Education and demonstration – Question or problem eliciting response
Reexamination Certificate
2007-05-15
2007-05-15
Cheng, Joe H. (Department: 3714)
Education and demonstration
Question or problem eliciting response
C434S236000, C434S362000
Reexamination Certificate
active
11054019
ABSTRACT:
Methods for designing an assessment and providing accessibility features for a test taker profile are disclosed. A test taker profile, including multiple knowledge, skill and other attribute(s) (KSAs), is defined in which each KSA has a specific level. Each KSA is designated as either a focal KSA (an essential part of the targeted proficiency to be measured) or an ancillary KSA (not an essential part). For each focal KSA, a focal value (the value that the test taker must have to possess a high level in the targeted proficiency) is defined. For a particular test design alternative (which may include an accessibility feature), a requirement is determined for each KSA. An accessibility feature is selected which avoids indications of invalidity, including: a mismatch between the targeted proficiency and the expected proficiency; the test taker profile does not satisfy all ancillary requirements; and focal requirements are either excessive or insufficient.
REFERENCES:
patent: 6056556 (2000-05-01), Braun et al.
patent: 6108635 (2000-08-01), Herren et al.
patent: 2004/0076930 (2004-04-01), Steinberg et al.
Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., & Almond, R. G. “On The Structure Of Educational Assessments. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives.”2003, pp. 3-62, vol. 1, No. 1. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Landau, S. “Development Of An Audio-Tactile Accommodation For Delivery Of Standardized Tests To Students Who Are Blind Or Visually Impaired—Interim Progress Report(Feb. 2004)”. (U.S. Department of Education, SBIR Grant ED-02-CO-0054). Touch Graphics Company. New York.
Messick, S. “The Interplay Of Evidence And Consequences In The Validation Of Performance Assessments.”Mar. 1994. Education Researcher, vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 13-23.
Spearman, C. “General Intelligence” Objectively Determined And Measured. American Journal of Psychology, 1904, vol. 15, pp. 201-293.
Linn, R. L. “Validation Of The Uses And Interpretations Of Results Of State Assessment And Accountability Systems.” Chapter 2. Large-Scale Assessment Programs For All Students: Validity, Technical Adequacy, and Implementation. 2002. pp. 27-48. G. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mahwah, New Jersey.
Kane, M. “An Argument-Based Approach To Validity.”Quantitative Methods in Psychology, Psychological Bulletin, 1992, pp. 527-535. vol. 112, No. 3.
National Research Council. “Keeping Score For All: The Effects Of Inclusion And Accommodation Policies On Large-Scale Educational Assessment.”Committee on Participation of English Language Learners and Students with Disabilities in NAEP and Other Large-Scale Assessments. 2004, pp. 1-9, 103-125. National Academy of Sciences. Washington, DC.
Heath, A., & Hansen, E. G. “Guidelines for Testing and Assessment.”IMS Guidelines for Developing Accessible Learning Applications. 2002. IMS Consortium. Retrieved Jul. 15, 2005 from: http://www.imsglobal.org/accessibility/accessiblevers/sec9.html, 8 pages.
Haertel, E. H. “Evidentiary Argument And The Comparability Of Scores From Standard Versus Nonstandard Test Administrations.”2003, 17 pages.
Haertel, E. H., & Wiley, D. A. “Comparability Issues When Scores Are Produced Under Varying Testing Conditions.”2003, 13 pages.
Elliott, S. N., & Roach, A. T. “The Impact Of Providing Testing Accommodations To Students With Disabilities.”2002. Retrieved May 27, 2003 from http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/testacc/Publications/aera2002.doc, 22 pages.
Aguirre-Munoz, Z., & Baker, E. “Improving The Equity And Validity Of Assessment-Based Information Systems(CSE Tech. Rep. No. 462).”Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST). 1997. Retrieved Apr. 29, 2003, from http://www.cse.ucla.edu/CRESST/Reports/TECH462.pdf, 18 pages.
Haertel, E. H., & Linn, R. L. “Comparability.”Technical Issues In Large-Scale Performance Assessment. 1996. pp. 59-78. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. In G. W. Phillips (Ed.).
Wainer, H., & Thissen, D. “On Examinee Choice In Educational Testing.”Review of Educational Research, 1994. pp. 159-195. vol. 64, No. 1.
