Cawthon Stephanie W
Department of Educational Psychology, The University of Texas at Austin, 1 University Station, MC D5800, Austin, TX 78712, USA.
J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2010 Spring;15(2):185-203. doi: 10.1093/deafed/enq002. Epub 2010 Feb 10.
In the United States, students who are deaf or hard of hearing (SDHH) are required to participate in high-stakes standardized assessments under No Child Left Behind reforms. In 2006-2007, states added science to reading and mathematics as a tested content area. Many SDHH participate in these assessments using testing accommodations, but teachers have few evidence-based resources to draw upon when making accommodations decisions. Two research questions guided this study: (a) What were patterns of SDHH 2006-2007 test accommodations use in state standardized assessments in mathematics, reading, and science? (b) What evidence did teachers use to determine the effectiveness of accommodations for SDHH? A total of 290 participants described their assessment practices with SDHH via an online and paper-and-pencil survey. Extended time, small group, and test directions interpreted were the most frequently used accommodations by SDHH, but there were some different patterns in science for accommodations that included changes to the test items. Teachers reported both student satisfaction and test score validity epistemologies of accommodations' effectiveness.
在美国,根据《不让一个孩子掉队》改革法案,失聪或听力有障碍的学生(SDHH)必须参加高风险的标准化评估。在2006 - 2007年,各州将科学纳入阅读和数学,作为一个测试内容领域。许多失聪或听力有障碍的学生使用测试便利措施参加这些评估,但教师在做出便利措施决策时几乎没有基于证据的资源可供参考。本研究受两个研究问题的指引:(a)在2006 - 2007年的州标准化评估中,失聪或听力有障碍的学生在数学、阅读和科学测试中使用便利措施的模式是怎样的?(b)教师用哪些证据来确定针对失聪或听力有障碍学生的便利措施的有效性?共有290名参与者通过在线和纸笔调查描述了他们对失聪或听力有障碍学生的评估做法。延长时间、小组测试以及对测试说明的解读是失聪或听力有障碍学生最常使用的便利措施,但在科学测试中,对于包括对测试项目进行修改的便利措施存在一些不同的模式。教师报告了便利措施有效性的学生满意度和测试分数效度的认识论。