No description available.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the degree of concurrence between teachers' judgments of the academic achievement of students and the results of standardized,norm-referenced achievement tests. Although this issue had been addressed before, results reported in the literature lacked a sensitivity to the informational needs of educational policy makers and were obfuscated by significant differences in research design and analytical techniques. This study attempted to address the potential moderating effect of teachers' pre-established notions of students' knowledge, academic subject area, grade level, and student gender on the agreement level between teachers' judgment of student achievement and test results, while focusing on the ever increasing use of test scores to make decisions regarding student readiness for promotion/graduation and overall school accountability.Approximately 670 teachers were asked to rate their students as "not ready to succeed at the next grade level without remedial assistance" (non-masters) or "ready to succeed without additional instruction or intervention" (masters). Ratings were obtained in both English/language arts and mathematics for 15,935 students in grades 1, 2, 3, 6, and 8. The sample utilized was representative of the demographics of the state of Indiana. While appropriate statistical tests of significance were performed when appropriate, this study focused on effect size as the final determinant of "educational significance."Analyses revealed no practical reason to believe that teachers' judgments were influenced by their initial ratings of students as masters or non-masters, student gender, grade level, or subject matter. On the average, teachers' mastery/non-mastery ratings were found to agree with "cutscores" established through discriminant analysis in about 78% of the cases. These results were seen as encouraging, in that test results could be used to support teacher judgment, which seemed unaffected by moderating variables, while not offering information completely redundant with pre-existing teacher knowledge of student achievement. / Department of Educational Psychology

No description available.

Previous research has reported that the effectiveness of special education in remediating learning difficulties varies as a function of the type of classroom placement, the student's age, and their intellectual ability. More recent findings have also suggested that a learning disability is not a single diagnostic entity, but rather distinct subtypes of learning disabled students exist. The study sought to determine if cluster analysis of the present sample yielded subtypes which conformed to previously identified LD subtypes; and whether these different subtypes of learning disabled (LD) students respond differentially in terms of the students academic achievement.The sample was comprised of 136 LD subjects between the ages of 9 and 15 years old for whom Peabody Individual Achievement Test (PIAT) data was available for both initial assessment, and re-assessment three years later.Initial comparisons of the sample were conducted by examining differences in academic achievement for the three subtests of the PIAT for two different types of educational placement: full time versus part time; by racial groups; and between pre and post test results. Three main effects were found in the initial MANOVA on the PIAT subtests of math and reading recognition, however, none of the statistically significant results were determined to be of practical significance. These statistical results were consistent with previous research findings.The sample was subtyped using cluster analysis. A three cluster solution was determined using three variables: intelligence, achievement, and age of the subject. The three subtypes were described and determined to be consistent with subtypes previously identified. Cluster 1 was dropped from further analysis as not conforming to an LD profile and because of sample size.A 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 MANOVA was performed: cluster membership by placement by race by pre-post test results. Cluster 2 students significantly declined in their reading recognition achievement over the three years they were in special education, while Cluster 3 students gained significantly in reading recognition achievement over the same time period.The present results suggest that school psychologist should carefully consider not only whether a student is learning disabled, but the nature and severity of the disability when recommending placement. / Department of Educational Psychology

One hundred and fifteen second and third grade Anglo and Hispanic boys and girls from an isolated rural town in Arizona were tested on two nonverbal measures of cognitive skills to ascertain their predictive validity and ethnic bias. Bias was addressed by regression analysis, a technique that allows for the comparison of slopes and intercepts for two or more groups. The children from both ethnics were roughly equated on SES variables due to the location and nature of the community. The Raven's Coloured Test of Cognitive Skills (NTCS) were employed to predict the state-mandated California Achievement Test (CAT) and the pupils' grade point average (GPA). The results suggested that the Raven's exhibits both slope and intercept bias for three of the four criterion variables whereas the NTCS demonstrated bias only in terms of GPA. Both nonverbal tests correlated highly indicating that they are measuring similar skills. The NTCS generally had higher predictive validity than the Raven's. A combination of the two tests increased prediction by only a small amount. These results indicate that, contrary to previous research, the Raven's may be a biased predictor for Hispanics and that the NTCS appears both less biased and a better predictor. Both nonverbal test validities approached the WISC-R correlation coefficients for Hispanics. Neither test proved to be a potent predictor of Anglo test scores or GPAs. This differential validity infers that the nonverbal tests be employed with caution with native English speakers. The hypothesized reasons for the better performance of the NTCS included its measuring of more than one skill. The two tests were contrasted in terms of psychometric considerations, training time, and testing time. Limitations of the study as well as suggestions for further research with various non-native speakers of English was discussed.

M.A. (Clinical Psychology) / Please refer to full text to view abstract

No description available.

The use of cooperative learning as an instructional procedure for delivering instruction has become popular among many educators. Research in cooperative learning has provided positive indicators for improvement in academic achievement and attitudes towards self, peers, and school. Little research has been performed on the type of students that compose these groups. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of homogeneous and heterogeneous ability created groups on individual student performance. Through the use of two problem solving activities, students were exposed to cooperative learning experiences followed by individual performance assessments. The two cooperative exercises provided varying results. No significant interaction effects were found in either case. The first exercise showed a significant main effect for ability level. Students in high ability groups overall scored higher than both middle and low ability groups, (F=6.78, p<.01). The second exercise produced significant main effects for cooperative type, ability level, and teacher. Homogeneous groups performed on the average at a higher level than heterogeneous groups (F=6.88, p<.01). Both high and middle grouped students scored higher than low ability students (F=13.85, p<.01). Teacher differences were present for this exercise (F=4.67, p<.01). / Ph. D.

The purpose of this study was to identify possible variables that may contribute to a foster child's passing or failing of the California High School Exit Exam.

No description available.