{"title":"Evaluation of Seeds of Science/Roots of Reading: Effective Tools for Developing Literacy through Science in the Early Grades-Light Energy Unit. CRESST Report 781.","authors":"P. Goldschmidt, Hyekyung Jung","doi":"10.1037/e642032011-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e642032011-001","url":null,"abstract":".................................................................................................................................","PeriodicalId":19116,"journal":{"name":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79744053","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
J. Abedi, Seth Leon, Jenny C. Kao, R. Bayley, Nancy Ewers, J. Herman, Kimberly Mundhenk
{"title":"Accessible Reading Assessments for Students with Disabilities: The Role of Cognitive, Grammatical, Lexical, and Textual/Visual Features. CRESST Report 785.","authors":"J. Abedi, Seth Leon, Jenny C. Kao, R. Bayley, Nancy Ewers, J. Herman, Kimberly Mundhenk","doi":"10.1037/e642002011-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e642002011-001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19116,"journal":{"name":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83898266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
.................................................................................................................................1 Why Game and Domain Instruction Should Be Aligned .......................................................1 Two Components Important to Improving Instructional Games and Simulations ................3 Player Interaction Framework ............................................................................................4 Game Play Model ..............................................................................................................5 Methodology ..........................................................................................................................6 Sample ................................................................................................................................8 Training the Coders ............................................................................................................8 Analyses and Results ...........................................................................................................10 Discussion ............................................................................................................................14 Implications..........................................................................................................................15 References ............................................................................................................................17
{"title":"Aligning Instruction and Assessment with Game and Simulation Design. CRESST Report 780.","authors":"Richard Wainess, Alan Koenig, Deirdre Kerr","doi":"10.1037/e642042011-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e642042011-001","url":null,"abstract":".................................................................................................................................1 Why Game and Domain Instruction Should Be Aligned .......................................................1 Two Components Important to Improving Instructional Games and Simulations ................3 Player Interaction Framework ............................................................................................4 Game Play Model ..............................................................................................................5 Methodology ..........................................................................................................................6 Sample ................................................................................................................................8 Training the Coders ............................................................................................................8 Analyses and Results ...........................................................................................................10 Discussion ............................................................................................................................14 Implications..........................................................................................................................15 References ............................................................................................................................17","PeriodicalId":19116,"journal":{"name":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77694691","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
D. Huang, Seth Leon, Cheri L. Hodson, Deborah La Torre, N. Obregon, Gwendelyn J. Rivera
{"title":"Preparing Students for the 21st Century: Exploring the Effect of Afterschool Participation on Students' Collaboration Skills, Oral Communication Skills, and Self-Efficacy. CRESST Report 777.","authors":"D. Huang, Seth Leon, Cheri L. Hodson, Deborah La Torre, N. Obregon, Gwendelyn J. Rivera","doi":"10.1037/e642072011-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e642072011-001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19116,"journal":{"name":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81597918","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
D. Huang, Jamie Cho, Hannah H. Nam, Deborah La Torre, Christine Oh, Aletha M. Harven, Lindsay Pérez Huber, Zena H. Rudo, Sarah L. Caverly
This study describes how staff qualifications, decisions on staffing procedures, and professional development opportunities support the recruitment and retention of quality staff members. Four high-functioning programs were identified. Qualitative procedures and instruments were designed to capture staff and parents’ emic perspectives about relationships and professional development. Study findings revealed that all staff across the four afterschool programs consistently reported an intrinsic reason for working in their program. Interview data implied that program incentives such as a career ladder and an ascending pay scale were not enticing enough to recruit or retain staff. The decisions to stay with a program tend to be altruistic in nature, such as to provide academic, social, or emotional support for the students. Thus, at these four programs, the motivation for the staff to stay with the programs could be the organized environments, clear program structures, open communication, clear program goals, consistent expectations, positive relationships, and program climates that foster staff efficacy in “making a difference” in their students’ lives. Thus, promoting strategies in enhancing staff efficacy, such as empowering staff with decision-making and providing professional development opportunities to enhance their professional skills could help programs to recruit and retain quality staff members.
