可访问性工具在低风险计算机数学考试中的使用预测

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
S. Witmer, Emily C. Bouck
{"title":"可访问性工具在低风险计算机数学考试中的使用预测","authors":"S. Witmer, Emily C. Bouck","doi":"10.1177/15345084231152477","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One perceived advantage of computer-based testing is that accessibility tools can be embedded within the testing format, allowing students with disabilities to use them when necessary to remove unique barriers within testing. However, an important assumption is that students activate and use the tools when needed. Initial data from large-scale computer-based testing suggest many students with disabilities are not using them; information is needed to understand why. Both computer skills and motivation are likely necessary for students to use accessibility tools; therefore, we explored whether prior computer use, math motivation, and test motivation predicted accessibility tool use on a national math test. We further explored the relationship between accessibility tool use and test performance. Accessibility tool use was relatively infrequent. Test motivation was weakly associated with text-to-speech use. Use of eliminate choice and scratchwork tools were weakly associated with performance. When combined with related empirical work, findings suggest a potential need to improve student test motivation and corresponding use of accessibility tools to improve validity of low-stakes test scores. However, given the weak relationships identified between tool use and performance, evidence-based math interventions are anticipated to be more helpful for improving math performance than mere promotion of accessibility tool use.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Predictors of Accessibility Tool Use on a Low-Stakes Computer-Based Math Test\",\"authors\":\"S. Witmer, Emily C. Bouck\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15345084231152477\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"One perceived advantage of computer-based testing is that accessibility tools can be embedded within the testing format, allowing students with disabilities to use them when necessary to remove unique barriers within testing. However, an important assumption is that students activate and use the tools when needed. Initial data from large-scale computer-based testing suggest many students with disabilities are not using them; information is needed to understand why. Both computer skills and motivation are likely necessary for students to use accessibility tools; therefore, we explored whether prior computer use, math motivation, and test motivation predicted accessibility tool use on a national math test. We further explored the relationship between accessibility tool use and test performance. Accessibility tool use was relatively infrequent. Test motivation was weakly associated with text-to-speech use. Use of eliminate choice and scratchwork tools were weakly associated with performance. When combined with related empirical work, findings suggest a potential need to improve student test motivation and corresponding use of accessibility tools to improve validity of low-stakes test scores. However, given the weak relationships identified between tool use and performance, evidence-based math interventions are anticipated to be more helpful for improving math performance than mere promotion of accessibility tool use.\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15345084231152477\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15345084231152477","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

基于计算机的测试的一个明显优势是,无障碍工具可以嵌入测试格式中,让残疾学生在必要时使用它们来消除测试中的独特障碍。然而,一个重要的假设是,学生在需要时激活并使用这些工具。大规模计算机测试的初步数据表明,许多残疾学生没有使用它们;需要了解原因的信息。学生使用无障碍工具可能需要计算机技能和动机;因此,我们探讨了先前的计算机使用、数学动机和测试动机是否预测了国家数学测试中可访问工具的使用。我们进一步探讨了可访问性工具的使用与测试性能之间的关系。可访问性工具的使用相对较少。测试动机与语篇转换使用的相关性较弱。使用淘汰选择和scratchwork工具与性能的相关性较弱。当与相关的实证研究相结合时,研究结果表明,可能需要提高学生的考试动机,并相应地使用可访问性工具来提高低风险考试成绩的有效性。然而,鉴于工具使用和绩效之间的薄弱关系,基于证据的数学干预措施预计比仅仅促进无障碍工具的使用更有助于提高数学绩效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Predictors of Accessibility Tool Use on a Low-Stakes Computer-Based Math Test
One perceived advantage of computer-based testing is that accessibility tools can be embedded within the testing format, allowing students with disabilities to use them when necessary to remove unique barriers within testing. However, an important assumption is that students activate and use the tools when needed. Initial data from large-scale computer-based testing suggest many students with disabilities are not using them; information is needed to understand why. Both computer skills and motivation are likely necessary for students to use accessibility tools; therefore, we explored whether prior computer use, math motivation, and test motivation predicted accessibility tool use on a national math test. We further explored the relationship between accessibility tool use and test performance. Accessibility tool use was relatively infrequent. Test motivation was weakly associated with text-to-speech use. Use of eliminate choice and scratchwork tools were weakly associated with performance. When combined with related empirical work, findings suggest a potential need to improve student test motivation and corresponding use of accessibility tools to improve validity of low-stakes test scores. However, given the weak relationships identified between tool use and performance, evidence-based math interventions are anticipated to be more helpful for improving math performance than mere promotion of accessibility tool use.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信