nera 2010 printed program book 10-13-10 final with …€¦ · these in rconference workshop are...

NERA 2010: Building Research Partnerships


41st Annual Meeting of theNortheastern Educational

Research AssociationHartford Marriott Rocky Hill

October 20th �– 22nd, 2010


Welcome to the 41st Annual Northeastern Educational Research Association Conference!Building Research Partnerships

Welcome to the 41st annual meeting of the Northeastern Educational Research Association! It is myhope that you will enjoy the high quality educational research for which NERA continues to beknown. In addition, I urge you to take advantage of the pre and in conference workshops.Throughout the entire program, you will see evidence of our overall conference theme, BuildingResearch Partnerships.

Use your time at NERA to learn about how using multiple research lenses can help us address thetough learning and assessment questions with which we are faced in education. Build some newresearch partnerships!

Katharyn E. Nottis, NERA President

�“Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much�” Helen Keller


Welcome Message from the 2010 Program Committee

This event is a rare occasion for �“new�” and �“seasoned�” researchers to come together and examine practice and otherfactors of interest to the educational community with the goal of improving academic possibilities for all students. Wehope you will enjoy this opportunity to share a broad array of perspectives with colleagues to research partnerships thatare enriched and energized by the diversity of lenses.

We are pleased to offer you an exciting and enriching program in this year�’s conference. Last year�’s conference was atotal success in terms of the substantive presentations, vigorous conversation and exchanges, and attendance. Wehope you will find this year�’s sessions equally enriching, interesting, and informative. We are honored to have twoexceptional keynote presenters, Kathleen Williamson from the US DOE and Burke Johnson from the University of SouthAlabama. We have exceptional pre and in conference workshops, a diverse set of paper sessions, and, as always,innovative, top notch entertainment featuring The Shilanski Jazz Band on Wednesday evening and the Messickists &Distractors on Thursday evening!

To reflect this year�’s theme, we have a variety of workshops to offer training in a variety of methodologies (i.e.,quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods) and on the process of collaboration itself. We also would like to bring toyour attention the invited panel on collaboration and teaming.

Next, to demonstrate collaboration in action, please engage the presenters in the poster session. There are noconcurrent sessions being held during the poster session on Thursday morning at 10:15 AM. So, please make sure youengage the presenters in a dialogue in an effort to learn and to offer feedback. Who knows �– collaborations andresearch partnerships may be initiated as a result!

We are very grateful to our sponsors and institutional members who have contributed to NERA and the 2010conference. We also want to thank all the volunteers who have made this conference possible. There was incrediblesupport to make this conference possible from reviewing papers, to being chairs and discussants, to offering a word ofsupport, and for . We also want to thank Sharon Cramer, Sara Finney, Kelly Godfrey, and Jan Stivers for their generosityin volunteering their time to provide the high quality workshops.

Finally, we want to thank the president of NERA, Katharyn Nottis, and our Board of Directors for their support andcontributions. Much appreciation goes to Kevin Brewer and Helen Ng, The College Board, for many hours of hard workin producing this program.

Dolores Burton, Yanhui Pang, and Thanos Patelis2010 NERA Conference Co Chairs


ContentsOur Sponsors................................................................................................................................................................................5Overview....................................................................................................................................................................................11

Sessions, Events, and Experiences Available at NERA 2010..............................................................................................11General Meeting Information ...........................................................................................................................................12

Wednesday ................................................................................................................................................................................13Wednesday highlights .......................................................................................................................................................13Pre Conference Workshops �– 10:00 am �– 4:45 pm...........................................................................................................15Concurrent Session 1 �– 1:30 �– 3:00 pm.............................................................................................................................16Concurrent Session 2 �– 3:15 �– 4:45 pm.............................................................................................................................19

Thursday ....................................................................................................................................................................................22Thursday Highlights ...........................................................................................................................................................22Concurrent Session 3 �– 8:30 �– 10:00 am...........................................................................................................................24The NERA Poster Session �– 10:15 �– 11:15 am...................................................................................................................28Concurrent Session 4 �– 2:00 �– 3:30 pm.............................................................................................................................33Concurrent Session 5 �– 3:45 �– 5:15 pm.............................................................................................................................37Invited Panel �– 5:30 �– 6:45 pm..........................................................................................................................................41

Friday .........................................................................................................................................................................................42Friday Highlights................................................................................................................................................................42Concurrent Session 6 �– 9:00 to 10:30 am .........................................................................................................................43Concurrent Session 7 10:45 am �– 12:15 pm ....................................................................................................................45

About NERA ...............................................................................................................................................................................48NERA Mission ....................................................................................................................................................................48NERA Leadership ...............................................................................................................................................................48

Additional Conference Information ...........................................................................................................................................49Thanks to Our Reviewers! .................................................................................................................................................49Author Index......................................................................................................................................................................50Contact Information (Session organizers and first authors) .............................................................................................52

Conference Overview ................................................................................................................................................................56Hartford Marriott Rocky Hill Meeting Space .............................................................................................................................61NERA Conference 2010: Schedule At A Glance..........................................................................................................................62

Overview


Our Sponsors

Much appreciation is extended to our very generous corporate and institutional sponsors for theirsupport of the 41st Annual Conference of the Northeastern Educational Research Association!

PlatinumSponsors

The College Boardhttp://www.collegeboard.com/research

Educational Testing Servicehttp://www.ets.org

University of Connecticut�’s Neag School of Educationhttp://www.education.uconn.edu

Westfield State Universityhttp://www.wsc.mass.edu

GoldSponsors

James Madison Universityhttp://www.jmu.edu/assessment

Johnson &Wales Universityhttp://www.jwu.edu/education/grad/edd.htm

SilverSponsors

Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvaniahttp://www.bloomu.edu/

Bucknell University's College of Arts and Sciences in support of BucknellUniversity's Education Department

www.bucknell.edu/Education.xml

Buros Center for Testing at University of Nebraska Lincolnhttp://www.unl.edu/buros/

Pace Universityhttp://www.pace.edu/

University of Massachusetts at Amherst School of Educationhttp://www.umass.edu/education

William Paterson Universitywww.wpunj.edu

Overview


Overview


OverviewWe are excited to continue the tradition of bringing together educational researchers and practitioners representing adiverse set of interests and backgrounds in an intimate setting with an emphasis on quality interactions and research! Notonly is the tradition of excellence and personalized, intimate feedback continued, but the cutting edge quality funcontinuous.

Sessions, Events, and Experiences Available at NERA 2010

Pre conferenceWorkshops

We are pleased to offer two pre conference workshops! One pre conference session runs from 10:00 am to 4:45pm and the other from 10:00 am until 12:45 pm both on Wednesday, October 20. These are greatopportunities get in depth information and training about a topic offered by experts in the field �— at nocharge! We only ask that you indicate on the conference registration and membership form whether you planto attend a pre conference session. Please note that Pre Conference Workshop A is limited to 20 participants �–so sign up quickly!!Pre conference Workshop A: NVivo 8 Fundamentals (full day)Presenter: Dr. Kelly Godfrey, The College BoardPre conference Workshop B: Survey Design and DevelopmentPresenters: Dr. Katherine McCormick, University of Kentucky

In ConferenceWorkshops

In addition to all of the great paper sessions, poster sessions, symposia, keynotes, and networking opportunitiesfor which NERA is known, we are also offering training opportunities that will take place during the conference.These �“in conference workshop�” are open to all conference attendees, are free of charge, and do not requirepre registration. The sessions are simply another way that NERA helps its members use and conducteducational research to improve student learning.In Conference Workshop A:Collaboration for Scholarship Results: Guidelines for Maximizing Outcomes, Enjoyment and Learning Presenters:Drs. Jan Stivers, Marist College, and Sharon Cramer, Buffalo State CollegeIn Conference Workshop B:Mixed Method Design and Analysis with ValidityPresenter: Dr. Burke Johnson, University of South AlabamaIn Conference Workshop C:An Introduction to Structural Equation ModelingPresenter: Dr. Sara Finney, James Madison University

ConcurrentSessions

Concurrent sessions are a key aspect of the NERA conference. Through concurrent sessions, presenters andattendees have the opportunity to learn from one another about cutting edge research taking place around theNortheast and beyond. All submissions to the NERA conference have been subjected to a blind peer reviewprocess and have been subsequently selected and grouped to create a comprehensive educational researchconference experience.Papers are scheduled into one of several concurrent session time slots that take place on Wednesday, Thursday,and Friday of the conference. Session attendees are encouraged to approach presenters after sessions tofurther exchange ideas.

The NERA PosterSession

The NERA Poster Session is an integral part of the NERA experience. The NERA Poster Session will take place onThursday, October 21st from 10:15 am �– 11:15 am. No other sessions are scheduled at this time. So, pleasetake your time to engage the presenters, offer feedback, generate ideas, and even build research partnerships!

NERA Social Events As is the NERA tradition, registered conference attendees are invited to join us at two receptions. TheWednesday night NERA Welcome Reception provides a low key environment for old friends or newacquaintances to meet one another with soothing music from a jazz trio playing in the background. For thisyear�’s Thursday night event, NERA President Katharyn Nottis invites conference attendees to join the fun withtwo bands making their a special appearance as part of their national tour coming off standing room onlyaudience show in Denver, CO at the AERA/NCME conference, the Messickists and Distractors. A limitednumber of drink tickets will be provided for both social events.

Overview


General Meeting Information

Location All events for the NERA 2010 conference will take place at the Hartford Marriott Rocky Hill in Rocky Hill,Connecticut. The contact information for the hotel is as follows:100 Capital BoulevardRocky Hill, Connecticut 06067 USAPhone: 1 860 257 6000Fax: 1 860 257 6060Toll free: 1 800 228 9290Web Site: http://www.marriott.com/bdlrh

Registration & theRegistration Desk

The NERA 2010 registration desk will be located in the Marriott conference foyer adjacent to the Rocky Hill andHartford Rooms. Registration will be open the following times:Wednesday, October 20th: 9:00 am �– 5:30 pmThursday, October 21st: 7:00 am �– 11:15 am, 1:15 pm �– 5:15 pmFriday, October 22nd: 8:00 am �– 12:15 pm

Meals At NERA 2010, many of the meals are combined with conference events. For example, both keynote speechestake place in conjunction with meals. As such, conference attendees are encouraged to participate in as manymeals as possible during the conference. For attendees staying at the conference hotel, a number of meals areincluded in the price of the hotel room:For attendees staying Tuesday night: Tuesday night dinner, Wednesday breakfast and lunch are on your own.The NERA Deli will be open for Wednesday lunch offering a brown bag lunch for an inexpensive $10. This willkeep you going as you take advantage of the pre conference workshop and head into the sessions to kick offthe conference. Look for the NERA Deli signs at the hotel for the exact location.For attendees staying Wednesday night: Dinner on Wednesday, breakfast on Thursday, and lunch on Thursdayare included.For attendees staying Thursday night: Dinner on Thursday, breakfast on Friday, and lunch on Friday areincluded.All included meals will take place in the hotel�’s conference facilities, not in the hotel restaurant. Attendees notstaying at the hotel have the option of purchasing meal tickets at the conference (see the NERA registrationdesk for details).

Cyber Café As a benefit to conference attendees, the NERA �’10 conference will have a cyber café at which conferenceattendees can check e mail, print out airline/train tickets, and surf the Internet. There are a limited number ofcomputer terminals available in the Cyber Café, and all terminals are available on a first come, first servedbasis.

Round Table forResearch inProgress

In an effort to support researchers, a round table for research in progress has been scheduled. In addition, theposter sessions are scheduled without any competing sessions to permit all participants to engage the researchpresenters in a dialogue.

Mentorship To encourage graduate students and early career professionals, NERA has an extensive mentoring program thattakes place during the conference. For information on the NERA mentoring program, contact mentorshipcoordinator Tom Levine, University of Connecticut, at [email protected].

Wednesday Highlights


Wednesday

Wednesday highlights

Pre Conference Workshop A: NVivo 8 FundamentalsSalon A, 10:00 am �– 4:45 pmThis session is training for QSR International�’s NVivo software, apowerful qualitative data analysis tool that allows users tosimultaneously code audio, video, picture, and text within oneinterface. Participants will receive hands on training in datapreparation, importing, coding, conducting queries, anddemonstrating and sharing findings using NVivo. A laptop andpre installed version of NVivo 8 (free trial or full version) isrequired.Presenter: Dr. Kelly Godfrey, The College Board

Dr. Kelly Godfrey is an Associate Research Scientist at TheCollege Board. She received her doctoral degree from the

Educational Research Methodologydepartment at UNC Greensboro, and hasbeen a trainer for QSR�’s qualitative analysissoftware for over 6 years. Her researchfocuses primarily in psychometrics, includingIRT and test equating, and programevaluation, including mixed methods andresponsive evaluation approaches.

Pre Conference Workshop B: Survey Design and DevelopmentSalon B, 10:00 am �– 12:45 pmThe purpose of the training session is to provide attendees withan overview of survey design.Presenter: Dr. Katherine McCormick, University of Kentucky

Dr. Katherine McCormick is an Associate Professor inInterdisciplinary Early Childhood Education and holds the

James W. and Diane V. Stuckert ServiceLearning Professor in the Department ofSpecial Education and RehabilitationCounseling. Dr. McCormick was recentlyappointed by Kentucky Governor SteveBeshear to the Kentucky Early ChildhoodDevelopment Authority. Her research with

other colleagues at UK includes a 3 year research andevaluation project of the Kentucky primary program and a 7year federally funded project to study transition for youngchildren with disabilities and their families across the earlychildhood years. Her work with the Endowment includeswork on campus to encourage more faculty to use servicelearning in their coursework and to promote the inclusion ofservice learning and engagement into UK promotion andtenure policy. Most recently, she has focused her efforts oninternational service learning in Ecuador.

The NERA DeliTBD at the Marriott, 12:00 pm �– 1:30pmAttendees who are interested in grabbing a quick bite to eatbefore the Concurrent Session 1 have the option of grabbing a

brown bag lunch for $10. Go to the NERA Registration Deskfor details. No reservation required.

Symposium on Trends in College ReadinessSalon C, 1:30 pm �– 3:00 pmThis session will provide an overview of trends in collegereadiness across six geographic regions across the UnitedStates. See session description 1.2 for details.

Invited Panel on Collaboration and TeamingSalon C, 3:15 pm �– 4:45 pmExemplifying the theme of the conference (Building ResearchPartnerships), this panel will provide real examples aboutcollaboration and teaming. See session description 2.2 fordetails.

Symposium on Practical Applications of Structural EquationModelingSalon D, 3:15 pm �– 4:45 pmThe overall purpose of the symposium is to provide guidance topractitioners/researchers about effective strategies whenusing item level data with structural equation modeling. Seesession description 2.3 for details.

Symposium on Designing and Using Assessment FormativelyHartford, 3:15 pm �– 4:45 pmThis session will define and provide contemporary research andpractice on formative assessment. See session description 2.4for details.

Symposium on Special Education and Rehabilitation ResearchRocky Hill, 3:15 pm �– 4:45 pmAn annual NERA tradition, this symposium will showcasecutting edge research of interest to special educationresearchers and educational practitioners. See sessiondescription 2.5 for details.

MentoringConnecticut, 3:15 pm �– 4:45 pmRocky Hill, 4:45 pm �– 5:30 pmMentoring sessions provided as pre arranged by Tom Levine,University of Connecticut, chair of the Mentoring Committee.

Round Table for Research in ProgressConnecticut, 4:55 pm �– 5:30 pmRound table feedback sessions provided as pre arranged byDolores Burton, New York Institute of Technology, 2010 NERAProgram Committee.

Wednesday Highlights


Graduate Student SocialLobby Bar at the Marriott, 4:45 pm �–5:30 pmAll graduate students attending NERAare welcome to meet one another andenjoy complimentary appetizers. Opento all conference participants who aregraduate students; no RSVP or reservations necessary.

Welcome & Keynote by Elizabeth Williamson, US Departmentof Education: The Quiet Revelation: Driven by a Partnershipof Motivated Parents, Teachers, Administrators andResearchersThe Grand Ballroom, 5:30 pm �– 6:45 pm

Ms. Williamson will present an overview of the President�’sagenda for education and discuss reauthorization of ESEA. Herpresentation will also include information about the EducationDepartment�’s new initiatives. Open to all conferenceattendees. Individuals who wish to participate in the dinnerheld in conjunction with the Welcome and Keynote must bestaying at the hotel on Wednesday night or must purchase ameal ticket. See the NERA registration desk for details.

Elizabeth Williamson is a program specialist in the PhiladelphiaRegional Office of the United States Department ofEducation�’s Office of Outreach and Communication. ThePhiladelphia Regional Office serves the educationcommunities in Delaware, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia,West Virginia and the District of Columbia by communicatingmajor Department initiatives through outreach activities.

Prior to her appointment at the Department of Education,Elizabeth was the regional communications director for the U.S. Small Business Administration and a public affairs specialistfor the New Jersey Juvenile Justice System. She also served asa public information officer for a New Jersey regional schooldistrict.

Elizabeth received her undergraduate degree in American andBritish literature from the University of Pittsburgh and herMaster of Arts degree from Virginia Tech. She has 40 years ofclassroom teaching experience, and has taught in communitycolleges and universities in Maryland, New Jersey, Virginia,and Pennsylvania. In addition to working as a programspecialist for the Department of Education, she is currently anadjunct professor teaching rhetoric at Temple University.

NERA Welcome ReceptionSalons A and B, 8:00 pm 10:00 pmCome meet other conference attendees in a jovial, low keyatmosphere against a backdrop of jazz by the Shilanski JazzBand. Complimentary drink tickets will be available in limitedsupply. Open to all conference attendees.

Sponsored bythe GraduateStudent IssuesCommittee

Wednesday Concurrent Session 1 (1:30 pm �– 3:00 pm)


Pre Conference Workshops �– 10:00 am �– 4:45 pm

1.A Pre Conference Workshop A Salon ANVivo 8 FundamentalsPresenter: Kelly Godfrey ([email protected]), The CollegeBoard

This session is training for QSR International�’s NVivo software, apowerful qualitative data analysis tool that allows users tosimultaneously code audio, video,picture, and text within one interface.Participants will receive hands ontraining in data preparation, importing,coding, conducting queries, anddemonstrating and sharing findingsusing NVivo. A laptop and preinstalled version of NVivo 8 (free trial or full version) isrequired. Please make sure you install the softwarebeforehand.

1.B Pre Conference Workshop B Salon BSurvey Design and DevelopmentPresenter: Katherine McCormick ([email protected]), University ofKentucky

The purpose of the training session isto provide attendees with anoverview of survey design.

Please Note:This sessionruns from

10am�–4:45pm

Please Note:This sessionruns from

10am�–12:45pm



Concurrent Session 1 �– 1:30 �– 3:00 pm

1.2 Symposium Salon CTowards College Readiness for AllSymposium Organizer: Jennifer Bausmith([email protected]), The College Board

Symposium Chair: Megan France ([email protected]), James MadisonUniversity

Symposium Discussant: Kevin Sweeney ([email protected]),The College Board

As pressure mounts for all students to become college ready it isimportant to know where and to what extent students are movingtowards that goal. The papers in this session will include analyses offive years of matched cohort data on graduating seniors across each ofsix regions in the country, as well as a national overview. The sessionwill examine the progress made across the country in preparingstudents for college by examining five years of trends in six differentregions in the nation along a variety of measures related to collegepreparation and success: achievement gaps, AP participation andperformance, SAT participation and performance, and a new CollegeReadiness Index that predicts students�’ college success.

Towards College Readiness: An OverviewCarol Barry ([email protected]), The College BoardRoxanna Menson ([email protected]), The College Board

PSAT/NMSQT Participation and SAT Performance: Trends acrossStates

Haifa Matos Elefonte ([email protected]), The CollegeBoard

Jen Bausmith ([email protected]), The College Board

The Relationship between Advanced Placement and SATAnita Rawls ([email protected]), The College BoardVytas Laitusis ([email protected]), The College Board

Who is College Ready? SAT Participation and PerformanceDemographics, 2005 2009

Mary McKillip ([email protected]), The College BoardJohn Lee ([email protected]), The College Board

1.3 Working Group Discussion Salon DTechniques and Outcomes of International Collaborations onCourses Using Technology

Working Group Coordinator: Rochelle Kaplan ([email protected]),William Paterson University

Working Group Discussant: Hilary Wilder ([email protected]), WilliamPaterson University

This working group will present some data on three projectsdesigned as international course collaborations. It will also focus on theprocesses involved in setting up and implementing these collaborationsusing distance learning approaches. The first project describes acollaboration between teacher education students in New Jersey andNamibia The second describes a collaboration during an undergraduatesociology course between a New Jersey class and one in Australia andthe third describes an in progress assignment for mathematicseducators for New Jersey and Israeli teachers. Results of survey dataand some coded responses obtained from online discussions will bepresented. The major part of the presentation will be an opportunity toshare strategies for conducting international collaborations withincourses.

Using Online Technologies to Promote Multicultural Experiences inEducational Technology Courses

Hilary Wilder, William Paterson UniversityHeejung An ([email protected]), William Paterson University

International Group Projects Using Google GroupsSheetal Ranjan ([email protected]), William Paterson UniversityMarietta Martinovic,RMIT University, Australia

Using Video Case Analysis and Distance Learning Methods withElementary Mathematics Teachers: An International CourseCollaboration

Rochelle Kaplan, William Paterson UniversityHagar Gal, David Yellin Teachers College, Israel

1.4 Individual Paper Session HartfordInternational Education and ComparisonsSession Chair: Katrina Crotts ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts Amherst

Session Discussant: Rosemary Reshetar ([email protected]),The College Board

Sociocultural Influences on Policy Discussions: Development of aConceptual Framework for Educational Policy Analysis

Bridget Thomas ([email protected]), George Mason University

This paper discusses the development of a conceptual framework toevaluate early childhood education policies. A framework was createdthat maps the goals of a program into four categories (academic, childdevelopment, societal, and economic) and the implementation of theprogram across Heck�’s (2004) core policy values (choice, quality,efficiency, and equity). The framework was used as the structure for acontent analysis of the preschool policy documents of selectedprograms in the United States, Canada, and Sweden. Using this contentanalysis as a demonstration of the framework, this paper focuses onthe development of the framework, its utility in evaluating socioculturalinfluences on policy development, and the possibilities for use of theframework in future analyses.

Developing Basic and Higher Level Reading Skills: Extending anInstructional Model to National and International Settings

Michael Joseph Deasy ([email protected]), University of MassachusettsLowell

James Carifio, University of Massachusetts LowellLorraine Dagostino, University of Massachusetts Lowell

According to the UN, twenty percent of the adult population isilliterate and schools in areas with the lowest literacy rates needsupport in developing the capacity for literacy instruction. This studyexplored if a beginning reading instructional model (Singer & Donlan,1989) replicated to national and international settings and how well itdeveloped basic and higher level processing skills. A construct of themodel using the Progress in Reading Literacy Study 2006 database wastested in five countries using multiple regression. On the internationalbenchmark scale, the model predicted fourth grade performance at anintermediate level for four countries and a high level for the fifthcountry. The model offers teachers a framework for designing beginningreading instruction.



Teachers Rule�…Or Do They? Exploring Teacher Autonomy under theBritish National Curriculum

Sara Letai Feshazion ([email protected]), University ofConnecticut

Jessica Addonizio, University of ConnecticutTara Case, University of ConnecticutAlicia Crichton, University of ConnecticutHeather Frac, University of ConnecticutEmily Giannotta, University of ConnecticutNicole Holland, University of ConnecticutBlair Izard, University of ConnecticutLaura Kirsche,University of ConnecticutGregory Parkhurst, University of ConnecticutYurah Robidas, University of ConnecticutKristina Scarrozzo, University of ConnecticutKelsey Seddon, University of ConnecticutJennifer Suen, University of Connecticut

In recent decades, the educational system in England has causedteachers to adapt their pedagogy and practices to fit the centralgovernment�’s mandates for curriculum reform. The overall purpose ofthe research was to investigate teacher beliefs regarding theirautonomy as professional educators teaching in London urban state(public) schools under the national curriculum. This research wasconducted in four London schools by a cohort of 14 teacher educationcandidates on a semester long professional teaching internshipprogram. Data was collected from both administrators and teachersusing a mixed method design of surveys and interviews. Findingssuggest the range of autonomy varied between schools and individualsbased upon subject area under the national curriculum, grade leveltaught, and years of service teaching. The implications are significant inthe consideration of reform minded agendas for the education systemhere in the United States.

Teacher Retention in EARCOS: Salary and Leadership Are KeyLaura Roberts ([email protected]), Right Angle ResearchSteven Mancuso, American Community School of Amman, Amman,Jordan

Roland Yoshida, Lehigh University

The purpose of this study was to create a model to explain teacherturnover in the East Asia Regional Council of Schools (EARCOS). We senta letter electronically to EARCOS school heads asking them to distributean electronic version of the International Teacher Mobility Survey(ITMS) to overseas hired teachers at their schools. From a population of2,143 overseas hired teachers, 745 responded (35%). The mostimportant correlates of turnover were satisfaction with salary and theperception of a supportive principal. Results are consistent withsociological theory and with studies conducted in the U.S. Thesefindings provide guides for leadership development in EARCOS toimprove teacher retention and to improve conditions for studentlearning.

1.5 Symposium Rocky HillEthics Across the Curriculum: Exploration by anInterdisciplinary Academic Community of Inquiry

Symposium Organizer: Inna Rozentsvit ([email protected]),Brooklyn College, CUNY

Symposium Discussant: Victoria Núñez ([email protected]),Brooklyn College, CUNY

The discussion of �“pure ethics�” falls within the realm of philosophy.Discussions of morality and moral development typically are found inthe disciplines of social sciences, rare guests in the secondary school�’sscience classroom or its computer lab. While colleges and universitiesoffer courses in ethics, and professions and corporations adopt theirown Codes of Ethics, recent and remote examples of socialirresponsibility of individuals and organizations are abundant. In light of

this, we should seriously reconsider our approach to teaching andinterweave discussions about ethical dilemmas throughout the schoolcurriculum. In this symposium we will cross disciplinary lines to explorethe teach ability of ethics in the forum of an interdisciplinarycommunity of inquiry.Ethical Inquiry Across the Curriculum: A Way to Re contextualize,Reason, and Reflect in Community

Lisa Novemsky ([email protected]), Brooklyn College, CUNY

Teaching Science with Ethical Compass in Hand & Moral Imaginationin Mind: Who? When? How?

