Resources
Search Filters
Search Results
NCEO Technical Reports: Student Think-Aloud Reflections on Comprehensible and Readable Assessment Items: Perspectives on What Does and Does Not Make an Item Readable (#48)A document reporting on research related to large-scale assessments for students with learning disabilities in reading. The researchers examined the role of "readable and comprehensible" test items that could make assessments more universally designed, using think-aloud methods to better understand how interventions to improve readability affect student performance. Reducing word counts in items and making important words bold did not seem to affect student achievement but vocabulary did. Students had difficulty with non-construct vocabulary in both the stem and answer choices of items as well as with words that have negative prefixes (e.g., dis). This suggests that readability correlates with vocabulary and that construct and non-construct vocabulary must be clearly defined in order to make tests more accessible.
Published: September 2007
Learning Opportunities for Your Child Through Alternate Assessments: Alternate Assessments Based on Modified Academic Achievement StandardsFormats: PDFA guide helping parents of students with disabilities understand a new state alternate assessment allowable under No Child Left Behind. While few states are currently offering this assessment option, some will be developing it in the coming years. Parents will need to understand what it is and how to decide if it is the right option for their child.
Published: 2007
NCEO Technical Reports: A Summary of the Research on the Effects of Test Accommodations: 2005-2006 (#47)This year 2007 report summarizes 32 research studies on testing accommodations published in 2005-2006. The report provides information on participants, specific disability characteristics, research design, findings, and limitations. The report also identifies promising areas of research, and makes recommendations.
Published: August 2007- NCEO Annual Performance Reports and State Performance Plans: 2004-2005 State Assessment DataFormats: PDF
A report summarizing assessment data from State Performance Plans.
Published: June 2007 
PARA Accessible Reading Assessment Reports: What Do State Reading Test Specifications Specify?A report examining state assessment blueprints or test specifications for state reading assessments. The No Child Left Behind Act requires all states to assess student reading, but each state is responsible for selecting what will be tested and how in its large-scale statewide assessments. As part of this process, states develop standards with which both instruction and assessments are expected to align. State standards for reading vary by definition and focus from state to state. The authors of this paper looked at:
- Themes related to the purposes and constructs of assessments
- How those themes related to state standards
- The number of items assigned to particular constructs
- The types of items typically found in statewide assessments
Published: June 2007- Hints and Tips for Addressing Accommodations Issues for Peer ReviewFormats: PDF
Information and examples that states can use in responding to accommodation criteria in the Standards and Assessment Peer Review process, and to address the need for continued improvement after approval.
Published: 2007-04-02 
Hints and Tips for Addressing Accommodations Issues for Peer ReviewFormats: PDFA report examining the key accommodations issues that have arisen for states in the recent federal standards and assessments peer review process. The report by the Institute's National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) was developed in collaboration with the Assessing Special Education Students (ASES) State Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standards (SCASS), and results from an analysis of peer review comments on accommodations. This publication highlights examples of assessment accommodations that were considered acceptable and unacceptable for peer review and includes NCEO recommendations for best practices with regard to assessment accommodations.
Published: 2007
NCEO Technical Reports: Nearing the Target in Disaggregated Subgroup Reporting to the Public on 2004-2005 Assessment Results (#46)This year 2007 report describes the public reporting of participation and performance data for students with disabilities published on state department of education web sites for the 2004-2005 school year. It describes the state assessment systems, how data were reported, and achievement gaps. It concludes with recommendations for public reporting.
Published: April 2007- How NCLB Affects Students with DisabilitiesFormats: Online
This testimony was presented at a hearing before the Committee on Education and Labor.
Published: 2007-03-29 
Educational Policy Reform Research Institute Reports: Profiles of Reform: Four States' Journeys to Implement Standards-Based Reform with Students with DisabilitiesFormats: PDFThis year 2007 report is a synthesis of research conducted in four states and eight districts by the Educational Policy Reform Research Institute (EPRRI) to investigate and describe the impact of including students with disabilities in evolving state educational accountability systems.
Published: March 2007
NCEO English Language Learners (ELLs) with Disabilities Reports: Standards-Based Instructional Strategies for English Language Learners with Disabilities (#18)This year 2007 report describes the extent of information on instructional strategies provided for English learners with disabilities available to educators as a result of a review of state standards and supplementary instructional documents.
