References
INTRODUCTION
Alexander, Lamar 1991 America 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Alexander, Lamar, and H. Thomas James 1987 The Nation's Report Card: Improving the Assessment of Student Achievement. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Applied Measurement in Education 1998 Special issue: Setting consensus goals for academic achievement. Applied Measurement in Education 11(1).
Jones, Lyle V. 1996 A history of the National Assessment of Educational Progress and some questions about its future. Educational Researcher (October):1-8.
Messick, Samuel, Albert Beaton, and Frederic Lord 1983 National Assessment of Educational Progress Reconsidered: A New Design for a New Era. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
National Academy of Education 1996 Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading , Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trila State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1993 The Trial State Assessment: Prospects and Realities, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1992 Assessing Student Achievement in the States, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
National Assessment Governing Board no date Draft Statement of Purposes for the National Assessment of Educational Progress. National Assessment Governing Board, Washington, DC.
1996 Redesigning the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
National Center for Education Statistics 1974 NAEP General Information Yearbook. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
National Commission on Excellence in Education 1983 A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics 1989 Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
National Research Council 1999 Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds. Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
1996a National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
1996b Evaluation of "Redesigning the National Assessment of Educational Progress." Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Office of Technology Assessment 1992 Testing in American Schools: Asking the Right Questions. Office of Technology Assessment, OTA-SET-519; February. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Tyler, Ralph 1966 The development of instruments for assessing educational progress . Pp. 95-101 in Proceedings of the 1965 Invitational Conference on Testing Problems. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Barron, Sheila, and Daniel Koretz in press Interpretation and Use of the NAEP TSA Results by the Media. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Beatty, Alexandra S., Clyde M. Reese, Hilary R. Persky, and Peggy Carr 1996 NAEP 1994 U.S. History Report Card: Findings from the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Bohrnstedt, George W. 1997 Connecting NAEP Outcomes to a Broader Context of Educational Information . Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, March 24-28, 1997.
Boruch, Robert, and George Terhanian 1999 Putting data sets together: Linking NCES surveys to one another and to data sets from other sources. In Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds. Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Boruch, Robert, and Erling Boe 1994 On "Good, Certain, and Easy Government"; The policy uses of statistical data and reports. Pp. 23-36 in Effective Dissemination of Clinical and Health Information, L.D. Sechrest, T.E. Becker, E.M. Rogers, T.S. Campbell, and M.L. Grady, eds. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Bryk, Anthony S., and Kim L. Hermanson 1993 Educational indicator systems: Observations on their structure, interpretation, and use. Linda Darling-Hamilton, ed. Review of Research in Education 19:451-484.
Burstein, Leigh 1980 The analysis of multilevel in educational research and evaluation . David C. Berliner, ed. Review of Research in Education 8:158-233.
Burstein, Leigh, Daniel Koretz, Robert Linn, Brenda Sugrue, John Novak, Eva L. Baker, and Elizabeth Lewis Harris 1996 Describing performance standards: Validity of the 1992 National Assessment of Educational Progress achievement level descriptors as characterizations of mathematics performance. Educational Assessment 3(1):9-51.
Burstein, Leigh, Lorraine M. McDonnell, Jeannette Van Winkle, Tor H. Ormseth, Jim Mirocha, and Gretchen Guiton 1995 Validating National Curriculum Indicators. Prepared for the National Science Foundation, Document No. MR-658-NSF . Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Council of Chief State School Officers ' 1989 State Education Indicators. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
de Neufville, Judith I. 1975 Social Indicators and Public Policy: Interactive Processes of Design and Application. New York: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company .
Finn, Chester 1989 News release, November 29. National Assessment Governing Board, Washington, DC.
Forsyth, Robert, Ronald Hambleton, Robert Linn, Robert Mislevy, and Wendy Yen 1996 Design/Feasibility Team: Report to the National Assessment Governing Board. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
Grissmer, David W., and Ann Flanagan 1997 Improving the NAEP Data for Policy Analysis. Draft prepared for the National Center for Education Statistics.
Hartka, Liz, and Fran Stancavage 1997 Perspectives on the impact of the Trial State Assessments: State assessment directors, state mathematics specialists, and state reading specialists. Pp. 429-489 in Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment, Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Hilton, T., ed. 1992 Using National Databases in Education Research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Hoachlander, Gary, Jeanne E. Griffith, and John H. Ralph 1996 From Data to Information: New Directions for the National Center for Education Statistics. NCES 96-901, August. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Koretz, Daniel M., and Edward Deibert 1995/1996 Setting standards and interpreting achievement: A cautionary tale from the National Assessment of Education Progress. Educational Assessment 3(1):53-81.