Inna Rozentsvit ([email protected]), Brooklyn College, CUNY

Teaching Environmental Ethics: The Mother, the Mountain, & theMature Self: Three Exercises in Moral Imagination

Robinson Lilenthal, Rutgers University

The Challenge of Ethics in TechnologyBarbara Rosenfeld ([email protected]), Brooklyn College,CUNY

Teaching Ethics and Socio Emotional Curriculum with a DiverseLearning Community Presenter

Victoria Grinman, The Summit School

1.6 Individual Paper Session Salon ICollaboration, Teaming, and Group ProcessSession Chair: Darshanand Ramdass ([email protected]),Graduate Center, CUNY

Session Discussant: Cheryl Gowie ([email protected]), SienaCollege

Building Mutually Beneficial Campus Community Partnerships forHealth: Challenges and Lessons Learned

Christie Barcelos ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts Amherst

This case study examines the challenges and lessons learned fromservice learning partnerships between a community health center andseveral institutions of higher education. Drawing from the literature onservice learning, a content analysis of program documents and stafffeedback is used to identify challenges in creating and maintainingmutually beneficial partnerships. These challenges includecommunication barriers in understanding partnership goals andstudents�’ lack of cultural competency. Lessons learned includestrategies to establish realistic project expectations and facilitatestudent understanding of community health disparities. The challengesidentified in this case study confirm and extend those found in theliterature and provide examples for other postsecondary institutionsand community organizations to build mutually beneficial servicelearning partnerships.

The Relationship of Personality Traits to Satisfaction with the Team: AStudy of Interdisciplinary Teacher Teams in Rhode Island MiddleSchools

Michele Humbyrd ([email protected]), Johnson & WalesUniversity

Robert K. Gable ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales University

Shared practice in schools has emerged; teachers are moving fromisolation to team collaboration where personality traits could berelated to quality interactions. Team personality traits and teamsatisfaction were examined. A survey and interview approach was usedfor N = 244 full time teachers from N = 49 interdisciplinary teams at N =7 middle schools. Descriptive, correlational, multiple regressionanalyses and coded themes about team members�’ personalities andinteractions were employed. No significant relationships were foundbetween the BFI traits and Satisfaction with the Team. Team level



analysis indicated a significant negative correlation betweenSatisfaction with the Team and Extraversion and Agreeableness.Qualitative data revealed team climate, team member personality, andteam personality configuration were related to Satisfaction with theTeam.

1.7 Individual Paper Session Salon IILearning and Instruction ISession Chair & Discussant: Barbara Wert ([email protected]),Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania

Results of Using the �“Take Away�” Technique on Students�’Achievements and Attitudes in High School Physics and PhysicalScience Courses

James Carifio ([email protected]), University of MassachusettsLowell

The Take Away Technique was used in High School Physics andPhysical Science courses for the unit on Newtonian mechanics in ateacher (6) by grade level (4) crossed design (N=212). The experimentalgroup did a short Takeaway after each class summarizing the keyconcepts and concepts covered in the class, whereas the control groupwrote a short evaluation of what they liked and disliked about the class.The experimental group performed better than the control group onboth the achievement measure and the attitude measure used in allclasses (p< .001). The experimental group students gave the samepositive benefits for the Takeaway technique as given in a previousstudy done with college undergraduates in a psychology course.

Teachers' Choice: Building Content Area Connections ThroughProfessional Development in Language and Literacy Support

Francine Falk Ross ([email protected]), Pace University

PBL in Action: Effects of GlobalEd 2 on Students�’ Motivation Relatedto Science and Social Studies in Middle School

Mariya A Yukhymenko ([email protected]), University ofConnecticut

Scott Brown, University of ConnecticutMark Boyer, University of ConnecticutKimberly A. Lawless, University of Illinois at ChicagoAndrew Cutter, University of ConnecticutGregory Mullin, University of ConnecticutGregory Williams, University of ConnecticutNicole Powell, University of ConnecticutMaria Fernanda Enriquez, University of ConnecticutKamila Brodowinska, University of Illinois at ChicagoDaniel O�’Brien, University of Illinois at ChicagoGena Khodos, University of Illinois at Chicago

The present study explored the effects of Problem Based LearningEnvironment focused on international negotiation, science, technology,and writing, the GlobalEd 2 Project, on middle school students�’academic motivation and future aspirations. Specifically, this studyinvestigated students�’ Interest in Academic Science Activities, Interestin Science Related Career or Degree, Technology Self Efficacy, Efficacyfor Engaging in Academic Science Activities, Efficacy for Science Skills orCareer, Writing Tasks Self Efficacy, Interest in Social Studies, and SocialPerspective Taking. Results revealed some differences in students�’motivation as a result of participating in GlobalEd 2. Additionally,differences were found in Interest in Academic Science Activitiesamong students from different states. Theoretical and educationalimplications are discussed.

1.8 Individual Paper Session Salon IIIPre Service Teachers and Alternative ProgramsSession Chair: Pamela Stazesky ([email protected]), Center forCollaborative Education

Session Discussant: Sharon Cramer ([email protected]),Buffalo State College

Middle and High School Mathematics Teacher Differences inMathematics Alternative Certification

Brian Evans ([email protected]), Pace University

This study examined the differences in content knowledge, attitudestoward mathematics, and concepts of teacher self efficacy amongseveral different types of teachers in the New York City TeachingFellows (NYCTF) program, and informs teacher education inmathematics alternative certification. Findings revealed that highschool teachers had significantly higher content knowledge than middleschool teachers. Mathematics Teaching Fellows had significantly highercontent knowledge than Mathematics Immersion Teaching Fellows.Mathematics and science majors had significantly higher contentknowledge than other majors. Mathematics content knowledge wasnot related to attitudes toward mathematics and concepts of teacherself efficacy. Thus, teachers had the same high positive attitudestoward mathematics and same high concepts of self efficacy regardlessof content ability.

Mentoring/Induction Programs: One State�’s LandscapeCara McDermott Fasy ([email protected]), Rhode Island College

There is an increasing consensus that special education teacherpreparation is at a critical juncture. As special education servicedelivery and classroom practice continue to evolve in response tofederal initiatives, special education teacher preparation programsmust evolve as well. Moving forward, mentoring/induction programswill play an important role in the professional development of newspecial education teachers. However, as noted in Rhode Island�’s Raceto the Top (RTTT) application, �“many LEAs have struggled to design andlaunch effective induction programs, particularly for teacher with highneed students.�” The purpose of this study is to investigate one State�’scurrent landscape and to offer suggestions for ways of buildingeffective partnerships between institutions of higher education andLocal Education Agencies.

Alignment of University Instructional Materials with District ReadingCurricula and Assessments: Preparing Classroom Ready TeacherCandidates

Maureen Ruby ([email protected]), Eastern CT State UniversityBrandon Monroe, Eastern CT State University

This project provided an opportunity to close the gap between thepreparation of elementary literacy educators and the expectations ofschool districts that partner with universities in preservice teachers�’clinical and student teaching experiences. By identifying curricula andassessments used in cooperating districts, informed faculty can nowincorporate specific clinical tools into coursework. This is accomplishedby providing a seamless connection between theory, pedagogy, andpractice in the university classroom. Candidates will become more�“classroom ready,�” and the department is better prepared to meetNCATE�’s demands for evidence of program outcomes. Faculty, schools,and students will have a common knowledge base and languageregarding literacy instruction and assessment.




2.1 Salon BNo Session Scheduled

2.2 Invited Panel Salon CCollaboration and TeachingSession Organizer & Facilitator: Dolores Burton, NYIT

Valerie Jackson, Belmont (NY) Elementary SchoolLinda Catelli, Dowling CollegePatricia Ann Marcellino, Adelphi UniversityYaoying Xu, Virginia Commonwealth UniversityElizabeth Mauch, Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania

2.3 Symposium Salon DPractical Applications of Structural Equation ModelingSymposium Organizer: Craig S. Wells ([email protected]),University of Massachusetts Amherst

Symposium Discussant: Robert Keller([email protected]), Measured Progress

Structural equation modeling (SEM) is a powerful tool that is capableof several types of analyses such as assessing test dimensionality,testing the structural relationship among a set of latent variables, andassessing measurement invariance. However, researchers face severalchallenges when attempting to use SEM with item level data. Thepurpose of this symposium is to examine the use of SEM in severalcontexts when the observed data are based on item responses (e.g.,Likert type items). The overall purpose of the symposium is to provideguidance to practitioners/researchers about effective strategies whenusing item level data with SEM.

A Comparison of Methods for the Assessment of MeasurementInvariance

Robert Cook ([email protected]), University of MassachusettsAmherst

Craig S. Wells, University of Massachusetts Amherst

The Effect of Using Item Level Data versus Parcels when ConductingSEM

Brooke Magnus ([email protected]), University of NorthCarolina �– Chapel Hill

Craig S. Wells ([email protected]), University of MassachusettsAmherst

A Comparison of Linear and Nonlinear Factor Analysis in Examiningthe Effect of a Calculator Accommodation on Math Performance

Minji Kang ([email protected]), University of MassachusettsAmherst


A Comparison of SEM Software Packages in Assessing TestDimensionality

Amy Semerjian ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts Amherst


2.4 Symposium HartfordDesigning and Using Assessments Formatively: ContemporaryResearch and Practice

Symposium Organizer: Kristen Huff ([email protected]), TheCollege Board

Symposium Chair: Sheryl Packman ([email protected]), TheCollege Board

Symposium Discussants:Stephen G. Sireci ([email protected]), University of MassachusettsAmherst

David Moss ([email protected]), University of Connecticut

The frequently used term "formative assessment" has differentmeanings for different people. However, labeling an assessment a priorias formative is misleading as an assessment is formative only when theresults are used to modify instruction. This definition of formativeassessment (FA) begs the questions: What constitutes FA? What are theoptimal design characteristics of FA? What is the most useful way toconsider FA from a validity perspective? These questions become evenmore intriguing when one considers that the most effective FA is aseamless, ongoing process of instruction, assessment, feedback andmodification, engaged in collaboratively by the teacher and student.We will present contemporary research and practice on FA, and twodiscussants will offer commentary from different perspectives.

Considering the Validity of Formative Assessment from TwoPerspectives

Christine J. Lyon, Educational Testing Service

Students as the Definitive Source of Formative Assessment: AcademicSelf Assessment and the Self Regulation of Learning

Heidi L. Andrade, University of Albany

Formative Assessment in the Classroom: Variations in the Nature andLevel of Teacher Support

Vytas Laitusis ([email protected]), The College Board

Using Evidence Centered Design to Support the Formative Use ofAssessment in the Classroom

Kristen Huff, The College BoardSheryl Packman, The College Board

2.5 Symposium Rocky HillSpecial Education and Rehabilitation ResearchSymposium Organizer: Barbara J. Helms ([email protected]), EducationDevelopment Center, Inc.

Symposium Discussant: Dianne Zager ([email protected]), PaceUniversity

The Symposium on Special Education and Rehabilitation Research isan annual session devoted to research relative to both adults andstudents with disabilities. This year�’s session includes three papersrelated to students with exceptionalities; specifically factors thatinfluence the attitudes of university students toward their classmatesand others with exceptionalities, the use of the IBET model for teachingmathematics to students with autism, and an assessment model forcollege students with autism.

Factors that Influence Attitudes of University Students towardIndividuals with Exceptionalities

Barbara Wert ([email protected]), Bloomsburg University ofPennsylvania

Deborah S. Stryker, Bloomsburg University of PASheila Dove Jones, Bloomsburg University of PAEileen Astor Stetson, Bloomsburg University of PAMaureen Walsh, Bloomsburg University of PAYanhui Pang, Bloomsburg University of PABarbara Wilson, Bloomsburg University of PA



Anthony Zilz, Bloomsburg University of PAJames Krause, Bloomsburg University of PAEmeka Obiozor, Bloomsburg University of PA

Effectiveness of the Integrated Behavioral Experiential Teaching (IBET)Model for Teaching Mathematics to Students with Autism

Dianne Zager, Pace UniversityFrancine Dreyfus, Pace UniversityMarisa Cohen, Pace UniversityChristine Emmons ([email protected]), Yale Child StudyCenter

Text Cohesion and the Ability to Identify Anaphoric Relationships: AnExploratory Study of College Students with Autism

Samantha Feinman ([email protected]), Pace UniversityDarlene Perner ([email protected]), Bloomsburg University

2.6 Individual Paper Session Salon IComputers & Technology in Education ISession Chair: Elina Chernobilsky ([email protected]),Caldwell College

Session Discussant: Benedict Lai ([email protected]), University ofConnecticut

Zut Alors: Designing Podcasts for Increasing Performance in FrenchPronunciation

Anthony Girasoli ([email protected]), University ofConnecticut & Norwich Free Academy

At the Norwich Free Academy, eleven Honors French students werepreparing to participate in a French poetry recital contest. Anaccessible technological device and media were chosen as a learningaid �– the Apple iPod and podcasts. Could podcasts be crafted tofacilitate knowledge transfer of French pronunciation? Studentsparticipated in a pre and post test of academic and technology selfefficacy before and after using the podcasts. Qualitative data were alsogathered from the students and teacher. While the quantitative datawill be analyzed this summer, the qualitative data suggests that thepodcasts were helpful. If podcasts can be created by grounding theproduction in cognitive theory, it is possible that podcasts could beused to enhance foreign language learning.

Virtual Education in Rhode Island�’s K 12 Public Schools: Current Statusand Perceptions of Administrators

Barbara Morse ([email protected]), North Kingstown SchoolDepartmentRalph Jasparro ([email protected] ), Johnson and WalesUniversity

The USDOE Technology Plan encourages schools to provide everystudent with access to online learning opportunities and to developcriteria for earning credit through e learning. This study surveyed N =29 public school administrators. Focus group interviews wereconducted and descriptive statistics, ANOVAs and t tests were used toexplore differences in administrators�’ perceptions which wereexamined for metropolitan and charter status. The most commonforms of fully online courses were for remediation or credit recovery(45%), elective courses (38%), required courses (21%) and AdvancedPlacement and/or college credit courses (21%). Administrators areseeking to expand online learning programs in their districts, whileperceived barriers to expansion include course development and/orpurchasing costs, the lack of other sources of funding, and the lack ofgrants.

Learning in Second Life? Listening to Two Multivocal Inter animatedDiscourses

Martha Strickland ([email protected]), Pennsylvania State UniversityHarrisburgGloria Clark, Pennsylvania State University Harrisburg

This interactive session will present results from a study conductedby an educational psychology professor and a professor of Spanishseeking to understand learning in the virtual world, Second Life, duringa Spanish course. The purpose of this study was to analyze how aprofessor and her undergraduate students, when introduced to avirtual world as a key learning context, construct their learning insidethat world. Focus group transcripts, journals, and qualitative analysisstrategies were used to explore their learning construction. Findingsrevealed two Discourses. These Discourses were both multivocal,revealing institutional and cultural voices, and inter animated. Thesemultivocal inter animated Discourses expose important considerationswhen introducing a virtual world as a learning context for anundergraduate course.

2.7 Individual Paper Session Salon IIProgram Evaluation: Issues and StudiesSession Chair: Barbara Rosenfeld ([email protected]),Brooklyn College of CUNY

Session Discussant: John Lee ([email protected]), The CollegeBoard

Evaluating Programs Serving High Risk Populations: Challenges andRecommendations

Gavrielle Levine ([email protected]), Long Island UniversityPeter Swerdzewski ([email protected])

Grant supported programs, particularly those sponsored withgovernment funds, are required to include a rigorous evaluation as partof the proposal and project implementation to demonstrate programeffectiveness. Ironically, programs that serve high risk populations areoften at an inherent disadvantage with regard to conducting rigorousprogram evaluations since this unique population does not lend itself toaccepted program evaluation standards and practices. Consequently,these programs often do not receive the funding needed to provideuseful programs for high risk populations. The New York City basedRESOLVE abstinence education program will be used as a runningexample to discuss challenges and recommendations that arecommonly encountered when evaluating programs that target high riskyouth. Examining the challenges that high risk populations present toevaluators can lead to the development of new evaluation protocolsthat are more appropriate to this group of individuals.

The Impact of a College Readiness Initiative in a Large, Urban SchoolDistrict

Jennifer Bausmith ([email protected]), The College BoardMary McKillip ([email protected]), The College Board

This presentation will provide background on the beginnings of aresearch collaboration between a large, urban public school district andThe College Board�’s Research and Development Department. Thecollaboration is designed to develop and explore mutually relevantresearch projects that will answer questions about students�’ progresstowards college readiness. Preliminary data analyses involved utilizingfive years of matched cohort files to track district students�’participation and performance on College Board assessments. Thesetrends were examined both for all participating students as well as for avariety of test taking trajectories. These analyses served to promotediscussion between the College Board and the district and to clarify thedirection of more in depth analyses and next steps.



Effects of Cognitive Process and Decision Making Training in ReadingExperience with Underachieving College Students

Rebecca Dean ([email protected]), Salem State CollegeLorraine Dagostino, University of Massachusetts LowellElizabeth Bifuh Ambe, University of Massachusetts Lowell

The ability of underprepared college students to read and learn fromtheir reading is essential to their academic success and to their abilityto persist towards completing their degree. The purposes of this studywere to (a) assess the relationship between the cognitive processes ofreading based decision making and meaningful learning and (b) assessthe degree to which a five week instructional intervention in thecognitive processes of reading based decision making training affectedstudent learning.

Hierarchical Linear Modeling of Students�’ Mathematics Self Efficacyand School Effects on Mathematics Achievement

Xing Liu ([email protected]), Eastern Connecticut State UniversityHari Koirala ([email protected]), Eastern Connecticut StateUniversity

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationshipbetween mathematics self efficacy and mathematics achievement ofhigh school sophomores across the United States, and to examine theeffects of gender, ethnicities, and school characteristics on students�’mathematics achievement using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM).The base year data of the Educational Longitudinal Study (ELS): 2002were used for analysis. Hierarchical linear models were developed fromthe one way random effects ANOVA model and the unconditionalModel with mathematics self efficacy in level 1 to the contextualmodels with variables in the both levels. Both fixed effects and randomeffects were estimated and interpreted for all the models.

Teen Motherhood and Its Impact On Student Achievement in Reading,Mathematics, and Science

Shanetia P. Clark ([email protected]), Pennsylvania State University atHarrisburg

Barbara A. Marinak ([email protected]), Pennsylvania State Universityat Harrisburg

Steven A Melnick ([email protected]), Penn State University at HarrisburgJane M. Wilburne, Pennsylvania State University at HarrisburgJason Petula, Pennsylvania State University at Harrisburg

National attention has focused on the importance of highly qualifiedteachers as a means to improve student achievement in reading,mathematics, and science. But scant attention has been directedtoward impact of parenting on student achievement. This researchexplores the relationships of teen motherhood and the subsequentachievement of fifth grade students in reading, mathematics, andscience.

2.8 Individual Paper Session Salon IIIValidation StudiesSession Chair: Jennifer Kobrin ([email protected]), The CollegeBoard

Session Discussant: Dena Pastor ([email protected]), James MadisonUniversity

Using Student Think Alouds and Confirmatory Factor Analysis toImprove the Measurement of University Mattering

Megan France ([email protected]), James Madison UniversityChristine Harmes, James Madison University

This study provides an applied example of how a mixed methodsdesign can enhance the instrument development process. The

researchers employed both quantitative (QUAN) and qualitative (QUAL)methodologies (an integrated mixed design) to improve the RevisedUniversity Mattering Scale (RUMS). There were two QUAN phases andone QUAL phase. Both QUAN phases utilized CFA to inform the internalstructure of the RUMS. The QUAL phase consisted of gathering thinkalouds for each item on the RUMS. The QUAN results were analyzed toindentify which items were performing poorly, the QUAL results wereanalyzed to understand why those items were functioning poorly, andthe results from both QUAN and QUAL components results wereconsidered together to inform the theory of university mattering.

Assessing Young Children: An Examination of Variability in TeacherRatings of Kindergarten Students�’ Skills

Jessica Goldstein ([email protected]), University ofConnecticutKaren Rambo ([email protected]), University of Connecticut

Though annual testing requirements mandated in the No Child LeftBehind Act of 2001(NCLB) begins in third grade, educators are placing arenewed emphasis on education in the primary grades as it serves asthe foundation for all future learning. In 2005 and 2006, the State ofConnecticut passed legislation requiring the assessment of kindergartenstudents at school entry and again at the end of the kindergarten yearbeginning in 2007. In this paper, exploratory and confirmatory factoranalyses were used to examine the structure of the instrument usingdesigned to fulfill this legislation using data from one urban district inthe state.

Evaluating the Quality of Assessment: Applying G Theory to a NonTraditional Performance Assessment

Christopher Orem ([email protected]), James Madison University

The Assessment Progress Template (APT) is a performanceassessment used by academic programs to report their assessmentpractices. A rubric was developed to evaluate the APT. Generalizabilitytheory was used to gather validity evidence for the rubric scores. Fiverater teams rated random samples of APTs and separate fully crosseddesigns were used to estimate ratings from the different teams.Generalizability studies were conducted to analyze the variancecomponents of the rater and item facets, and decision studies wereconducted to investigate additional universes of generalization. Resultsprovided some support that the current design yielded consistentresults among teams. This study provides initial support for themethodology used to evaluate assessment. Additionally, suggestionsare made for improving future research.

A Mixed Method Approach to Developing Measures of MathematicalKnowledge for Teaching in Preservice Teachers

Javarro Russell ([email protected]), James Madison UniversityRobin Anderson ([email protected]), James Madison UniversityCara Meixner, James Madison UniversityLouAnn Lovin, James Madison University

Pre service teacher programs are in search of tools to assess theirstudents�’ mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT), a construct seenas essential to mathematics education. Items developed to specificallyassess MKT have been piloted on a sample of preservice teachers. Thisresearch will use a mixed method approach to providing validationevidence for the interpretation of scores from the items. This approachallows for a strong validity argument by connecting examinee thoughtprocesses (qualitative data) to the psychometric properties of the items(quantitative data). The results will provide validity evidence for theuse of these items, as well as inform proper assessment practices whenmeasuring MKT with preservice teachers.

Thursday Highlights


Thursday

Thursday HighlightsIn Conference Workshop A: Collaboration for ScholarshipResults: Guidelines for Maximizing Outcomes, Enjoymentand LearningSalon A, 8:30 am �– 10:00 amThis interactive workshop will enable participants to gain newinsights about how they work with others throughout thewriting process. The presenters, who have collaborated longdistance on two joint articles and a research project resultingin a book, have also served as informal resources to eachother on independent projects. This session will enableparticipants to develop new skills and enthusiasm fortransforming the solitary scholarship experience into one that(when shared) can include candor and celebration.Presenters: Jan Stivers, Marist College, and Sharon Cramer,Buffalo State College

Dr. Jan Stivers is Professor of Special Education at MaristCollege in Poughkeepsie, New York, whereshe has team�–taught classes and led collegewide collaborative efforts (for example byco chairing the Middle States Self Study).Jan also serves as a consultant to schooldistricts implementing inclusive education,with a focus on collaboration and coteaching. As a researcher and writer, she has

worked alone and in collaboration with others, most recentlywith Sharon Cramer on A Teacher�’s Guide to Change. Jan willuse examples from teaching, research and service to illustratethe challenges and rewards of collaboration and to offersuggestions for enhancing collaborative skills.

Dr. Sharon F. Cramer is a SUNY Distinguished Service Professorat Buffalo State College, where she hasbeen a member of the faculty since 1985.Her experiences creating collaborativeenvironments in academic settingsinclude chairing the ExceptionalEducation Department and the CollegeSenate at Buffalo State, as well asleadership roles in state and nationalprofessional organizations (including NERA). In 2003, shereceived the Burton Blatt Humanitarian Award from theDivision of Developmental Disabilities of the Council forExceptional Children, and in 2008, the Leo D. DohertyMemorial Award for Outstanding Leadership and Service fromNERA. She and her co presenter, Jan Stivers, recentlycollaborated on A Teacher�’s Guide to Change: Understanding,Navigating and Leading the Process (Corwin Press, 2009). Herpublications include A Special Educator�’s Guide toCollaboration (Corwin Press, 2006). Dr. Cramer has given over100 presentations and keynotes in 20 states and Canada. Shecompleted her Ph.D. at New York University, earned an M.A.T.from Harvard University and a B. A. from Tufts University. She

has been listed in Who�’s Who in America and Who�’s Who inAmerican Education since 2006.

Symposium on Research on College Board Assessments andEducational InitiativesSalon B 8:30 am �– 10:00 amThis session pulls together the work of several current graduatestudents who are interning with the College Board to providethem an opportunity to showcase their research and also togain invaluable presentation experience. See sessiondescription 3.2 for details.

The NERA Poster SessionSalon A, B & C (Nutmeg Ballroom), 10:15 am �– 11:15 amA NERA tradition! Coffee will be available during the session.No other sessions are scheduled for this time, so please grabyour refreshment and engage the presenters in a collegialconversation. See the NERA Poster Session for listing of allpresentation.

Keynote by Burke Johnson: Can the Philosophy and Practice ofMixed Methodology Help Us Construct a More Inclusive"Education Science"?Salon I, II & III (Grand Ballroom), 11:30 am �– 12:30 pm

In this presentation, Dr. Johnson will provide an overview of thecurrent state of the field in mixed methodology and discusshow it might mediate the longstanding qualitativequantitative schism in education. He will trace the intellectualhistory out of which mixed research emerged, and he willbriefly discuss its current philosophies and approaches topractice. He will carefully explain how researchers canreconcile some of the epistemological differences between"pure" qualitative and quantitative research and distinguish anew set of philosophical underpinnings for mixed research. Healso will address why mixed methods research fits well withinterdisciplinary and practice oriented fields such as manyareas in educational research. Then Dr. Johnson will presentthe tenets for an �“inclusive education science" and dialoguewith the audience about the strengths and weaknesses ofthese tenets and listen to the audience to learn how theymight be improved. Open to all conference attendees.Individuals who wish to participate in the lunch held after thekeynote must be staying at the hotel on Wednesday night ormust purchase a meal ticket. See the NERA registration deskfor details.

