uda annotated bib

8/15/2019 UDA Annotated Bib

1/28

Annotated Bibliography for “technology-based assessment”

Allan, J. M., Bulla, N. & oodman, !.A. "#$$%. 'est Access( uidelines for )omputer-Administered 'esting. American *rinting +ouse for the Blind( ouisille, /. 0etrieed1ecember #%, #$$% from http(22333.aph.org

'his document highlights and addresses the problems of all aspects of test accessibility todisabled indiiduals, particularly those 3ith lo3 ision or 3ho are blind. 4n spite of adances intechnology "e.g., computer-administered tests it is clear that these indiiduals are still not able to perform 3ith their sighted peers on e5ual ground. 'he authors put forth the 6*rinciples of4nclusie 1esign6 and argue that tests must be made accessible to all potential test-ta7ers,regardless of format and2or disability. 8urther, this is only possible by initiating the process at thedesign stage9 accommodations at the point of test administration are not enough. 'his document proides information about the educational impact of isual disabilities and a general oerie3of present testing accommodations for paper and pencil tests, as 3ell as computer-based tests.

Austin, J. "#$$$. 'echnology and assessment. :ashington, 1.).( ;.!. 1ept. of


2/28

#$ce"tional %hildren , 1"#, DE-D%.

4nestigated group s indiidual administration of a eel D ideodisc ersion of the')B. Multiple-choice s true2false ')B formats 3ere also tested. 'he ')B consists of % subtestsrelated to employment and % related to independent liing. 4t includes simply 3orded and

illustrated test boo7lets and ideotapes that use sign language to present 5uestions in astandardiCed format. 'he # differently formatted ersions of the ideodisc ')B 3ere tested on#$F hearing-impaired "+4 !s "aged D#-%# yrs in a group and @# +4 !s "aged D@-# yrsindiidually. )orrelations for subtests on >ob-related social s7ills and money-management s7illsfaored group and indiidual administration modes and the multiple choice format. 'he multiple-choice format and group administration 3ere appropriate for the ma>ority of !s.

Bunderson, ).G. %om"uters in educational assessment: !n o""ortunity to restructureeducational "ractice "0eport No. 'M$DF$#E. :ashington, 1.).( =ffice of 'echnologyAssessment "


3/28

students under paper-based testing. :ith the current increase in computer-based assessment,

instructors and institutions must be a3are of and plan for possible test mode effects.

)onstantine, A. "#$$$. )omputers mightier than the pen in tests. Times #ducational(u""lement, )+-, 444.

0eeals that computer-based assessment ")BA methods hae increased studentsK performance and boosted correct responses in eHaminations. Attitudes of lecturers on computer- based tests9 Adantages of the )BA to further and higher education9 )omparison bet3een pencil2paper-methods in tests and )BA.

)utshall, !. "#$$D. Just clic7 here. Techni.ues: %onnecting #ducation & %areers, "E, %E-%.

8ocuses on technological adancements in education and assessment systems in the;nited !tates. eneral categories of )omputer based assessment ")BA9 Benefits of )BA tostudents9 =nline testing deeloped by the National =ccupational )ompetency 'esting 4nstitute.


4/28

+off, 1.. "D. 'esting. #ducation Wee, 1-"#, @.

*resents information on a study comparing test scores of students on computer-basedassessments and traditional printed tests. 0esults of the study9 *erformance of highly s7illedcomputer users on open-ended math 5uestions.

allagher, A., Bennett, 0.


5/28

students are li7ely to be the “canaries in the coal mine” as educators eHperiment 3ith ne3technological assessments.

reen3ood, ).0. "D? Adances in technology-based assessment 3ithin special education. #$ce"tional %hildren, 1"#, D$#-D$?.

'his article introduces a special issue on technology-based assessment 3ithin specialeducation. 4t notes the effects of the DFF 'echnology-0elated Assistance for 4ndiiduals 3ith1isabilities Act and briefly reie3s the nine papers in the issue.

reen3ood, ). 0 . & 0ieth, +. J. "D?. )urrent dimensions of technology-based assessment inspecial education. #$ce"tional %hildren , 1"#, D$E-DD%.

*roides a current perspectie on technology-based assessment "'BA and its role inspecial education and school psychology. 'he uni5ue contribution of 'BA has been to improe5uality through the merger of assessment methods and electronic technology, including

net3or7ing, eHpert systems, authoring soft3are, and multimedia. 'he success of thiscollaboration can be measured in terms of improements in the ability to describe and treatspecial education problems 3ith greater conceptual clarity, methodological eHpertise, andgenerality. )urrent 'BA includes at least ? dimensions( technology "e.g., the integration of teHt,graphics, audio, and ideo, assessment "e.g., behaioral assessment, method, and utiliCation"e.g., access, training, support, and cost.