Published: February 2007
PARA Accessible Reading Assessment Reports: Examining Differential Distractor Functioning in Reading Assessments for Students with DisabilitiesA report examining the incorrect response choices, or distractors, of students with disabilities in standardized reading assessments. Differential distractor functioning (DDF) analysis differs from differential item functioning (DIF) analysis, which treats all answers alike and examines all wrong answers against the correct answer. DDF analysis, in contrast, examines only the wrong answers. If different groups, such as students with disabilities and students without disabilities, preferred different incorrect responses to an item, then the item could mean something different to the different groups. The authors found items showing DDF for students with disabilities in grade 9, but not for grade 3. Results also suggest that items showing DDF were more likely to be located in the second half of the assessments rather than the first half. Additionally, results suggest that in items showing DDF, students with disabilities were less likely to choose the most common distractor than their non-disabled peers. Results of this study can shed light on potential factors affecting the accessibility of reading assessments for students with disabilities.
Published: January 2007
PARA Accessible Reading Assessment Reports: Examining Differential Item Functioning in Reading Assessments for Students With DisabilitiesA report examining group differences between students with disabilities and students without disabilities using differential item functioning (DIF) analyses in a high-stakes reading assessment. Results indicated that for grade 9, many items exhibited DIF and these were more likely to be located in the second half of the assessment subscales. After accounting for reading ability, when compared to their non-disabled peers, students with disabilities consistently under-performed on items located in the second half relative to the items located in the first half. These results were seen in grade 9 for data from two different states, but these results were not seen for grade 3. This study has several limitations to the data. There was no access to information about the testing accommodations that students with disabilities might have received, and no information about the type of disabilities. Results of this study can shed light on potential factors affecting the accessibility of reading assessments for students with disabilities, in an ultimate effort to provide assessment tools that are conceptually and psychometrically sound for all students.
Published: January 2007
NCEO English Language Learners (ELLs) with Disabilities Reports: Use of Chunking and Questioning Aloud to Improve the Reading Comprehension of English Language Learners with Disabilities (#17)This year 2006 report provides details about a series of single-subject research studies examining how chunking and questioning aloud could be used to improve grade-level standards-based reading achievement of English learners with learning disabilities.
Published: December 2006
NCEO English Language Learners (ELLs) with Disabilities Reports: Math Strategy Instruction for Students with Disabilities who are Learning English (#16)This year 2006 report describes a series of single-subject studies examining the effect of a teacher-directed "think aloud" instructional strategy in math with English learners with disabilities.
Published: November 2006
A State Guide to the Development of Universally Designed AssessmentsA resource guide describing universal design for assessments -- an approach to educational assessment based on principles of accessibility for a wide variety of end users. Elements of universal design include inclusive test population; precisely defined constructs; accessible, non-biased items; tests that are amenable to accommodations; simple, clear and intuitive instructions and procedures; maximum readability and comprehensibility; and maximum legibility. The purpose of this guide is to provide states with strategies for designing tests from the very beginning, through conceptualization and item construction, field-testing, item reviews, statewide operationalization, and evaluation. The objective is to create tests that present an accurate measure of the knowledge and skills of the diverse population of students enrolled in today's public schools.
Published: 2006- A State Guide to the Development of Universally Designed AssessmentsFormats: PDF
Test design strategies for accurately measuring the knowledge and skills of a diverse student population from test conceptualization and item construction, to field-testing, item reviews, statewide operationalization, and evaluation.
Published: 2006-09-01 - Educational Policy Reform Research Institute Reports: Topical Review Seven: Accountability for Students with Disabilities Who Receive Special Education: Characteristics of the Subgroup of Students with Disabilities (#7)Formats: PDF
This year 2006 topical review is one of two that synthesize a set of analyses and studies that have been conducted under the auspices of the Educational Policy Reform Research Institute (EPRRI). This report presents the quantitative analyses, and its purpose is to examine specific features of the subgroup of students with disabilities as they relate to the specific accountability requirements.
Published: September 2006 
NCEO Policy Directions: Using Systematic Item Selection Methods to Improve Universal Design of Assessments (#18)This year 2006 report provides an overview of item selection methods for assessments and suggests that a combination of methods will optimize characteristics of universal design and produce better results. The report outlines strengths and weaknesses of each method, and makes the recommendation that all methods be employed systematically and in conjunction with each other.
Published: September 2006
NCEO Synthesis Reports: 2005 State Policies on Assessment Participation and Accommodations for Students with Disabilities (#64)This year 2006 report analyzes states' participation and accommodation policies for students with disabilities for school year 2005. Key findings include (1) increased clarification for when accommodations can be used, (2) controversial accommodations continue to be read aloud questions, sign interpret questions and calculator use, (3) spell check appears to be more widely accepted than in the past, (4) that most states permit extended time with no restriction, and (5) that fewer states allow testing over multiple days. Also, most states now have user accessible policies on their web sites. Authors note the analysis was descriptive and there was no attempt to determine degree of compliance to federal requirements.
Published: September 2006