhazur, E. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research (3rd ed.). New York: Harcourt Brace. Phillips, S.E. (1994). High-stakes testing accommodations: Validity versus disabled rights. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 93–120. Plutchik, R. (1974). Foundation of experimental research (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row. Rivera, C., and Stansfield, C.W. (2001, April). The effects of linguistic simplification of science test items on performance of limited English proficient and monolingual English-speaking students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA. Rivera, C., Stansfield, C.W., Scialdone, L., and Sharkey, M. (2000). An analysis of state policies for the inclusion and accommodation of English language learners in state assessment programs during 1998–1999. Arlington, VA: George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education. 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:

OCR for page 80
Reporting Test Results for Students with Disabilities and English-Language Learners: Summary of a Workshop University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Schulte, A.A., Elliott, S.N., and Kratochwill, T.R. (2000). Effects of testing accommodations on standardized mathematics test scores: An experimental analysis of the performances of students with and without disabilities. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. Sireci, S.G. (1997). Problems and issues in linking assessments across languages. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 16(1), 12–19. Taylor, W. (2002). Analysis of provisions ofESEA relating to assessment. Paper prepared for March 22 meeting of the Board on Testing and Assessment, Washington DC. Thompson, S.J., and Thurlow, M.L. (2001). 2001 State special education outcomes: A report on state activities at the end of the century. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Education Outcomes. Thurlow, M.L. (2001a). State policies on accommodations and reporting: Overview of results from surveys of state directors of special education. Paper prepared for workshop on Reporting Test Results for Accommodated Examinees: Policy, Measurement, and Score Use Considerations, November 28, Washington DC. Thurlow, M.L. (2001b). The effects of a simplified-English dictionary accommodation for LEP students who are not literate in their first language. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April, Seattle, WA. Tindal, G., Anderson, L., Helwig, R., Miller, S., and Glasgow, A. (1999). Accommodating students with learning disabilities on math tests using language simplification. Eugene, OR: RCTP. 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(IV), 439–450. Trimble, S. (2001). Kentucky’s policy and reporting results for accomodated test takers. Paper prepared for workshop on Reporting Test Results for Accommodated Examinees: Policy, Measurement, and Score Use Considerations, November 28, Washington DC. U.S. Department of Education. (1994). The NAEP 1992 technical report (NCES Report No. 23-TR20). E.G.Johnson and J.E.Carlson (Eds.). Washington, DC: Author, National Center for Education Statistics. U.S. Department of Education. (1999). The NAEP guide (NCES Report No. 2000–456). N. Horkay (Ed.). Washington, DC: Author, National Center for Education Statistics.

OCR for page 80
Reporting Test Results for Students with Disabilities and English-Language Learners: Summary of a Workshop This page in the original is blank.