+amilton, . !., lein, !. *., & oriO, :. "#$$$. ;sing :eb-based testing for large-scaleassessment "4*-D@. !anta Monica, )A( 0AN1 )orporation.

+egelson, !.. "D#, April. !ssessment of science teaching and learning outcomes. *aper presented at the meeting of the American 0esearch Association, !an 8rancisco, )A.

4ndicators of current issues and concerns in the assessment of science teaching andlearning outcomes are discussed. 'he greatest public attention to science test scores is deoted toscores from assessments that are eHternal to schools, including national assessments such as the National Assessment of


6/28

+elgeson, !. . & umar. 1. 1. "D%. A reie3 of educational technology in scienceassessment. 'ournal of %om"uters in 5athematics and (cience Teaching, 14"%2?, ##-#?%.

0eie3s emerging applications of microcomputers and hypermedia to assessment. ;se

consists mainly of computeriCed test administration of multiple-choice tests dra3n from item ban7s. !ignificant adantages are possible in seeral areas including immediate feedbac7 tostudents, formatie ealuation 3ith remediation possibilities, and monitoring home3or7 andlaboratory actiities. ains in assessment techni5ues include adaptie testing that matchesstudentKs leel of performance.

+uff, .. & !ireci, !.. "#$$D. Galidity issues in computer-based testing. #ducational 5easurement: ssues and 2ractice, 43"%, D@-#E.

Adances in technology are stimulating the deelopment of compleH, computeriCedassessments. 'he preailing rationales for deeloping computer-based assessments are improed

measurement and increased efficiency. 4n the midst of this measurement reolution, testdeelopers and ealuators must reisit the notion of alidity. 4n this article, the authors discussthe potential positie and negatie effects computer-based testing could hae on alidity, reie3the literature regarding alidation perspecties in computer-based testing, and proidesuggestions regarding ho3 to ealuate the contributions of computer-based testing to more alidmeasurement practices. 'hey conclude that computer-based testing sho3s great promise forenhancing alidity, but at this >uncture, it remains e5uiocal 3hether technological innoations inassessment hae led to more alid measurement.

4rin, .. & :al7er, +.M. "D?. Assessing childrens social s7ills using ideo-basedmicrocomputer technology. #$ce"tional %hildren, 1"#, DF#-D@.

0eie3s the content and procedural re5uirements of social-competence assessment forchildren 3ith disabilities and presents information on multiperspectie prototype assessmentsusing a ideodisc and a microcomputer 3ith a touch screen. Assessment content focus is on6>oining in6 3ith peers at 3or7 or play, dealing 3ith teasing and proocation, and complying3ith teacher directies. 4n each of these domains, cue recognition, response alternaties, anda3areness of conse5uences are assessed. *reliminary psychometric data from D$E students are presented on sensitiity, reliability, and construct alidity. 1ata indicate that the prototypeassessments discriminate among students 3ith different social 7no3ledge and perceptions, areconsistent internally and across time, and can be interpreted meaningfully across constructs.Anomalous alidity data reeal response biases related to assessment content and technology.

Jacobson, 0. . "D%. Ne3 computer techni5ue seen producing a reolution in educationaltesting. The %hronicle of 6igher #ducation, (e"tem7er 1, A##-#%, #@.

1iscusses computer adaptie tests ")A'!.


7/28

1ebate on using )A'! for college admissions9 4mpact of public-relations s7ills of test producerson use and acceptance.

entuc7y 1epartment of


8/28

to the study of e5uialence and that the often inconsistent findings result from the rapid changesin eHposure to technology.

Means, B., *enuel, B. & IuellmalC, ects. 'he first prototype assessment tas7, designed for middle and secondary school students, presents an engaging, problem-based learning tas7 that integrates technology use 3ithinestigation of an authentic problem, i.e., that a group of foreign eHchange students 3ants tocome to the ;nited !tates for the summer and needs to choose one of t3o cities to isit. 'hesecond prototype, tested 3ith a fourth2fifth-grade class, is a palm-top collaboration assessment.

Approach, pilot testing, results, and neHt steps are described for each prototype.


9/28

*ellegrino, J.:., )hudo3s7y, N. & laser, 0. "


10/28

access. Moing ahead 3ithout addressing the issues raised in this brief 3ill almost certainlyresult in fla3ed assessments.

0ic7etts, ). & :il7s, !.J. "#$$#. 4mproing student performance through computer-basedassessments( 4nsights from recent research. !ssessments & #valuation on 6igher

#ducation, 4 "E, ?E-?.