Dr. R. Burke Johnson is professor at theUniversity of South Alabama. Dr.Johnson is the author with LarryChristensen of Educational Research:Quantitative, Qualitative, and MixedApproaches. Dr. Johnson received hisdoctorate from Research, Evaluation,

Thursday Highlights


Measurement, and Statistics Program at the University ofGeorgia. Dr. Johnson has two master�’s degrees in psychologyand sociology. His research interests are in mixed methodsresearch, evaluation, and research methodology.

Lunch and AwardsSalon I, II & III (Grand Ballroom) Grand Ballroom, 12:30 pm �–1:30 pmOpen to all conference attendees. Individuals who wish toparticipate in the lunch held in conjunction with the awardceremony must be staying at the hotel on Wednesday night ormust purchase a meal ticket. See the NERA registration deskfor details.

In Conference Workshop B: Mixed Methods Design andAnalysis with ValiditySalon A, 2:00 pm �– 3:30 pmThis workshop will cover some of the nuts and bolts of mixedmethods research. Current thinking on the following topicswill be briefly examined: appropriate research questions,sampling methods in mixed research, typologies of mixedresearch designs, and mixed data collection and analysisstrategies. Special attention, throughout the workshop, will begiven to �“legitimating�” mixed methods studies using the nineOnwuegbuzie and Johnson validity criteria. Exemplary studieswill be addressed as models of practice. Participants�’ insightsand questions will be discussed as time permits, and sourcesfor additional information will be provided. Dr. Johnson alsowill provide a copy of his Primer of Mixed Methodology, sobring your jump drive to receive a copy.Presenter: Dr. R. Burke Johnson, University of South Alabama

(See keynote address Dr. Johnson�’s bio and picture)

Symposium: Fordham Five on Finishing and Further:Dissertation Research Then and NowSalon B, 2:00 pm �– 3:30 pmWhat is becoming a tradition at NERA, these five NERAmembers will describe the dissertation research theycompleted over a decade ago and will comment on what hashappened in their dissertation area since that time. Seesession description 4.2 for details.

In Conference Workshop C: An Introduction to StructuralEquation ModelingSalon A, 3:45 pm �– 5:15 pmThe purpose of the training session is to provide attendees witha general overview of structural equation modeling (SEM) byintroducing path analysis, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA),and full structural equation modeling. We will start with pathanalysis, which models relationships among measuredvariables, then move to CFA, which is simply an extension ofexploratory factor analysis, and finish with full structuralmodels involving latent variables, which essentially mergespath analysis and CFA. The advantage of the latter is thattheories may be tested by estimating relationships betweenthe underlying constructs of interest, rather than estimatingrelationships between observed variables that arecontaminated by measurement error. Links will be madebetween these techniques and other more familiar techniquessuch as multiple regression and exploratory factor analysis.

For each SEM technique, the following steps in the analysisprocess will be explained: model specification, modelidentification, model data fit evaluation, and parameterestimate interpretation. This 1.5 hour workshop requires noprior experience with SEM.Presenter: Dr. Sara Finney, James Madison University

Dr. Sara Finney has a dual appointment at James MadisonUniversity (JMU) as an AssociateProfessor in the Department of GraduatePsychology and as an AssociateAssessment Specialist in the Center forAssessment and Research Studies, whereshe teaches courses in structural equationmodeling and multivariate statistics. Inaddition to serving as a faculty memberfor the Assessment & Measurement PhD

program, Dr. Finney coordinates the Quantitative PsychologyConcentration within the Psychological Sciences M.A. programat JMU. Much of her research involves the application ofstructural equation modeling techniques to assess thefunctioning of self report measures.

Teacher as Researcher Award PresentationHartford, 3:45 pm �– 5:15 pmChair: Susan Eichenholtz, Adelphi UniversityAward Recipient & Presenter: Pat Romano

Graduate Student Issues Committee Special Session: SevenYear, Five Career Paths: Successes and Lessons LearnedHartford, 5:30 pm �– 6:45 pmThe Graduate Student Issues Committee is excited to host aninteractive, panel based formatwhere five graduates of UMassAmherst School of Education�’sResearch and Evaluation MethodsProgram will discuss how theircareer paths have played out in theseven years since graduation.

Dinner, Presidential Address, and AwardsSalon I, II & III (Grand Ballroom), 7:00 pm �– 8:30 pmNERA President, Katharyn E. Nottis, Bucknell University willmake her Presidential Address entitled �“Looking through thePrism of Research Partnerships�”.NERA awards will be presented during this time, as well.Open to all conference attendees. Individuals who wish toparticipate in the dinner held in conjunction with the awardceremony must be staying at the hotel on Thursday night ormust purchase a meal ticket. See the NERA registration deskfor details.

President�’s ReceptionSalon A, B, C & D (Nutmeg Ballroom), 8:30 pm �– 10:30 pmFeaturing the Messickists and the Distractors coming off of astanding room only performance in Denver, CO! Limited drinktickets will be available. Open to all conference attendees.


Thursday Concurrent Session 3 (8:30 am �– 10:00 am)


Concurrent Session 3 �– 8:30 �– 10:00 am

3.1 In Conference Workshop A Salon ACollaboration for Scholarship Results: Guidelines forMaximizing Outcomes, Enjoyment and Learning

Presenters: Janet Stivers ([email protected]), Marist College,Sharon Cramer ([email protected]), Buffalo State College

This interactive workshop will enable participants to gain newinsights about how they work with others throughout the writingprocess. The presenters, who have collaborated long distance on twojoint articles and a research project resulting in a book, have alsoserved as informal resources to each other on independent projects.This session will enable participants to develop new skills andenthusiasm for transforming the solitary scholarship experience intoone that (when shared) can include candor and celebration.

3.2 Symposium Salon BResearch on College Board Assessments and EducationalInitiatives

Symposium Organizer: Jennifer Bausmith([email protected]), The College Board

Symposium Discussant: Megan France ([email protected]), JamesMadison University

This session pulls together the work of several current graduatestudents who are interning with the College Board to provide them anopportunity to showcase their research and also to gain invaluablepresentation experience. Four papers will be included in the sessionwhich focuses on a broad array of College Board assessments andeducational initiatives. Paper 1 presents an evaluation of the 2009Chinese Guest Teacher Summer Institute. Paper 2 will present anevaluation of The Springboard Program developed by the CollegeBoard. Paper 3 examines the educational crisis facing young men ofcolor. Paper 4 evaluates SAT test items for bias caused by culturedependent content.

The Evaluation of the 2009 Chinese Guest Teacher Summer InstituteJing Feng ([email protected]), Fordham UniversityAnita Rawls ([email protected]), The College Board

The Influence of the Springboard Program on the High School CollegeBound StudentsJun Li ([email protected]), Fordham UniversityHaifa Matos Elefonte ([email protected]), The CollegeBoard

The Educational Crisis Facing Young Men of ColorTefaya Ransom ([email protected]), University of PennsylvaniaJohn Lee ([email protected]), The College BoardVytas Laitusis ([email protected]), The College Board

Differential Item Functioning of SAT Items between US Citizens andInternational StudentsNina Proestler ([email protected]), Fordham UniversityMichael Chajewski ([email protected]), The College Board

3.3 Individual Paper Session Salon CIssues in Post Secondary EducationSession Chair: Melinda Burchard, James Madison UniversitySession Discussant: Lucia Buttaro ([email protected]), AdelphiUniversity

Tackling Plagiarism in Higher EducationReva Fish ([email protected]), SUNY College at BuffaloGerri M. Hura, SUNY College at Buffalo

This study explored the scope and nature of plagiarism by studentsat a large urban college in order to provide information about how pastefforts to curb plagiarism are faring and the extent of the problemcurrently. Students and faculty completed electronic surveys askingabout their views and experiences regarding plagiarism. Data analysiswas carried out in two stages in this mixed methods study, includingdescriptive statistics of categorical and Likert scale survey responsesfollowed by content analysis of responses to an open ended surveyquestion that invited respondents to provide additional information orfollow up comments about plagiarism at the college.

The Legal Role in Public Higher EducationFrank A. Sargent ([email protected] ), Johnson & Wales UniversityFelice Billups ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales University

This study investigated why some colleges and universities employin house counsel, while others rely on private law firms. Employingdepth interviewing techniques and an evaluative questionnaire tocollect and analyze data, interviews were conducted with N=6 vicepresidents at N=6 public institutions of higher education in one state inthe Northeast region; n=3 attorneys who serve as in house counsel;and, n = 3 attorneys from private law firms who provide legal counsel topublic institutions of higher education. The findings of this study revealcost, availability of counsel, knowledge of client, and knowledge of legalissues as major factors to consider when selecting a method of deliveryof legal services for a public institution of higher education and revealsignificant differences in preventive law practices between institutionsthat employ in house legal staff and institutions that rely on outsidecounsel.

3.4 Individual Paper Session Salon DPsychometric Issues ISession Chair: Douglas Penfield ([email protected]),Rutgers University

Session Discussant: Jonathan Steinberg ([email protected]),Educational Testing Service

Rapid Responding: An Overlooked Threat to ValidityJames Koepfler ([email protected] ), James Madison UniversityDaniel P. Jurich ([email protected]), James Madison University

One advantage of computer based testing is that it allows testadministrators the option of forcing a respondent into answering allitems. An overlooked disadvantage is that respondents may rapidlyrespond to items that they would otherwise skip. Rapid responding willbias subsequent item parameters and estimates of true ability. Asimulation will be conducted that mimics a possible low stakes testingscenario where rapid responding is present and affected itemsremoved. Traditional and modern missing data techniques will becompared on their ability to recover item and ability parameters.Treating rapid responses as missing data, and subsequently applyingmissing data techniques, may provide more accurate parameterestimates. This may allow for more valid interpretations of computerbased test scores.



The Role of Normative Performance Data in Standard SettingJerome Cody Clauser ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts AmherstBrian Clauser, National Board of Medical ExaminersStephen G. Sireci ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts Amherst

This paper will examine the role of normative performance data instandard setting. It begins with a thorough review of the literaturewhich chronicles both historic perspectives and recent developments.The review highlights shifting perspectives on the validity of standardsdeveloped with normative performance data. The paper concludes witha discussion of �“best practices�” in standard setting and a variety ofrecommendations for future research.

Robustness of Three Decision Consistency Estimates to Violations ofUncorrelated Error Scores

Emily Hailey, University of VirginiaPatrick Meyer ([email protected]), University of VirginiaMichael Hull, University of Virginia

Decision consistency estimates are based on models that assumeuncorrelated error scores. However, testlets and other violations ofuncorrelated errors are commonly encountered in high stakes criterionreferenced testing. The purpose of this study is to evaluate therobustness of decision consistency indices to violation of theassumption of uncorrelated error scores. Huynh, Subkoviak, and Leemethods for computing decision consistency will be studied using asimulation that manipulates: (a) test length, (b) percent of items withcorrelated errors, (c) percent of items in each testlet, (d) cut score, and(d) degree of error score correlation. This study will provide guidanceon which method to use when the assumption of uncorrelated errorscore is violated.

3.5 Individual Paper Session HartfordCognitive Strategies in EducationSession Chair: Bridget Thomas ([email protected]), George MasonUniversity

Session Discussant: Robin Anderson ([email protected]), JamesMadison University

Assessing Cognitive Flexibility Following Discrete InstructionJames B. Crabbe ([email protected]), County College of MorrisCharles Secolsky ([email protected] ), County College of Morris

We asked whether students,, writing a one page essay, wouldintegrate physiological systems (as taught in Anatomy and Physiology I),even though explicit instructions to integrate were not given. Complexthinking assessment was guided by Cognitive Flexibility Theorydeveloped by Rand Spiro. Using two approaches, independent samplest tests and log linear analyses, we found that students do discussdiscrete systems and there is some level of complexity in their writingas ascertained by t tests. However, using a log linear approach, it doesnot appear that students�’ discussions were highly complex in nature.

Training Students�’ Self regulation of Motoric Flexibility: The Effects ofModeling and Self evaluation

Gloria McNamara ([email protected]), CUNY: The GraduateCenter

Barry Zimmerman ([email protected]), CUNY: TheGraduate Center

The purpose of this research was to determine if technique modelingand self evaluation had an impact on college students�’ self regulationof motoric flexibility, measured through physiological assessments andsurveys of stretching practices, flexibility outcome expectations, selfefficacy, and knowledge. In order to measure the impact of thetreatments, students were randomly assigned to three conditions: 1)

control lecture condition, in which flexibility fitness was taught using ascripted lecture format; 2) technique modeling condition, in whichflexibility fitness was taught using the same script in addition to theresearcher modeling proper stretching technique; and 3) techniquemodeling and self evaluation condition, in which flexibility fitness wastaught using the same script and technique modeling in addition tostudents being taught to measure their own motoric flexibility and torecord their progress. The results of this research study demonstratethat flexibility training had a significant positive linear effect on collegestudents�’ right upper body motoric flexibility, stretching practices,outcome expectations, self efficacy and flexibility proceduralknowledge.

The Effects of Planning on the Cognitive Abilities of a Novice WriterDarshanand Ramdass ([email protected]), Graduate School &University Center, CUNY

Mereille Gold ([email protected]), Brooklyn College

This study evaluated the effects of planning on the writing skills ofone normally achieving 6th grade student. The participant wrote 3essays in the baseline phase. Following a writing strategy intervention,the sixth grader wrote 4 more essays in the post test phase. It washypothesized that planning would improve the writing skills of thestudent on all dependent measures and improve the student�’s selfefficacy from pretest to posttest. Results showed that the student didnot plan before writing the essay in the baseline phase. However, theintervention was instrumental in facilitating planning behaviors,improving the overall quality of his writing, and self efficacy frombaseline to posttest.

3.6 Individual Paper Session Rocky HillSocial Support in Education and Other Support MechanismsSession Chair: Christine Emmons ([email protected]), YaleUniversitySession Discussant: Thomas DiPaola ([email protected]), Johnson &Wales University

Suburban Middle School Students�’ Reports of the Social SupportsThey Receive Through Their Advisory Program

Beth Giller ([email protected]), University of Hartford

Findings from survey research aimed at examining suburban middleschool students�’ reports of the social supports they received throughtheir school�’s advisory program are presented in this paper. A modifiedversion of the Child and Adolescent Social Support Scale (Malecki,Demaray, & Elliot, 2000) was administered to 580 middle schoolstudents. Results were similar to previous social support research infinding that younger students perceived they received more socialsupport through advisory class than did older students. Similarly, girlsperceived more support than did boys. Overall, students perceived themost support from their advisory teacher and a close friend in advisory.They perceived and valued emotional support the most whencompared with the other types of social support.

A Qualitative Study of the Influence of the Senior Pastor on theEducational and Professional Achievement of African American Men

Tracy P Johnson ([email protected]), Buffalo State College

Despite recent educational reports on the academic gains ofAmerican schools, Black males continue to underachieve on mostacademic issues when compared to their white counterparts. Thisqualitative study explores the role of the Senior Pastor, as the churchand structural role of religion, in relationship to the educational, social,and cultural capital used by the men in this study to negotiate theirmasculine identities with oppressive professional and educationalspaces. The results from this study revealed that the participants reliedheavily upon spirituality and the Church to help persist through theireducational journey. Moreover, this study found that the participants



relied heavily upon spiritual practices, such as prayer and reading thebible to overcoming difficult obstacles in achieving academic, personal,and financial success. More importantly, the data revealed that one onone mentoring sessions with the Senior Pastor, the educational level ofthe Senior Pastor as well as their perspective regarding educationimpacted how the men viewed and valued education.

Student Support Service for Doctoral Student SuccessFelice D. Billups ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales UniversityStacey Kite ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales University

This session will present the results of phase three of a descriptivestudy to identify/examine/indicate satisfaction with support servicesoffered at an Ed.D. Program at a small university in southern NewEngland. Qualitative data from the first phase of this study identifiedfactors that impede or assist in the completion of the degree program.These findings were then used to develop a quantitative instrument todetermine the satisfaction and magnitude of importance from studentscurrently enrolled in their courses, dissertation phase, and alumni. Thisthird, and final phase, consists of qualitative interviews with students toclarify the findings from phase one and phase two.

Interdistrict Magnet High School Students�’ Perceived Social Support:An Exploratory Investigation

Diana J LaRocco ([email protected]), University of HartfordJessica M. Fitzgerald, University of Hartford

Magnet high school attendance seems to lead to improved academicperformance (Cobb, Bifulco, & Bell, 2009). Likewise, perceived socialsupport has been linked with positive outcomes for adolescents(Rosenfeld, Richman, & Bowen, 2000). Yet, little is known about urbanmagnet high school students�’ perceived social support. Select resultsfrom a study in which the Child and Adolescent Social Support Scale(Malecki, Demaray, & Elliot, 2000) was administered to 319 studentsare presented in this paper. Students�’ reports of the frequency ofsupport fell between most of the time and almost always (M = 250.20,SD = 47.17, n = 213). The perceived importance of support wasbetween important and very important (M = 121.33, SD = 26.68, n =198).

3.7 Individual Paper Session Salon IValidation Studies IISession Chair: April Zenisky ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts Amherst

Session Discussant: Abigail Lau ([email protected]), College of the HolyCross

Construct Invariance of the Survey of Knowledge of Internet Risk andInternet Behavior Knowledge Scale

Robert K. Gable ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales UniversityLarry H. Ludlow ([email protected]), Boston CollegeStacey L. Kite ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales UniversityD. Betsy McCoach ([email protected]), University of Connecticut

The wide use of the Internet has the potential for students tobecome victims of Internet sexual predators or other students whoengage in inappropriate cyberbullying behaviors. The key foreducational programming efforts targeted for students, teachers andparents is instrumentation that provides meaningful and reliable dataassessing students�’ knowledge of Internet risk and their actual Internetbehaviors. The Survey of Internet Risk and Internet Behavior (SIRIB) wasdeveloped for this type of assessment. Construct invariance of theSKIRIB is examined for N = 2000 middle school and N = 2000 high schoolstudents using multi group confirmatory factor analysis and Raschrating scale modeling techniques. Implications for future scoreinterpretations are discussed.

Measuring Goal Setting Attitudes and Predicting Academic Outcomesusing the Theory of Planned Behavior

Steven L Holtzman ([email protected]), Educational Testing ServiceTeresa Jackson, Educational Testing ServiceJeremy Burrus, Educational Testing ServiceRichard Roberts, Educational Testing Service

This study aims to predict grades and goal setting behaviors in asample of high school students by developing a goal setting assessmentemploying the Theory of Planned Behavior (TpB; Ajzen, 1991). In thenewly developed TpB goal setting assessment, students�’ intentions toset goals can be measured by their level of perceived control, attitudes,and subjective norms. Furthermore, goal setting intentions predictgrades and behaviors. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) revealed thatthe structure of the goal setting assessment was generally consistentwith the TpB framework. Also, structural equation modeling (SEM)indicated that perceived control, attitudes, and subjective normssignificantly predicted intentions. A second SEM revealed thatintentions were a significant predictor of grades and goal settingbehaviors.

�“I Can�’t Believe She Gave Me a C!�”: Measuring Entitlement in HigherEducation

Jason Kopp ([email protected]), James Madison UniversityTracy E. Zinn, James Madison UniversitySara J. Finney ([email protected]), James Madison UniversityDaniel P. Jurich ([email protected]), James Madison University

Researchers have increasingly focused on entitlement related toeducation, but a measure with adequate construct validity evidence hasyet to be created. Construct validity evidence was gathered for a newlycreated measure of academic entitlement, the Academic EntitlementQuestionnaire (AEQ). After a review of the entitlement literature,focusing on the various facets of entitlement, items were written tocover the breadth of the academic entitlement construct. Reponsesfrom two samples of college students resulted in an eight item,unidimensional measure. Theoretically based a priori hypotheses wereempirically supported, which included a positive relationship withexternal locus of control and a negative relationship with masteryachievement goal orientation. Thus, the AEQ shows promise as a usefulmeasure of academic entitlement.

Psychometric Properties of the Short Version of Autism SpectrumQuotient (AQ 26)

Anna Zilberberg ([email protected]), James Madison UniversityDena Pastor ([email protected]), James Madison UniversityChristine J. Harmes ([email protected]), James Madison University

The short version of the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ 26) (BaronCohen et al., 2001) was designed to screen for autistic traits in a nonclinical adult population. The current study garnered validity evidencefor this instrument through investigating its dimensionality using bothconfirmatory and exploratory factor analytic methods. In addition, twoscoring schemes available for the AQ 26 were compared. The resultsindicated that the AQ 26 is in need of substantial revisions before it canbe used in research or practice. Further, the two scoring schemes weredeemed not interchangeable. Substantive suggestions regarding futurescale development and the optimal scoring scheme are made based onthe empirical results of the current analysis.

3.8 Individual Paper Session Salon IIAssessment Design & Instructional SensitivitySession Chair: Rochelle Kaplan ([email protected]), William PatersonUniversity

Session Discussant: Kristen Huff ([email protected]), The CollegeBoard



Bringing Innovation to TestingRobert Cook ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts, Amherst

Jason Schweid ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts, Amherst

Current educational models are placing increasing emphasis ondevelopment of specific cognitive learning structures and processingskills rather than the more traditional �“three R�’s�” approach. With thecurrent policy emphasis on educational testing and the disconnectbetween what conventional tests can measure and these cognitivepsychological trends, more innovative forms of testing are beingsought. While computer based testing has great potential for theinnovation required to provide meaningful cognitive diagnosticinformation, to date, such innovation has consisted merely ofmodification of traditional testing methods and focused on traditionaltesting subject matter. Rather than continue down this path, testdevelopers should look to innovative technological trends anddetermine how they might be developed or integrated into assessmentmethodology.

Using Item Mapping to Evaluate Curriculum Assessment AlignmentLeah Kaira ([email protected]), University of MassachusettsAmherst

One strategy used to evaluate the match between the curriculumand the assessment is carrying out alignment studies. Bhola, Impara,and Buckendahl (2003) define alignment as �“the degree of agreementbetween a state�’s content standards for a specific subject and theassessment(s) used to measure student achievement of thesestandards�” (p. 21). One of the greatest limitations of current alignmentmethods is that they do not take into account actual studentperformance. This study employed IRT based item mappingmethodology on Math and Reading assessments for adult learners toillustrate how item mapping could be used to assess alignment. Thestudy also aimed at investigating the impact response probability (RP)has on item mapping. Two RP values (RP50 and RP67) were used in thestudy. The degree of agreement between item mapping results andSubject Matter Experts (SMEs) classification of the items was used toassess alignment. Both Math and Reading results showed that morecongruence between item mapping results and SME classification of theitems was obtained at RP50 than RP67.

An Exploration of the Instructional Sensitivity of Items on One StateTest

Megan Welsh ([email protected]), University of Connecticut

This paper explores an approach for gauging the instructionalsensitivity of test items on the third and fifth grade versions of a statemathematics assessment by blending two approaches promoted byPopham & Kaase (2009). The first approach involves asking 22 teachersfrom one school district to rate the instructional sensitivity of test itemsthrough a judgmental review process. The second, empirical, approachinvolves contrasting student performance on test items between thosestudents whose teachers believe they taught the item content well andthose whose teachers believe they taught the content badly. Resultsindicate that teachers have difficulty identifying instructionallyinsensitive items, leaving questions about the efficacy of both thejudgmental review and empirical approaches.

3.9 Salon IIINo Session Scheduled

3.10 Individual Paper Session ConnecticutTeaching & LearningSession Chair: Hilary Campbell ([email protected]), HumanResources Research Organization (HumRRO)

Session Discussant: Samantha Feinman ([email protected]), PaceUniversity

Improving the Acquisition of Science Material by Fifth Grade StudentsThrough the Use of Imagery Interventions

Marisa Cohen ([email protected]), CUNY Graduate Center

This study examined the effect of imagery interventions for thepresentation of science material to fifth grade learners. Students wererandomly assigned to three interventions: a Dual Coding method, anImage Creation No Picture method, and an Image Creation Picturemethod. Students were measured on their acquisition and retention ofthe vocabulary instructed through the use of sentence fill in anddefinition word match tasks. Significant differences were foundbetween the Image Creation Picture group and the Image Creation NoPicture group for both measures at immediate recall, assessed a daylater, and delayed recall, assessed two weeks after instruction. Such astudy has implications as to the way to integrate science and literacyand successfully present vocabulary in the classroom.

Teacher Quality, Content Knowledge, and Self Efficacy in oneMathematics Teach for America Cohort

Brian Evans ([email protected]), Pace University

The purpose of this study was to understand the relationshipsbetween mathematical content knowledge, perceptions of teachingself efficacy, and attitudes toward mathematics in one cohort of TeachAmerica (TFA) teachers. Findings revealed that mathematical contentknowledge was related to attitudes toward mathematics, and attitudestoward mathematics were related to perceptions of self efficacy. It wasfound that teachers had high levels of self efficacy. It was also foundthat mathematics related majors had higher mathematical contentknowledge than did business majors, but similar levels of self efficacy.Liberal arts majors had similar content knowledge and levels of selfefficacy as did mathematics related majors.

Curriculum Based Measurement Performance Indicators: A Tool forUndergraduate Calculus Students to Inform and Direct TheirLearning Behavior

Linda Sturges ([email protected]), SUNY Maritime College

The purpose of this study was to examine the role of individualizedperformance feedback on students�’ learning behaviors with 67 calculusstudents who were tested using curriculum based measurementpractices. It was postulated that students who receive individualizedfeedback as progress graph or as a progress graph supplemented withqualitative mastery analysis would have more accurate judgments oftheir calculus capability and relearn topics not mastered more oftenthan students who received a no individualized feedback. Additionally,when students receive individualized feedback they would achieve athigher levels on exams. Mixed model analyses supported thesehypotheses. An implication of the findings for teachers is the use of thefeedback information to refine instruction and close the feedback loop.

Thursday Poster Session (10:15 am �– 11:15 am)


The NERA Poster Session �– 10:15 �– 11:15 amSalon A, B, C and D 10:15 am �– 11:15 am

A Comparison of Oral Storytelling Goals and TechniquesWithin Various African Cultural Contexts and Implications forAmerican Teacher Educational Programs: A Review of theLiterature

Johan van der Jagt ([email protected]), Bloomsburg University ofPennsylvania

Mary Sciacchetano ([email protected]), BloomsburgUniversity of Pennsylvania

The tradition of oral storytelling in Africa continues to enhance thegoals of cultures. This contrasts with North American cultural changesin which oral storytelling is greatly diminished due to e.g., technologyand changes within family systems and student learning styles are notbeing addressed. This literature review utilized databases and primaryliterature sources to research African traditional storytelling goals andmethods. The results indicate that oral storytelling continue to havegoals of building peaceful and harmonious relationships, humbleness,and relating cultural variables. Implications and recommendations forthe incorporation of the culturally diverse goals and strategies toaddress inclusive classroom teaching learning styles in the NorthAmerican education system and teacher training programs are noted.

