			Home About us Contact

Achievement Measures (achievement + measure)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Education	71%

Selected Abstracts

The Sensitivity of Value-Added Teacher Effect Estimates to Different Mathematics Achievement Measures

JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT, Issue 1 2007
J. R. Lockwood
Using longitudinal data from a cohort of middle school students from a large school district, we estimate separate "value-added" teacher effects for two subscales of a mathematics assessment under a variety of statistical models varying in form and degree of control for student background characteristics. We find that the variation in estimated effects resulting from the different mathematics achievement measures is large relative to variation resulting from choices about model specification, and that the variation within teachers across achievement measures is larger than the variation across teachers. These results suggest that conclusions about individual teachers' performance based on value-added models can be sensitive to the ways in which student achievement is measured. [source]

Self-efficacy, reasoning ability, and achievement in college biology

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING, Issue 5 2007
Anton E. Lawson
Abstract This study compared the relationships of self-efficacy and reasoning ability to achievement in introductory college biology. Based on the hypothesis that developing formal and postformal reasoning ability is a primary factor influencing self-efficacy, a significant positive correlation was predicted between reasoning ability and degree of self-efficacy to complete biological tasks. Further, reasoning ability was predicted to be more highly correlated with course achievement than self-efficacy. The study involved pre- and posttesting 459 introductory biology students. Both self-efficacy and reasoning ability increased during the semester. As predicted, self-efficacy and reasoning ability were positively correlated. Depending on the nature of the achievement measure, reasoning ability accounted for some 15 to 30 times more variance in achievement than self-efficacy. Also, as predicted, reasoning ability was a strong predictor of self-efficacy, but self-efficacy was not a strong predictor of reasoning ability. Self-efficacy estimates and achievement were higher for the concrete tasks than for the formal tasks and higher for the formal tasks than for the postformal tasks. In general, students tended to overestimate their abilities to carry out the concrete, formal, and postformal tasks. Results support the study's working hypothesis that intellectual development continues for some students during the college years, that a postformal level of intellectual development exists, and that reasoning ability is a primary factor influencing both self-efficacy and achievement. Student overestimation of their abilities may contribute to complacency, lack of effort, and to less than optimal achievement. Consequently, it may be advantageous early in the semester to provide students with particularly challenging tasks that "shock" them out of their complacency and perhaps increase their effort, their reasoning skills, and their achievement. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 44: 706,724, 2007 [source]

The Use of Generalizability (G) Theory in the Testing of Linguistic Minorities

EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT: ISSUES AND PRACTICE, Issue 1 2006
Flores, Guillermo Solano
We contend that generalizability (G) theory allows the design of psychometric approaches to testing English-language learners (ELLs) that are consistent with current thinking in linguistics. We used G theory to estimate the amount of measurement error due to code (language or dialect). Fourth- and fifth-grade ELLs, native speakers of Haitian-Creole from two speech communities, were given the same set of mathematics items in the standard English and standard Haitian-Creole dialects (Sample 1) or in the standard and local dialects of Haitian-Creole (Samples 2 and 3). The largest measurement error observed was produced by the interaction of student, item, and code. Our results indicate that the reliability and dependability of ELL achievement measures is affected by two facts that operate in combination: Each test item poses a unique set of linguistic challenges and each student has a unique set of linguistic strengths and weaknesses. This sensitivity to language appears to take place at the level of dialect. Also, students from different speech communities within the same broad linguistic group may differ considerably in the number of items needed to obtain dependable measures of their academic achievement. Whether students are tested in English or in their first language, dialect variation needs to be considered if language as a source of measurement error is to be effectively addressed. [source]

The Impact of Childhood Epilepsy on Neurocognitive and Behavioral Performance: A Prospective Longitudinal Study

EPILEPSIA, Issue 4 2000
Laura L. Bailet
Summary: Purpose: To assess neurocognitive and behavioral performance in children with idiopathic epilepsy (CWE, n = 74), their siblings without epilepsy (control, n = 23), and children with migraine (CWM, n = 13), and to identify medical factors related to learning or behavioral problems in CWE. Methods: Subjects, ages 8,13 years with IQs of ,80, completed a neurocognitive test battery annually for ,3 years. For CWE, age at seizure onset, most recent EEG results, seizure type, seizure frequency, current antiepileptic drug (AED), and most recent AED serum levels were documented at each visit. Results: CWE and CWM had high rates of grade retention and placement in special education compared with sibling controls. CWE performed worse than controls on numerous neurocognitive variables. These differences persisted over time. CWE with abnormal EEGs scored lower than CWE with normal EEGs on reading and spelling measures, even with comparable IQs. Age at seizure onset, seizure type, and seizure frequency were not related to neurocognitive or behavioral test scores. CWE taking carbamazepine (CBZ) performed better than CWE taking valproate (VPA) on academic achievement measures, although the study lacked controls necessary to assess this finding thoroughly. CWM did not differ from CWE or controls in cognitive or academic achievement skills. Conclusions: Long-term risk of learning problems exists among CWE as compared with controls, even with normal IQs and well-controlled seizures. Predicting learning problems in CWE based on medical factors remains elusive. Monitoring of educational progress and neurocognitive screening may be most effective in assessing academic risk for CWE. [source]

College Students Classified as Having Learning Disabilities and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and the Foreign Language Requirement

FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS, Issue 3 2003
Richard L. Sparks EdD
College students classified as having attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are often assumed by educators and service providers to have problems that impair FL learning. To date, no empirical studies have investigated this assumption. In the two studies reported here, college students classified as LD or as both LD and having ADHD (LD/ADHD) who had either substituted courses for the FL requirement (petition) or had fulfilled the requirement by passing FL courses (nonpetition) were compared in terms of demographic, cognitive, and academic achievement profiles, and FL grades. In the first study, few differences were found in demographic, cognitive, and achievement profiles between petition students classified as LD or LD/ADHD. In the second study, no significant differences in demographic profiles were found among groups classified as petition LD, petition LD/ADHD, nonpetition LD, and nonpetition LD/ADHD. On cognitive and academic achievement measures, the nonpetition LD/ADHD group scored significantly higher than the petition LD group on measures of IQ, reading, math, and scholastic achievement (ACT). The results of both studies appear to be counterintuitive because students with two disabilities (LD and ADHD) were found to exhibit cognitive ability, academic achievement, and FL grades greater than or equal to students with LD alone. Findings suggest that students classified as both LD and ADHD may not necessarily experience serious problems with FL learning. [source]