Kettler, R. J., Rodriguez, M. C., Bolt, D. M., Elliott, S. N., Beddow, P. A., & Kurz, A. (2011). Modified multiple-choice items for alternate assessments: Reliability, difficulty, and differential boost . Applied Measurement in Education , 24 (3), 210–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2011.580620

Journal Article

Kettler, R. J., Rodriguez, M. C., Bolt, D. M., Elliott, S. N., Beddow, P. A., & Kurz, A. (2011). Modified multiple-choice items for alternate assessments: Reliability, difficulty, and differential boost. Applied Measurement in Education, 24(3), 210–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2011.580620

Tags

Attention problem; Autism; Emotional/Behavioral disability; Hearing impairment (including deafness); K-12; Learning disabilities; Math; Middle school; Multiple accommodations; Multiple disabilities; No disability; Oral delivery; Physical disability; Reading; Recorded delivery (audio or video); Simplified language; Speech/Language disability; U.S. context; Visual cues; Visual impairment (including blindness)

URL

https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/hame20

Summary

Accommodation

This study reviewed the effects of modifications—the most common being simplified language, removal of response option, graphic support, and reorganization of layout (adding white space between questions, bolding key words, breaking one paragraph into several).

Participants

Three groups of grade 8 students participated, including (a) students without disabilities, (b) students with disabilities who would be eligible for a modified assessment, and (c) students with disabilities who would not be eligible for a modified assessment. Participants attended middle schools in four U.S. states: Arizona, Hawaii, Idaho, and Indiana. Demographic data including gender and ethnicity were reported.

Dependent Variable

The dependent variable was scores on computer administered reading and math tests. Questions were drawn from a pool provided by Discovery Education Assessment, and were modified in some conditions.

Findings

Results showed that there were no meaningful differences in reliability between original and modified test items. Evidence suggested that modifications provided a differential boost for students with disabilities who were eligible for the modified assessment. Limitations of the study were reported, and future research directions were suggested.