In order is meet the requiremcnts for technically sound assessment instruments as required by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), this study investigates the construct validity of Indiana's alternate assessment, the Indiana Standards Tool for Alternate Reporting (ISTAR), a teacher rating assessment as compared to Indiana's general educational assessment, the Indiana Statewide Test of Educational Progress - Plus (ISTEP+), a criterion referenced assessment. Study participants consisted of 284 students from grades 3, 6, and 8. Students were from general and special education. All students in the study were considered not to have significant cognitive disabilities that would have exempted them from ISTEP+ participation. Therefore, all students in the study were required to participate in the fall 2003 ISTEP+ testing session. Students with disabilities in the study were identified as having one of four mild disabilities as defined by the Indiana Professional Standards Board (Mild Mental Disabilities, Learning Disabilities, Emotional Disabilities, or Other Health Impairment. Teachers rated students using the ISTAR assessment during a fall testing window from August 1, through October 31, 2003. The Pearson correlation coefficient used to determine the relationship between ISTEP+ scores and ISTAR teacher ratings. Results of the Pearson correlation coefficient indicated a linear relationship between scores on the two assessment instruments for students in grades 3, 6, and 8 with mild disabilities and without disabilities who participated in both assessments (r = .46 to r = .71). An analysis of variance was used to determine if the ISTAR instrument could, when appropriately completed, differentiate between groups of students who would be expected to perform less well or better than other groups of students. Results from the ANOVA, Levene and Welch procedures as well as the Tamhane post hoc statistic indicated that ISTAR is capable of differentiating between different achievement level groups for the constructs of English/language arts and mathematics. While the study results indicate a sufficient positive relationship, it should be considered to be a baseline study. Additional years of data are needed before valid inferences can be made for the ISTAR assessment tool. / Department of Special Education

This thesis explored standardized assessment practices and analyzed accommodations commonly provided to address the unique needs of students with a sensory impairment. Current assessment practices in Indiana result in well below average scores on the Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational Progress - Plus (ISTEP+) and the Graduation Qualifying Examination (GQE) for students who have a sensory impairment. Using a mixed-method of qualitative and quantitative processes, the researcher postulated that if assessment processes were equitable for this population of students, their scores should approximate the normal distribution seen in the overall state totals for the total school population; albeit with a slightly lower trajectory. Reasoning being that the overall population of students with a sensory impairment spans from students with high ability to students with multiple disabilities. Through a literature review and meta-analysis on the topic of assessment, surveys and discussions with varied local experts, and interviews with state and national experts in the sensory areas represented, this study sought to establish a framework for accommodating this population of students on standardized assessments. Using descriptive analysis procedures, the various data sets brought forth 25 qualities or practices that the diverse experts agreed should be in place when assessing this population of students. The data reflected a high level of consensus among parents, teachers, state, and national experts regardless of region of state represented. The data also reflected consensus across sensory subgroups (blind, deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing/cochlear implant, and low vision). The research concluded with a modified confirmatory factor analysis of the 25 qualities with the state-dictated permissible accommodations published in the test guidance manual. This analysis revealed less than half of the perceived best practices were in place for the current state-mandated assessment system. Suggestions for improving accommodation options on future assessment procedures and the prospective for further research were offered. / Department of Special Education