KPMG Peat Marwick LLP, and Mathtech, Inc. 1996 A Review of the National Assessment of Educational Progress: Management and Methodological Procedures. Prepared for National Center for Education Statistics, June 4.
Linn, Robert L. 1998 Validating inferences from National Assessment of Educational Progress achievement-level setting. Applied Measurement in Education 11(1):23-47.
Linn, Robert L., and Eva L. Baker 1998 Back to basics: Indicators as a system. The CRESST Line Winter:1-3.
McDonnell, Lorraine M. 1994 Policymakers' View of Student Assessment. RAND Institute on Education and Training, prepared for Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education . Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Mullis, Ina V., Jay R. Campbell, and Alan E. Farstrup 1993 NAEP 1992 Reading Report Card for the National and the States: Data from the National and Trial State Assessments. NCES Report No. 23-ST06; September. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
National Academy of Education 1997 Assessment in Transition: Monitoring the Nation's Educational Progress, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1996 Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
National Assessment Governing Board 1996 Policy Statement on Redesigning the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
National Center for Education Statistics 1997 A School Reform Framework for the Redesign of SASS. National Center for Education Statistics School and Staffing Survey staff. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
National Research Council 1996 Evaluation of "Redesigning the National Assessment of Educational Progress." Committee on the Evaluation and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment. September. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
1993 A Collaborative Agenda for Improving International Comparative Studies in Education, Dorothy M. Gilford, ed. Board on International Comparative Studies in Education, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
1985 Youth Employment and Training Programs: The YEDPA Years, Charlie L. Betsey, Robinson G. Hollister, Jr., and Mary R. Papageorgiou, eds. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council and Institute of Medicine 1995 Integrating Federal Statistics on Children: Report of a Workshop. Committee on National Statistics and Board on Children, Youth, and Families . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Odden, Allan 1990 Educational educators in the United States: The need for analysis . Educational Researcher 19(7):24-29.
Peak, Lois 1996 Pursuing Excellence: A Study of U.S. Eighth-Grade Mathematics and Science Teaching, Learning, Curriculum, and Achievement in International Context. NCES 97-198. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Porter, Andrew C. 1996 SCASS Science Opportunity-to-Learn Survey. Prepared for Council of Chief State School Officers Large-Scale Assessment Conference, June 23-26.
1991 Creating a system of school process indicators. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 13(1):13-29.
Porter, Andrew, Michael Kirst, E. Osthoff, J. Smithson, and S. Schneider 1993 Reform Up Close: An Analysis of High School Mathematics and Science Classrooms. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
Richards, C.E. 1988 Indicators and three types of education monitoring systems: Implications for design. Phi Delta Kappan 69(7):490-498.
Rivlin, Alice M. 1973 Measuring performance in education. Pp. 411-437 in Studies in Income and Wealth, M. Moss, ed. New York: Columbia University Press.
Shavelson, Richard J. 1987 Historical and Political Considerations in Developing a National Indicator System. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April.
Sheldon, E.B., and R. Parke 1975 Social indicators. Science 188:693-699.
Smith, Thomas M., Beth Aronstamm Young, Yupin Bae, Susan P. Choy, and Nabeel Alsalam 1997 The Condition of Education, 1997. NCES 97-388. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Special Study Panel on Education Indicators
1991 Education Counts: An Indicator System to Monitor the Nation's Educational Health. Report to the Acting Commissioner of Education Statistics; September . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Stigler, James, and Michelle Perry 1999 Developing classroom process data for the improvement of teaching . In Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds. Committee on the Evaluation of the National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Stigler, James, and James Hiebert 1997 Third International Mathematics and Science Study: Videotape Classroom Study Examples Tape and Guide. Available: http://nces.ed.gov/timss/video.
Stufflebeam, Daniel L., Richard M. Jaeger, and Michael Scriven 1991 Summative Evaluation of the National Assessment Governing Board's Inaugural 1990-91 Effort to Set Achievement Levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Prepared for the National Assessment Governing Board, August 23.
