Grants and Contracts Details
Description
Largely due to the pressure created by the adequate yearly progress (AYP)
provision of the 2002No ChildLeft Behind Act, many states are now looking toward
technology to provide a means for assessing students quickly and affordably (Bennett,
2002; Bushweller, 2000; Hamilton et aI., 2000; Trotter, 2002). At last count, at least 12
states (FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, MN, NC, OR, PA, SD, UT, VA) are actively investigating
the feasibility of converting paper-and-pencil-based tests into computer-based tests (John
Olson, CCSSO, personal communication June, 2002). However, in doing so most states
are proceeding cautiously for fear that changes in test format potentially can invalidate
test reliability.and trend data. As a result, rather than utilizing technology as a means for
creating a better assessment, most states are merely using it as a means for saving time
and money. In fact, in many cases technology may be creating barriers for some students
by preventing them from using assistive technologies or by testing them on their
computer skills rather than on the constructs intended by the test creators (Trotter, 2002).
The unfortunate outcome of most states' rush toward technology is that many of
the more pedagogically-sound virtues of technology are being overlooked. These
advantages include improved ability to test cognitive constructs, better matching of
classroom and assessment tools, increased potential for use of assessment results to
inform subsequent instruction, and increased accessibility for students with disabilities
and limited English proficiency (Bennett, 2001; Chung & Baker, 1997; Dolan & Rose,
2000; Mislevy et aI., 2001; Ruiz-Primo et aI., 1997; Russell, 2000). Among these, the
ability to provide a fairer and more inclusive test through technology is the most
compelling given the Federal requirement that states demonstrate AyP for students with
disabilities.
This investigation proposed by the University of Kentucky and CAST will
describe the implementation of Kentucky's technology-based accessible assessment
proto-type, verify accessibility for the widest range of users, compare student assessment
results among user and non-user schools and students, and compare the student results in
schools that implemented universal design for learning during instruction with schools
that did not implement UDL for instruction. Using this information, we plan to replicate
the design for Maine. Maine has had extensive experience in utilizing the principles of
UDL in the design of curriculum, but to date, has not implemented UDL for statewide
assessments.
Multiple methodologies will be used in the investigation including interviews,
focus groups, document analysis, surveys, participant observation and data analysis to
address seven research questions. The results will be reported for each state as a part of
an embedded case-study design. Then a cross-case analysis will be conducted to identify
common themes, distinct differences, and summary results in the two states.
Status | Finished |
---|---|
Effective start/end date | 10/1/02 → 9/30/06 |
Fingerprint
Explore the research topics touched on by this project. These labels are generated based on the underlying awards/grants. Together they form a unique fingerprint.