Ziomek, R. L., & Andrews, K. M. (1998). ACT assessment score gains of special-tested students who tested at least twice . National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, Kansas State University. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED426108
Ziomek, R. L., & Andrews, K. M. (1998). ACT assessment score gains of special-tested students who tested at least twice. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, Kansas State University. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED426108
Research Report (ERIC doc. reproduction service no. ED426108)
The investigation involved the scores of students with disabilities who took the ACT Assessment at least twice, and at least once under extended-time guidelines.
Performance data from three groups were analyzed: (a) prospective postsecondary students who tested at least twice under extended-time guidelines (n=3,410); (b) prospective postsecondary students who initially tested under standard time limits and then retested under extended-time guidelines (n=3,439); and (c) prospective postsecondary students who initially tested under extended-time guidelines and then retested under standard time guidelines (n=439). There were no specific disabilities provided, only that the participants were provided the extended-time accommodation.
ACT Assessment Composite Scores (extant assessment data) formed the dependent variable.
Of the three groups of students, the second group had the largest ACT Composite score gain of 3.2 scale score points. The third group of students had an average ACT Composite score decline of 0.6 scale score points. The first group had an average scale score gain of 0.9 points, which was similar to that of students who tested twice under standard-time limits. The results of these analyses raised two important questions: (1) Do students with disabilities benefit from taking the ACT Assessment under extended time? (2) What do these results suggest regarding the 'flagging' of test scores of students who have been provided extended time as a testing accommodation? The latter issue was noted as directly related to the concern over comparability of test scores between standard and nonstandard administrations.