Asian and American Parenting Styles and Their Impact onAdolescents' Self Esteem and Academic Achievement

Ji Eun Lee ([email protected]), University at Albany SUNYStella Xian Li ([email protected]), University at Albany SUNYDeepti Marathe, University at Albany SUNYYuriko Sasak, University at Albany SUNYJoan Newman ([email protected]), University at Albany SUNY

In a previous study we found that an authoritative parenting stylepredicted high school academic success for students from USA, but notthose from China or Korea. The study currently in progress investigatesa wider range of parenting styles to determine which is morecharacteristic of Asian parents and whether the prevalent parentingstyle predicts academic success for their children. Undergraduatestudents now in the USA but who spent their high school years in China,Korea or USA complete surveys on the parenting style of their mothersand fathers, their high school academic achievement level, and theirself esteem. ANCOVA will be used to test differences in the effect ofparenting style on student competence in each country.

In What Ways Does a Mini Scale Virtual Community ofPractice Approach to Professional Development Assist NewChina's Elementary Science Teachers to Implement InquiryBased Instruction in their Classrooms?

Hongqin Zhang ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts Amherst

Jiaxu Li, Chongwen Elementary SchoolDinger Zhang, Chongwen Elementary SchoolRongmei Wen, Chongwen Elementary SchoolXiangpeng Zhou, Chongwen Elementary School

It is a big problem to give opportunity for students discourse in theclassroom in China. Because of many entrance exams, parents andteachers emphasize students understanding content knowledge insteadof other science literacy. Furthermore, more than 2500 years�’Confucius' philosophy deeply influences educational culture of China.Chinese students regard their teacher as the absolute authority in theschool. This study is to explore a research class initiated by a FamousTeacher Studio, and the phenomenon of the teaching research

presented by a Famous Teacher Studio, to explain a very commonprofessional learning community in China and how they try to findsolutions to break teachers�’ authority, give students the opportunity toexchange their ideas.

Coming Out in the Classroom: The Experiences of TwoLesbian/Gay College Instructors

Kristen Helmer ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts, Amherst

Through the lived experiences of lesbian and gay educators, thepower relations that have been constructed within the homophobicand heterosexist value structure of U.S. public education can beinterrogated, emancipation and social justice can be promoted, andlesbian and gay educators can be empowered. However, there is anabsence of empirical based research and an ensuing lack of data aboutthe experiences of lesbian and gay educators. The purpose of thisphenomenological pilot study was to explore the experiences andhighlight the implications of coming out in the college classroom forlesbian or gay identified college instructors through in depthinterviewing. The poster session will presented excerpts from thecrafted profiles of the two study participants highlighting the emergingthemes.

Designing Online Instruction Using Case based Approach:Criteria, Effect and Lessons Learned

Heng Luo ([email protected]), Syracuse UniversityTiffany A. Koszalka, Syracuse University

Case based approach, as an instructional method, has been widelyused in training professionals such as doctors, lawyers, and teachers. Itseffect on classroom education has been well studied with empiricalevidence from various fields. However, the construct of case basedinstruction was often vaguely defined, and less emphasis was given toits application in a purely online environment. As a result, using anonline tutorial developed by the authors, the study first proposes aninstrument to assess whether the tutorial is a good application of casebased approach, and then investigates the effects of its online andpaper based versions, with the purpose to find out how the use ofmultimedia and online interaction affects the overall effect of casebased instruction.

Differentiated Professional Development: Impact on thePreschool Literacy Gap

Maureen Ruby ([email protected]), Eastern CT State UniversityAnn Anderberg, Eastern CT State University

Findings on preschool students�’ outcomes on assessments of earlyliteracy development in a research project providing differentiatedprofessional development for staff in two preschool centers will bepresented. For this study, intensive training on evidence based earlyliteracy practices was developed for adults who worked with thestudents. In addition to information on the adult training, the curriculaused in the preschool classrooms will be described. The presentationwill focus on a discussion of preschoolers�’ 2009 2010 school year gainsin literacy (including letter identification, phonological awareness skills,receptive and expressive vocabulary knowledge, concepts about print,and name writing) as assessed with standardized measures given inEnglish for both native English speaking and Spanish speaking students.



Dramatic Play Lab and its Effects on the Use of ThematicVocabulary

Ellina Chernobilsky ([email protected]), Caldwell CollegeJulie A. Leszczynski, Walden University

Learning the meaning of vocabulary words and using themappropriately in speech is an important part of a child�’s learning.Designing play labs to enable such learning allows students to makeconnections to the words while playing. This action research study wasconducted to determine if using multiple methods to elicit targetedvocabulary would help kindergarten children retain the words. Variousprops and materials in play labs, peer conversations, and drawingswere used to provoke targeted vocabulary. Oral storytelling was usedto measure the vocabulary retention. The results of the study haveshown that students who are exposed to targeted vocabulary wordsare more likely to use the words when retelling a story then those whohave not been exposed.

Effects of Sensory Intervention on the Self StimulatoryBehavior of Children with Autism

Melissa Benzel ([email protected]), Pace UniversityCatherine Rivela ([email protected]), Pace University

Students with autism spectrum disorders often exhibit various selfstimulatory behaviors, which can be maladaptive and prohibit themfrom participating in the general education environment. Sensory dietsare commonly used with individuals with autism, however there is littleresearch supporting their effectiveness in reducing self stimulatorybehaviors in the classroom. In order to address this issue, an AB actionresearch design was developed to investigate the effects of sensoryintervention on the maladaptive self stimulatory behavior of fourchildren with autism. Prior to daily 40 minute instructional sessions,each student will participate in individualized sensory diet for fiveminutes, addressing their proprioceptive, vestibular and tactile areas.During this time, data will be taken to monitor the frequency of theself stimulatory behavior.

Ethical Dilemmas for the School Counselor: Balancing StudentConfidentiality and Parents�’ Right to Know

Nithya Iyer ([email protected]), SUNY Oneonta, EducationalPsychology and Counseling

Julia Baxter MacGregor, SUNY OneontaAmanda R. Connor, SUNY Oneonta

Professional School Counselors have a variety of roles andresponsibilities to students, teachers, parents, and administrators.School counselors must collaborate with both the students and otherstakeholders �– in this case, usually parents and teachers. Consultationand collaboration with stakeholders can be carried out through teammeetings or child study teams, with all relevant parties present. Suchgatherings, while beneficial to everyone involved, can potentially bringabout ethical dilemmas for school counselors. This article will examinethe function of child study teams, the counselor�’s role as consultantwithin the team, and what ethical issues might arise in this role.Recommendations for avoiding and resolving such potential dilemmaswill be provided.

Expressing Situations that Elicit Emotions in Students withAutism

Kaitlin Brayer ([email protected]), Pace University

This action research explores the ability of students with autism tocommunicate expressions of emotional states. Two students withautism, one female age 7.1 and one male age 6.5 participated in thestudy. Students demonstrated an ability to identify emotions, but haddifficulty labeling emotions and expressing emotions. Students wereassessed on labeling emotions on faces in isolation and in specific

situations. Students were taught in direct instruction trials of emotionaldiscrimination to answer the questions, �“What makes you feel happy?�”and �“What makes you feel angry?�” Photographs of the students inisolation in situations that made them angry and happy were used inthe trials. This action research is currently in progress.

Factors That Influence Teacher�’s Decision Making ProcessRegarding Grade Retention

Gia Renaud ([email protected]), Salve Regina University

The purpose of this study was to investigate teacher attitudes towardgrade retention and if teacher practices differ when recommendingretention of students. It also explored what factors influenced theteacher decision making process and how state testing influences theirjudgment. The research questions that guided this study were: 1. Whatfactors influence elementary teachers�’ decision making process aboutretaining students?; and 2. How does student performance on statetesting affect elementary teachers�’ decision making process aboutretaining students?

Gender Differences in Engineering Education: Is What�’s GoodFor the Goose Good For the Gander?

Jennifer Walter ([email protected]), Bucknell UniversityCandice Stefanou ([email protected]), Bucknell UniversityKatharyn Nottis ([email protected]), Bucknell UniversityMichael Prince, Bucknell UniversityJonathan Stolk, Franklin W. Olin College of EngineeringJohn Chen, California Polytechnic State University

The purpose of this study is to understand the effects of pedagogicalconditions on engineering students�’ development of lifelong learningskills. This study examines whether pedagogical choice interacts withgender to produce different effects. Four instructional environmentsthat vary in the amount and type of student centered pedagogies areexamined. Two use a more student directed approach (problem basedand project based), while two others use a more teacher directedapproach but incorporate instructional technology to a greater degree.Self report measures from both male and female students suggest thatpedagogical style does, in fact, play an important role in students�’motivational propensities and learning strategies.

Gender Differences in Implementation of Tutoring and PeerCoaching

Lindsey K Le ([email protected]), University of Connecticut

In order to examine gender differences in the implementation oftutoring and peer coaching, 108 undergraduate college students from acollege in New England were surveyed. Results from cross tabulationsbetween gender, purposes for seeking tutoring and peer coaching, aswell as strategies when implementing peer coaching groups indicatedthat females participated in both tutoring and peer coachingsignificantly more than males on a variety of purposes. Results alsoindicated that females utilized discussion based and written basedstrategies for studying more than males did. Implications of the studyare discussed.

Head Start Teachers�’ Pedagogical Approaches to CurriculumDelivery

Reva Fish ([email protected]), SUNY College at Buffalo

In recent years, Head Start teachers have been faced with a push toincrease academic rigor in their classrooms. Research shows theirstudents benefit from a supportive learning environment that allowsfor child led play activities and provides playful teacher guided learningactivities rather than structured didactic instruction. However, in orderto be comfortable with the integration of play and learning, Head Startteachers must be confident that these activities provide everything



children need to learn and they must have the pedagogical skills toimplement them. This study uses a grounded theory approach to datacollection and analysis to explain the pedagogical strategies used byHead Start preschool teachers to meet increasingly rigorous curriculumrequirements and higher expectations for student learning.

Igniting Independence: Using a Peer Support Group toCultivate Agency in Adolescents with Autism

Julia Keister ([email protected]), Pace University

Students with disabilities often lack the agency needed to beindependent problem solvers. This study attempts to answer thequestion of whether a peer support group centered on selfdetermination will increase the agency and therefore problem solvingskills of students with autism, by enabling them to achieve a personalcommunity based goal. 4 participants will complete an 8 weekintervention model with 7 stages that address different aspects of selfdetermination. While student progress will ultimately be determinedby their goal achievement, a combination of parent/student surveys,Stage Progress Assessments, and researcher observations will be usedto collect data. Through this study it is hypothesized that the studentswill achieve their community based goal, and that their agency andproblem solving skills will increase.

Increasing Self Determination in Middle School StudentsThrough Goal Setting

Tracy Haber ([email protected]), Pace University

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of goal settingon self determination levels of Middle School students with specialneeds. Participants are involved in a three step intervention. At thebeginning of each week, participants set clear goals with their teacher.Then, throughout the week the teacher provides instruction gearedtowards the students�’ goals. At the end of each week, students reflectwith their teacher about the progress made towards the goals. Thestudents then work with the teacher to determine if they should set anew goal for the following week, or if the original goal should beamended. This study is a work in progress; anticipated results are thatan increase in levels of self determination will occur.

Ordinal Regression Analysis: Fitting the Continuation RatioModel to Educational Data Using Stata

Xing Liu ([email protected]), Eastern Connecticut State University

Ordinal data in education are widely available to researchers. Tomodel these ordinal data, one of the most commonly used models isthe proportional odds (PO) model, which is also known as thecumulative odds model. However, when the research interest isfocused on a particular category rather than at or below that category,given that an individual must pass through a lower category beforeachieving a higher level, the continuation ratio model (Fienberg, 1980;Long & Freese, 2006) is a more appropriate choice than theproportional odds model. The purpose of this paper is to demonstratethe use of the continuation ratio (CR) model to analyze ordinal data ineducation using Stata, and compare the results of the continuationratio model with the proportional odds model. Ordinal regressionanalyses are based on a subset of data from the EducationalLongitudinal Study 2002 (ELS: 2002).

Partnering for Research and Professional Development inLiteracy Instruction in Guatemala

Miriam Pepper Sanello ([email protected]), AdelphiUniversity

Adrienne Andi Sosin ([email protected]), Adelphi UniversityMichelle Zucaro, Adelphi UniversityCynthia Rainbow, Adelphi University

This poster describes an international initiative that engagesteachers from the US and Guatemala in professional development totransform teaching and learning using recommended approaches tobalanced literacy. During this initiative, research partnerships havedeveloped to examine Guatemalan K 6 cross cultural classroomenvironments and literacy instructional practices. The partners, whohave established ties with the Consejo de Lectura de Guatemala,include teachers associated with the Nassau Reading Council of theInternational Reading Association, educators from US colleges anduniversities, and graduate students. Data sources include interviewswith project participants, with field notes, videos, photos and teachersurveys collected at a professional development conference inGuatemala. Findings suggest the importance of internationalpartnerships to improve professional development in literacyinstructional practices.

Retention of Most at Risk Entering Students at a Four YearCollege

Hari P Koirala ([email protected]), Eastern Connecticut StateUniversity

Marsha J. Davis ([email protected]), Eastern Connecticut StateUniversity

Carmen R. Cid ([email protected]), Eastern Connecticut StateUniversity

The literature on retention and graduation of college studentssuggests that institutions that serve higher proportions of at riskstudents, such as low income, first generation, and minority students,have generally a lower graduation rate. Using both quantitative andqualitative research methodologies, this study focused on the retentionof students from first to second year and from second to third year at afour year college. Consistent with the literature, it was found that adisproportionately higher percentage of the at risk students are likelyto leave college without graduating. This study adds to the literature byproviding specific information about factors that affect studentretention from the first to the second year and from the second to thethird year.

Teacher Self Efficacy and Accommodating for Students withDisabilities in the Regular Education Classroom

Christine Gotshall ([email protected]), Bucknell UniversityCandice Stefanou ([email protected]), Bucknell University

Children with disabilities are taught in the general educationclassroom when possible, requiring k 12 teachers to be well trained inaccommodating instruction. Additionally, more children with disabilitiesare enrolling in post secondary schools where faculty mustaccommodate for learning differences. This study is to investigatesteacher feelings about their abilities to educate students with specialneeds, how their degree of teacher self efficacy compares to intendedcourses of action, if teachers develop learned helplessness when facedwith difficult situations, if a relationship exists between teacher efficacyand learned helplessness, and if teacher self efficacy and learnedhelplessness differ by gender, educational level, years of teachingexperience, and grade level taught. Results showed that several factorsaffect the degree of teacher efficacy and learned helplessness.

Teaching Emotional Literacy Skills Using RULER and TheTransporters Methods to Young Children with Autism

Lisa Dold ([email protected]), Pace University

This study will examine the overall impact of teaching youngstudents with autism emotional literacy skills. Adaptations from twodifferent curriculums will be combined with individualized materials tocreate structured learning sessions focused on teaching emotionalliteracy skills. Four students in first and third grade will attend learningsession groups over the course of four weeks. Qualitative andquantitative data in the form of teacher questionnaires, student pre



and post tests, quizzes and observational notes will be examined todetermine if the students have benefited from the emotional literacylearning sessions. Additionally the data will be examined to makefurther adaptations to the available emotional literacy curriculums inorder to best meet the learning needs of students with autism.

The Effect of Sheltered Instruction Strategies on the AcademicAchievement of Mainstreamed English Language Learners

Nichole Rucci ([email protected]), William Paterson University

The purpose of this study was to measure the effects of scaffoldinginterventions for mainstreamed ESL (English as a Second Language)students. The modifications were made in an eighth grade socialstudies class, but they could be applied to other grade levels andsubject areas easily. The expectation was that these specialconsiderations would improve students�’ content comprehension, thusenabling greater academic achievement. Lessons were enhanced withan abundance of visuals and individualized vocabulary studies, andparticipants were evaluated at three week intervals to determine thesuccess of the specific interventions. Results serve to reiterate thevalue of general education teachers taking responsibility to providemeaningful instruction for all of their students �– even the ones who arestill learning the language.

The Effect of Using Technology on the Motivation andPerformance of Eighth Grade Mathematics Students in anUrban School

Lilioara Helgiu ([email protected]), William Paterson University andPassaic NJ School District

In this twenty first century most jobs are based on computerapplications and are necessary for survival in a tough competitive jobmarket. This is one reason why technology based strategies in teachingmathematics are of interest. The purpose of the present study was toassess how effective technology tools were when used in an urbanclassroom for teaching mathematics to eighth graders. The studyconducted an experiment with 61 students who were taught andassessed with and without using technology in the mathematicclassroom. Findings indicated a trend demonstrating that studentswhen students learned mathematics through technology, they achievedbetter results on tests scores and became motivated to do class work,and homework.

The Effects of Computer Assisted and Teacher led Instructionon an Early Literacy Skill of Preschool Students with Autism

Jason Travers ([email protected]), University of Massachusettsat Amherst

This study focused on teaching alphabet skills to young children withautism. Two instructional conditions were compared, traditionalteacher led group instruction that used alphabet books and multimediacomputer assisted instruction. Data were compared to determine theeffects on alphabetic skills acquisition and maintenance, as well asstudent attention and engagement in problem behavior from bothinterventions. The results indicate that both interventions wereeffective for improving student alphabet recognition skills. The childrenin both interventions also maintained their learning over two weekperiods without instruction. High rates of attention to task and lowrates of undesirable behavior were obtained in both interventions.Research based instructional methods combined with motivatingqualities of the interventions may have been essential to academic andbehavioral outcomes.

The Effects of the Practice of Yoga and Meditation onTeachers and their Teaching Practice

Danette Day ([email protected]), UMASS Amherst

Effective teaching is more than an intuitive process, and there isgrowing concern about how best to prepare teachers for today�’sclassrooms. This qualitative, phenomenological research explored how the practice of yoga and meditation affected teachers and their teaching practice. Through in depth interviews participants described how yogaand meditation increased their physical, emotional and intellectualawareness. Participants developed understanding of how to embodybeneficial qualities, how to make more meaningful connections withtheir students, and how to improve their teaching practice. Furtherresearch is required to introduce the practice of yoga and meditationinto teacher education programs, as a skill that teachers can acquireand use to meet the varied demands of teaching.

The Power of Service Learning and Sports Teams: BuildingResearch Partnerships

Kate Darcy Hohenthal ([email protected]), University of Hartford

This research study explores the perceptions of the members of agirls JV basketball team when they engage in a service learninginitiative focused on hunger and homelessness.

The Relationship Between the Valence of Self Talk Statementsand Social Anxiety: An Analysis of Gender and Athletic Status

Melissa Bostwick ([email protected]), Bucknell UniversityCandice Stefanou ([email protected]), Bucknell UniversityJoe Murray, Bucknell University

When faced with difficult or novel situations, most people employ astrategy to help them deal successfully with that situation, like self talkstatements. Self talk statements can either be negative or positive innature. These statements affect individuals differently depending onthe valence of the statement. The purpose of this study was toinvestigate the relationship between self talk statements and socialanxiety and specifically to examine differences between males andfemales and athletic status. The results revealed positive and negativecorrelations between social anxiety and negative and positive selfstatements. The relative use of positive and negative self statementswas somewhat dependent on gender and athletic status. There wereno significant differences between social anxiety and gender or athleticstatus.

Using Video Modeling to Increase Appropriate ObjectInteraction During Play in Children with Autism SpectrumDisorders

Diana Rocklin ([email protected]), Pace UniversityAshley Montero ([email protected]), Pace University

The identification of efficient teaching procedures to address deficitsin play skills, which are commonly seen in children with autism, is achallenge for professionals. In the present action research, videomodeling will be used to teach two school aged children with autismappropriate object interaction during play using a peer as a videomodel. The number of modeled and not modeled motor play responseswill serve as dependant measures; data will also be taken on time ontask. A multiple baseline procedure across two response categories(building a marble track, and building a train track) will be implementedto demonstrate experimental control. The research on this study iscurrently being implemented therefore results are not present at thistime.



Preparation for Professional Graduate SchoolsMargaret Anderson ([email protected]), SUNY CortlandThomas Breitfeller, SUNY CortlandAmanda Zezima, SUNY Cortland

Four years ago we developed a psychology based undergraduateinternship in the schools program at SUNY Cortland. Following asemester of training, students who qualify are placed with localsponsors in school psychology, counseling or social work at grade levelsfrom pre K through college. Student response to the program has beenvery strong and 93% of those participating have been accepted intotheir first choice graduate school. This poster describes graduateschools�’ expectations and evaluation process. We present a review ofsurveys related to graduate schools admission criteria. We also providea draft of a survey we plan to distribute this year to solicit feedback tohelp us further refine our preparation program.

Tutoring a First Grade Struggling Reader Positively AffectsLearning of Children and Teacher Candidates

Brittany Bright, William Paterson University of New JerseyJillian Dowling, William Paterson University of New JerseyCassandra Katsogiannos, William Paterson University of New JerseyAmanda Wiley, William Paterson University of New JerseyJulie Rosenthal ([email protected]), William Paterson University ofNew Jersey

This presentation chronicles a semester long tutoring programembedded in an undergraduate literacy course. In the course, teachercandidates work one on one with struggling readers on a variety ofneeds driven literacy activities. In this presentation, candidates willshare assessments used, instruction planned, and artifacts of thetutoring sessions including children�’s work. Based on samples ofchildren�’s work and candidates�’ ongoing anecdotal records, childrenbenefitted from tutoring sessions, both emotionally and academically.Evidence drawn from each candidate�’s weekly plans and reflectivejournals show that candidates developed a greater understanding ofcomponents of early literacy, and in their knowledge of literacyinstruction. Additionally, each grew in her self efficacy for teachingreading and writing.

Thursday Concurrent Session 4 (2:00 pm �– 3:30 pm)



4.1 In Conference Workshop B Salon AMixed Methods Design and Analysis with ValidityPresenter: Burke Johnson, University of South Alabama

This workshop will cover some of the nuts and bolts of mixedmethods research. Current thinking on the following topics willbe briefly examined: appropriate research questions, samplingmethods in mixed research, typologies of mixed researchdesigns, and mixed data collection and analysis strategies.Special attention, throughout the workshop, will be given to�“legitimating�” mixed methods studies using the nineOnwuegbuzie and Johnson validity criteria. Exemplary studieswill be addressed as models of practice. Participants�’ insightsand questions will be discussed as time permits, and sources foradditional information will be provided. Dr. Johnson also willprovide a copy of his Primer of Mixed Methodology, so bringyour jump drive to receive a copy.

4.2 Symposium Salon BFordham Five on Finishing and Further: Dissertation ResearchThen and Now

Symposium Coordinator: Stephen G. Sireci ([email protected]),University of Massachusetts

Symposium Chair: Maureen Ewing ([email protected]), TheCollege Board

Symposium Discussant: Kurt Geisinger ([email protected]),University of Nebraska �– Lincoln

In this session, five NERA members will describe their dissertationresearch completed over a decade ago and will comment on what hashappened in their dissertation area since that time. An overview of thetechnical issues addressed in their disserations, as well as the practicalissues faced will be presented. Finally, an indication of how the methodevolved from the time of the disseration to its current state will beprovided. The quantitative methods include the use of cluster analysisand multidimensional scaling in evaluating test content, test equating,differential item functioning, structural equation modeling, andBayesian inference networks. This will be a unique session that willoffer both graduate students some practical advice and researchersinterested in these methods a unique perspective.

The Importance of Content Validation in Educational TestingStephen G. Sireci, University of Massachusetts

Equating Examinations with Multiple Item FormatsAndrew Wiley ([email protected]), The College Board

Differential Item FunctioningKevin Sweeney ([email protected]), The College Board

Structural Equation Modeling: Modeling for the Math ChallengedThanos Patelis ([email protected]), The College Board

Diagnostic Indices for Bayesian Inference Networks in CognitiveAssessment

David Williamson, Educational Testing Service

4.3 Salon CNo Session Scheduled

4.4 Individual Paper Session Salon DCognitive Methods in Assessment and Assessment StrategiesSession Chair: Kristen Huff ([email protected]), The College BoardSession Discussant: Hilary Campbell ([email protected]),Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO)

Implementation of Formative Assessment Strategies Perceived byHigh School Students and Teachers: Professional DevelopmentImplications

Rosemary Burns ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales UniversityRalph Jasparro ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales University

The purpose of this research study was to investigate the level ofimplementation of formative assessment strategies among high schoolteachers and student. Furthermore, the research analyzed therelationship of the disciplines taught, the amount and kinds ofprofessional development teachers had, and district urbanicity relativeto their levels of implementation of formative assessment strategies.Formative assessment is a bidirectional process between teacher andstudent to enhance, recognize, and respond to the learning.Traditionally, teachers instruct a variety of content based skills andknowledge and conclude with a test. By implementing formativeassessment strategies, teachers can revise their instruction accordingly,and students are provided scaffolded opportunities to construct theirown process for learning. A mixed methods design was used to surveyhigh school teachers (N = 137) and students (N = 129) in three schooldistricts. Principal findings included significant differences betweenstudent and teacher regarding teacher modification of instruction whenstudents are struggling.

An Empirical Validation of an Item Skill Q matrix for a Reading TestHongli Li ([email protected]), The Pennsylvania State UniversityHoi K. Suen, The Pennsylvania State University

In recent years, cognitive diagnostic assessment has receivedintensive and widened attention. In order to use Cognitive DiagnosticModeling (CDMs) approach to extract detailed diagnostic information,one should identify the subskills required by each item in the test, theso called Q matrix. However, due to the lack of full understanding ofthe construct and the underlying cognitive processes, to establish a Qmatrix, especially for an existing test, has been a challenging task. Aninitial Q matrix has been built for a second language reading test basedon students�’ think aloud verbal report and expert rating. The purposeof this study is to demonstrate the process of empirically validating theinitial Q matrix by using Fusion model calibration.

