Psychometric issues in Testing Students With Disabilities

Geisinger, Kurt F.

doi:10.1207/s15324818ame0702_2

Cited by 37 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many of the adapted, accommodated, and modified assessments for SWDs often present threats to equating assumptions and can complicate equating (Geisinger, 1994).…”

Section: Research On Equating Assessments For Students With Disabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considerations for Equating Alternate Assessments: Two Case Studies of Alternate Assessments Based on Alternate Achievement Standards

Wyse

Dean

Viger

et al. 2013

Applied Measurement in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of alternate assessments for students with disabilities plays a pivotal role in state and national accountability systems. An important assumption in the use of alternate assessments in these accountability systems is that scores are comparable on different test forms across diverse groups of students over time. The use of test equating is a common way that states attempt to establish score comparability on different test forms. However, equating presents many unique, practical, and technical challenges for alternate assessments. This article provides case studies of equating for two alternate assessments in Michigan and an approach to determine whether or not equating would be preferred to not equating on these assessments. This approach is based on examining equated score and performance-level differences and investigating population invariance across subgroups of students with disabilities. Results suggest that using an equating method with these data appeared to have a minimal impact on proficiency classifications. The population invariance assumption was suspect for some subgroups and equating methods with some large potential differences observed.

show abstract

“…Many of the adapted, accommodated, and modified assessments for SWDs often present threats to equating assumptions and can complicate equating (Geisinger, 1994).…”

Section: Research On Equating Assessments For Students With Disabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considerations for Equating Alternate Assessments: Two Case Studies of Alternate Assessments Based on Alternate Achievement Standards

Wyse

Dean

Viger

et al. 2013

Applied Measurement in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, DIF analyses are typically run on sample sizes larger than 100 examinees, and this threshold is rarely met or even approached. Geisinger (1994) notes that simply altering the format of the assessment may still disadvantage some examinees since "[s]ome longer test administrations, especially those involving braille for test-takers with visual impairments or involving test-takers with physical impairments may introduce significant amounts of fatigue and, hence, error" (p. 129). He adds later that it may also take examinees more time to finish a large print version of a test, regardless of disability status, because of characteristics of that format.…”

Section: The Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Using Differential Item Functioning to Investigate the Impact of Testing Accommodations on an English-Language Arts Assessment for Students who are Blind or Visually Impaired

Stone

Cook

Laitusis

et al. 2010

Applied Measurement in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This validity study examined differential item functioning (DIF) results on large-scale state standards-based English-language arts assessments at grades 4 and 8 for students without disabilities taking the test under standard conditions and students who are blind or visually impaired taking the test with either a large print or braille form. Using the Mantel-Haenszel method, only one item at each grade was flagged as displaying large DIF, in each case favoring students without disabilities. Additional items were flagged as exhibiting intermediate DIF, with some items found to favor each group. A priori hypothesis coding and attempts to predict the effects of large print or braille accommodations on DIF were not found to have a relationship with the actual flagging of items, although some a posteriori explanations could be made. The results are seen as supporting the accessibility and validity of the current test for students who are blind or visually impaired while also identifying areas for improvement consisting mainly of attention to formatting and consistency.

show abstract

“…They concluded that the reliability of test forms administered to candidates with handicaps versus those without handicaps need not be of great concern for psychometricians. Geisinger (1994) noted, however, that this conclusion should be limited to large-scale assessments such as the SAT and GRE, for which accommodations are more carefully developed and implemented. Geisinger's cautionary note is based on the possibility that lesser known tests that may have less well-developed accommodations and variations in administration conditions have considerable potential for contributing error, which, in turn, could decrease test reliability.…”

Section: Testing Accommodationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The problem is that several assumptions underlying classical methods of equating are violated when candidates with disabilities are compared with those without disabilities (Geisinger, 1994). For example, the groups are not randomly selected, as classical equating would require.…”

Section: Equatingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Testing Accommodations for Examinees With Disabilities: A Review of Psychometric, Legal, and Social Policy Issues

Pitoniak

Royer

2001

Review of Educational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The provision of testing accommodations for examinees with disabling conditions has become an important topic in recent years. This review presents a summary of the relevant issues. The first section traces the history of legislation related to the testing of individuals with disabilities and presents a brief summary of guidelines issued by relevant testing organizations. The second section provides a description of disabilities typically accommodated in large-scale examinations and highlights the ever-increasing role of learning disabilities in testing practice. Summaries of legal cases concerning testing accommodations are then presented. Next, psychometric issues are described, and results and ideas for future research are presented. The review also examines the emerging role of learning disabilities in the area of testing accommodations and addresses the intensely debated social policy questions related to equity and fairness in educational assessment. Pitoniak and RoyerTindal, Hollenbeck, Heath, and Almond (1997; see also Hollenbeck, Tindal, & Almond, 1998) defined the two terms as follows.Accommodations do not change the nature of the construct being tested, but differentially affect a student's or group's performance in comparison to a peer group. Also, accommodations provide unique and differential access (to performance) so certain students or groups of students may complete the test and tasks without other confounding influences of test format, administration, or responding.Modifications result in a change in the test (how it is given, how it is completed, or what construct is being assessed) and work across the board for all students with equal effect. Because of the lack of interaction between "group" and "change in test," the modification itself does not qualify as an accommodation. (Hollenbeck et al., 1998, pp. 175-176) In this article, we focus on the provision of testing accommodations. 2 The review begins with a history of the legislation related to the testing of candidates with disabilities, followed by a brief summary of guidelines issued by relevant testing organizations. Next, a description of disabilities typically accommodated in large-scale examinations is provided, and the increasingly prominent role of learning disabilities in measurement is given specific focus. Following that section, legal cases concerning testing accommodations are summarized. Then a review of psychometric issues and results is presented, along with ideas for future research. The article concludes with a discussion that integrates these intertwined strands and places them within a social policy context.It should be noted that this article focuses on large-scale educational assessments. As the reader will see, testing accommodations involve customizing materials and testing conditions to the candidate's needs. Standardized testing, with an extensive literature on relevant issues, provides a useful starting point for a discussion of testing conditions. Individualized assessments and psychological tests, which hav...

show abstract

Psychometric issues in Testing Students With Disabilities

Cited by 37 publications

References 15 publications

Considerations for Equating Alternate Assessments: Two Case Studies of Alternate Assessments Based on Alternate Achievement Standards

Considerations for Equating Alternate Assessments: Two Case Studies of Alternate Assessments Based on Alternate Achievement Standards

Using Differential Item Functioning to Investigate the Impact of Testing Accommodations on an English-Language Arts Assessment for Students who are Blind or Visually Impaired

Testing Accommodations for Examinees With Disabilities: A Review of Psychometric, Legal, and Social Policy Issues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About