U.S. General Accounting Office 1993 Educational Achievement Standards: NAGB's Approach Yields Misleading Interpretations. GAO/PEMD-93-12. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
Allen, Nancy L., James E. Carlson, and Christine A. Zelenak 1998a The 1996 NAEP Technical Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Allen, Nancy L., Spencer S. Swinton, Steven P. Isham, and Christine A. Zelenak 1998b Technical Report of the NAEP 1996 State Assessment Program in Science. Prepared by Educational Testing Service, No. NCES 98-480; January . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Allen, Nancy L., Debra L. Kline, and Christine A. Zelenak 1996 The NAEP 1994 Technical Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Barron, Sheila I. 1999 Difficulties associated with secondary analysis of NAEP data. In Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds. Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Campbell, Jay R., Kristin E. Voelkl, and Patricia L. Donahue 1997 NAEP 1996 Trends in Academic Progress: Achievement of U.S. Students in Science, 1969 to 1996; Mathematics, 1973 to 1996; Reading, 1971 to 1996; and Writing, 1984 to 1996. NCES 97-985. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Carlson, James E. 1996 Information Provided by Polytomous and Dichotomous Items on Certain NAEP Instruments. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April.
DeVito, Pasquale J. 1996 Issues Relating to the Future of National Assessment of Education Progress: The State Perspective. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April, 1996.
Forsyth, Robert, Ronald Hambleton, Robert Linn, Robert Mislevy, and Wendy Yen 1996 Design/Feasibility Team: Report to the National Assessment Governing Board. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
Hambleton, Ronald K. 1997 Enhancing the Validity of NAEP Achievement Level Score Reporting. Presentation at the National Assessment Governing Board Achievement Levels Committee meeting, Boulder, CO, August 20-22.
Hambleton, Ronald K., and Sharon C. Slater 1996 Are NAEP Executive Summary Reports Understandable to Policy Makers and Educators? Presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, April.
Hartka, Elizabeth, and Donald H. McLauglin 1994 A study of the administration of the 1992 National Assessment of Educational Progress Trial State Assessment. Pp. 479-552 in The Trial State Assessment: Prospects and Realities: Background Studies , Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Hartka, Elizabeth, Jin-Ying Yu, and Don McLaughlin 1997a A study of the administration of the 1994 Trial State Assessment. Pp. 109-190 in Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessments. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Hartka, Elizabeth, Marianne Perie, and Don McLaughlin 1997b Public school nonparticipation study. Pp. 191-222 in Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessments. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Hedges, Larry V., and Richard L. Venesky 1997 The 1994 reading anomaly: Report to the National Academy of Education on the drop in the National Assessment of Educational Progress main assessment (short-term trend) scores. Pp. 295-350 in Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessments. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Heitjan, D.F., and Roderick J.A. Little 1991 Multiple imputation for the fatal accident reporting system. Applied Statistics 40:13-29.
Jaeger, Richard M. 1997 Reporting the Results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress . Unpublished paper prepared for the NAEP Validity Studies Panel, December 18.
1996 Reporting Large-Scale Assessment Results for Public Consumption: Some Propositions and Palliatives. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, April.
1992 General issues in reporting the results of the NAEP Trial State Assessment results. Pp. 285-344 in Assessing Student Achievement: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Kish, L., and M.R. Frankel 1974 Inference from complex samples. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 36:1-22.
Kolen, Michael J. 1999a Issues in phasing out trend NAEP. In Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds. Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
1999b Issues in combining state NAEP and main NAEP. In Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP. James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds. Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
KPMG Peat Marwick LLP, and Mathtech, Inc. 1996 A Review of the National Assessment of Educational Progress: Management and Methodological Procedures. Prepared for National Center for Education Statistics, June 4.
Mislevy, Robert J. 1985 Estimation of latent group effects. Journal of the American Statistical Association 80:993-997.
Mislevy, Robert J., Eugene G. Johnson, and Eiji Muraki 1992 Scaling procedures in NAEP. Journal of Education Statistics 17:131-154.
Muraki, Eiji 1992 Application of Multigroup Partial Credit Model to Differential Item Functioning. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April.
National Academy of Education 1997 Assessment in Transition: Monitoring the Nation's Educational Progress, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1996 Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1993 The Trial State Assessment: Prospects and Realities, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1992 Assessing Student Achievement in the States, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
National Assessment Governing Board 1997 Bridging Policy to Implementation: A Resolution. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
1996 Redesigning the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
National Research Council 1999 Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds. Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
O'Sullivan, Christine Y., Clyde M. Reese, and John Mazzeo, eds. 1997 NAEP 1996 Science Report Card for the Nation and the States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Reese, Clyde M., Karen E. Miller, John Mazzeo, and John Dossey 1997 NAEP 1996 Mathematics Report Card for the Nation and the States: Findings from the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Rubin, D.B. 1987 Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Rust, Keith 1996 Sampling issues for the redesign. Appendix 1 in Design/Feasibility Team: Report to the National Assessment Governing Board. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
Rust, Keith, and J. P. Shaffer 1997 Sampling. In E.G. Johnson's E. Lager, and C.Y. O'Sullivan, NAEP Reconfigured: An Integrated Redesign of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Working Paper No. 97-31. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Silver, Edward A., and Patricia Ann Kenney 1997 An examination of relationships between the 1990 mathematics scores for grade 8 and selected themes from the NCTM. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 24: 159-167.
