Each year as a growing number of students with learning disabilities are included in statewide assessments, teacher perceptions and beliefs toward student achievement are being identified and examined. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001(NCLB) and the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004) raise the achievement expectations of students with disabilities and require that teachers are knowledgeable about state academic content and achievement standards (Thompson, Lazarus, Clapper, & Thurlow, 2006). State departments of education are responsible to ensure that teacher competencies and expectations are specific to the achievement of grade level content standards (Thompson, et al., 2006). Educational reform, increased knowledge in the teacher-learning process, and greater access to the general education curriculum require changes in instructional practice. This study investigated special education teachers' perceptions, backgrounds and beliefs related to test performance of third grade students with learning disabilities who passed the reading portion of the state assessment in Florida, the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT). The comparative descriptive research design was used to identify these factors and their effects in the study (Creswell, 2002). Quantitative data collection was used. A survey instrument was developed to include information on teachers' background, beliefs, experience, and perceptions toward statewide assessments. The survey was sent to seventy six third grade teachers of students with learning disabilities. Teachers receiving the survey were categorized into two groups based on the outcome of the 2007 FCAT in reading. Significant differences between teacher responses were found in the areas of professional development for test accommodations, co-teaching, and working with professionals in the general curriculum. Response to survey items on service delivery models indicated that students who spend the majority of time in the general education classroom or in a resource room setting have increased student achievement on statewide assessments. Differences were also found between teachers on questions related to school location, percentage of minority students, students who are eligible for free and reduced lunch, and positions employees held in education by the teachers in the study. One of the most significant findings of this study concluded that increased time spent in the general education classroom and collaboration of special education teachers with general education staff proved to be most beneficial when addressing the needs of students with learning disabilities and statewide assessment. The concept of teacher knowledge base and continued awareness of perceptions andbeliefs addressed in this study allowed for further research investigations.

No description available.

The purpose of this study was to investigate how online testing was implemented within a statewide high-stakes testing program in Virginia's public education system. Virginia's state assessments, known as the Standards of Learning (SOL) tests, were first administered to public school students in 1998 as paper-and-pencil, multiple-choice tests where students used a paper test booklet, an optical scan paper answer document, and a #2 pencil to complete each test. In 2000, at the direction of the Governor and General Assembly of the Commonwealth, the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) introduced a technology initiative where, upon successful implementation, students would be able to complete their required SOL tests electronically via the Internet. The researcher, an employee of the VDOE with direct involvement in the implementation of online testing, conducted a participant-observer case study and interviewed individuals closely associated with the Virginia Web-based Standards of Learning Technology Initiative. The interview transcripts, project documents, and experiences of the researcher as a participant-observer were used as the primary data sources. Glaser and Strauss's (1967) constant comparative method with suggested procedural additions from Lincoln and Guba (1985) and Maykut and Morehouse (1994), was applied in data analysis. The findings are presented as a monograph with the history and implementation of Virginia's Web-based Standards of Learning Technology Initiative detailed by the participant-observer researcher. The desired outcomes of the researcher's efforts are (a) informing others of Virginia's experiences, including its successes and failures, (b) sharing the lessons learned throughout the implementation of Virginia's Web-based SOL Technology Initiative, and (c) identifying best practices that could be transferable to other state or local organizations attempting similar large-scale initiatives. / Ed. D.

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

Relatively recent federal education initiatives, such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB; 2001), have focused on school accountability for student achievement including achievement of traditionally at-risk populations, such as students in special education, students from low-income or high poverty areas, and students who speak English as a new second language. Additionally, these federal initiatives also mandate that all students take the same test measuring grade level standards despite research that has demonstrated that students from at-risk populations are sometimes at a disadvantage on high-stakes tests. Furthermore, initiatives such as NCLB are often at odds with other education initiatives such as IDEA, which states that students in special education should be tested at their respective level. Therefore, the current study proposed to examine the relationship between Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive abilities and performance on a state-wide high-stakes achievement test. There currently are no studies examining such a relationship. This study used Multivariate Regression Analysis, in order to investigate the relationship between CHC cognitive and achievement abilities and performance on a state-wide high-stakes achievement test, namely the ISTEP+, with 45 children who had been referred for a psychoeducational evaluation to determine special education eligibility and who had also taken the ISTEP+. No statistically significant result was found between the WJ-III-COG broad CHC abilities and performance on the English/Language Arts and Math performance of the ISTEP+. Furthermore, no statistically significant result was found between the WJ-III-ACH and Math performance on the ISTEP+. However, a statistically significant result was found between the WJ-III-ACH Passage Comprehension subtest and the English/Language Arts portion of the ISTEP+. The results indicated that students who had higher scores on the Passage Comprehension subtest also had higher scores on the English/Language Arts portion of the ISTEP+. The current study took a step forward in the area of the relationship between CHC and academic achievement, particularly state-mandated high-stakes testing given the dearth of research in this area. Given the data from the current study indicating a statistically significant relationship between Passage Comprehension and English/Language Arts from the ISTEP+, the current study has practical implications for school psychologists, especially when school psychologists are being asked to make predictions regarding a student’s academic achievement. Results of the current study might help elucidate reading problems and recommended interventions for those reading problems. / Department of Educational Psychology

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Idaho, 2005. / Also available online in PDF format. Abstract. "April 2005." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 116-118).

The focus of this research is Virginia’s Secondary Highway Construction System funding allocations and its impact on statewide deficient lane miles reduction. The research question guiding this study is: “Which of the four allocation models -- the current Secondary Highway System allocation model or one of three alternatives of this model based on Brian D. Taylor’s geographic equity categories (outcome, opportunity, and market) best maximizes statewide deficient lane miles reductions?” Taylor defines each of these geographic equity categories (independent variables for this study) for all levels of government. While Taylor’s research focus has been on equity as it relates to transit and congestion pricing, this study applied his construct to highways. As a result of scanning subjects related to transportation, the need for this study became apparent. Since the 1980’s, Virginia’s highway allocation formula has not changed (Virginia Department of Transportation, 2005). The Virginia General Assembly has sponsored follow-up studies through a series of resolutions over the years (Auditor of Pubic Accounts, 2004). To date, none of the legislatively sponsored research findings have prompted an update of Virginia’s highway allocation formula (Virginia Transportation Research Council, 2008). There is a significant academic and professional literature on federal transportation politics and specific transportation engineering issues. However, there is very limited research on the development of state level highway transportation funding methodologies. This study used the quantitative research approach, which is concerned with determining the relationship between one factor (an independent variable) and another (a dependent or outcome variable) in a population (Walker, 2005, Newman, 1998, and Geddes, 1990). Therefore, this study employed the quantitative research approach to study cause and effect (Mulhall, 2004, Loughborough, 1995, and Collier 1995) relationships of Virginia’s Secondary construction allocations to individual counties and statewide deficient lane miles reductions overall. The .20 portion of the formula for area was examined because this data rarely changes due to locality annexations. Conversely, the .80 portion of the formula was excluded from the analysis because of the demographic variability due to population shifts. As such, the Federal Highway Administration and states update population statistics from the decennial census with the apportionment of funds for formula based programs such as Virginia’s Secondary Highway Construction program (Federal Register, 2002). This researcher concluded that of the four geographic allocation models, the geographic opportunity equity maximized an additional 4.15 statewide deficient lane miles reductions over the baseline model. This study recommends using the geographic opportunity equity model when allocating Virginia’s Secondary Highway Construction funds to maximize the statewide deficient lane miles reductions above the baseline model, the geographic market equity model and the geographic outcome equity model.

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

No description available.

No description available.