Multi Method Approaches to Test Design with Students in Mind: AnEAG 2% Perspective

Phil Robakiewicz ([email protected]), MeasuredProgress

Sue Bechard ([email protected]), Measured Progress

This paper discusses how three investigative studies across fivestates determined strategies to decrease item difficulty in tests ofreading comprehension to investigate whether reducing cognitive loadmade a difference for students with disabilities. Coordinated studiesincluded cognitive interviews, item difficulty modeling, and distractoranalyses. The results of the investigations were triangulated to revisethe items to conform to the cognitive model and create a pilot test,which was administered to 1280 students. This project highlights theneed for multiple methods by multiple researchers to strengthen theevidence for item manipulations and provide a better understanding ofthe target population.



4.5 Individual Paper Session HartfordStudent Populations with Special NeedsSession Chair: Darlene Perner ([email protected]), BloomsburgUniversity of Pennsylvania

Session Discussant: Yanhui Pang ([email protected]), BloomsburgUniversity of Pennsylvania

The Purpose of a College Education: Getting a Job. Narrations of FirstGeneration College Students

Angela Thering ([email protected]), D�’Youville College

American colleges are considered classed environments. Firstgeneration college students often have difficulties navigating thesystem of higher education. This study focuses on how a group ofwhite, working class, undergraduate first generation studentsattending a large northeastern research university narrate theireducational and social experiences in both their home culture andwithin the culture of college. Two main themes that were drawn fromthis qualitative study were that the participants who were raised inworking class communities had close connections to the military, thisgroup of students thought that although there are �“no guarantees�” acollege education would lead them to the sort of job that would allowthem to live more comfortably than their working class parents.

Connecticut High School Students with Disabilities: Four Year Resultsfor Those Who Started in 2005 2006

Kate Zhou ([email protected]), Connecticut State Department ofEducation

Alison Zhou ([email protected]), Connecticut State Department ofEducation

Much of current literature on educational outcomes for high schoolstudents with disabilities focuses on reporting of graduation anddropout rates. This study goes further by examining demographicinformation (e.g., grade 9 entry age) and educational experiences (e.g.,time with non disabled peers) in relation to six categories of outcomesfor students with disabilities: 1) Transfer to general education; 2) Reachmaximum age for receipt of special education services; 3) Remain inspecial education with promotion to next grade; 4) Remain in specialeducation repeating grade; 5) Drop out; 6) Graduate with regular highschool diploma or receive a certificate. Four year results were reportedfor the 6,761 Connecticut public school students identified withdisabilities who entered grade 9 in 2005 06.

Examining the Manifestation of Behavioral Problems and ReadingDifficulties among Language Minority and Monolingual UrbanElementary School Students

Margaret Pierce ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts Amherst

Adrianna Wechsler, University of Nevada, Las VegasGil Noam, McLean HospitalMaryanne Wolf, Tufts UniversityTami Katzir, University of Haifa

This study examined the manifestation of behavioral problems andreading difficulties among Language Minority and English Monolingualurban second and third graders (n=96) identified as poor readers. Eachparticipant was evaluated with language and literacy assessments andself efficacy and social functioning measures. Each subject�’s in schoolbehavior was rated using the Conners�’ Teacher Rating Scale �– Revised.Univariate analyses showed that a disproportionate percentage of bothgroups already displayed clinically significant levels of hyperactive andADHD like behaviors, anxiety, social problems, and oppositionalbehaviors in the classroom. Analyses of variance demonstrated thatthere were no observed differences between the groups on mostliteracy measures, on their teachers�’ ratings of problem behaviors inthe classroom, or on self ratings of self efficacy and social competence.

Results are discussed in relation to comprehensive models ofintervention and resilience for urban students with reading difficulties.

Tier II Behavior Interventions in Head StartKim Westcott ([email protected]), University at Albany, SUNYBethany Ochal, University at Albany, SUNYMelinda Tanzman, University at Albany, SUNY

This study focused on early identification and differentiatedintervention for preschool children with behavior problems. Thedisproportionate prevalence of behavior problems among low incomechildren suggests the importance of such early intervention to promotelater academic and social success in this population. Tier II behaviorsupports, in the context of the Teaching Pyramid, were provided in anupstate New York Head Start. Interventions were implemented insmall group settings. Using qualitative individualized reports followingeach session combined with Social Skills Improvement System scores,changes in problem behaviors and social skills were assessed.Differentiated behavior supports provided were associated withreduced behavior problems and increased pro social behavior in thesample of low income preschoolers.

Cultural Competence, Systems of Care, and Students with Emotionaland Behavioral Challenges

Lakeisha Meyer ([email protected]), Bucknell UniversityJeffrey A. Anderson, Indiana University �– BloomingtonKand McQueen, Indiana State University

For youth with emotional and behavioral challenges, there is a trendof minority overrepresentation in restrictive settings. �“System of care�”refers to an approach that emphasizes cultural competence andproviding services in the least restrictive setting. This study investigatedthe relationship between placement restrictiveness, emotionalbehavioral functioning, race, and parent perceptions of culturalcompetence. 356 school aged youth and their families wereinterviewed. Study findings revealed no racial differences in the areasof placement restrictiveness and perceptions of cultural competence.Emotional behavioral functioning and a combination of age and genderinfluenced placement restrictiveness. Systems of care may be living upto their goal of cultural competence, which has implications for howschools can better serve youth with emotional and behavioralchallenges.

4.6 Individual Paper Session Rocky HillParental Involvement in EducationSession Chair: Francine Falk Ross ([email protected]), Pace UniversitySession Discussant: Rochelle Kaplan ([email protected]), WilliamPaterson University

Are Household Income, Gender, and Race Important In ShapingParental Involvement in Children�’s Education?

Nicholas Hartlep ([email protected]), University of Wisconsin,Milwaukee

Antonio Ellis, Howard University

The author used data from the National Household EducationSurveys (NHES) Program 2007 Parent and Family Involvement inEducation Survey (National Center for Education Statistics, 2007)(N=10,681) to examine household income, gender, and race of parents,and their importance in shaping parental involvement in children�’seducation. The study finds that when accounting for tutoring that: (1)Pacific Islander mothers have the highest odds of being involved in theirchild�’s homework; (2) Black fathers have the highest odds of beinginvolved in their child�’s homework; and (3) Low household incomes(compared to high household incomes) have the highest odds of beinginvolved in their child�’s homework. This study supports previousresearch on �“nontraditional parental involvement,�” as well as previousresearch regarding high African American parental involvement.



Parental Involvement in Connecticut Priority School District MiddleSchools as Mandated by No Child Left Behind

Claire Mastromonaco ([email protected]), University of Bridgeport

The purpose of this study was to investigate parental involvement inPriority School Districts�’ (PSD) middle schools in Connecticut asmandated by No Child Left Behind and to create parental involvementguidelines. This analysis sought to answer: do PSDs provide a �“bestpractice�” model for parental involvement? This study presented ahistory of parental involvement and current adolescent developmentresearch. Dr. Joyce Epstein�’s six point framework for parentalinvolvement was used to analyze parental involvement in select PrioritySchool District middle schools in Connecticut. After the analysis, a setof guidelines was developed and approved by a panel of experts. Fiveresearch areas were provided for future research studies in Connecticutand throughout the nation.

The Role of Parents in Preschool Policies: Improving Parenting vs.Supporting Parents

Bridget E Thomas ([email protected]), George Mason University

This paper presents selected results from a study that investigatedhow a country�’s preschool policies are influenced by what thepolicymakers consider the purpose of preschool. Using content analysisof program documents and evaluation of the available literaturerelated to each program�’s goals, case studies of selected program weredeveloped that addressed the way in which sociocultural influenceshave affected the design, implementation, and policy values related toeach program. This paper focuses on views of parents that emergedfrom the policy documents in Georgia and Sweden. Parents werecentral to the emergent goal themes for both programs, but in asignificantly different way: in Georgia the theme that emerged wasimproving parenting, whereas Sweden�’s related theme was supportingparents.

4.7 Working Group Session Salon IThe Conduct of Post Secondary Educational Research byProfessors of Different Disciplines at the Community CollegeLevel

Working Group Organizer & Discussant: Charles Secolsky([email protected]), County College of Morris

Community colleges are presently undergoing greater scrutiny andaccountability by state and local officials because they arecommissioned to educate high school students and returning adultstudents. For some of these students, the community college is theirfirst choice to pursue a post secondary education. However, othersattend a community college because they cannot find, either becauseof cost constraints or academic preparation, other institutions thatsatisfactorily meet their needs. Given the great time demands placedon the educators at community colleges, little educational research canbe undertaken even though faculty development in educationalresearch is sorely needed. Four working papers are presented, each ona different question related to post secondary educational research.They are: differences in grading honors Calculus problems, domainlearning in a Hospitality/Management program, faculty perceptions ofstudent grading systems, and item analysis for Chemistry tests.

Assessing the Domains of Learning in a Hospitality/ManagementProgram at a Community College

Mark Cosgrove, County College of Morris

Differences between Mathematical and English Responses on anHonors Calculus Test

Peter Arvanites ([email protected]), Rockland CommunityCollege

Beyond the Polarization Regarding Community College Change inGrading Systems

Peter Pappas, County College of MorrisJack Bernardo, County College of Morris

Using GPA and Retention as Distal Criteria in Item AnalysesJanet Johannessen, County College of Morris

4.8 Individual Paper Session Salon IIStudent Characteristics and Experiences in Post SecondaryEducation

Session Chair: Robin Anderson ([email protected]), James MadisonUniversity

Session Discussant: Tracy Johnson ([email protected]), BuffaloState College

The Effect of Music Aptitude on Children�’s Musical Responses andMusic Education Majors�’ Teaching Skills

Jason Crockett ([email protected]), Long Island UniversityJennifer Scott Miceli, Long Island University

This study investigated the way in which children�’s music aptitudeaffects their musical responses and the way in which college students�’music aptitude affects their teaching skills. The following researchquestions were determined: (a) What effect does music aptitude haveon children�’s musical responses? and (b) How does music aptitudeaffect a music educator's teaching skills based on the INTASCStandards? The study involved 23 music education majors and 30preschool children. Data was collected over a ten week period usingmusic aptitude tests by Edwin E. Gordon. Research findings indicatedthat high music aptitude does effect children�’s musical responsesduring preparatory audiation and music education majors�’ high musicaptitude correlates with their effectiveness according to the INTASCStandards.

Does Implicit Intelligence Moderate Stereotype Threat in Perceptionof Non Traditional Students?

Avis Jackson ([email protected]), Morgan State UniversityJohn Young ([email protected]), Educational Testing ServiceCarrol S. Perrino, Morgan State University

Older non traditional students, particularly women, are perceived asless competent (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002, Kite, Stockdale,Whitley, & Johnson, 2005). However, increased exposure decreases agebias (Kite, et al. 2005). Implicit intelligence beliefs have been shown tomoderate stereotype threat (Aronson Fried & Good, 2002, Good,Aronson & Inzlicht 2003). Stereotype threat was manipulated in threeconditions (positive, neutral, high) with implicit intelligence theories(entity, incrementalist) in six scenarios to measure non traditionalstudent competence. Subjects attributed performance of actors to thesituation or personal attributes, accounting for subjects�’ implicitintelligence beliefs, age, gender and exposure (Dweck & Henderson,1989). Factor analysis and multiple regression will be run. Implicationsfor teaching post secondary older non traditional students.

An Investigation of Student Study Behaviors in Post Secondary ClassesJess L. Gregory ([email protected]), Southern Connecticut StateUniversity

Cicely Horsham Brathwaite ([email protected]), University ofBridgeport

Margaret Lally Queenan ([email protected]), University ofBridgeport

Beth Scott, University of Bridgeport

The current study explored study skills utilized by students acrosspost secondary academic levels. Participants ranged from bachelors,masters, post graduate and doctoral levels. One hundred and fortyeight students from a private university in the Northeast completed a



survey which assessed participant�’s self reported use of textbook skills,note taking, memory, test preparation, concentration, and timemanagement. Textbook skills, p<.01 and time management skills, p<.05were found to be positively correlated with class level. The resultsindicate that more advanced students utilize time management andtextbook skills however students at all levels might benefit from directinstruction on other effective study skills. Implications for the study arediscussed.

Back to BASICS: An Evaluation of Brief Alcohol Screening andIntervention for College Students

Kimberly Marsh ([email protected]), James Madison UniversityChristopher S. Hulleman, James Madison UniversityPaige Hawkins, James Madison UniversityTia Mann, James Madison University

Binge drinking and negative consequences associated with excessivealcohol consumption or abuse is an issue of concern within collegestudent populations. Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention forCollege Students (BASICS) is an evidence based, early interventionalcohol abuse program developed for a college student population byresearchers at University of Washington�’s Addictive Behavior ResearchCenter and offered to students at a number of colleges and universities(Dimeff, Baer, Kivlahan, & Marlatt, 1999). The current study replicatesand further examines changes in college student drinking habits, levelof temptation to abuse alcohol, and negative consequences associatedwith excessive alcohol consumption upon their completion of BASICS.Preliminary results suggest that BASICS participants exhibit significantdecreases in negative drinking behavior and negative consequencesassociated with excessive alcohol consumption.

Beliefs towards Academic Dishonesty: Ukrainian UndergraduateStudentsMariya A Yukhymenko ([email protected]), University ofConnecticut

The previous study focused on cross cultural comparison ofAmerican and Ukrainian undergraduates revealed that Ukrainianstudents reported significantly lower judgments about wrongness ofcheating and higher engagement in cheating behaviors. The presentstudy focused on Ukrainian undergraduates�’ beliefs towards specificacademic behaviors. The results revealed that that majority of studentsbelieve that receiving and supporting academic dishonesty is notwrong. However, students believe that receiving any kind of favoritismfrom a professor is wrong. Educational Implications are discussed.

4.9 Individual Paper Session Salon IIIPlacement & Predictive Validation StudiesSession Chair: Benedict Lai ([email protected]), University ofConnecticut

Session Discussant: Jennifer Kobrin ([email protected]), TheCollege Board

How Prepared are Advanced Placement Science Students for CollegeCoursework? An Investigation Using Multilevel Modeling

Pamela Kaliski ([email protected]), The College BoardMaureen Ewing ([email protected]), College Board

For many years, researchers have conducted studies investigatingthe validity of AP exam scores. Recently, some researchers haveinvestigated the college success of students who complete science APcourses. Students who complete a science AP course and exam, butchoose to take the introductory college course is the population ofinterest. These researchers have concluded that these students earnhigher grades in their introductory college courses than students withother experiences besides AP (e.g., regular science course), but thatthere is not enough evidence to imply mastery. There are important

limitations of these studies (e.g., use of survey data) that warrantadditional research around this topic; the current study will provideadditional research using multilevel modeling with College Board data.

General Education Outcomes and Advanced Placement ExamPerformance

Abigail Lau ([email protected]), College of the Holy CrossMegan France ([email protected]), James Madison University

The validity research available for the Advanced Placement examshas focused primarily on comparing students who have taken AP examsto those who have not on college outcomes such as college coursegrades, cumulative GPA, major program selection, and number ofadvanced courses. In this study we provide unique validity evidence forthe AP exams in that we compare students in terms of theirperformance on institution specific general education outcomesassessment tests. Specifically we found that for several AP exams, evenafter controlling for overall college preparedness (SAT scores), studentswho have completed relevant AP exams still outperform others onthese measures of general education outcomes.

An Investigation on the Teachers�’ Perception of Placement AccuracyYuan Wang ([email protected]), Educational Testing ServiceGuangming Ling ([email protected]), Educational Testing ServiceMikyung K. Wolf, Educational Testing ServiceYeonsuk Cho, Educational Testing Service

With the flying number of international students who seek languagehelp from college based ESL programs, the validity and accuracy of theplacement procedure have become a concern. This study usedteachers�’ ratings on the accuracy of placement decisions as a directmeasure, and compared the results of two repeated ratings (at thebeginning and the end of the semester) on 114 students�’ placementdecisions. In the Listening/Speaking course, over one third of thestudents�’ ratings changed, revealing a group of students that are likelyto be misplaced. Descriptive analysis and generalized linear modelswere applied to analyze the placement test and TOEFL iBT scores. Thestudents whose ratings went up were found to have higher TOEFLspeaking scores, suggesting a potential advantage of placing studentson their TOEFL iBT scores.




5.1 In Conference Workshop C Salon AAn Introduction to Structural Equation ModelingPresenter: Sara Finney ([email protected]), James Madison University

The purpose of the training session is to provide attendees with ageneral overview of structural equation modeling (SEM) by\introducing path analysis, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and fullstructural equation modeling. We will start with path analysis, whichmodels relationships among measured variables, then move to CFA,which is simply an extension of exploratory factor analysis, and finishwith full structural models involving latent variables, which essentiallymerges path analysis and CFA. The advantage of the latter is thattheories may be tested by estimating relationships between theunderlying constructs of interest, rather than estimating relationshipsbetween observed variables that are contaminated by measurementerror. Links will be made between these techniques and other morefamiliar techniques such as multiple regression and exploratory factoranalysis. For each SEM technique, the following steps in the analysisprocess will be explained: model specification, model identification,model data fit evaluation, and parameter estimate interpretation.This 1.5 hour workshop requires no prior experience with SEM.

5.2 Individual Paper Session Salon BPsychometric Issues IISession Chair: Elizabeth Stone ([email protected]), Educational TestingService

Session Discussant: Rosemary Reshetar ([email protected]),The College Board

An IRT Approach for Detecting Differences in the Cognitive Demandsof Testlet Pairs

Charles Secolsky ([email protected]), County College of MorrisPeter Arvanites ([email protected]), SUNY RocklandCommunity College

John Klages, County College of Morris

The validation of item responses for measuring higher orderproblem solving continues to be a challenging problem. This paperemploys testlet pairs in an attempt to detect invalid responses onmultiple choice tests that are based on either definitional or complexcomputational items. Identifying such different types of cognitiveoriented items may influence the interpretation of test results,especially if what is identified is not a function of the difficulty of otheritems in the testlet pairs. It was found that when items statistics werecalibrated with the full item set on the test, item statistics (difficultyand discrimination) were different.

Detecting Sources of DIF in Polythomous Items by CognitiveInterviewing

Isabel Benitez Baena ([email protected]), University of Granada (Spain)Jose Luis Padilla García, University of Granada (Spain)M. Dolores Hidalgo Montesinos, University of MurciaStephen G. Sireci ([email protected]), University of Massachusetts,Amherst

Differential Item Functioning (DIF) has received increased attentionby professionals and researchers interested in international and crosscultural assessments over the last decades. Efforts have been focusedmuch more on developing statistics to detect DIF than on identifyingDIF causes. Cognitive interviewing allows survey researchers to identifyquestions that turn out to be problematic and possible sources ofmeasurement error. Cognitive interviewing may be helpful in detectingsources of DIF linking validity evidence on response processes to

possible sources of DIF. This study is part of a major research projectaimed at investigating into the causes of DIF by means of cognitiveinterviewing. First, polythomous DIF was analyzed for the �“self relatedcognitions�” scale (Student Questionnaire, Q17) included in the StudentQuestionnaire of the Program for International Student Assessment(OECD, 2006). Secondly, potential sources of DIF in items flagged withDIF were pointed out and cognitive interviewing will be performed.

Responses of 25215 participants, 19604 participants from Spain and5611 participants from Unites States were analyzed to detect DIF. Theself related cognitions scale consists of 8 polythomous items with 4response categories. Polytomous DIF analysis comparing groupsdefined by country were conducted using Logistic Regression analysisframework. DIF was analyzed using Discriminant logistic regressionmodels and effect size measures. Interviewing protocol along with maincharacteristic of cognitive interviewing study will be presented anddiscussed.

The Role of Model Selection in the Assessment of DIF and a MixtureModel Analysis

Yu Meng ([email protected]), University of MassachusettsAmherst

Craig S. Wells ([email protected]), University of MassachusettsAmherst

Jennifer Randall ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts Amherst

Mixture models are often used to help understand potential causesof differential item functioning (DIF). The purpose of the present studywas to examine the role of model selection and model fit whenconducting a mixture model analysis to understand the possible causesof DIF in an accommodated assessment for students with disabilities.Items were identified as exhibiting potential DIF with various IRTmodels (1PLM, 2PLM and 3PLM) using the likelihood ratio test. Asubsequent mixture model was applied to help understand the natureof the DIF further. The results of the mixture model were comparedacross the IRT models to determine if model selection plays animportant role in understanding the observed DIF.

5.3 Individual Paper Session Salon CComputers & Technology in Education IISession Chair: Joan Myers ([email protected]), Pace UniversitySession Discussant: Javarro Russell ([email protected]), JamesMadison University

�“We don�’t go on the computers anymore�” How Urban ChildrenLose out in Learning the New Digital Literacies

Peter McDermott ([email protected]), The Sage CollegesKathleen Gormley, The Sage Colleges

In this descriptive study we compared urban and suburban childrenin their knowledge and use of the new digital literacies. More than twohundred 4th and 5th grade children (urban = 150 urban; suburban = 60)participated in the study. Interviews with the children and theirclassroom teachers contextualized the descriptive data acquired fromthe children�’s computer demonstrations. Mean scores confirm theexistence of a digital divide between urban and suburban children.Urban children have fewer opportunities to use the new digitalliteracies in school than suburban children. Statewide testingrequirements pressure the urban teachers to teach conventionalreading and writing skills without use of the new technologies.Suburban children, on the other hand, are advantaged at home and inschool in their access to and use of the digital technologies for learning.



The Affordances of Being Anonymous In An Online DiscussionBenedict M. Lai ([email protected]), University of Connecticut atStorrs

Michael F. Young ([email protected]), University of Connecticut atStorrs

Computer mediated communication (CMC) is changing the waypeople learn. The purpose of this research is to investigate educationalaffordances of pseudonyms used by online discussants. Pseudonymscan offer a layer of anonymity that shield the author from persecutionor accountability, while still providing readers with a way to attribute aset of communications to a single entity. Building upon previousresearch on the social implications of anonymity in CMC, this studyseeks to explore how pseudonyms can foster better discussions.

Assessment of Students�’ Knowledge of Internet Risk and InternetBehaviors: Potential Threat to Bullying and Contact by InternetPredators

Stacey Kite ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales UniversityRobert K. Gable ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales UniversityLawrence Filippelli, Scituate School Department

Given the serious issue of bullying, this study sought to assess middleand high school students' knowledge of appropriate use and theirbehaviors on the Internet and social networking sites, especiallyregarding behaviors that may lead to cyberbullying or contact withpotential Internet predators. Three school districts (urban, suburban,and urban ring) with grades 6 �– 12 are participating in this study.Differences among and between grade levels, gender, and schooldemographics at the dimension and item level will be presented.

Playful Talk and Creative Social Interactions in Online LearningEnvironments

Florence Sullivan ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts, AmherstNicholas Wilson, University of Massachusetts, AmherstClaire Hamilton, University of Massachusetts, Amherst

This paper explores the relationship of playful and everyday talk tocreative social interactions in online learning environments. Playful andeveryday talk is an important focus of study because it may shed lighton student exploration of social identities and the development ofcreativity as a habit of mind. Creativity is recognized as an extremelyimportant habit of mind as regards the advancement of knowledge inmany disciplines. Through frame and discourse analysis we identifyinstances of creative social interaction and examine them from both anagency lens as it is related to identity and a meaning lens as it is relatedto creative and imaginative dialogue. This paper will have implicationsfor the design of online learning environments.

5.4 Individual Paper Session Salon DNon Cognitive Constructs in EducationSession Chair: Sharon Cramer ([email protected]), BuffaloState College

Session Discussant: Jennifer Bausmith ([email protected]),The College Board

The Relationship of General and Specific Self Efficacy and GPA in aHighly Diverse Woman�’s Liberal Arts College

Stephen P. Becker ([email protected]), Pine Manor CollegeRobert K. Gable ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales University

Bandura�’s construct of General and Specific self efficacy wasexamined in the context of GPA for N = 98 female students at a diverseliberal arts college in New England. General (alpha reliability .76) andSpecific (alpha reliability .77) self efficacy data were assessed with a 25item questionnaire administered at the beginning of first semester for

analysis of semester end GPA. While there was no significantrelationship for General self efficacy and GPA, there was a significantcorrelation between Specific self efficacy and GPA (r = .27, r2 = .08, p =.006, ES = medium) supportive of Bandura�’s concept of context specificself efficacy. Five additional items were associated with significantrelationships with GPA. Meaningful interpretations are offered andimplications for college administrators are discussed.

A Working Framework for Assessing Academic Preparedness andProviding Feedback for Career Interests

Jonathan Steinberg ([email protected]), Educational Testing ServiceWalter Emmerich, Educational Testing Service

Research has demonstrated that effective career decision makingcan be enhanced with feedback on abilities and interests, in relation tomatching potential career choices (Prediger, 1999). A career pathshould be aligned with one�’s motivation, attributes, and availablechoices, known as trait matching (Eccles, 2005). This paper proposes aframework incorporating characteristics related to trait matching asstudents decide on educational programs and careers: basic academicskills (BAS), general academic motivation (GAM), and career interests,all rooted in vocational psychology (Savickas & Spokane, 1999). Theframework serves as a potential guidance tool for evaluating careerchoices before or during college, particularly for those strugglingacademically. The framework was developed and tested withcommunity college and four year university students.

A Typology of Middle School Students based on Non cognitive FactorsZhitong Yang ([email protected]), Educational Testing ServiceRichard Roberts, Educational Testing Service

Students�’ coping strategies and feelings toward school relatedactivities have been found to have impact on their life satisfaction andacademic performance. Multistage cluster analyses with replicationwere used to sort profiles of 382 seventh graders sampled from fivecities in the U.S. 49 4 point Likert scale items were used to measuretwo domains of students�’ non cognitive disposition, coping strategy(i.e., task coping, avoidant coping, and emotional coping) and schoolfeeling (i.e., positive and negative feeling). The analysis yield 5replicable cluster groups varying in frequency of different copingstrategy used and school feeling experienced, namely, avoidant,enjoying, playful, indifferent, and emotional students. The studyprovides guidance for teachers and school counselors to diagnosestudents�’ maladaptive behaviors in terms of the two non cognitivemeasures.