Sireci, Stephen G., H. Jane Rogers, Hariharan Swaminathan, Kevin Meara, and Frederic Robin 1999 Evaluating the scale structure of the 1996 grade 8 NAEP science assessment . In Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds. Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Spencer, Bruce D. 1997a Combining state and national NAEP. Pp. 47-60 in Assessment in Transition: Monitoring the Nation's Educational Progress: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1997b School and student sampling in the 1994 Trial State Assessment: An evaluation. Pp. 51-108 in Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
U.S. General Accounting Office 1993 Educational Achievement Standards: NAGB's Approach Yields Misleading Interpretations. GAO/PEMD-93-12. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
Wainer, Howard 1997 Improving tabular displays, with NAEP tables as examples and inspirations . Journal of Education and Behavioral Statistics 22(1):1-30.
Widmeyer Group, Inc. 1993 Dissemination Strategies for the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Prepared for the National Assessment Governing Board. Washington, DC: The Widmeyer Group, Inc.
Yu, Feng, and Ratna Nandakumar 1996 Dimensionality of NAEP Data. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April, 1996.
Zhang, Jinming 1997 A New Approach for Assessing the Dimensionality of NAEP Data. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, March 24-28, 1997.
Zieleskiewicz, Jennifer 1999 Subject-matter experts' perceptions of the relevance of NAEP long-term trend items in science and mathematics. In Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds. Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Education, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Zwick, Rebecca 1991 Effects of item order and context on estimation of NAEP reading proficiency . Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice (Fall):10-16.
Abedi, Jamal, Carol Lord, and Joseph R. Plummer 1997 Final Report of Language Background as a Variable in NAEP Mathematics Performance. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing/University of California, Los Angeles. Los Angeles, CA: University of California.
Anderson, N.E., and J. Olson 1996 Puerto Rico Assessment of Educational Progress: 1994 PRAEP Technical Report. August. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Anderson, N.E., F.F. Jenkins, and K.E. Miller 1996 NAEP Inclusion Criteria and Testing Accommodations: Findings from the NAEP 1995 Field Test in Mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
August, Diane, and Edith McArthur 1996 Proceedings of the Conference on Inclusion Guidelines and Accommodations for Limited English Proficient Students in the National Assessment of Educational Progress, December 5-6, 1994. NCES 96-861; May. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
August, Diane, and Julia Lara 1996 Systemic Reform and Limited English proficient Students. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
August, Diane, Kenji Hakuta, and D. Pompa 1994 For all students: Limited English proficient students and Goals 2000 . Occasional Papers in Bilingual Education 10:4.
Bond, Lloyd. A. 1996 Statewide Assessment of Students with Disabilities. Council of Chief State School Officers and North Central Regional Educational Laboratory; January. Oak Brook, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Bond, Lloyd A., D. Braskamp, and Edward Roeber 1996 The Status Report of Assessment Programs in the United States: State Student Assessment Programs Database, School Year 1994-95. Council of Chief State School Officers and North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. Oak Brook, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Bradby, D. 1992 Language Characteristics and Academic Achievement: A Look at Asian and Hispanic Eighth Graders in NELS:88. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Butler, Frances A., and Robin Stevens 1997 Accommodation Strategies for English Language Learners on Large-Scale Assessments: Student Characteristics and Other Considerations. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing/University of California, Los Angeles.
Center for Equity and Excellence 1997 Statewide Assessment Programs: Policies and Practices for the Inclusion of LEP Students.