Willingham, W. W., Ragosta, M., Bennett, R. E., Braun, H., Rock, D. A., & Powers, D. E. (Eds.).Testing Handicapped People. 1988. Allyn and Bacon, Inc., Boston., p. 144-185.
Allan, J. M., Bulla, N., & Goodman, S. A. “Test Access—Guidelines For Computer Administered Testing.”2003. American Printing House for the Blind. Louisville, KY. Retrieved Jul. 13, 2005 from: http://www.aph.org/tests/access, 87 pages.
Abedi, J., Courtney, M., & Leon, S. “Effectiveness And Validity Of Accommodations For English Language Learners In Large-Scale Assessments. CSE Report 608.”2003. Los Angeles, CA. (Center for the Study of Evaluation).: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing., 120 pages.
Abedi, J., & Dietel, R. “Challenges in the No Child Left Behind Act for English Language Learners.”CRESST Policy Brief No. 7. 2004, 6 pages.
Abedi, J., Hoffstetter, C. H., & Lord, C. “Assessment Accomodations For English Language Learners: Implications For Policy-Based Empirical Research.”Review of Educational Research, 2004. pp. 1-28. vol. 74, No. 1.
Sheinker, A., & Barton, K. E. “Guidelines For Inclusive Test Administration 2005.”2004. CTB McGraw-Hill. Monterey, CA. http://www.ctb.com/media/articles/pdfs/general/guidelines—inclusive.pdf, 17 pages.
National Assessment Governing Board. “Reading Framework For The 2003 National Assessment Of Educational Progress.”Washington DC: National Assessment Governing Board. 2002., 84 pages.
Pitoniak, M. J., & Royer, J. M. “Testing Accommodations For Examinees With Disabilities: A Review Of Psychometric, Legal And Social Policy Issues.”Review of Educational Research, 2001. pp. 53-104. vol. 71.
Phillips, S. E. “Legal Issues Affecting Special Populations In Large-Scale Testing Programs.”Large-Scale Assessment Programs For All Students: Validity, Technical Adequacy, And Implementation. 2002. pp. 109-148. Lawrence Erlbaum. Mahwah, NJ.
Sheehan, K. M., & Ginther, A. “What Do Multiple Choice Verbal Reasoning Items Really Measure? An Analysis of the Cognitive Skills Underlying Performance on TOEFL Reading Comprehension Items.”Jan. 2002. 48 pages.
Hanson, E. G., Forer, D. C., & Lee, M. J. “Toward Accessible Computer-Based Tests: Prototypes for Visual and Other Disabilities.”ETS TOEFL Research Reports RR-78. Nov. 2004., 113 pages.
Allman, C.Making “Tests Accessible For Students With Visual Impairments: A Guide To Test Publishers, Test Developers, And State Assessment Personnel”(2nd Ed.). Jun. 2004. American Printing House for the Blind. Louisville, KY. Retrieved Dec. 1, 2004, from http://www.aph.org/tests/access2/ , 55 pages.
Hansen, E. G., Mislevy, R. J., & Steinberg, L. S.“Evidence-Centered Assessment Design For Reasoning About Testing Accommodations In NAEP Reading And Math.”2003, 151 pages.
Messick, S. “Validity.”Educational Measurement. 3rd ed. 1989. pp. 13-103. Macmillan. New York.
Elliott, S. N., Kratochwill, T. R., & Schulte, A. G. “The Assessment Accommodations Checklist.” Helping Teachers and Parents Support All Students′ Participation in Testing Programs. 1999. CTB McGraw-Hill. Monterey, CA., 6 pages.
Mislevy, R. J. “Evidence And Inference In Educational Assessment.”Psychometrika. 1994. vol. 59, No. 4. pp. 439-483.
“Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0”W3C RecommendationMay 5, 1999. Retrieved Jul. 13, 2005 from the World Wide Web Consortium site: http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-Webcontent/. Editors: Chisholm, W., Vanderheiden, G., & Jacob
Hansen Eric G.
Mislevy Robert J.
Steinberg Linda S.
Cheng Joe H.
Educational Testing Service
LandOfFree
Accessibility of testing within a validity framework does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Accessibility of testing within a validity framework, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Accessibility of testing within a validity framework will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3808386