{"title":"Examining Practices of Staff Recruitment and Retention in Four High-Functioning Afterschool Programs: Extended Study from the National Afterschool Partnership Report. CRESST Report 769.","authors":"D. Huang, Jamie Cho, Hannah H. Nam, Deborah La Torre, Christine Oh, Aletha M. Harven, Lindsay Pérez Huber, Zena H. Rudo, Sarah L. Caverly","doi":"10.1037/e642232011-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e642232011-001","url":null,"abstract":"This study describes how staff qualifications, decisions on staffing procedures, and professional development opportunities support the recruitment and retention of quality staff members. Four high-functioning programs were identified. Qualitative procedures and instruments were designed to capture staff and parents’ emic perspectives about relationships and professional development. Study findings revealed that all staff across the four afterschool programs consistently reported an intrinsic reason for working in their program. Interview data implied that program incentives such as a career ladder and an ascending pay scale were not enticing enough to recruit or retain staff. The decisions to stay with a program tend to be altruistic in nature, such as to provide academic, social, or emotional support for the students. Thus, at these four programs, the motivation for the staff to stay with the programs could be the organized environments, clear program structures, open communication, clear program goals, consistent expectations, positive relationships, and program climates that foster staff efficacy in “making a difference” in their students’ lives. Thus, promoting strategies in enhancing staff efficacy, such as empowering staff with decision-making and providing professional development opportunities to enhance their professional skills could help programs to recruit and retain quality staff members.","PeriodicalId":19116,"journal":{"name":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89496685","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
D. Huang, Jamie Cho, S. Mostafavi, Hannah H. Nam, Christine Oh, Aletha M. Harven, Seth Leon
{"title":"What Works? Common Practices in High Functioning Afterschool Programs across the Nation in Math, Reading, Science, Arts, Technology, and Homework--A Study by the National Partnership. The Afterschool Program Assessment Guide. CRESST Report 768.","authors":"D. Huang, Jamie Cho, S. Mostafavi, Hannah H. Nam, Christine Oh, Aletha M. Harven, Seth Leon","doi":"10.1037/e642382011-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e642382011-001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19116,"journal":{"name":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81645666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
English Language Learners (ELLs) are the fastest growing group of students in American public schools. According to Payán and Nettles (2008), the ELL population doubled in 23 states between 1995 and 2005. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that by 2050, the Hispanic school-age population will exceed the non-Hispanic white school-age public school population (Fry & Gonzalez, 2008). Amidst these dramatic increases, ELL achievement remains among the lowest of all students. For example, on the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 72% of 8th-grade ELL students scored below basic in mathematics as compared to 26% of non-ELL students (National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). Despite 8 years of strong No Child Left Behind (NCLB, 2002) accountability provisions, ELL academic achievement remains one of the greatest challenges confronting states, school districts, and schools.
英语学习者(ELLs)是美国公立学校中增长最快的学生群体。根据Payán和Nettles(2008)的数据，1995年至2005年间，美国23个州的ELL人口翻了一番。美国人口普查局估计，到2050年，西班牙裔学龄人口将超过非西班牙裔白人学龄公立学校人口(Fry & Gonzalez, 2008)。在这些戏剧性的增长中，英语成绩仍然是所有学生中最低的。例如，在2009年全国教育进步评估(NAEP)中，72%的八年级ELL学生的数学成绩低于基础，而非ELL学生的这一比例为26% (National Center For Education Statistics, 2009)。尽管《不让一个孩子掉队》(NCLB, 2002)的问责条款已经实施了8年，但ELL的学业成绩仍然是各州、学区和学校面临的最大挑战之一。
{"title":"Improving the Validity of English Language Learner Assessment Systems. Executive Summary. Policy Brief 10, Spring 2010.","authors":"M. Wolf, J. Herman, R. Dietel","doi":"10.1037/e685352011-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e685352011-001","url":null,"abstract":"English Language Learners (ELLs) are the fastest growing group of students in American public schools. According to Payán and Nettles (2008), the ELL population doubled in 23 states between 1995 and 2005. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that by 2050, the Hispanic school-age population will exceed the non-Hispanic white school-age public school population (Fry & Gonzalez, 2008). Amidst these dramatic increases, ELL achievement remains among the lowest of all students. For example, on the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 72% of 8th-grade ELL students scored below basic in mathematics as compared to 26% of non-ELL students (National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). Despite 8 years of strong No Child Left Behind (NCLB, 2002) accountability provisions, ELL academic achievement remains one of the greatest challenges confronting states, school districts, and schools.","PeriodicalId":19116,"journal":{"name":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87814116","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
D. Huang, Deborah La Torre, Nikki Duong, Lindsay Pérez Huber, Seth Leon, Christine Oh
{"title":"A Circle of Learning: Children and Adults Growing Together in LA's BEST. CRESST Report 758.","authors":"D. Huang, Deborah La Torre, Nikki Duong, Lindsay Pérez Huber, Seth Leon, Christine Oh","doi":"10.1037/e642652011-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e642652011-001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19116,"journal":{"name":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78412785","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gregory K. W. K. Chung, Sam O. Nagashima, Paul Espinosa, C. Berka, E. Baker
In this report, researchers examined rifle marksmanship development within a skill development framework outlined by Chung, Delacruz, de Vries, Bewley, and Baker (2006). Thirty-three novice shooters used an M4 rifle training simulator system to learn to shoot an 8-inch target at a simulated distance of 200 yards. Cognitive, psychomotor, and affective measures were gathered in addition to measures of performance and component skills. Partial support was found for rifle marksmanship skill development following Ackerman’s (1988) skill development theory. Support was found for the idea that known distance rifle marksmanship can transition rapidly from a learning phase to a practice phase, and that the cognitive and affective variables have a substantial influence on performance and skill development during the learning phase.