Cheung, Oona M., Barbara S. Clements, and Y. Carol Mieu 1994 The Feasibility of Collecting Comparable National Statistics about Students with Limited English Proficiency. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Council of Chief State School Officers 1991 Summary of State Practices Concerning the Assessment of and the Data Collection about LEP Students. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Educational Testing Service no date Testing Persons with Disabilities: A Report for ETS Programs and Their Constituents. Educational Testing Service Committee on People with Disabilities . Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Fleischman, Howard L., and Paul J. Hopstock 1993 Descriptive Study of Services to Limited English Proficient Students: Volume I, Summary of Findings and Conclusions. Prepared for Office of the Under Secretary, U.S. Department of Education . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Hafner, A. 1995 Assessment Practices: Developing and Modifying Statewide Assessment for LEP Students. Paper presented at the Council of Chief State School Officers Conference on Large-Scale Assessment; June. School of Education, California State University, Los Angeles.
Hakuta, Kenji, and Guadalupe Valdés 1997 A study design to evaluate strategies for the inclusion of limited English proficient students in the National Assessment of Educational Progress state trial assessment. Pp. 69-80 in Assessment in Transition: Monitoring the Nation's Educational Progress: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Houser, J. 1995 Assessing Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficiency . National Center for Education Statistics, Policy and Review Branch, Data Development Division, Working Paper No. 95-13; March. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Lewit, Eugene M., and Linda Schuumann Baker 1996 Children in special education. Issue on Special Education for Students With Disabilities, Spring. The Future of Children 6(1):139-151.
Mazzeo, John 1997 Toward a More Inclusive NAEP. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, March 24-28, 1997.
Mazzeo, J., J. Carlson, K. Voelkl, and A. Lutkus 1998 Increasing the Participation of Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficient Students in the National Assessment of Educational Progress: A Special Report on 1996 Research Activities . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
National Academy of Education 1997 Assessment in Transition: Monitoring the Nation's Educational Progress , Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1996 Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1993 The Trial State Assessment: Prospects and Realities, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
National Center on Educational Outcomes 1995a A Compilation of States' Guidelines for Accommodations in Assessments for Students with Disabilities. Martha L. Thurlow, D.L. Scott, and J.E. Ysseldyke, eds. Synthesis Report 18. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.
1995b A Compilation of States' Guidelines for Including Students with Disabilities in Assessments. Synthesis Report 17. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.
1994a Recommendations for Making Decisions About the Participation of Students with Disabilities in Statewide Assessment Programs. Synthesis Report 15. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.
1994b Making Decisions About the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities in Large-Scale Assessments: A Report on a Working Conference to Develop Guidelines on Inclusion and Accommodations . Synthesis Report 13. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.
1993 Testing Accommodations for Students with Disabilities: A Review of the Literature. Synthesis Report 4; March. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.
National Research Council 1997 Educating One and All: Students with Disabilities and Standards-Based Reform, Lorraine M. McDonnell, Margaret J. McLaughlin, and Patricia Morison, eds. Committee on Goals 2000 and the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council and Institute of Medicine 1997 Improving Schooling for Language-Minority Children: A Research Agenda, Diane August and Kenji Hakuta, eds. Committee on Developing a Research Agenda on the Education of Limited-English-Proficient and Bilingual Students, Board on Children, Youth, and Families. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Olson, John F. and Arnold A. Goldstein 1997 The Inclusion of Students With Disabilities and Limited English Proficient Students in Large-Scale Assessments: A Summary of Recent Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
O'Sullivan, Christine Y., Clyde M. Reese, and John Mazzeo 1997 NAEP 1996 Science Report Card for the Nation and the States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Reese, Clyde M., Karen E. Miller, John Mazzeo, and John Dossey 1997 NAEP 1996 Mathematics Report Card for the Nation and the States . Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Reschly, Daniel P. 1996 Identification and assessment of students with disabilities. Issue on Special Education for Students With Disabilities, Spring . The Future of Children 6(1):40-53.
Rivera, Charlene 1995 How Can We Ensure Equity in Statewide Assessment Programs? Findings from a national survey of assessment directors on statewide assessment policies for LEP students, presented at the Council of Chief State School Officers' National Conference on Large-Scale Assessment, June 18. Washington, DC: Institute for Equity and Excellence in Education, George Washington University, Washington, DC.
