Intended for use by teachers, teacher trainers, supervisors, administrators, researchers, and others concerned with reading and the bilingual learner, this bibliography contains annotations of 136 journal articles and ERIC documents pertaining to the subject. The materials cited in the bibliography were drawn from those placed in the ERIC system between January 1971 and June 1977, and are arranged into three sections according to the educational level with which they deal: (1) elementary, (2) secondary, and (3) elementary and secondary or adult education. (FL)

The issues surrounding the comparability of various tests used to assess performance in schools received broad public attention during congressional debate over the Voluntary National Tests proposed by President Clinton in his 1997 State of the Union Address. Proponents of Voluntary National Tests argue that there is no widely understood, challenging benchmark of individual student performance in 4th-grade reading and 8th-grade mathematics, thus the need for a new test. Opponents argue that a statistical linkage among tests already used by states and districts might provide the sort of comparability called for by the president's proposal. Public Law 105-78 requested that the National Research Council study whether an equivalency scale could be developed that would allow test scores from existing commercial tests and state assessments to be compared with each other and with the National Assessment of Education Progress. In this book, the committee reviewed research literature on the statistical and technical aspects of creating valid links between tests and how the content, use, and purposes of education testing in the United States influences the quality and meaning of those links. The book summarizes relevant prior linkage studies and presents a picture of the diversity of state testing programs. It also looks at the unique characteristics of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Uncommon Measures provides an answer to the question posed by Congress in Public Law 105-78, suggests criteria for evaluating the quality of linkages, and calls for further research to determine the level of precision needed to make inferences about linked tests. In arriving at its conclusions, the committee acknowledged that ultimately policymakers and educators must take responsibility for determining the degree of imprecision they are willing to tolerate in testing and linking. This book provides science-based information with which to make those decisions.

The goal of this book is to emphasize the formal statistical features of the practice of equating, linking, and scaling. The book encourages the view and discusses the quality of the equating results from the statistical perspective (new models, robustness, fit, testing hypotheses, statistical monitoring) as opposed to placing the focus on the policy and the implications, which although very important, represent a different side of the equating practice. The book contributes to establishing “equating” as a theoretical field, a view that has not been offered often before. The tradition in the practice of equating has been to present the knowledge and skills needed as a craft, which implies that only with years of experience under the guidance of a knowledgeable practitioner could one acquire the required skills. This book challenges this view by indicating how a good equating framework, a sound understanding of the assumptions that underlie the psychometric models, and the use of statistical tests and statistical process control tools can help the practitioner navigate the difficult decisions in choosing the final equating function. This book provides a valuable reference for several groups: (a) statisticians and psychometricians interested in the theory behind equating methods, in the use of model-based statistical methods for data smoothing, and in the evaluation of the equating results in applied work; (b) practitioners who need to equate tests, including those with these responsibilities in testing companies, state testing agencies, and school districts; and (c) instructors in psychometric, measurement, and psychology programs.