Resources
Search Filters
Search Results
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: PDFThis 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
NCEO Synthesis Reports: A Comparison of IEP/504 Accommodations Under Classroom and Standardized Testing Conditions: A Preliminary Report on SEELS Data (#63)This year 2006 report uses SEELS data to examine accommodation use across different education conditions, comparing IEP and 504 Plan accommodations to what students reportedly received in the classroom and on standardized tests. Findings show a lack of alignment in accommodation use among IEP/504 plans, classroom conditions, and state testing situations. Further, some variability is seen for students with different categorical labels. The author notes that continued monitoring of alignment should continue.
Published: September 2006
NCEO Synthesis Reports: Item-Level Effects of the Read-Aloud Accommodation for Students with Reading Disabilities (#65)This year 2006 report examines data on accommodated and non-accommodated performances of students with specific reading disabilities on various math test items anticipated to be highly sensitive to accommodation effects. Analyses use three consecutive years of data from an elementary and middle school statewide assessment program. Findings show that within the fourth grade dataset, items classified as reading-hard (RH) and those classified as mathematically easy but difficult to read (ME/RH) were positively affected by the accommodation. Marginally significant findings were obtained for the ME/RH item set at the eighth grade level. The author notes limitations of the study, as well as implications for the findings.
Published: September 2006
NCEO Technical Reports: A Summary of Research on the Effects of Test Accommodations: 2002 through 2004 (#45)This year 2006 report summarizes a review of 49 empirical research studies on test accommodations between 2002 and 2004. It also provides direction for designing future research on accommodations.
Published: September 2006
Universal Design Online ManualFormats: OnlineA tool outlining steps that states can take to ensure universal design of assessments. The recommendations can be used for both computer and paper-based assessments. The authors recommend that states follow the steps provided in chronological order. Including any step in the design and review of tests may improve the design features of a state assessment. This online document is accompanied by a more detailed "How-To" manual (see "A State Guide to the Development of Universally Designed Assessments").
Published: 2006- Universal Design Online ManualFormats: Online
Steps that states can take to ensure universal design of computer and paper-based assessments. Including any step in the design and review of tests may improve the design features of a state assessment.
Published: 2006-09-01 
NCEO English Language Learners (ELLs) with Disabilities Reports: Large-Scale Assessments and English Language Learners with Disabilities - A Case Study of Participation, Performance, and Perceptions: "Walking the Talk!" (#15)This year 2006 report describes issues that surround the inclusion of English learners in states' large-scale assessment systems with a focus on gathering practical information at the local school level to reflect a variety of perspectives.
Published: August 2006
NCEO Synthesis Reports: High Stakes Graduation Exams: The Intended and Unintended Consequences of Minnesota's Basic Standards Tests for Students with Disabilities (#62)This year 2006 report examines the intended and unintended consequences of Minnesota's high stakes graduation exam on students with disabilities through focus group data and interviews. The study included focus groups included parents of students with disabilities, special educators from six schools in two large urban and suburban school districts, and member of the Minnesota Association of educational Assessment and Evaluation, and interviews from building administrators, school district representatives, and a state representative. Findings include a combination of positive and negative consequences such as increasing exposure to curriculum, increased participation in testing, raising expectations, high levels of anxiety and frustration, and drop-out concerns among other findings. The author concludes that further studies are needed to document empirically whether these consequences are occurring for students with disabilities.
Published: August 2006
NCEO Technical Reports: Using the Think Aloud Method (cognitive labs) to Evaluate Test Design for Students with Disabilities and English Language Learners (#44)This year 2006 report describes research on think aloud methods used to detect design issues in large scale assessments. Students included in this study were students with learning disabilities, hearing impairments, cognitive disabilities, English learners, and students without disabilities proficient in English. Findings address the ability of specific student groups to participate in the think aloud procedure and the level of mathematics items with most informative data.
Published: August 2006
NCLB and IDEA: What Parents of Students with Disabilities Need to Know and DoFormats: PDFA guide informing parents of students with disabilities about the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). These are two of the nation's most important federal laws relating to public education. While NCLB seeks to improve the education of all children - especially children from low-income families - IDEA focuses on the individual child and seeks to ensure specialized services for children with disabilities so they may benefit from education. NCLB provisions apply to all students, including those whose disabilities require special education. So parents need to understand the requirements of NCLB. IDEA, in its latest update by Congress, has been more closely aligned with NCLB, making it equally important that parents know how the two laws work together to improve academic achievement of students with disabilities.
Published: August 2006
NCLB e IDEA: Lo que los Padres de Estudiantes con Discapacidades Necesitan Saber y HacerFormats: PDFA Spanish translation of a guide informing parents of students with disabilities about the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). These are two of the nation's most important federal laws relating to public education. While NCLB seeks to improve the education of all children - especially children from low-income families - IDEA focuses on the individual child and seeks to ensure specialized services for children with disabilities so they may benefit from education. NCLB provisions apply to all students, including those whose disabilities require special education. So parents need to understand the requirements of NCLB. IDEA, in its latest update by Congress, has been more closely aligned with NCLB, making it equally important that parents know how the two laws work together to improve academic achievement of students with disabilities. Content is in Spanish.
Published: August 2006- Testimony of Rachel Quenemoen, Before the Committee on Education and the Workforce, United States House of RepresentativesFormats: Online
This testimony was presented at the Hearing on No Child Left Behind: Ensuring High Academic Achievement for Limited English Proficient Students and Students with Disabilities, before the Committee on Education and the Workforce, United States House of Representatives.
Published: 2006-07-26