Secada, Walter G. 1994 Issues in the development of Spanish-language versions of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Pp. 377-400 in The Trial State Assessment: Prospects and Realities: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Education of the NAEP Trial State Assessments. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Spencer, Bruce D. 1994 A study of eligibility exclusions and sampling: 1992 Trial State Assessment. Pp. 1-68 in The Trial State Assessment: Prospects and Realities: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Stancavage, Fran, Don McLaughlin, Robert Vergun, Cathy Goldewski, and Jill Allen 1997a Study of exclusion and assessability of limited English proficiency students in the 1994 Trial State Assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Pp. 223-244 in Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1997b Study of exclusion and assessability of students with disabilities in the 1994 Trial State Assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Pp. 245-294 Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
U.S. Department of Education 1996 To Assure the Free and Appropriate Public Education of All Children with Disabilities. Eighteenth Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Valdés, Guadalupe, and Richard A. Figueroa 1994 Bilingualism and Testing: A Special Case of Bias. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Valdes, K.A., C.L. Williamson, and M. Wagner 1990 The National Longitudinal Transition Study of Special Education Students. Statistical Almanac, Volume 1. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Weston, Tim 1997 Investigating the Validity of the Accommodation of Oral Presentation: Proposal for Research. Prepared for September 12, 1997, NVS Panel meeting.
Willingham, Warren, M. Ragosta, Randy E. Bennett, Henry Braun, Donald A. Rock, and Donald Powers 1988 Testing Handicapped People. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Baxter, Gail P., and Robert Glaser in press Investigating the cognitive complexity of science assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice.
DeStefano, Lizanne, P. David Pearson, and Peter Afflerbach 1997 Content validation of the 1994 National Assessment of Educational Progress in reading: Assessing the relationship between the 1994 assessment and the reading framework. Pp. 1-50 in Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Greeno, James G., P. David Pearson, and Alan H. Schoenfeld 1997 Implications for the National Assessment of Educational Progress of research on learning and cognition. Pp. 151-215 in Assessment in Transition: Monitoring the Nation's Educational Progress: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Grouws, Douglas, ed. 1996 Handbook of Research on Teaching and Learning Mathematics. New York: Macmillan.
Hamilton, Laura S., E. Michael Nussbaum, and Richard E. Snow 1997 Interview procedures for validating science assessments. Applied Measurement in Education 10(2):181-200.
Johnson, Eugene G., Stephen Lazer, and Christine Y. O'Sullivan 1997 NAEP Reconfigured: An Integrated Redesign of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Prepared by Educational Testing Service, Westat, and National Computer Systems, August; NCES Working Paper Series No. 97-31, October. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Kenney, Patricia Ann 1999 Families of items in the NAEP mathematics assessment. In Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds. Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board of Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Kenney, Patricia Ann, and Edward A. Silver 1997 Results from the Sixth Mathematics Assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc.
Minstrell, James 1999 Student thinking, instruction, and assessment in a facet-based learning environment. In Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds. Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
1991 Facets of students' knowledge and relevant instruction. In Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies , Reinders Duit, Fred Goldberg, and Hans Niedderer, eds., Proceedings of an International Workshop, Bremen: Germany.
Minstrell, James, and Earl Hunt 1992 Instructional Design and Tools to Assist Teachers in Addressing Students' Understanding and Reasoning. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April 23, 1992.
Mislevy, Robert J. 1993 Foundations of a new test theory. In Test Theory for a New Generation of Tests, N. Fredericksen, R.J. Mislevy, and I.I. Bejar, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Murnane, Richard J., and F. Levy 1996 Teaching the New Basic Skills. New York: Free Press.
National Academy of Education 1997 Assessment in Transition: Monitoring the Nation's Educational Progress, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1996 Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading , Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1993 The Trial State Assessment: Prospects and Realities, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1992 Assessing Student Achievement in the States, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
National Assessment Governing Board no date a Mathematics Framework for the 1996 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
no date b Reading Framework for the National Assessment of Educational Progress: 1992-1998. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
no date c Science Assessment and Exercise Specifications for the 1996 NAEP. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
no date d Science Framework for the 1996 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics 1989 Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
National Research Council 1999a How People Learn: New Developments from the Science of Learning. John Bransford, Ann Brown, and Rodney R. Cocking, eds. Committee on the Science of Learning, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
1999b Evaluation of the Voluntary National Tests: Phase 1 Report. Lauress L. Wise, Robert M. Hauser, Karen J. Mitchell, and Michael J. Feuer, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
O'Sullivan, Christine Y., Clyde M. Reese, and John Mazzeo 1997 NAEP 1996 Science Report Card for the Nation and the States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Pearson, David, and Lizanne DeStefano 1994 Content validation of the 1992 NAEP in reading: Classifying items according to the reading framework. Pp. 285-314 in The Trial State Assessment: Prospects and Realities: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Reese, Clyde M., Karen E. Miller, John Mazzeo, and John Dossey 1997 NAEP 1996 Mathematics Report Card for the Nation and the States: Findings from the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Resnick, Lauren B. 1987 Education and Learning to Think. Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
SCANS Commission 1991 What Work Requires of Schools: A SCANS Report for America 2000. The Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.