5.5 Invited Session HartfordTeacher as Researcher Award PresentationChair: Susan Eichenholtz ([email protected]), Adelphi UniversityAward Recipient & Presenter: Pat Romano presenting �“Bio Buddies�”:Peer Tutoring as an Instructional Strategy

Pat Romano is a career changer, having previously worked inmedicine for a number of years. She became interested in teachingmiddle and high school science when her daughter was younger, as aregular �“guest scientist�” for her elementary school classes. Shereturned to graduate school at Pace University for a MST 7 12 Biology(and is also certified in Chemistry, General Science, and Health). Thisacademic year is her fifth year teaching middle school and high schoolscience at a small private college preparatory school (grades 6 12) inupper Westchester County. What she enjoys most about teaching iscurriculum development, creating lessons and activities in which my�“science phobic�” students will engage, and (just maybe) appreciate thatscience can be interesting and rewarding to learn. She is currentlyfinishing a special education certification at PACE. When notpreparing/delivering lesson plans, Pat enjoys cooking, knitting, readingnovels, and attending her daughter�’s soccer games. Pat reports, �“In my



current life, I can honestly say that I look forward to going to work eachday and that (on most days) teaching is a rewarding experience�”.

Peer tutoring is an instructional strategy where peers act as�“instructional agents�” for fellow students. Through peer tutoring,students learn to collaborate to improve content understanding asstudents with lower academic abilities are paired with students ofhigher ability. In this study, 10 high school (9th 10th grade) biologystudents (typical students and students with learning/behaviordisabilities) participated in a ten day peer tutoring intervention todetermine whether peer tutoring would; 1) facilitate student academicsuccess, 2) enhance student focus as well as engagement in biologyclass, and 3) favorably affect students�’ behavior in class leading tofewer off task behavioral problems. Baseline data included scores onacademic tasks, student surveys, student reflection journal entries,teacher observation field notes, and behavior checklists. Similar datatypes were collected for ten days after peer tutoring was initiated.Student scores on most academic tasks were higher after peer tutoring,with the exception of scores on the unit assessment. More studentscompleted homework after peer tutoring. After peer tutoring, off taskbehavior in class was reduced. Most students �“agreed strongly�” thatworking with peers led to greater understanding, better focus on task,and more enjoyment in studying biology.

5.6 Individual Paper Session Rocky HillTeaching StrategiesSession Chair: Beatrice Adera ([email protected]), Pennsylvania StateUniversity Harrisburg

Session Discussant: Janice Sawyer ([email protected]), NYIT

Multicultural and Multilingual Youth Projects from Turkmenistan:Developing 21st Century Skills through Global Connections andTeaching Beyond BordersMelda Yildiz ([email protected]), Kean University

This presentation is for teacher educators and K12 teachers whowould like to integrate global education, 21st Century skills and newmedia in education, the paper outlines my experiences as a FulbrightScholar teaching multicultural education, media literacy andeducational technology in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan; offers creativestrategies for producing media with youth; and showcases theirprojects and digital stories from Central Asia. The research participantsdeconstructed and assessed the national and local curriculum andstandards; presented their curriculum projects such as videodocumentaries reflecting not only on their stories but also internationalissues and perspectives through their online contact to globalcommunity and documented their stories in order to articulate therealities of conditions in schools through their research, analysis, anddialog. Through the discovery process, the participants explored,designed, and created the strategies, curricula, and programs forimproving student outcomes, also the candidates gained alternativepoint of view on their subject fields and renewed interest andcommitment to socially responsible teaching.

An Investigation of the Strategies and Decision Making ProcessesUsed By Effective Elementary Mathematics TeachersRochelle Kaplan ([email protected]), William Paterson University

This project investigated the behavioral and cognitive decisionmaking processes used by effective elementary mathematics teachersin order to add to the knowledge base in that field and move towardbetter elementary mathematics teacher preparation, enhancement,and selection. The data collection utilized an observational andinterview format for assessing teachers. Data were collected from 15teachers in New Jersey and in Israel from a variety of SES and ethniccommunities. The presentation will provide samples of interviews and

teaching transcripts as well as a coding system for analyzing the data.Preliminary hypotheses generated from the data will be presented.

What is an Effective Teacher? Using Parenting Style Theory toUnderstand How Teachers�’ Management and Instructional PracticesInteract to Influence Student Engagement and LearningJoan Walker ([email protected]), Pace UniversityPerry den Brok, Eindhoven University of TechnologyMieke Brekelmans, Utrecht University

The added value of attending a given classroom stems from thequality of two sources: teachers�’ instructional practices and theirrelationships with students (Pianta et al., 2007). Yet we know littleabout how these two teaching dimensions interact to influence studentoutcomes. Drawing from parenting style theory (Baumrind, 1994;Darling & Steinberg, 1993), this paper explains the concept of teachingstyle (Walker, 2008, 2009) and presents tests of its hypotheses usingsurvey data from 878Dutch high school students and their Englishlanguage teachers (n = 21). Preliminary path analyses support thetheory�’s assumptions: style functions as a moderator (betweeninstruction and student learning) and a mediator (via students�’openness to teachers�’ influence). Implications for teacher education arediscussed.

5.7 Individual Paper Session Salon IStudent MobilitySession Chair: Lynn Shelley ([email protected]), Westfield StateUniversity

Session Discussant: Mary McKillip ([email protected]), TheCollege Board

Homelessness and EducationChristina Spathis ([email protected]), NYITGwen Corley, NYIT

Homelessness can impact a student�’s ability to function properly inthe classroom. This study examines how homelessness affects astudents education and what strategies teachers can use to help thesestudents in the classroom from the perceptions of principals, homelessliaisons, assistant superintendents and experts on homelessness. This isa mixed methodology study where both quantitative and qualitativedata were to be collected from surveys and face to face interviews. Theonline surveys, using Survey Monkey, were distributed to teachers in aparticipating elementary school in one of the cooperating districts.Evidence from the data sources identified ways to better meet theneeds of homeless students and came to understand how beinghomeless affects a students ability to function in the classroom.

Student Mobility as an Indicator for Socioeconomic StatusAmy Semerjian ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts

Secondary data analysis addressing a continuum of socioeconomicstatus (SES) is problematic at the student level. For example, readilyavailable student level economic variables in Massachusetts�’ StudentInformation Management System (SIMS) data are discrete and havefew levels. To further explain SES, student level sociological indicatorsof student mobility were explored. Using simple linear regression, thisstudy found that student mobility negatively influenced test scores (p <0.001), but explained very little variability in test scores (r =0.002). Student enrollment data were operationally reported lessspecifically than SIMS codes. Enrollment status is recommended as asociological indicator, and more thorough data collectionrecommendations are given.

Mobility History of the High School Senior Dropouts in ConnecticutAlison Zhou ([email protected]), Connecticut State Department ofEducation



Jiarong Zhao ([email protected]), Connecticut StateDepartment of Education

Student mobility is defined as the students changing schools otherthan promoting to next grade level in another school. Historically,there are evidences showing that high school dropout students tend tohave more incidents of non promotional changing schools. The studentmobility is potentially a sign of school disengagement and also a riskfactor for high school students dropping out school. The purpose of thestudy is to investigate historical mobility profile of reported 1,489Connecticut high school senior dropouts in 2008 09. The characteristicprofiling include numbers of mobility incident occurred, type ofmobility incident, location of mobility incident, and time of mobilityincident occurred. In addition, other potentially contributing variablesto student dropout will be examined.

5.8 Individual Paper Session Salon IIConducting Focus Groups for Dissertation ResearchSession Chair & Discussant: Francine Falk Ross ([email protected]),Pace University

Helping Urban Students Read Science: A Partnership with TeachersMargaret Queenan ([email protected]), University ofBridgeport

The problem addressed 80% of fourth grade students in one urbanschool not meeting the state reading goal. Research questions asked:Will comprehension strategies bring students to proficiency, and willresearcher teacher collaboration support that effort? The researcherserved as participant observer for a fourth year. Data includedresearcher lesson plans, student interviews, discussion transcripts,student work, and field notes of lunchtime conversations with teachers,analyzed through constant comparison, coding until saturation, andtriangulation through sharing with teachers. Students learnedcomprehension strategies, but only 38% reached �“proficiency�” levels.Partnerships included collaboration during instruction and parallelteaching during guided reading. Implications address comprehensionstrategies as necessary but not sufficient for reading and guidedreading as reducing time with teachers for learning content.

A School University Partnership: Collaborative Professional Learningand Inquiry

Frank Daniello ([email protected]), Boston CollegeChristina Pavlak, Boston College

This mixed methods action research study examined a schooluniversity partnership designed to improve school writing instruction.Four aims guided the inquiry: What impact has the partnership had onthe researchers, teachers, and pupils? What factors have contributed tothese outcomes? How has the partnership been carried out? Whattensions, if any, exist within the partnership and what are the potentialreasons for these tensions? Data sources included classroomobservations, interviews with teachers and partnership leaders, studentwriting, and archival documents. Analyses indicated that thepartnership had a positive impact on all stakeholders. Complexitytheory was used as a lens to conceptualize the partnership as aComplex Adaptive System. Findings can inform collaborative practicesand promote educational betterment for all stakeholders.

A Meta Analysis of �“Teacher Effect�” and Teacher Qualities EffectingElementary Mathematics Achievement Scores

Craig Waterman ([email protected]), University ofConnecticut

The teacher effect is a measure of the amount of variation instudent�’s achievement scores attributed to teachers. This meta analysiscalculates the effect size of the teacher effect on elementary mathachievement is between .1128 and .1655. While a seemingly smallnumber, this represents 2 months of growth over the average teachers.Attempts to measure teacher qualities such as a masters degree,certification, or experience were not significant, although the evidencesuggests that experience is an important factor and that certificationmay even have a negative effect. Improvements on a future metaanalysis are discussed.

5.9 Working Group Discussion Salon IIIConducting Focus Groups for Dissertation ResearchOrganizer: Felice Billups ([email protected]), Johnson & WalesUniversity

Conducting Focus Groups for Dissertation ResearchFelice D. Billups, Johnson & Wales UniversityStacey L. Kite, Johnson & Wales University

This session is designed to assist doctoral students who are planningto employ focus group methodology for their dissertation datacollection. Intended as a practical step by step guide, the discussionwill focus on 1) developing a work plan and timeline for schedulingfocus groups, 2) developing a moderator�’s guide, 3) constructing thequestioning stages of the focus group session, fromwelcome/introductions to conclusion and de briefing, 4) managingproblems and challenges with focus groups and 5) coordinatingessential logistics. The session is structured to allow participants to askquestions and share concerns related to their research. Experts in thefield (Krueger & Casey, 2009; Morgan, 1997) will be referenced tosupport the discussion.

Invited Panel (5:30 pm �– 6:45 pm)


Invited Panel �– 5:30 �– 6:45 pm

GSIC Invited Panel HartfordSeven Years, Five Career Paths: Successes and Lessons LearnedOrganizer: Allison Brown ([email protected]), George WashingtonUniversity

Presenters: Kristen Huff, Senior Research Scientist, Research andDevelopment, College Board

Lisa A. Keller, Assistant Professor in the Research and EvaluationMethods Program in the School of Education at the University ofMassachusetts Amherst

Michael Jodoin, Associate Vice President, Scoring Services NationalBoard of Medical Examiners

Mary Pitoniak, Strategic Advisor, Educational Testing ServiceMary Zanetti, Senior Director, Division of Research & Evaluation,University of Massachusetts Medical School

This session is an interactive, panel based format where fivegraduates of UMass Amherst School ofEducation�’s Research and EvaluationMethods Program will discuss how theircareer paths have played out in the sevenyears since graduation. Highlights willfocus on choices and supports thathelped them successfully navigate thepost graduate landscape, as well as those �“lessons learned�”that only the benefit of hindsight can bestow.

Brought to you by UMass Grads �‘03


Friday Highlights


Friday

Friday Highlights

NERA Business MeetingSalon I, 8:00 am �– 9:00 amThe NERA Business Meeting is the one opportunity during theyear for all NERA members to assemble and discuss theoperations and future of the organization. All conferenceattendees are encouraged to attend this open meeting. This isa breakfast meeting, so all attendees are encouraged to bringfood from the breakfast buffet in the adjacent hallway into themeeting room.

Invited Panel: Beyond �“Perform and Conform�”: EarningTenure in Today�’s AcademySalon B, 9:00 am �– 10:30 amA panel provides multiple perspectives on the tenure process.See session description 6.2 for details.

Invited Session on Common Core State Standards: Alignmentand ImplicationsConnecticut, 9:00 am �– 11:00 amAs one of the original partner organizations in the CommonCore State Standards Initiative, the College Board is

committed to helpingstates and districtsunderstand how toimplement these newcommon standards. TheCollege Board hasconducted severalalignment studies

comparing the Common Core State Standards to CollegeBoard products and assessments. This session will give a briefoverview of the College Board�’s involvement in the initiative,will offer a description of our alignment methodology andinitial findings, and will discuss potential implications, basedon our alignment studies, for states and districts. Arepresentative from the Connecticut State Department ofEducation will offer commentary from a state�’s perspective.See session description 6.9 for details.

This session is open to all paid NERA conference attendees. Ifyou want to attend this session only, the cost is $25 andpayable at the NERA Registration Desk before the session.CEU�’s will be offered.

Graduate Student Issues Committee Special Session: PracticalApplications of Advanced Measurement and StatisticalMethodsSalon D, 10:45 am �– 12:15 pmThe Graduate Student Issues Committee is excited to host thissession that will feature an interactive discussion about theapplication of measurement and statistical techniques tocomplex situations of practical importance. Two accomplishedpractitioners, Drs. Betsy McCoach and Kurt Geisinger willprovide perspectives on the development of the field as itrelates to applied research. Additional questions will becollected from graduate students and posed to the panel.Audience questions will be taken at the end of the session aswell.

Brought to you by the AdHoc Committee on

District/State Issues, TheCollege Board, and the

University of Connecticut

Friday Concurrent Session 6 (9:00 am �– 10:30 am)


Concurrent Session 6 �– 9:00 to 10:30 am

6.2 Invited Panel Salon BBeyond �“Perform and Conform�”: Earning Tenure in Today�’sAcademy

Organizer & Facilitator: Yanhui Pang ([email protected]), BloomsburgUniversity of Pennsylvania

6.3 Working Group Discussion Salon CDeveloping Engaged Scholars: Identifying LeadershipCompetencies for Community Based Participatory Research

Working Group Organizer: Karen I. Case ([email protected]),University of Hartford

Working Group Discussants:Tatum Krause, University of HartfordK. Darcy Hoenthal, University of Hartford

The engaged scholar exhibits the competencies necessary to conductjointly planned, developed and implemented research with communitymembers. To pedagogically accomplish this, doctoral faculty ineducational leadership must move beyond the theory versus practiceargument and instead match theory with the corresponding skill setsnecessary to accomplish community based participatory research(CBPR). This work session focuses on the identification of leadershipcompetencies necessary to conduct CBPR. Doctoral programs ineducational leadership must evolve to match current conceptions ofleadership theory and devise student competencies for thedevelopment of engaged scholars, who have the skills to lead andfollow community members, for the purpose of dual capacity building.

6.4 Individual Paper Session Salon DPost Secondary Learning and IssuesSession Chair: Thomas DiPaola ([email protected]), Johnson & WalesUniversity

Session Discussant: Theresa Rooney ([email protected]), YorkCollege, CUNY

Higher level peer editing: An investigation of the use and quality ofpeer editing in an MBA program

Stacey Kite ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales UniversityJoanne M. Crossman, Johnson & Wales University

This mixed methods study investigated the use of peer editing toimprove writing among graduate students with a high percentage ofnon native speakers of English. Following a modified version of the Vanden Berg et al. (2006) Optimal Model of peer critique of universitycoursework, statistically significant gains were realized between theinitial draft and final proposal for each of the measured items: support,audience focus, writing conventions, and organization. During thequalitative phase, students were observed to identify how peer editorsengaged in discovery mode (Lockhart & Ng, 1995) interactions. Themodified model and pedagogical practice proved effective for thediverse student population.

Community Service Learning in Public Health: Toward a CriticalPedagogy

Christie Barcelos ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts Amherst

The objective of this paper is to provide recommendations formoving community service learning (CSL) in post secondary publichealth education toward a critical pedagogy and practice. Thispurposive review of the literature on CSL in higher education and thehealth professions critically reviews and synthesizes key theoretical andempirical works in both fields. Results include the finding that the

literature on service learning in public health is rich in theoretical work,professional documents, and position statements, but lacks empiricalevidence to support its stated goals of reducing health disparities andachieving social justice. I argue that the principles of community basedparticipatory research for health promotion can help move publichealth CSL toward a critical pedagogy and practice.

Putting Theory Into Practice: The Educational Leadership andTechnology Program Supporting Alumni as School Practitioners

Susan Eichenholtz ([email protected]), Adelphi University

This research examines how the graduate students�’ experience withtechnology and action research in the Educational Leadership andTechnology (EDL) program supports their work as building leaders afterthey completed the EDL program. A review of the literature suggeststhat preparation programs are not aligned with the needs of theeducational leader. The results of the survey sent to EDL alumni suggestthat the EDL program curriculum emphasis on technology and actionresearch were employed by the administrative school practitioners topromote change in their schools.

6.5 Individual Paper Session Hartford RoomPsychometric Issues IIISession Chair: Liu Xing ([email protected]), Eastern Connecticut StateUniversity

Session Discussant: Peter Swerdzewski ([email protected])

An Application of Multilevel Modeling to Investigate Item FeaturesImpacting Comparability between Test Administration Modes

Daniel P. Jurich ([email protected]), James Madison UniversityDena A. Pastor ([email protected]), James Madison UniversityJoshua T. Goodman ([email protected]), James Madison University

Maintaining score comparability for computer based tests adaptedfrom paper and pencil versions is an essential process when both testmodes are given in the same administration. Research has positedseveral item features that may contribute to test mode effects. Thecurrent study explores the extent to which several item characteristicscontribute to the differential functioning of items across testing modes.Two multilevel models are employed to investigate the effects of itemcharacteristics and test mode on the probability of obtaining a correctresponse to an item. A greater understanding of item characteristicsthat differentially affect examinee performance across test mode aid inthe creation of tests that are comparable prior to their initialadministration.

Dependability and Accuracy of Clinical Performance in NursingExamination Scores

Laurie Nagelsmith ([email protected]), Excelsior CollegeMaurice Odondi, Excelsior College

The purpose of this study was to determine the dependability andaccuracy of Clinical Performance in Nursing Examination (CPNE®) scoresobtained from trained raters. Intraclass correlations were calculated toestimate interrater agreement. Accuracy was determined by identifyingpercent accuracy. Generalizability (G) coefficients were calculated toestimate sources of variance in scores. The sample for the study wasobtained from the pool of faculty raters at Excelsior College who agreedto participate. All participants serve in the role of clinicalexaminer/rater for the CPNE. Each participant was asked to score theperformance of two candidates using current examination scoringprotocols. Findings from this study add to the existing body of validityevidence for inferences made based on CPNE scores.

Friday Concurrent Session 6 (9:00 am �– 10:30 am)


Using Computer based Testing with Young ChildrenSusan Barnes ([email protected]), James Madison University

This study explored factors that impact the merit of using computerbased testing (CBT) with children between the ages of three and six.Specifically, the level of adult supervision needed during the CBT, theyoung children�’s reactions to CBT, and the comparability of CBT andPPT scores were examined. These three questions were addressedusing a mixed methods approach. The findings indicated that while allchildren reacted positively to the CBT, preschoolers needed moresupport than kindergarteners in order to demonstrate their knowledgeor skills using a CBT. Kindergarten children performed nearly as well onthe CBT as they did on the traditional paper version of the test. Thepotential benefits of CBT, such as efficient and objective scoring, arepromising.

Using the Hong Psychological Reactance Scale to Better UnderstandCompliant and Non Compliant Examinees on Low Stakes Tests

Allison Brown ([email protected]), George Washington UniversitySara J. Finney ([email protected]), James Madison University

The current study examined the utility of reactance to discriminatebetween compliant and non compliant examinees in a low stakestesting context. Measurement invariance (i.e., configural, metric, andscalar) of the Hong Psychological Reactance Scale (HPRS) was testedand supported across two types of examinees: examinees thatattended university assessments (i.e., compliant examinees) andexaminees that skipped these assessments (i.e., non complaintexaminees). Establishing measurement invariance enabled the testingof latent mean differences, which provided known groups validityevidence: non compliant examinees reported significantly higher levelsof reactance than did complaint examinees. Implications for low stakestesting, including strategies to increase compliance, are discussed.

6.5 & 6.6No Session Scheduled

6.8 Individual Paper Session Salon IILarge Scale Testing IssuesSession Chair: Sheila Shultz ([email protected]), Human ResourcesResearch Organization (HumRRO)

Session Discussant: Kurt Geisinger ([email protected]), University ofNebraska �– Lincoln

Examining the Impact of Alternate Assessments on Instruction: AMultimethod Study of Test Consequences

Jessica Goldstein ([email protected]), University ofConnecticut

Janet Stuck, Connecticut State Department of Education

This mixed method study employed focus groups and surveyresearch to examine the validity of the use of one state’s alternate assessment to inform instruction. Connecticut’s Skills Checklist was developed in response to federal policy that requires all students withsignificant cognitive disabilities participate in state assessments and beincluded in measures of adequate yearly progress. The data indicatesthat the Checklist has helped teachers access the grade levelcurriculum in a manner that sets high expectations for students withsignificant cognitive disabilities. As a result, the Checklist has raisedspecial education teachers�’ expectations for their students.

The Instructional Impact of North Dakota State Accountability System:A Consequential Validity Study

Xin Wang ([email protected]), Mid continent Research for Educationand Learning (McREL)

This investigation examines both intended and unintendedconsequences of North Dakota state accountability system oncurriculum change and local instruction. A mixed methods approach isused to gather both qualitative and quantitative data from an onlinesurvey and focus groups. Teachers and principals from North Dakotapublic schools will complete an online survey about the implementationof the state assessment and accountability systems and related impacton their instructional practices. Focus groups of teachers and schooladministrators will verify and expand upon survey data regardingwhether the classroom teachers are aligning their instruction with thestate standards. Initial findings from survey data and focus groupprotocols will be reported.

Does a Low SAT Score Mean Lower Educational Quality?Allison Camara ([email protected]), American University

Previous research (Powell et al., 1984; Powell et al., 1996) hasexamined the impact of some of these variables in examining the staterankings on SAT scores. However, those analyses used state rank (anordinal measure) and this analysis will use actual state mean SAT scores(ordinal/ratio measure) and more current data that reflects theincreased number of students taking the SAT in the past decade. Theproposed policy memorandum will examine the validity of statecomparisons of educational quality based on mean state SAT. Thepaper will examine the relationship between the proportion of studentsin a state taking the SAT and mean SAT scores. The issue of whetherparticipation rates impact the performance on SAT scores can bedetermined using a number of measures.

6.9 Invited Session ConnecticutCommon Core Standards: Alignment and ImplicationsNote that this session runs from 9:00 am �– 11:00 am.CEU�’s are offered. Please make sure you collect them at the session.

Organizers: Thanos Patelis, The College Board, & Mary Yakimowski,University of Connecticut

Facilitator:

Presenters:Danielle Luisier, The College BoardBeth Hart, The College BoardElaine Carman, The College BoardJoanne White, Connecticut State Department of Education

As one of the original partner organizations in the Common CoreState Standards Initiative, the College Board is committed to helpingstates and districts understand how to implement these new commonstandards. The College Board has conducted several alignment studiescomparing the Common Core State Standards to College Boardproducts and assessments. This session will give a brief overview of theCollege Board�’s involvement in the initiative, will offer a description ofour alignment methodology and initial findings, and will discusspotential implications, based on the alignment studies, for states anddistricts. The Connecticut State Department of Education will offercommentary about the Common Core from the State�’s perspective. Thefacilitator will ensure a lively Q&A session.

This session is free to all registrants of the 2010 NERA Conference.Otherwise, there is a $25 fee for anyone wanting to attend just thissession and is payable at the NERA Registration Desk at the Rocky HillMarriott, Rocky Hill, CT using a check or cash.

This session is offered by the NERA Ad Hoc Committee on Districtand State Issues, The College Board, and the Neag School of Educationat the University of Connecticut.

Friday Concurrent Session 7 (10:45 am �– 12:15 pm)


Concurrent Session 7 10:45 am �– 12:15 pm

7.2 Individual Paper Session Salon BScale/Instrument DevelopmentSession Chair: Kenneth Haar ([email protected]), Westfield StateUniversity

Session Discussant: Lynn Shelley ([email protected]), Westfield StateUniversity

Oral Reading Fluency as Part of an Accessible Reading Assessment forStudents with Learning Disabilities

Elizabeth Stone ([email protected]), Educational Testing ServiceKelly Bruce, Educational Testing Service

Education related legislation (e.g., NCLB, 2001; IDEA, 1997 and 2004)has sought to improve participation in and performance on statestandards tests for students with disabilities. While these efforts mayhelp to place and keep an educational spotlight on this heterogeneoussubgroup, they may not be focused on improving accessibility of testsfor these students. This paper describes an oral reading fluencymeasure that was used as part of a routed test to gain informationabout reading proficiency for students in the lower tails of theproficiency distribution. The assessment was field tested for a group ofapproximately 700 students with and without reading disabilities in the8th grade. Results of analyses related to the fluency measure arediscussed.

Defining Critical Thinking in Higher Education: DeterminingAssessment �“Fit�”

Martha Stassen ([email protected]), University ofMassachusetts Amherst

Anne Herrington, University of Massachusetts AmherstLaura Henderson, University of Massachusetts Amherst

�“Critical Thinking�” has emerged as an essential learning outcome forhigher education. While there is general agreement that criticalthinking is important, there is less consensus, and often some lack ofclarity, about what exactly constitutes �“critical thinking�”. The range ofcritical thinking dimensions (and the lack of one agreed upon definitionof the construct) poses a challenge for campuses working to align theircourse, program, and institution wide priorities for critical thinking withappropriate national and/or standardized assessment methods. Thispaper addresses this challenge by conducting an exploratory qualitativecontent analysis of six different representations of critical thinking (twospecific to our campus and four drawn from national assessment tools)and identifying common and distinct dimensions across the six sources.

Funny the Way it is: Development of the Learner Attitudes ofProfessor Humor (LAPH) Scale

Greg Mullin ([email protected]), University of Connecticut

This study attempted to develop a scale to measure learner attitudestowards professor humor in the classroom. Scale items were created todetermine if students felt that professors�’ humor increased studentattention and interest, and to what degree humorous instruction isdesired by students. An initial pool of 25 questions was created, testedfor content validity, narrowed down to 20 questions, and pilot tested toa sample of 184 University of Connecticut undergraduate and graduatestudents. An EFA ultimately showed that 17 of the 20 items loadedonto one factor. It was determined that the factors of attention,interest, and desirability fit under the umbrella of interest andtherefore cannot be measured independently regarding learnerattitudes towards professor humor.