)ompared student performance on computer-based assessment to machine-gradedmultiple choice tests. 8ound that performance improed dramatically on the computer-basedassessment 3hen students 3ere not re5uired to scroll through the 5uestion paper. )oncluded thatstudents may be disadantaged by the introduction of online assessment unless care is ta7en 3iththe student-assessment interface.

0ussell, M. "#$$$. 4ts 'ime to ;pgrade( 'ests and Administration *rocedures for the Ne3Millennium. *aper presented at the !ecretaryKs )onference on


11/28

'echnology and Assessment( 'hin7ing Ahead -- *roceedings from a :or7shop. "#$$#.0etrieed !eptember , #$$% from 'he National Academies *ress :eb site(http(22333.nap.edu2boo7s2$%$$F%#$@2html2

'he 'echnology-Based Assessment *ro>ect. "#$$%. Techni.ues: %onnecting #ducation and%areers, 8 "#, DE.

ect.


12/28

!ince the D#$s, the business of school testing has largely been a proince of educational publishing. 'he same companies that published American teHtboo7s also distributed such 3ell-7no3n assessments as the !tanford Achieement 'est, the )alifornia Achieement 'est, and the4o3a 'ests of Basic !7ills. 'he big publishers cornered the mar7et for decades largely because of the high upfront costs of deeloping and alidating test content as 3ell as the complicated nature

of distributing and scoring paper tests. 'he mar7et for computer-based school testing should beabout as 3ide open as other technology and 4nternet business niches.


13/28

Annotated Bibliography for “test accommodations”

'he Alliance for 'echnology Access. "D?. )omputer resources for people 3ith disabilities( Aguide to eHploring todays assistie technology. Alameda, )A( +unter +ouse, 4nc.

Anderson-4nman, ., +orney, M., )hen, 1., & e3in, . "D?. +yperteHt literacy(=bserations from the


14/28

Burns,


15/28

%#O 2olicy Directions,

'his report eHamines issues concerning the proision of accommodations for students3ith disabilities participating in state and district assessments. 'he report considers 3hat anaccommodation is, 3hat 7inds of accommodations are aailable, 3ho should ma7e the decisionregarding accommodations, 3hen accommodations should be used, and ho3 accommodationsaffect test results. Analysis of state 3ritten guidelines has resulted in identification of thefollo3ing principles to guide decisions( "D base decisions on the studentKs needs9 "# use a formidentifying ariables in accommodation decisions9 "% hae people 3ho 7no3 the student ma7edecisions about accommodations9 "? align instruction, classroom testing, and district or stateassessment9 and "E consider the type of test. !tates are urged to hae a 3ritten assessment policy3hich reflects inclusie practices for student participation in assessment and clear assessmentaccommodation policies. '3o tables list types of assessment accommodations and sample5uestions to consider in the decision process.


16/28

ectie assessment process teachers may use indetermining alid test accommodations. :e conclude 3ith recommendations for practitioners.

8uchs, .!. & 8uchs, 1. "D. 8air and unfair testing accommodations. (chool !dministrator, "D$, #?-#.

'est accommodations are changes in standardiCed test conditions to e5ualiCeopportunities bet3een students 3ith or 3ithout disabilities by achieing alid scores. 'he4ndiiduals 3ith 1isabilities Act D amendments re5uire states and districts to include disabledstudents in accountability programs. Assumptions, practical implications, methodologies, andresources are discussed.

8uchs, .!., 8uchs, 1.,


17/28

8uchs, .!., 8uchs, 1.,


18/28

+anson,


19/28

Jayanthi, M. &


20/28

Meloy, .., 1eille, ). & 8risbie, 1.A. "#$$#. 'he effect of a read aloud accommodation ontest scores of students 3ith and 3ithout a learning disability in reading. Remedial &("ecial #ducation, 4+"?, #?F-#EE.

'he purpose of this study 3as to eHamine the effect of a read aloud testing

accommodation on students 3ith and 3ithout a learning disability in reading. A sample of #@$mid3estern middle school students "#?U 3ith a learning disability in reading, and @U 3ithoutsuch a disability 3ere randomly assigned to t3o eHperimental conditions for testing 3ith fourtests of the 4o3a 'ests of Basic !7ills. 'he test conditions 3ere standard administration andreading the tests aloud to the students. Based on a t3o-3ay "# X # analysis of ariance, 3ith testadministration and student status as the t3o fiHed factors, the students 3ith learning disabilitiesin reading, as 3ell as those 3ithout, eHhibited statistically significant gains 3ith the read aloudtest administration. 4nteraction effects 3ere not significant. 4mplications of these results for the

read aloud accommodation are presented.

