how a theoretical and data-based modification process can help students eligible for an aa-mas the...
TRANSCRIPT
How a Theoretical and Data-based Modification Process Can Help
Students Eligible for an AA-MAS
The Consortium for Alternate Assessment Validity and Experimental Studies
(CAAVES Project)
Presented by Ryan J. Kettler on April 15, 2009 at the annual meeting for the National Center for Measurement in Education San Diego, CA
The CAAVES project is funded by theUS Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education
2
CAAVES Project Research Questions
We sought to answer the following questions about item modifications:
1) Will modifications in testing conditions change the reliability of measurement?
2) Will taking the test under modified conditions change the comparability of scores for eligible students?
3) What specific modifications are the most helpful for making the scores of eligible students comparable to the scores of ineligible students?
Multi-State Sample
Students without
Disabilities, Ineligible
Students with
Disabilities, Ineligible
Students with
Disabilities, Eligible
Arizona 28 25 21
Hawaii 20 16 18
Idaho 62 43 59
Indiana 159 152 152
Typical Item in Original Condition
Reading Item in Original Condition
Item Modification Strategies
Universal Design Principles
Research on item answer choices
Cognitive Load Theory
Cognitive lab results
CAAVES Item Modification Strategies
For all items: Removed least effective distractor Increased white space
For many items: Bolded key vocabulary terms Simplified language in the directions, stimulus,
stem, and answer choices Reorganization of layout Added graphic support
Reading Item in Modified Condition
Mathematics Item in Modified Condition
Reliability and Concurrent Validity with a Proficiency Test
Mean Item Difficulty by Group and Condition in Reading
* Student abilities were equated using a Rasch model.
Mean Item Difficulty by Group and Condition in Math
CAAVES Modified Achievement CCSSO 2008 12
* Student abilities were equated using a Rasch model.
Upcoming Analyses: Difficulty Change on Individual Items
Students without Disabilities, Ineligible
Students with Disabilities, Eligible
Individual Modification Analysis
Reviewed items based on differential boost Nine well-modified items were identified Six poorly-modified items were identified
Patterns were revealed for two modifications One modification was used in 7 of 9 well-modified
items, and only 1 of 6 poorly-modified items Another modification was used on all 3 poorly-
modified reading items, and 0 of 4 well-modified items