Shavelson, Richard J. 1997 On a science performance assessment technology: implications for the future of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Pp. 103-122 in Assessment in Transition: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Shavelson, Richard J., Gail P. Baxter, and X. Gao 1993 Sampling variability of performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement 30(3):215-232.
Silver, Edward A., Cengiz Alacaci, and Despina Stylianou 1998 Gaining Insights into Students' Problem Solving: An Analysis of Student Responses to NAEP's Constructed-Response Questions. Presentation at the American Educational Research Association Meeting, April.
Silver, Edward A., and Patricia Ann Kenney 1994 The content and curricular validity of the 1992 NAEP TSA in mathematics . Pp. 231-284 in The Trial State Assessment: Prospects and Realities: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment . Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Silver, Edward A., Patricia Ann Kenney, and Leslie Salmon-Cox 1992 The content and curricular validity of the 1990 NAEP mathematics items: A retrospective analysis. Pp. 157-218 in Assessing Student Achievement: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Sireci, Stephen G., H. Jane Rogers, Hariharan Swaminathan, Kevin Meara, and Frederic Robin 1999 An external evaluation of the content representation of the 1996 grade 8 NAEP science assessment. In Grading the Nation's Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, James W. Pellegrino, Lee R. Jones, and Karen J. Mitchell, eds., Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress, Board on Testing and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
White, B.Y., and J. Fredericksen 1998 Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction 16:3-118.
Alexander, Lamar 1991 America 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Barron, Sheila, and Daniel Koretz in press Interpretation and use of the NAEP Trial State Assessment Results by the Media. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Brennan, Robert L. 1998 Misconceptions at the intersection of measurement theory and practice . Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 17(1):5-9.
Bullock, Cheryl Davis, and Lizanne DeStefano 1998 A study of the utility of results from the 1992 Trial State Assessment (TSA) in reading for state-level administrators of assessment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 20(1):47-51.
Burstein, Leigh, Daniel Koretz, Robert Linn, Brenda Sugrue, John Novak, Eva L. Baker, and Elizabeth Lewis Harris 1996 Describing performance standards: Validity of the 1992 National Assessment of Educational Progress achievement level descriptors as characterizations of mathematics performance. Educational Assessment 3(1):9-51.
Cohen, Jon, Elizabeth Greenberg, and George Bohrnstedt 1997 NAEP Achievement Standards, Background, and Options. Unpublished paper prepared by American Institutes for Research.
Education Week 1998 Quality Counts. 17(17).
Goldberg, Jeanne P. 1998 The recommended dietary allowances: Can they inform the development of standards of academic achievement? Applied Measurement in Education 11(1):97-105.
Hambleton, Ronald K. 1997 Enhancing the Validity of NAEP Achievement Level Score Reporting. Presentation at the National Assessment Governing Board Achievement Levels Committee meeting, Boulder, CO, August 20-22.
Hambleton, Ronald K., and Mary Lyn Bourque 1991 The Levels of Mathematics Achievement (Volume III, Technical Report). Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
Hanser, Lawrence M. 1998 Lessons for the National Assessment of Educational Progress from military standard setting. Applied Measurement in Education 11(1):81-95.
Impara, James C., and Barbara S. Plake 1998 Teachers' ability to estimate item difficulty: A test of the assumptions in the Angoff standard setting method. Journal of Educational Measurement 35(1):69-81.
Jasanoff, Sheila 1998 Science and judgment in environmental standard setting. Applied Measurement in Education 11(1):107-120.
Kane, Michael 1995 Examinee-centered vs. task-centered standard setting. Pp. 119-141 in Joint Conference on Standard Setting for Large-Scale Assessments: Proceedings Volume II. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Koretz, Daniel M., and Edward Deibert 1995/1996 Setting standards and interpreting achievement: A cautionary tale from the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Educational Assessment 3(1):53-81.
Lewis, D.M., D.R. Green, H.C. Mitzel, K. Braum, and R. Patz 1998 The Bookmark Standard-setting Procedure: Methodology and Recent Implications . Presentation at the National Council on Measurement in Education annual meeting, April.
Linn, Robert L. 1998 Validating inferences from National Assessment of Educational Progress achievement-level setting. Applied Measurement in Education 11(1):23-47.