National )enter on


21/28

0ith Disa7ilities !ct for "sychology "pp. #E-%@. :ashington, 1.).( American*sychological Association.

'he issue of nondiscrimination against persons 3ith disabilities is a ery ne3 one inmainstream psychometrics and industrial2organiCational psychology. 'esting accommodations

3ill be discussed under three broad categories( testing medium, time limits, and test content.egal and regulatory re5uirements Yfor employment testingZ and the role of rehabilitation psychologists is discussed.

=lson, . "#$$#. 'esting. #ducation Wee, 41"#$, @.

=ffers a loo7 at educational testing in the ;nited !tates. *ublication of K1ata-Based1ecision-Ma7ing,K released by the National Association of or focus of thischapter is on the area of testing accommodations 3hen there are fe3 legal precedents and tough


22/28

policy 5uestions. =ther topics discussed in this chapter include professional standards,accommodations s modifications, reporting and interpreting of scores, and recommendations based on legal re5uirements and psychometric properties.

*itonia7, M.J. & 0oyer, J.M. "#$$D. 'esting Accommodations for eHaminees 3ith disabilities( A

reie3 of psychometric, legal and social policy issues. Revie0 of #ducational Research,1"D, E%-D$?.

0eie3s seeral issues related to the proision of testing accommodations to eHaminees3ith disabilities. ;nited !tates la3s that act as catalysts for researching and implementing testingaccommodations9 1iscussion on learning disabilities9 !trategies for test accommodation9 egalcases related to the proision of testing accommodations for eHaminees 3ith disabilities9)ategories of difficulties in conducting research on testing accommodations.

!chulte, A.A..,


23/28

'his document summariCes the research on test changes to proide an empirical basis fordefining accommodations for students 3ith disabilities. 4t begins by proiding an historicaloerie3 of special education accountability. 4t describes ho3 separate special educationaccountability systems hae eoled and summariCes information on the participation of students

3ith disabilities in general education accountability systems. 'he role of the 4ndiidualiCed


24/28

on the specific types of accommodations used. =erall, studentsK assessment accommodationsmatched their instructional accommodations, though many students receied testingaccommodations that had not been receied in instruction. 4mplications are discussed for 4


25/28

Annotated Bibliography for “uniersal design of assessment”

Bar, ., & alluCCo, J. "D. The accessi7le school: /niversal design for educational settings Ber7eley, )A( M4 )ommunications.

Bo3e, 8.. "#$$$. /niversal design in education :estport, )'( Bergin & arey.

'horoughly but informally describes and applies the 6seen principles of universal design6 to arious aspects of formal schooling systems. 'he aspects include audio-isual andother resources for teaching and learning, computer rooms, email and 3eb pages, so the boo7 hasat least something to say to us all. =ffers cost-effectie 3ays to respond to the special needs oftodayKs dierse students.

Burgstahler, !. "#$$D. /niversal design of instruction !eattle( 1=-4', ;niersity of:ashington. 0etrieed August #$, #$$%, fromhttp(22333.3ashington.edu2doit2Brochures2Academics2instruction.html

Burgstahler, !. "#$$%. #.ual access: %om"uter la7s !eattle( 1=-4', ;niersity of :ashington.0etrieed August #$, #$$%, fromhttp(22333.3ashington.edu2doit2Brochures2'echnology2comp.access.html

)a3ley, J.8., 8oley, '.


26/28

1olan, 0. *., & 0ose, 1. +. "#$$$. Accurate assessment through ;niersal 1esign for earning.Journal of !pecial


27/28

8or students 3ith disabilities, electronic "or digital teHt offers many adantages oer print-based materials. A one-stop resource 3here teachers could 5uic7ly find electronic ersionsof curricular materials and the resources and supports they need to use them effectiely, een forthe neHt dayKs lesson, seems logical. )A!' is creating such a resource 3ith its ne3 ;niersalearning )enter ";), a :eb-based serice "http(22333.ulc.cast.org that 3ill enable teachers,

students, administrators, and parents to locate and ac5uire accessible digital content and soft3aretools to help them meet the needs of indiidual learners, especially those 3ith disabilities.

*isha, B. & )oyne, *. "#$$D. !mart from the start( 'he promise of ;niersal 1esign forearning. Remedial and ("ecial #ducation, 4 "?, D-#$%.

0ose, 1. "#$$D. ;niersal design for learning( Associate


28/28

333.adapten.org2uniersal2indeH.php

333.cast.org2udl

333.design.ncsu.edu2cud

333.education.umn.edu2nceo

http(22ncam.3gbh.org

333.trace.3isc.edu

'he 'race 0esearch & 1eelopment )enter is a part of the )ollege of

uda annotated bib

Documents