No description available.

An achievement gap between ethnic minorities and White Americans continues to exist within the U.S., as well as between the U.S. and varying countries. Research has identified several factors that contribute to this gap, such as differences in curricula across countries, teacher quality, and school funding. In addition to these factors, teachers’ implicit theories of intelligence may also contribute to the achievement gap. Whether teachers view intelligence as fixed (entity theory) or malleable (incremental theory) can impact instructional practices, specifically the use of performance and learning goals. Performance goals focus on evaluation, ability, and performance rather than mastery of material, growth, and overall learning as seen in learning goals. Research is limited regarding the development of implicit theories of intelligence; however, there is evidence culture may be involved. Identifying specific cultural practices that influence the development of implicit theories of intelligence may provide a unique perspective on pedagogy and how teachers interact with students. One cultural practice that may be related to the development of implicit theories of intelligence is standardized achievement testing. The current study used survey methodology to evaluate the relation between implicit theories of intelligence, perceived pressure from standardized achievement testing, and classroom goal structures and the differences between these variables amongst full-time teachers (N = 45). Results indicated significant differences in perceived pressure from standardized achievement testing amongst teachers with classrooms containing lower percentages of reading and math proficient students as well as significant differences in classroom goal structures amongst teachers with classrooms containing fewer ethnic minority and ELL students. Implications of these findings and areas of future research are discussed.

A common issue noted by detractors of the traditional scoring of Multiple Choice (MC) tests is the confounding of guessing or other false positives with partial knowledge and full knowledge. The current study provides a review of classical test theory (CTT) approaches to handling guessing and partial knowledge. When those methods are rejected, the item response theory (IRT) and cognitive diagnostic modeling (CDM) approaches, and their relative strengths and weaknesses, are considered. Finally, a generalization of the Multicomponent Latent Trait Model for Diagnosis (MLTM-D; Embretson & Yang, 2013) is proposed. The results of a simulation study are presented, which indicate that, in the presence of guessing, the proposed model has more reliable and accurate item parameter estimates than the MLTM-D, generally yielding better recovery of person parameters. Discussion of the methods and findings, as well as some suggested directions for further study, is included.

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.

No description available.