Linn, Robert L., and Lorrie A. Shepard 1997 Item-by-item Standard Setting: Unintended Consequences Due to Less Than Perfect Item-correlatons. Presentation at the Council of Chief State School Officers Large-Scale Assessment Conference.
Linn, Robert L., Daniel M. Koretz, Eva L. Baker, and Leigh Burstein 1991 The Validity and Credibility of the Achievement Levels for the National Assessment of Educational Progress in Mathematics. Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of Evaluation, University of California.
McLaughlin, Donald H., Phyllis A. DuBois, Marian S. Eaton, Dey E. Ehrlich, Fran B. Stancavage, Catherine A. O'Sonnell, Jin-Ying Yu; Lizanne DeStefano, David Pearson, Diane Bottomley, Cheryl Ann Bullock, Matthew Hanson, and Cindi Rucinski 1993 Comparison of teachers' and researchers' ratings of students' performance in mathematics and reading with NAEP measurement of achievement levels . Pp. 283-364 in Setting Performance Standards for Student Achievement: Background Studies, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
Mehrens, William A. 1995 Methodological issues in standard setting for educational exams. Pp. 221-263 in Joint Conference on Standard Setting for Large-Scale Assessments: Proceedings Volume II. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
National Academy of Education 1997 Assessment in Transition: Monitoring the Nation's Educational Progress, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1996 Quality and Utility: The 1994 Trial State Assessment in Reading, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1993a Setting Performance Standards for Student Achievement, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1993b The Trial State Assessment: Prospects and Realities, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
1992 Assessing Student Achievement in the States, Robert Glaser, Robert Linn, and George Bohrnstedt, eds. Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP Trial State Assessment. Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
National Assessment Governing Board 1997 What Do Students Know? 1996 NAEP Science Results for 4th, 8th, and 12th Graders. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
O'Sullivan, Christine Y., Clyde M. Reese, and John Mazzeo 1997 NAEP 1996 Science Report Card for the Nation and the States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Pellegrino, James, Lauress Wise, and Nambury Raju 1998 Guest editors' note. Applied Measurement in Education 11(1):1-7.
Reckase, Mark D. 1998 Converting boundaries between National Assessment Governing Board performance categories to points on the National Assessment of Educational Progress score scale: The 1996 science NAEP process. Applied Measurement in Education 11(1):9-21.
Reese, Clyde M., Karen E. Miller, John Mazzeo, and John Dossey 1997 NAEP 1996 Mathematics Report Card for the Nation and the States: Findings from the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Shepard, Lorrie A. 1995 Implications for standard setting of the National Academy of Education evaluation of the National Assessment of Educational Progress achievement levels. Pp. 143-160 in Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Standard Setting for Large-Scale Assessments, Volume II. Presentation at the Joint Conference on Standard Setting for Large-Scale Assessments, October 5. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Stufflebeam, Daniel L., Richard M. Jaeger, and Michael Scriven 1991 Summative Evaluation of the National Assessment Governing Board's Inaugural 1990-91 Effort to Set Achievement Levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Prepared for the National Assessment Governing Board, August 23.
U.S. General Accounting Office 1993 Educational Achievement Standards: NAGB's Approach Yields Misleading Interpretations. GAO/PEMD-93-12. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
American Institutes for Research 1997 Redesign Plan for a More Useful National Assessment of Education Progress, George Bohrnstedt, Jon Cohen, Archie Lapointe, Roger Levine, and Christine Paulsen, eds. Prepared for National Center for Education Statistics, June, Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
Bay, Luz, Lee Chen, Bradley A. Hanson, Jay Happel, Michael J. Kolen, Timothy Miller, Mary Pommerich, James Sconing, Tianyou Wang, and Catherine Welch 1997 ACT's NAEP Redesign Project: Assessment Design is the Key to Useful and Stable Assessment Results . Prepared by ACT for U.S. Department of Education; NCES Working Paper Series No. 97-30, October. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Forsyth, Robert, Ronald Hambleton, Robert Linn, Robert Mislevy, and Wendy Yen 1996 Design/Feasibility Team: Report to the National Assessment Governing Board. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
Johnson, Eugene G., Stephen Lazer, and Christine Y. O'Sullivan 1997 NAEP Reconfigured: An Integrated Redesign of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Prepared by Educational Testing Service, Westat, and National Computer Systems, August; NCES Working Paper Series No. 97-31, October. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
National Assessment Governing Board 1997 Bridging Policy to Implementation: A Resolution. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
1996 Policy Statement on Redesigning the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