7.3 Individual Paper Session Salon CPsychometric Issues IVSession Chair: Steven Holtzman ([email protected]), EducationalTesting Service

Session Discussant: Rochelle Michel ([email protected]), EducationalTesting Service

Levels of Urgency & Attitudes toward Group ExperiencesChristine Perakslis ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales UniversityFelice Billups ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales UniversityStacey Kite ([email protected]), Johnson & Wales University

The purpose of this study was to investigate differences betweenpersonality factors and student attitudes toward group experiences topropose pedagogical adjustments to an university. This quantitative,descriptive study employed two instruments: an attitudinal survey, anda behavioral (personality) assessment. Descriptive statistics were runand t tests used to determine if there were significant differences inattitudes based on personality factors. Freshmen with a C high factor(high levels of patience) reported significantly less favorable attitudesabout trustworthy attributes in others (M = 2.99, t = 3.21, p = .01, d =.65) than those without this factor (M = 3.50) Understanding andinfluencing freshman student attitudes toward group experiencesthrough personality assessments can be used to enhance academic andsocial integration.

Evaluating Examinee Motivation in Low Stakes Assessment using ItemResponse Time

Hanwook Yoo ([email protected]), University of MassachusettsAmherst

Lisa A. Keller (lisa [email protected]), University of MassachusettsAmherst

The relationship between response time (RT) and test taker behaviorto produce item responses has always been an interesting topic toeducational and psychological researchers. The purpose of this study isto investigate the effect of item and examinee characteristics on itemRTs from computer based low stakes assessment. Then, response timeeffort (RTE) and response time fidelity (RTF) are examined to decidewhether examinee effort is a potential issue on a multistage adaptivetest for adult basic education students. The results provide that logtransformed median RT may be appropriate to analyze the item levelRT data using regression analysis. Regarding the comparison betweenEnglish language learners (ELLs) and non ELLs of examinee motivation,ELLs spent more testing time to answer each item, but they may putmore effort to answer correctly than non ELLs.

Mathematics Strategy Use in Solving Test Items in Varied FormatsSarah M. Bonner ([email protected]), Hunter College

Although test scores from similar tests in multiple choice andconstructed response formats are highly correlated, equivalences inrankings may mask differences in substantive strategy use. Theresearcher used an experimental design and participant think alouds toexplore cognitive processes among 60 examinees. This study examinedthe effect of format on mathematics performance and strategy use, formale and female examinees given stem equivalent items in differentformats. A significant main effect of format on performance was found,with constructed response items more difficult. The multiple choiceformat was associated with more varied strategies, backwardstrategies, and guessing. Format was found to moderate the effect ofproblem conceptualization on performance. The study has implicationsfor cognitively based test development and score interpretation.



7.4 GSIC Invited Panel Salon DPractical Applications of Advanced Measurement andStatistical Methods

Panel Organizer: Allison Brown ([email protected]), GeorgeWashington University

Presenters: Betsy McCoach, University of ConnecticutKurt Geisinger, The Buros Center for Testing, University of NebraskaLincoln

This session will feature an interactive discussion about the applicationof measurement and statistical techniquesto complex situations of practicalimportance. Two accomplishedpractitioners, Drs. Betsy McCoach and KurtGeisinger will provide perspectives on thedevelopment of the field as it relates toapplied research. Additional questions willbe collected from graduate students andposed to the panel. Audience questions will be taken at the end of thesession as well.

7.5 Individual Paper Session HartfordInstructional Design & PracticeSession Chair: Barbara Wert ([email protected]), BloomsburgUniversity

Session Discussant: Bridget Thomas ([email protected]), GeorgeMason University

A Waste of Time? The Value and Promise of Researcher CompletedQualitative Data Transcribing

Krista Lucas ([email protected]), Boston College

A former teacher of the year turned doctoral candidate sharesinsights she gained from completing transcribing of more than fortyindividual and small group interviews with public school children ofcolor aged 8 12. In this paper, the author argues that transcribing is apowerful qualitative research tool, one that should not be looked at asmundane, tedious or a waste of a researcher�’s time.

A Grounded Theory of 21st Century Skills Instructional Design for HighSchool Students

Jennifer Olsen, Tolland Public Schools

The purpose of this qualitative study was to develop a model ofinstructional design that high school teachers use to promote students�’proficiency in 21st century skills. Few, if any, comprehensive theoriesabout designing instruction to promote students�’ proficiency in 21st

century skills seem to exist. A qualitative methodology using agrounded theory approach was used to gather data and develop themodel. The model of instructional design for 21st century skills thatemerged from the iterative analyses of teachers�’ stories has as itscentral category an inquiry based approach to teaching and learning.Further, their accounts of designing instruction yielded the modelcomponents: environment, planning, instructing, and assessingstudents�’ proficiency in 21st century skills.

�“Mini Observations: An Authentic, Sustainable and Ongoing Processfor Changing Teacher Practice and Improving School Performance�”

Peter Madonia ([email protected]), Southern CT StateUniveristy

Jack Zamary, Middlebury Elementary School

This paper will present the outcome of a pilot research effortexamining and assessing the application of focused mini observationsby teachers and school leaders seeking performance gains for allstudents. Policy implications resulting from findings supporting thedocumentation of an effective, feasible and replicable approach for

improving instructional practice and influencing the quality of teachingand learning in schools are envisioned as resulting from this study. Datarelated to the process, procedures and findings of a pilot effort protocolwill be presented; the perspectives and observations of the audiencewill be solicited. This information will serve to support refinements to alarger more broad based study to be initiated in the spring of 2011.

Building a Successful Partnership Between a University and LocalSchool Districts

Catherine L Tannahill ([email protected]), Eastern ConnecticutState University

Jeanelle Day, Eastern Connecticut State University

The purpose of this paper is to describe the use of theCollaborative/Cooperative Model of staff development as a means forproviding content knowledge and pedagogical skills to middle schoolteachers. The study involved four sequential one year projects toincrease science (and related mathematics and literacy) contentknowledge and skills. The research question addressed: What is themost effective staff development model to provide science (and relatedmathematics and literacy) content knowledge and skills to middleschool teachers? The study involved an intensive two week workshopat the beginning with on going electronic and formal university basedfollow up activities. Using pre and post testing, participating teachersdemonstrated significant gains in content knowledge and growth inimplementation of content and skills.

7.6 Individual Paper Session Rocky HillPre Service TeachersSession Chair & Discussant: Jan Stivers ([email protected]), MaristCollege

Developing Efficacy Beliefs in Pre Service TeachersCheryl Gowie ([email protected]), Siena College

This paper reports on the initial two years of a study of thedevelopment of efficacy beliefs in undergraduate preservice secondaryteachers. The purpose of the research is to determine whether certaininstructional practices associated with mastery experience, vicariousexperience, social persuasion, and emotional state, i.e., sources ofefficacy beliefs, in fact correlate with increased efficacy beliefs in thispopulation. The Teacher Efficacy Scale: Short Form (Woolfolk and Hoy,1993) was administered to three sections of an Educational Psychologycourse over a two year period. In year 2 data were collected at thebeginning and end of the semester, allowing for investigation of changein beliefs. Differences in instructional practices are examined as theyimpact the development of efficacy beliefs.

Urban Field Placements Influence on Pre service Teachers�’ CareerPlans

Helen A Marx ([email protected]), Eastern Connecticut StateUniversity

This study examined the influence of urban school placements onpre service teachers�’ feelings of preparedness towards working withculturally and linguistically diverse students and intentions to seekemployment within urban school districts. The study surveyed 40 preservice teachers, all of whom participated in an urban field placement.The study found that the urban field placement influenced students�’career intentions to work within urban schools. However, theseplacements did not increase feelings of preparedness towards workingwith ELL learners. Other factors that influenced career intentionstoward urban schools were the pre service teachers�’ k 12 schoolingexperience within an urban school and other significant cross culturalexperiences, such as study abroad. The findings suggest that urban fieldplacements may positively influence pre service intentions to workwithin urban schools.




Expertise2: Outcomes of Instructor Collaboration on ElementaryTeacher Education in Mathematics

Mary Truxaw ([email protected]), University of Connecticut,Dept. of Curriculum and Instruction

Fabiana Cardetti, University of Connecticut, Dept. of MathematicsCynthia A. Bushey, University of Connecticut, Teachers for a New EraProject

This research grew from two university faculty members�’collaboration across different academic fields (mathematics andeducation) in order to better serve elementary education majors. Thecollaborative process resulted not only in shared expertise, but also inan ongoing investigation of confidence of mathematical contentknowledge (M CK) and mathematics pedagogical content knowledge(M PCK) of elementary preservice teachers (PSTs) who participated inmath content coursework designed for elementary teachers. Findingssuggest that PSTs who take one or more of these content courses,along with a mathematics methods course, have higher M CK and MPCK than PSTs who take only traditional mathematics courses alongwith a mathematics methods course.

About NERA


About NERA

NERA MissionThe mission of the Northeastern Educational Research Association is to encourage and promote educational research by: Sponsoring an annual conference at which formal presentations, feedback, and professional interchange about research occurs. Promoting the sharing of professional information through publications and other types of communications. Encouraging the development of research among junior researchers.NERA welcomes individuals conducting research in all aspects of education including learning, curriculum and instruction, educational policy andadministration, measurement, statistics, research methodology, counseling, human development, social context of education, cultural diversity, specialeducation and rehabilitation, educational assessment, school evaluation and program development, education in the professions, post secondaryeducation, teaching and teacher education, technology in education, creative arts in the schools, and others.

NERA LeadershipBoard of Directors President:

Katharyn Nottis, Bucknell UniversityPresident Elect:Thanos Patelis, The College BoardPast President:Kristen Huff, The College BoardSecretary:Barbara Y. Wert, Bloomsburg University of PennsylvaniaTreasurer:Helen A. Marx, Eastern Connecticut State UniversityNERA Board of Directors:Allison Brown, George Washington UniversitySamantha Feinman, Pace UniversitySara J. Finney, James Madison UniversityJennifer Kobrin, The College BoardLynn Shelley Sireci, Westfield State UniversityElizabeth Stone, Educational Testing ServiceApril L. Zenisky, University of Massachusetts at Amherst

NERA ResearcherCo Editors

Jennifer L. Kobrin, The College BoardKevin Meara, Educational Testing Service

2010 ConferenceCo Chairs

Dolores Burton, New York Institute of TechnologyYanhui Pang, Bloomsburg University of PennsylvaniaThanos Patelis, The College Board

Graduate StudentIssues Committee

Chair:Allison Brown, George Washington UniversityMembers:Marisa Cohen, CUNY Graduate CenterKatrina Crotts, University of Massachusetts AmherstMegan France, James Madison UniversityDaniel Jurich, James Madison UniversityMelissa Smythe, SUNY Buffalo

NERA Committees Teacher as Researcher Award Committee Chair: Susan Eichenholtz, Adelphi UniversityLeo D. Doherty Memorial Award Committee Chair: Gavrielle Levine, Long Island UniversityThomas Donlon Mentoring Award Committee Chair: Rochelle Kaplan, William Paterson UniversityLorne H. Woollatt Distinguished Paper Award Committee Chair: Julie Rosenthal, William Paterson UniversityCommunications Committee Chair: Darlene Perner, Bloomsburg University of PennsylvaniaMembership Committee Chair: Barbara Wert, Bloomsburg University of PennsylvaniaNERA Diversity Task Force Chair: Melda Yildiz, William Patterson UniversityNERA District/State Task Force Chair: Kenneth Weiss, Central Connecticut State University

Additional Conference Information



Thanks to Our Reviewers!Beatrice Adera, Penn State HarrisburgDaniel S. Alemu, The Sage CollegesRobin D. Anderson, James Madison UniversityCarol Barry, The College BoardJennifer Bausmith, The College BoardSunny Becker, HumRROAmanda Bozack, University of New HavenMelinda Burchard, James Madison UniversityDolores Burton, New York Institute of TechnologyLucia Buttaro, Adelphi UniversityHilary Campbell, HumRROEllina Chernobilsky, Caldwell CollegeChristine Clayton, Pace UniversityMarisa Cohen, The Graduate Center of CUNYJami Cotter, Siena CollegeSharon Cramer, Buffalo State UniversityThomas P. DiPaola, Johnson and Wales UniversitySusan Eichenholtz, Adelphi UniversityChristine Emmons, Yale UniversityBrian Evans, Pace UniversitySamantha Feinman, Pace UniversityMegan France, James Madison UniversityKurt Geisinger, University of NebraskaCheryl Gowie, Siena CollegeKenneth Haar, Westfield State CollegeAnn Hassenpflug, University of AkronK. Darcy Hohenthal, University of HartfordSteven Holtzman, Education Testing ServiceKristen Huff, The College BoardTracy P. Johnson, Buffalo State CollegeRochelle Kaplan, William Paterson UniversityJennifer Kobrin, The College BoardBenedict Lai, University of ConnecticutAbigail Lau, The College of the Holy CrossG. Levine, CW Post �– LIUJun Li, Fordham UniversityXing Liu, Eastern Connecticut State UniversityCara McDermott Fasy, Rhode Island CollegeRochelle Michel, Educational Testing ServiceJennifer Minsky, Educational Testing ServiceJoan Myers, Pace UniversityNicky Nunez, Brooklyn College CUNYWilliams Emeka Obiozor, Bloomsburg University ofPennsylvaniaYanhui Pang, Bloomsburg University of PennsylvaniaThanos Patelis, The College BoardDouglas Penfield, Rutgers UniversityDarlene Perner, Bloomsburg University of PennsylvaniaDarshanand Ramdass, The Graduate Center of the CityUniversity of New YorkCasey M. Roberts, Hampton City SchoolsSusan Rogers, University at AlbanyBarbara Rosenfeld, Brooklyn College of the City University ofNew York

Javarro Russell, James Madison UniversityRamona R. SantaMaria, Buffalo State College SUNYSheila R. Schultz, HumRROLouise J. Shaw, Dowling CollegeLynn Shelley, Westfield State CollegeStephen G. Sireci, University of Massachusetts AmherstMelissa K. Smythe, University at Buffalo �– Buffalo State CollegePamela Stazerky, Center for Collaborative EducationCandice Stefanou, Bucknell UniversityJonathan Steinberg, Educational Testing ServiceJan Stivers, Marist CollegeElizabeth Stone, Educational Testing ServiceAndrea T. Sweeney, Law School Admission CouncilPeter Swerdzewski, The College BoardBridget E. Thomas, George Mason UniversityKenneth Weiss, Central Connecticut State UniversityMarie C. White, Nyack College Manhattan CampusCaroline Wylie, Educational Testing ServiceApril Zenisky, University of Massachusetts AmherstAnna Zilberberg, James Madison University



Author IndexAll authors for individual paper sessions, symposia, the poster session, and working groups are listed below, along with authors�’ corresponding sessions.

AJessica Addonizio .....................................1.4Heejung An ..............................................1.3Ann Anderberg.......................Poster SessionJeffrey A. Anderson..................................4.5Margaret Anderson................Poster SessionRobin Anderson .......................................2.8Heidi L. Andrade.......................................2.4Peter Arvanites ................................. 4.7, 5.2Eileen Astor Stetson.................................2.5

BIsabel Benitez Baena ................................5.2Christie Barcelos ............................... 1.6, 6.4Susan Barnes............................................6.5Carol Barry ...............................................1.2Jennifer Bausmith ....................................2.7Julia Baxter ............................Poster SessionSue Bechard .............................................4.4Stephen P. Becker ....................................5.4Melissa Benzel .......................Poster SessionJack Bernardo...........................................4.7Elizabeth Bifuh Ambe ..............................2.7Felice D. Billups ................... 3.3, 3.6, 5.9, 7.3Sarah M. Bonner ......................................7.3Melissa Bostwick ...................Poster SessionMark Boyer ..............................................1.7Kaitlin Brayer .........................Poster SessionMieke Brekelmans ...................................5.6Thomas Breitfeller .................Poster SessionBrittany Bright .......................Poster SessionPerry den Brock........................................5.6Kamila Brodowinska.................................1.7Allison Brown...........................................6.5Scott Brown .............................................1.7Kelly Bruce ...............................................7.2Jeremy Burrus ..........................................3.7Rosemary Burns .......................................4.4Cynthia Bushey ........................................7.6

CAllison Camara .........................................6.8Fabiana Cardetti.......................................7.6James Carifio..................................... 1.4, 1.7Tara Case .................................................1.4Michael Chajewski ...................................3.2John Chen .............................Poster SessionEllina Chernobilsky.................Poster SessionYeonsuk Cho ............................................4.9Carmen R. Cid ........................Poster SessionGloria Clark ..............................................2.6Shanetia P. Clark ......................................2.7Jerome Cody Clauser................................3.4Marisa Cohen.................................. 2.5, 3.10Amanda R. Connor ................Poster SessionRobert Cook ...................................... 2.3, 3.8Gwen Corley.............................................5.7Mark Cosgrove.........................................4.7James B. Crabbe.......................................3.5Alicia Crichton ..........................................1.4Jason Crockett..........................................4.8Joanne M. Crossman................................6.4Andrew Cutter .........................................1.7

DLorraine Dagostino .................................. 2.7Frank Daniello.......................................... 5.8Marsha J. Davis ...................... Poster SessionDanette Day........................... Poster SessionJeanelle Day............................................. 7.5Rebecca Dean .......................................... 2.7Michael Joseph Deasy.............................. 1.4Lisa Dold ................................ Poster SessionSheila Dove Jones .................................... 2.5Jullian Dowling ...................... Poster SessionFrancine Dreyfus...................................... 2.5

ESusan Eichenholtz .................................... 6.4Antonio Ellis............................................. 4.6Walter Emmerich (pos.)........................... 5.4Christine Emmons.................................... 2.5Maria Fernanda Enriquez......................... 1.7Brian Evans ............................................ 3.10Maureen Ewing........................................ 4.9

FBrian Evans ..................................... 1.8, 3.10Michael Faggella Luby ............................. 4.3Francine Falk Ross ............................ 1.7, 3.6Samantha Feinman.................................. 2.5Jing Feng .................................................. 3.2Sara Letai Feshazion ................................ 1.4Lawrence Filippelli ................................... 5.3Sara J. Finney ............................. 3.7, 5.2, 6.5Reva Fish......................... 3.3, Poster SessionJessica M. Fitzgerald ................................ 3.6Heather Frac ............................................ 1.4Megan France ................................... 2.8, 4.9

GRobert K. Gable....................1.6, 3.7, 5.3, 5.4Hagar Gal ................................................. 1.3Jose Luis Padilla Garcia ............................ 5.2Emily Giannotta ....................................... 1.4Beth Giller................................................ 3.6Anthony Girasoli ...................................... 2.6Mereille Gold ........................................... 3.5Jessica Goldstein............................... 2.8, 6.8Joshua Goodman ..................................... 6.5Kathleen Gormley .................................... 5.3Christine Gotshall .................. Poster SessionCheryl Gowie ........................................... 7.6Jessica L. Gregory..................................... 4.8Victoria Grinman...................................... 1.5

HTracy Haber ........................... Poster SessionEmily Hailey ............................................. 3.4Claire Hamilton ........................................ 5.3Christine Harmes .............................. 2.8, 3.7Nicholas Hartlep ...................................... 4.6Paige Hawkins.......................................... 4.8Lilioara Helgiu ........................ Poster SessionKristen Helmer....................... Poster SessionLaura Henderson ..................................... 7.2Anne Herrington ...................................... 7.2K. Darcy Hohenthal ................ Poster Session

Nicole Holland ......................................... 1.4Steven L. Holtzman.................................. 3.7Cicely Horsham Brathwaite ..................... 4.8Kristen Huff ............................................. 2.4Michael Hull............................................. 3.4Christopher S. Hulleman.......................... 4.8Gerri M.Hura ........................................... 3.3Michele Humbyrd.................................... 1.6

INithya Iyer ............................. Poster SessionBlair Izard ................................................ 1.4

JAvis Jackson............................................. 4.8Teresa Jackson......................................... 3.7Ralph Jasparro .................................. 2.6, 4.4Janet Johannessen................................... 4.7Tracy P. Johnson ...................................... 3.6Sheila Jones ............................................. 2.5Daniel P. Jurich ...........................3.4, 3.7, 6.5

KLeah Kaira ................................................ 3.8Pamela Kaliski.......................................... 4.9Minji Kang................................................ 2.3Rochelle Kaplan ................................ 1.3, 5.6Cassandra Katsogiannos ....... Poster SessionTami Katzir............................................... 4.5Julia Keister ........................... Poster SessionLisa Keller ................................................ 7.3Gena Khodos ........................................... 1.7Laura Kirsche ........................................... 1.4Stacey Kite .................... 3.6, 3.7, 5.3, 6.4, 7.3John Klages .............................................. 5.2James Koepfler ........................................ 3.4Hari Koirala ..................... 2.7, Poster SessionJason Kopp .............................................. 3.7Tiffany A. Koszalka ................ Poster SessionJames Krause ........................................... 2.5Tatum Krause .......................................... 6.3

LBenedict M. Lai........................................ 5.3Vytas Laitusis ..............................1.2, 2.4, 3.2Diana J. LaRocco ...................................... 3.6Abigail Lau ............................................... 4.9Kimberly A. Lawless ................................. 1.7Lindsey K. Le ......................... Poster SessionJi Eun Lee............................... Poster SessionJohn Lee............................................ 1.2, 3.2Julie A. Leszczynski ............... Poster SessionGavrielle Levine ....................................... 2.7Hongli Li................................................... 4.4Jun Li........................................................ 3.2Stella Xian Li .......................... Poster SessionRobinson Lilenthal ................................... 1.5Guangming Ling....................................... 4.9Xing Liu ........................... 2.7, Poster SessionLouAnn Lovin ........................................... 2.8Krista Lucas.............................................. 7.5Larry H. Ludlow........................................ 3.7Heng Luo ............................... Poster SessionChristine J. Lyon....................................... 2.4


NERA 2010: Building Research Partnerships Page 51

MPeter Madonia......................................... 7.5Brooke Magnus ....................................... 2.3Steven Mancuso...................................... 1.4Tia Mann ................................................. 4.8Deepti Marathe .................... Poster SessionBarbara Marinak...................................... 2.7Kimberly Marsh ....................................... 4.8Marietta Martinovic ................................ 1.3Helen Marx.............................................. 7.6Claire Mastromonaco.............................. 4.6Haifa Matos Elefonte ........................1.2, 3.2D. Betsy McCoach.................................... 3.7Peter McDermott .................................... 5.3Cara McDermott Fasy ............................. 1.8Mary McKillip ....................................1.2, 2.7Gloria McNamara .................................... 3.5Kand McQueen........................................ 4.5Cara Meixner........................................... 2.8Steven Melnick........................................ 2.7Yu Meng .................................................. 5.2Roxanna Menson..................................... 1.2Lakeisha Meyer ....................................... 4.5Patrick Meyer .......................................... 3.4Jennifer Scott Miceli ................................ 4.8Brandon Monroe..................................... 1.8Barbara Morse ........................................ 2.6Ashley Montero..................... Poster Sessiony M. Dolores Hidalgo Montesinos ........... 5.2Gregory Mullin ...........................1.7, 3.7, 7.2Joe Murray ........................... Poster Session

NLaurie Nagelsmith ................................... 6.5Joan Newman........................ Poster SessionGil Noam ................................................. 4.5Katharyn Nottis ..................... Poster SessionLisa Novemsky......................................... 1.5

OEmeka Obiozor ........................................ 2.5Daniel O�’Brien ......................................... 1.7Bethany Ochal ......................................... 4.5Maurice Odondi ...................................... 6.5Jennifer Olsen.......................................... 7.5Christopher Orem.................................... 2.8

PSheryl Packman ....................................... 2.4Yanhui Pang............................................. 2.5Peter Pappas ........................................... 4.7Gregory Parkhurst ................................... 1.4Dena Pastor................................3.6, 3.7, 6.5Thanos Patelis ......................................... 4.2Christina Pavlak ....................................... 5.8Miriam Pepper Sanello........... Paper SessionChristine Perakslis ................................... 7.3Carol S. Perrino........................................ 4.8Darlene Perner ........................................ 2.5Jason Petula ............................................ 2.7Margaret Pierce....................................... 4.5Nicole Powell........................................... 1.7Michael Prince....................... Poster SessionNina Proestle........................................... 3.2

QMargaret Lally Queenan....................4.8, 5.8

RCynthia Rainbow ....................Poster SessionKaren Rambo............................................2.8Darshanand Ramdass...............................3.5Jennifer Randall........................................5.2Sheetal Ranjan .........................................1.3Tefaya Ransom.........................................3.2Anita Rawls .......................................1.2, 3.2Gia Renaud ............................Poster SessionCatherine Rivela ....................Poster SessionPhil Robakiewicz.......................................4.4Laura Roberts...........................................1.4Richard Roberts.................................3.7, 5.4Yurah Robidas ..........................................1.4Diana Rocklin .........................Poster SessionPat Romano..............................................5.5Barbara Rosenfeld...........Poster Session, 1.5Julie Rosenthal .......................Poster SessionInna Rozentsvit.........................................1.5Maureen Ruby ................1.8, Poster SessionNichole Rucci..........................Poster SessionJavarro Russell..........................................2.8

SFrank A. Sargent.......................................3.3Yuriko Sasak ..........................Poster SessionKristina Scarrozzo.....................................1.4Jason Schweid ..........................................3.8Beth Scott ................................................4.8Mary Sciacchetano ................Poster SessionCharles Secolsky................................3.5, 5.2Kelsey Seddon ..........................................1.4Amy Semerjian ..................................2.3, 5.7Stephen G. Sireci ........................ 3.4, 4.2, 5.2Melissa Smythe ........................................7.3Mathew Snow ........................Poster SessionCodine Soman ..........................................6.7Adrienne Sosin ................7.4, Poster SessionChristina Spathis ......................................5.7Martha Stassen .................................1.1, 7.2Caryn Stedman.........................................1.8Candice Stefanou ...................Poster SessionJonathan Steinberg ..................................5.4Jonathan Stolk .......................Poster SessionElizabeth Stone ........................................7.2Martha Strickland.....................................2.6Deborah Stryker .......................................2.5Janet Stuck ...............................................6.8Linda Sturges..........................................3.10Jennifer Suen ....................................1.4, 4.4Florence Sullivan ......................................5.3Kevin Sweeney .........................................4.2Peter Swerdzewski ...................................2.7

TCatherine L. Tannahill ..............................7.5Melinda Tanzman.....................................4.5Amy Thelk ................................................4.2Angela Thering .........................................4.5Bridget E.Thomas ..............................1.4, 4.6Jason Travers..........................Poster SessionMary Truxaw ............................................7.6

UVJohan van der Jagt..................Poster Session

WJoan Walker ............................................. 5.6Maureen Walsh ....................................... 2.5Jennifer Walter ......................Poster SessionYuan Wang............................................... 4.9Xin Wang.................................................. 6.8Craig Waterman....................................... 5.8Craig S. Wells .................................... 2.3, 5.2Megan Welsh........................................... 3.8Rongmei Wen ........................Poster SessionAdrianna Wechsler .................................. 4.5Barbara Wert ........................................... 2.5Kim Westcott ........................................... 4.5Jane M. Wilburne..................................... 2.7Hilary Wilder ............................................ 3.3Amanda Wiley .......................Poster SessionAndrew Wiley .......................................... 4.2Gregory Williams ..................................... 1.7David Williamson ..................................... 4.2Barbara Wilson ........................................ 2.5Nicholas Wilson ....................................... 5.3Maryanne Wolf ........................................ 4.5Mikyung K. Wolf....................................... 4.9

XYZhitong Yang ............................................ 5.4Ozgur Yildirim .......................................... 2.7Melda Yildiz.............................................. 5.6John Young .............................................. 4.8Henry Yoo .................................. 1.2, 5.7, 7.3Roland Yoshida ........................................ 1.4Michael F. Young...................................... 5.3Judy Yu..................................................... 7.3Mariya Yukhymenko ......................... 1.7, 4.8

ZDianne Zager............................................ 2.5Jack Zamary ............................................. 7.5Amanda Zezima ....................Poster SessionJiarong Zhao...................................... 4.5, 5.7Dinger Zhang .........................Poster SessionHongquin Zhang ....................Poster SessionAlison Zhou ....................................... 4.5, 5.7Kate Zhou.......................................... 4.5, 5.7Xiangpeng Zhou ....................Poster SessionAnna Zilberberg ....................................... 3.7Anthony Zilz ............................................. 2.5Barry Zimmerman .................................... 3.5Tracy E. Zinn............................................. 3.7Michelle Zucaro ....................Poster Session



Contact Information (Session organizers and first authors)Contact information is listed for first authors of papers presented in individual paper sessions and coordinators of symposia.