在这份报告中，研究人员在Chung, Delacruz, de Vries, Bewley和Baker(2006)概述的技能发展框架内研究了步枪射击技术的发展。33名射击新手使用M4步枪训练模拟器系统，在200码的模拟距离上学习射击8英寸的目标。除了表现和组成技能的测量外，还收集了认知、精神运动和情感测量。Ackerman(1988)的技能发展理论对步枪射击技能的发展提供了部分支持。已知的远程步枪射击技术可以从学习阶段迅速过渡到练习阶段，并且认知和情感变量对学习阶段的表现和技能发展有实质性影响，这一观点得到了支持。
{"title":"The Influence of Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Factors on the Development of Rifle Marksmanship Skills. CRESST Report 753.","authors":"Gregory K. W. K. Chung, Sam O. Nagashima, Paul Espinosa, C. Berka, E. Baker","doi":"10.1037/e642782011-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e642782011-001","url":null,"abstract":"In this report, researchers examined rifle marksmanship development within a skill development framework outlined by Chung, Delacruz, de Vries, Bewley, and Baker (2006). Thirty-three novice shooters used an M4 rifle training simulator system to learn to shoot an 8-inch target at a simulated distance of 200 yards. Cognitive, psychomotor, and affective measures were gathered in addition to measures of performance and component skills. Partial support was found for rifle marksmanship skill development following Ackerman’s (1988) skill development theory. Support was found for the idea that known distance rifle marksmanship can transition rapidly from a learning phase to a practice phase, and that the cognitive and affective variables have a substantial influence on performance and skill development during the learning phase.","PeriodicalId":19116,"journal":{"name":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88820745","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study examines the incorrect response choices, or distractors, by students with disabilities in standardized reading assessments. Differential distractor functioning (DDF) analysis differs from differential item functioning (DIF) analysis, which treats all answers alike and examines all wrong answers against the correct answer. DDF analysis in contrast examines only the incorrect answers. If different groups, such as students with disabilities and students without disabilities, selected different incorrect responses to an item, then the item could mean something different to the different groups. Our study results found items showing DDF for students with disabilities in Grade 9, but not for Grade 3. Results also suggest that items showing DDF were more likely to be located in the second half of the assessments rather than the first half of the assessments. Additionally, results suggest that in items showing DDF, students with disabilities were less likely to choose the most common distractor than students without disabilities. Results of this study can shed light on potential factors affecting the accessibility of reading assessments for students with disabilities, in an ultimate effort to provide assessment tools that are conceptually and psychometrically sound for all students. A companion report is available examining differential item functioning for students with disabilities.
{"title":"Examining Differential Distractor Functioning in Reading Assessments for Students with Disabilities. CRESST Report 743.","authors":"J. Abedi, Seth Leon, Jenny C. Kao","doi":"10.1037/e642962011-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e642962011-001","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the incorrect response choices, or distractors, by students with disabilities in standardized reading assessments. Differential distractor functioning (DDF) analysis differs from differential item functioning (DIF) analysis, which treats all answers alike and examines all wrong answers against the correct answer. DDF analysis in contrast examines only the incorrect answers. If different groups, such as students with disabilities and students without disabilities, selected different incorrect responses to an item, then the item could mean something different to the different groups. Our study results found items showing DDF for students with disabilities in Grade 9, but not for Grade 3. Results also suggest that items showing DDF were more likely to be located in the second half of the assessments rather than the first half of the assessments. Additionally, results suggest that in items showing DDF, students with disabilities were less likely to choose the most common distractor than students without disabilities. Results of this study can shed light on potential factors affecting the accessibility of reading assessments for students with disabilities, in an ultimate effort to provide assessment tools that are conceptually and psychometrically sound for all students. A companion report is available examining differential item functioning for students with disabilities.","PeriodicalId":19116,"journal":{"name":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2008-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83542556","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：