AAdera, Beatrice (Pennsylvania State University �– Harrisburg) ............................................................................................................................ [email protected], Robin (James Madison University)................................................................................................................................................ander2rd@jmu.eduAnderson, Margaret (SUNY Cortland) ....................................................................................................................................margaret.anderson@cortland.eduArvanites, Peter (Rockland Community College) ............................................................................................................................. [email protected]

BBaena, Isabel Benitez (University of Granada (Spain)) ....................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Christie (University of Massachusetts Amherst) ...........................................................................................................cbarcelo@schoolph.umass.eduBarnes, Susan (James Madison University) .................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Carol (The College Board) .........................................................................................................................................................cabarry@collegeboard.orgBausmith, Jennifer (The College Board) .......................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Stephen P. (Pine Manor College).......................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Melissa (Pace University) ......................................................................................................................................................melissa.benzel@gmail.comBillups, Felice D. (Johnson & Wales University)................................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Sarah M. (Hunter College) ................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Melissa (Bucknell University) .................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Kaitlin (Pace University) ................................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Allison (George Washington University) ..................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Melinda (James Madison University) ...........................................................................................................................................burchams@jmu.eduBurns, Rosemary (Johnson & Wales University) ...................................................................................................................................................roe27@cox.netBushey, Cynthia (University of Connecticut).....................................................................................................................................cynthia.bushey@uconn.eduButtaro, Lucia (Adelphi University) .............................................................................................................................................................buttaro@adelphi.edu

CCamara, Allison (Achieve Inc.)....................................................................................................................................................................acamara@achieve.orgCampbell, Hilary (Human Resources Research Organization [HumRRO]) ............................................................................................HCampbell@HumRRO.orgCarifio, James (University of Massachusetts Lowell)............................................................................................................................... [email protected], Karen (University of Hartford) .............................................................................................................................................................kcase@hartford.eduChernobilsky, Elina (Caldwell College) .............................................................................................................................................echernobilsky@caldwell.eduClark, Shanetia P. (Pennsylvania State University at Harrisburg .................................................................................................................... [email protected], Jerome Cody (University of Massachusetts) ..........................................................................................................................jclauser@educ.umass.eduCohen, Marisa (The Graduate Center of the City University of New York).......................................................................................... [email protected], Robert (University of Massachusetts Amherst) ..................................................................................................................... [email protected], James B. (County College of Morris) .................................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Sharon (Buffalo State College) ............................................................................................................................................ [email protected], Jason (Long Island University) .............................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Katrina (Westfield State College)..............................................................................................................................................kcrotts9074@wsc.ma.edu

DDaniello, Frank (Boston College) ......................................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Danette (University of Massachusetts �– Amherst) ......................................................................................................................... [email protected], Rebecca (Salem State College) .................................................................................................................................................rebeccajdean@yahoo.comDeasy, Michael Joseph (University of Massachusetts Lowell).......................................................................................................................... [email protected], Thomas (Johnson & Wales University) ..............................................................................................................................................tdipaola@jwu.eduDold, Lisa (Pace University) .....................................................................................................................................................................LDold@schools.nyc.gov

EEichenholtz, Susan (Adelphi University)................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Christine (Yale University) ...............................................................................................................................................christine.emmons@yale.eduEvans, Brian (Pace University)..........................................................................................................................................................................bevans@pace.edu

FFalk Ross, Francine (Pace University).............................................................................................................................................................ffalkross@pace.eduFeinman, Samantha (Pace University) ......................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Jing (Fordham University) ................................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Sara Letai (University of Connecticut) .............................................................................................................................. [email protected], Sara (James Madison University)......................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Reva (State University of New York at Buffalo)............................................................................................................................. [email protected], Megan (James Madison University) ................................................................................................................................................. [email protected]

GGable, Robert K. (Johnson & Wales University) .................................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Kurt (Buros Center for Testing, University of Nebraska Lincoln).................................................................................................kgeisinger2@unl.eduGiller, Beth (University of Hartford) ........................................................................................................................................................bgiller@sps.suffield.orgGirasoli, Anthony (University of Connecticut & Norwich Free Academy) ........................................................................... [email protected]



Godfrey, Kelly (The College Board)................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Jessica (University of Connecticut) ................................................................................................................................ [email protected], Christine (Bucknell University) ................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Cheryl (Siena College).................................................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Jess L. (Southern Connecticut State University) .................................................................................................................. [email protected]

HHaber, Tracy (Pace University) ................................................................................................................................................................thaber@aaronacad.orgHarr, Kenneth (Westfield State University) .................................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Nicholas (University of Wisconsin Milwaukee)..............................................................................................................................nhartlep@uwm.eduHelgiu, Lilioara (William Paterson University & Passaic NJ School District) ................................................................................................. [email protected], Kristen (University of Massachusetts Amherst) ................................................................................................................... [email protected], Barbara (Education Development Center, Inc.) ................................................................................................................................ [email protected], K. Darcy (University of Hartford)................................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Steven L. (Educational Testing Service) .........................................................................................................................................sholtzman@ets.orgHuff, Kristen (The College Board) ........................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Michele (Johnson & Wales University) ............................................................................................................................. [email protected]

IIyer, Nithya (SUNY Oneonta) ...................................................................................................................................................................... [email protected]

JJackson, Avis (Morgan State University).................................................................................................................................................avis.jackson@gmail.comvan der Jagt, Johan (Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania) .................................................................................................................. [email protected], Burke (University of South Alabama) ......................................................................................................................................bjohnson@usouthal.eduJohnson, Tracy P. (Buffalo State College) .......................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Daniel (James Madison University) ...................................................................................................................................................... [email protected]

KKaira, Leah (University of Massachusetts Amherst) ................................................................................................................................lkaira@educ.umass.eduKaliski, Pamela (The College Board) ................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Minji (University o f Massachusetts Amherst) ................................................................................................................................ [email protected], Rochelle (William Paterson University)............................................................................................................................................ [email protected], Julia (Pace University) ............................................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Robert (Measured Progress) ................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Stacey (Johnson & Wales University) ................................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Jennifer (The College Board) ................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], James (James Madison University) ................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Hari P. (Eastern Connecticut State University) .......................................................................................................................... [email protected], Jason (James Madison University) ................................................................................................................................................koppjp@dukes.jmu.edu

LLai, Benedict (University of Connecticut) .............................................................................................................................................benedict.lai@unconn.eduLaitusis, Vytas (The College Board).....................................................................................................................................................vlaitusis@collegeboard.orgLaRocco, Diana J. (University of Hartford) .............................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Abigail (College of the Holy Cross) ....................................................................................................................................................lau.abigail@gmail.comLe, Lindsey K. (University of Connecticut) ............................................................................................................................................................ [email protected], Ji Eun (University at Albany SUNY) ..................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], John (The College Board) ...................................................................................................................................................................jlee@collegeboard.orgLevine, Gavrielle (Long Island University at C.W. Post) ....................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Hongli (Penn State University Park) ............................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Jun (Fordham University) .......................................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Stella Xian (State University of New York at Albany)........................................................................................................................ [email protected], Xing (Eastern Connecticut State University) ............................................................................................................................................liux@easternct.eduLucas, Krista (Boston College) ............................................................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Heng (Syracuse University) ...........................................................................................................................................................................heluo@syr.edu

MMadonia, Peter (Southern Connecticut State University) ...............................................................................................................madoniap1@southernct.eduMagnus, Brooke (University of Massachusetts Amherst)................................................................................................................. [email protected], Kimberly (James Madison University) .........................................................................................................................................krm.marsh@gmail.comMarx, Helen (Eastern Connecticut State University) ........................................................................................................................... [email protected], Claire (University of Bridgeport) ....................................................................................................................................mastrodance@aol.comMatos Elefonte, Haifa (The College Board) ........................................................................................................................... [email protected], Katherine (University of Kentucky)......................................................................................................................................kmcco2@email.uky.eduMcDermott, Peter (The Sage Colleges)............................................................................................................................................................mcderp@sage.eduMcDermott Fasy, Cara (Rhode Island College) ...............................................................................................................................................mcdermcb@bc.eduMcKillip, Mary (The College Board) .................................................................................................................................................mmckillip@collegeboard.orgMcNamara, Gloria (The Graduate Center of the City University of New York)........................................................................................ [email protected], Steven (Penn State University at Harrisburg)......................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Yu (University of Massachusetts Amherst).................................................................................................................................ymeng@educ.umass.edu



Meyer, Lakeisha (Bucknell University) .......................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Patrick (University of Virginia) .......................................................................................................................................................meyerjp@virginia.eduMichel, Rochelle (Educational Testing Service) ...................................................................................................................................................rmichel@ets.orgMorse, Barbara (North Kingstown School Department) ..................................................................................................................... [email protected], David (University of Connecticut) .................................................................................................................................................david.moss@uconn.eduMullin, Gregory (University of Connecticut) ......................................................................................................................................gregory.mullin@uconn.eduMyers, Joan (James Madison University) .............................................................................................................................................. [email protected]

NNagelsmith, Laurie (Excelsior College) .............................................................................................................................................. [email protected]úñez, Victoria (Brooklyn College, CUNY).........................................................................................................................................vnunez@brooklyn.cuny.eduNovemsky, Lisa (Brooklyn College, CUNY).................................................................................................................................... [email protected]

OOrem, Christopher (James Madison University) .............................................................................................................................................. [email protected]

PPackman, Sheryl (The College Board)..............................................................................................................................................spackman@collegeboard.orgPastor, Dena (James Madison University)...................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Thanos (The College Board).................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Douglas (Rutgers University)................................................................................................................................................. [email protected] Sanello, Miriam (Adelphi University) ................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Christine (Johnson & Wales University) ........................................................................................................................................ [email protected], Darlene (Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania).........................................................................................................................dperner@bloomu.eduPierce, Margaret (University of Massachusetts �– Amherst) ...............................................................................................................mpierce@educ.umass.eduProestler, Nina (Fordham University) .................................................................................................................................................. [email protected]

QQueenan, Margaret Lally (University of Bridgeport) .........................................................................................................................mqueenan@bridgeport.edu

RRamdass, Darshanand (The Graduate Center of the City University of New York) ................................................................................. [email protected], Sheetal (William Paterson University).............................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Tefaya (University of Pennsylvania) .......................................................................................................................................ransomt@gse.upenn.eduRawls, Anita (The College Board) ......................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Gia (Salve Regina University) .......................................................................................................................................................gia.renaud@salve.eduRivela, Catherine (Pace University) ............................................................................................................................................................ [email protected], Phil (Measured Progress) ....................................................................................................................... [email protected], Laura (Right Angle Research) ..................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Diana (Pace University) ............................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Theresa (York College, CUNY) ..................................................................................................................................................trooney@york.cuny.eduRosenfeld, Barbara (Brooklyn College of the City University of New York) ................................................................................... [email protected], Julie (William Paterson University of New Jersey) .................................................................................................................. [email protected], Inna (Brooklyn College, CUNY).........................................................................................................................................inna.rozentsvit@gmail.comRuby, Maureen (Eastern Connecticut State University) ............................................................................................................................ [email protected], Nichole (William Paterson University) ......................................................................................................................................tecnichole@optonline.netRussell, Javarro (James Madison University)................................................................................................................................................... [email protected]

SSargent, Frank A. (Johnson & Wales University) .............................................................................................................................................fsargent@jwu.eduSawyer, Janice (New York Institute of Technology) .......................................................................................................................................jsawye01@nyit.eduSecolsky, Charles (County College of Morris) ............................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Amy (University of Massachusetts Amherst) ................................................................................................................. [email protected], Lynn (Westfield State University) ..................................................................................................................................................lshelley@wsc.ma.eduShultz, Sheila (Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO) ......................................................................................................... [email protected], Stephen G. (University of Massachusetts Amherst) ...................................................................................................................... [email protected], Christina (New York Institute of Technology) ....................................................................................................................................cspathis@nyit.eduStassen, Martha (University of Massachusetts �– Amherst) .............................................................................................................. [email protected], Pamela (Center for Collaborative Education) ............................................................................................................................ [email protected], Candice (Bucknell University) .................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Jonathan (Educational Testing Service)..........................................................................................................................................jsteinberg@ets.orgStivers, Janet (Marist College) ................................................................................................................................................................. [email protected], Elizabeth (Educational Testing Service) ....................................................................................................................................................estone@ets.orgStrickland, Martha (Penn State University at Harrisburg) ................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Linda (SUNY Maritime College) ......................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Florence (University of Massachusetts �– Amherst) ..............................................................................................................fsullivan@educ.umass.eduSweeney, Kevin (The College Board)............................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Peter......................................................................................................................................................................................... [email protected]

TTannahill, Catherine L. (Eastern Connecticut State university) ............................................................................................................ [email protected], Angela (D�’Youville College) ....................................................................................................................................................... [email protected]



Thomas, Bridget (George Mason University)............................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Kelly (University of Connecticut) ............................................................................................................................... [email protected], Jason (University of Massachusetts �– Amherst) ..................................................................................................................... [email protected], Mary (University of Connecticut) ........................................................................................................................................... [email protected]

UVWWalker, Joan (Pace University) ...................................................................................................................................................................walkjoan@gmail.comWalter, Jennifer (Bucknell University) ...................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Xin (Mid continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL)) ..................................................................................................... [email protected], Yuan (Educational Testing Service) ........................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Craig (University of Connecticut) ............................................................................................................................... [email protected], Craig S. (University of Massachusetts Amherst) ........................................................................................................................ [email protected], Barbara (Bloomsburg University) ........................................................................................................................................................bwert@bloomu.eduWestcott, Kim (University at Albany, SUNY) ....................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Hilary (William Paterson University) ................................................................................................................................................ [email protected], Andrew (The College Board) ..................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], David (Educational Testing Service) ..................................................................................................................................... [email protected]

XXing, Liu (Eastern Connecticut State University) ............................................................................................................................................liux@easternct.edu

YYang, Zhitong (Educational Testing Service) .......................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Melda (Kean University) ..................................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Hanwook (University of Massachusetts �– Amherst) .......................................................................................................................... [email protected], Judy (Teachers College Columbia University) ................................................................................................................................... [email protected], Mariya (University of Connecticut) .................................................................................................................... [email protected]

ZZager, Dianne (Pace University) ....................................................................................................................................................................... [email protected], April (University of Massachusetts Amherst) ....................................................................................................................... [email protected], Hongqin (University of Massachusetts Amherst) ................................................................................................................... [email protected], Alison (Connecticut State Department of Education) ...........................................................................................................................alison.zhou@ct.govZhao, Kate Jiarong (Connecticut State Department of Education) ................................................................................................................... [email protected], Anna (James Madison University) .............................................................................................................................................. [email protected]

Conference Overview


Conference Overview

Salon A Salon B Salon C Salon D Hartford Rocky Hill Salon I Salon II Salon III ConnecticutWednesday, October 20th, 2010Registration 9:00 am �– 5:30 pm in the Nutmeg Foyer

10:00 am12:45 pm

Pre conferenceA: NVivo 8 �–Part 1

Pre conferenceB: SurveyDesign &Development

12:00 pm 1:30 pm Lunch on your own. Take advantage of the NERA Deli to pick up a brown bag lunch for $101:30 pm �–3:00 pm

ConcurrentSession 1

NVivo 8 �– Part 2 1.2 Symposium:Toward CollegeReadiness forAll

1.3 WorkingGroupDiscussion:

Techniques andOutcomes ofInternationalCollaborationson CoursesUsingTechnology

1.4 Paper Session:InternationalStudies andComparativeEducation I

1.5 ThemeBased Session:

Ethics Across theCurriculum:Exploration byanInterdisciplinary AcademicCommunity ofInquiry

1.6 PaperSession:

Collaboration,Teaming, andGroup Process

1.7 PaperSession:

Learning andInstruction I

1.8 PaperSession:

Pre ServiceTeachers andAlternativePrograms

3:00 pm 3:15 pm Coffee Break3:15 pm4:45 pm

ConcurrentSession 2

NVivo 8 �– Part 3 2.2 InvitedPanel:

Collaborationand Teaming

2.3 Symposium:PracticalApplications ofSEM

2.4 Symposium:Designing andUsingAssessmentsFormatively:ContemporaryResearch andPractice

2.5 Symposium:SpecialEducation andRehabilitationResearch

2.6 PaperSession:

Computers &Technology inEducation I

2.7 PaperSession:

ProgramEvaluation:Issues andStudies

2.8 PaperSession:

ValidationStudies

MentoringPre arranged

4:45 pm 5:30 pm GSIC Meeting (Lobby Bar) MentoringPre arranged

Round Table forResearch inProgress

Pre arranged5:30 pm 5:45 pm Welcome (Salon I III)5:30 pm 6:45 pm Keynote: Elizabeth Williamson, USDOE (The Quiet Revelation: Driven by a Partnership of Motivated Parents, Teachers, Administrators and Researchers) (Salon I III)6:45 pm 7:45 pm Dinner (Salon I III)

8:00 pm10:00 pm

NERA Welcome ReceptionThe Shilanski Jazz Band

Conference Overview


Salon A Salon B Salon C Salon D Hartford Rocky Hill Salon I Salon II Salon III Connecticut

Thursday, October 21st, 2010Registration 7:00 am �– 11:15 am and 12:30 pm �– 5:15 pm in the Nutmeg Foyer7am 8:30am Breakfast

8:30 am �–10:00 am

ConcurrentSession 3

3.1 InConferenceWorkshop:Collaborationfor ScholarshipResults:Guidelines forMaximizingOutcomes,Enjoyment andLearning

3.2 Symposium:Research onCollege BoardAssessmentsandEducationalInitiatives

3.3 PaperSession:

Issues in PostSecondaryEducation

3.4 PaperSession:

PsychometricIssues I

3.5 Paper Session:CognitiveStrategies inEducation

3.6 PaperSession:

Social Support inEducation andOther SupportMechanisms

3.7 PaperSession:

ValidationStudies �– II

3.8 PaperSession:

AssessmentDesign &InstructionalSensitivity

3.9 No SessionScheduled

3.10 PaperSession:

Teaching &Learning

10:15am 11:15am Poster Session (Salon A �– D) & Coffee Break11:30 am 12:30 pm Keynote: Burke Johnson, University of South Alabama (Can the Philosophy and Practice of Mixed Methodology Help Us Construct a More Inclusive "Education Science"?)(Salon I III)

12:30 pm 1:30 pm Lunch / Awards (Salon I III)2:00 pm3:30 pm

ConcurrentSession 4

4.1 InConferenceWorkshop:MixedMethodsDesign andAnalysis withValidity

4.2 Symposium:Fordham Fiveon Finishingand Further:DissertationResearch Thenand Now


4.4 PaperSession:

CognitiveMethods inAssessmentandAssessmentStrategies

4.5 Paper Session:StudentPopulations withSpecial Needs

4.6 PaperSession:

ParentalInvolvement inEducation


The Conduct ofPostSecondaryEducationalResearch byProfessors ofDifferentDisciplines attheCommunityCollege Level

4.8 PaperSession:

StudentCharacteristicsandExperiences inPost SecondaryEducation

4.9 PaperSession:

Placement &PredictiveValidationStudies

3:30 pm 3:45 pm Coffee Break

Conference Overview


Salon A Salon B Salon C Salon D Hartford Rocky Hill Salon I Salon II Salon III Connecticut3:45 pm5:15 pm

ConcurrentSession 5

5.1 InConferenceWorkshop:Introduction toStructuralEquationModeling

5.2 PaperSession:

PsychometricIssues II

5.3 PaperSession:

Computers &Technology inEducation II

5.4 PaperSession: Non

CognitiveConstructs inEducation

5.5 Invited Panel:Teachers asResearcherAwardPresentation

5.6 PaperSession:

TeachingStrategies

5.7 PaperSession:

StudentMobility

5.8 PaperSession:

Learning andInstruction II


ConductingFocus GroupsforDissertationResearch

5:30 pm 6:45 pm Graduate Student Issues Committee Special Session: Seven Years, Five Career Paths: Successes and Lessons Learned (Salon B)7:00 pm 7:45 pm Dinner (Salon I III)7:45 pm 8:30 pm Presidential Address: Katharyn Nottis, Bucknell University (Looking through the Prism of Research Partnerships) & Awards (Salon I III)8:30 pm 10:30 pm President's Reception where research partnerships can be made�– The Messickists and Distractors in live performances

Friday, October 22nd, 2010Registration 8:00 am �– 12:15 pm in the Nutmeg Foyer7:30 am 9:00 am Breakfast (provided by hotel)8:00 am 9:00 am NERA Business Meeting. All are welcome! This is a working breakfast meeting, so feel free to bring food from the buffet into the meeting.

9am10:30am

ConcurrentSession 6


6.2 InvitedPanel:

Beyond"Perform andConform:"Earning Tenurein Today'sAcademy


DevelopingEngagedScholars:IdentifyingLeadershipCompetenciesforCommunityBasedParticipatoryResearch

6.4 PaperSession:

Post SecondaryLearning andIssues

6.5 Symposium:PsychometricIssues �– III



6.8 PaperSession:

Large ScaleTesting Issues

6.9 InvitedSession:

Common Coreand StateStandards

(9am �– 11am)

10:30am 10:45am Coffee Break10:45am12:15pm

ConcurrentSession 7


7.2 PaperSession:

Scale /InstrumentDevelopment

7.3 PaperSession:

PsychometricIssues IV

7.4 GSICSponsoredSession:

PracticalApplications ofAdvancedMeasurementand StatisticalMethods

7.5 Paper Session:Assessment andLearning ofMathematics

7.6 PaperSession:

Pre ServiceTeachers

12:15pm 1:15pm Lunch

Conference Overview


Hartford Marriott Rocky Hill Meeting Space

NERA 2010: Building Research Partnerships Inside Back Cover

Hartford Marriott Rocky Hill Meeting Space

The Connecticut Room is located on the second floor of the Marriott. To access the Connecticut Room, take the elevatorslocated adjacent to the lobby to the second floor and follow the signage.

to Lobby

Grand Ballroom

Salon II

Salon A Salon B

Salon C Salon D

HartfordRoom

Rocky HillRoom Salon I

Nutmeg Ballroom

Nutmeg Foyer

Registration

Back Cover Schedule At A Glance

NERA �’10: Building Research Partnerships

NERA Conference 2010: Schedule At A Glance

Salon A Salon B Salon C Salon D Hartford Rocky Hill Salon I Salon II Salon III Connecticut

Wednesday, October 2010:00 �– 4:45 Pre Conference Workshops Precon A Precon B

12:45 �– 1:30 Lunch (The NERA Deli)

1:30 �– 3:00 Concurrent Session 1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8

3:00 �– 3:15 Coffee Break

3:15 �– 4:45 Concurrent Session 2 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 Mentoring

4:45 �– 5:30 GSIC Meeting (Lobby Bar) Mentoring Round Table

5:30 �– 6:45 Welcome and Keynote

6:45 �– 7:45 Dinner

8:00 �– 10:00 NERA Welcome Reception TheShilanski Jazz Band

Thursday, October 217:00 �– 8:30 Breakfast

8:30 �– 10:00 Concurrent Session 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.10

10:15 �– 11:15 The NERA Poster Session Poster Poster Poster Poster

11:30 �– 12:30 Keynote

12:30 �– 1:30 Lunch & Awards




5:30 �– 6:45 Graduate Student Panel

7:00 �– 7:45 Dinner

7:45 �– 8:30 Presidential Address / Awards

8:30 �– 10:30 Presidential Reception �– TheMessickists and Distractors

Friday, October 227:30 �– 9:00 Breakfast

8:00 �– 9:00 NERA Business Meeting

9:00 �– 10:30 Concurrent Session 6 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.8 6.9


10:45 �– 12:15 Concurrent Session 7 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.712:15 �– 1:15 Lunch

nera 2010 printed program book 10-13-10 final with …€¦ · these in rconference workshop are...

Documents