Stanford Achievement Test—8th Edition: Reading Comprehension Subgroup Results

Stanford Achievement Test—8th Edition Stanford Achievement Test—8th Edition: Reading Comprehension Subgroup Results Judith A. Holt The following pages contain a set of five graphs depicting the median scaled scores and corresponding grade equivalents (GEs) on the 8th Edition Stanford Achievement Test (SAT-8) Reading Comprehension subtest for various groups of deaf and hard of hearing students. The median scores used in these graphs were extracted from a series of special decile norms computed for the population of deaf and hard of hearing students in the United States during a special achievement test project conducted by the Center for Assessment and Demographic Studies (CADS). Since this population is heterogeneous with respect to various demographic, audiological, and educational characteristics, misconceptions could occur when interpreting the scores of individual students. For example, if a particular student has handicaps in addition to hearing impairment , it may not be useful to compare that student to the entire population of deaf and hard of hearing students. An individual student may also belong to more than one relevant group. Thus, it is appropriate at times to use more than one set of group norms when interpreting a score (e.g., handicap status norms, ethnic group norms, and program type norms). A complete listing of the special group norms is available in: Holt, J. A., Traxler, C. B., local schools, minimal or no classroom integration with hearing students; and local schools, integrated with hearing students . Figure 3 compares students at three levels of hearing loss: profound loss, severe loss, and less-than-severe loss. Figure 4 compares students in three ethnic groups: White, non-Hispanic; Black, non-Hispanic; and Hispanic. Figure 5 compares students who have one or more reported additional educationally relevant handicapping conditions (AHC) with those who have none. The Holt, Traxler, and Allen (1992) report, noted above, also includes decile norms by geographic region. However, since there are only slight differences in scores among the regions, graphs for these norms are not included here. Stanford Achievement Test—8th Edition Figure 1. SAT-8 Reading Comprehension Median Scaled Scores Figure 2. SAT-8 Reading Comprehension Median Scaled Scores, by Program Type 700 675 650 625 600 S 575 o 550 525 -f 500â– / 475 450 425 400 .1990NormingSample(N=6¿73) (Deaf & Hard of Hearing Students) 10 -Γ 11 —Γ 12 —ι— 13 Age 14 15 16 17 18 O i. 8· w Ã700 675 650 625 4 600 A S 575 O g550 •S 5525 500 A 475 H 450 H 425 400 10 11 12 —ι— 13 Age —Γ- Η 15 16 17 18 I S* m % < § Thisgraphcontainsmedianscoresforhearingstudentsonly throughage15.Hearingstudentsareautomaticallyassignedtothe testlevelsbasedontheirgradeinschool.Thecurriculumgrade levelsmeasuredbytheSAT-8rangefromalowof1.5(middleof thefirstgrade)onthePrimary1testtoahighof9-9(endofthe ninthgrade)ontheAdvanced2test.Therefore,hearingstudents age16andolderwouldbebeyondthegradelevelsforwhichthe test was designed. Typically, development of deaf and hard of hearing students' achievement skills occurs at different rates than for hearing students (and occurs unevenly in different subject areas). Rather than being assigned test levels based on age or grade in school, the students in the norming sample were assigned test levels according to screening procedures recommended by CADS. Alaginthereadingachievementofdeafandhardofhearing students is indicated in this graph. Their highest median scaled score is 619 at age 17 (with a corresponding GE of 4.5). The median scaled score for deaf and hard of hearing students is higher at age 17 than at age 18. This is due to the fact that higher achieving 18-year-olds have graduated or are performing at a level beyond that measured by the SAT-8. In addition, students with additional educationally relevant handicapping condition(s) are more likely to be taking the SAT8 at age 18 (see Figure 5). Students in special school programs, both residential and day, scored significantly lower than students in integrated local school programs, but significantly higher than those in non-integrated localschoolprograms.Thehighestmedianscaledscoresare:643 (with a GE of 5.7) for integrated local school programs, 609 (with a GE of 3-8) for special school programs, and 584 (with a GE of 2.8)fornon-integratedlocalschoolprograms. While 55% of the students with severe or profound hearing losses were in special schools, 51% of those with less-than-severe losses were in local schools and were integrated with hearing students 6 or more hours per week. This is consistent with the finding that students with less-than-severe hearing losses scored significantly higher than those with severe or profound losses (see Figure 3). Within local schools, only 30% of the students in minority groups were integrated 6 or more hours per week, compared to 58% of the White students. This coincides with the finding that White students scored significantly higher than minority students (see Figure 4). Among the students in local schools with a cognitive handicap (i.e.,emotional/behavioralproblemorlearningdisability),the majority (61%) were in self-contained classrooms with no integration . This also corroborates the finding that students with additional educationally relevant handicapping condition(s) scored significantly lower than those with only hearing impairment (see Figure 5). Caution must be observed when drawing conclusions from these results. It is not known whether students achieve more due to integration or whether students are selected for integration based on their higher achievement levels. Stanford Achievement Test—8th Edition Figure 3. SAT-8 Reading Comprehension Median Scaled Scores, by Level of Hearing Loss Figure 4. SAT-8 Reading Comprehension Median Scaled Scores, by Ethnicity 700 675 650 625 600 B 575 O O «550 â–i 3 525 CO 500 475 450 425 400 1J 10 11 12 —T13 Age 14 15 16 17 18 I ! 700 675 650 625 600 2 575 o 550 H 525 -1 500 475 450 425 400 10 11 12 13 Age 14 15 16 17 18 Õ W I Thisgraphshowsarelationshipbetweenreadingcomprehensionscoresandlevelofhearingloss ,consistentacrossagegroups. Studentswithaless-than-severehearinglossscoredsignificantly higherthanstudentswithasevereloss,whoalsoscoredsignifi- cantlyhigherthanthosewithaprofoundloss.Thehighestme- dianscaledscoresare:637(withaGEof5-4)forstudentswitha less-than-severeloss,621(withaGEof4.5)forstudentswitha severeloss,and608(withaGEof38)forstudentswithaprofoundloss . Students with less-than severe losses were those most likely to be enrolled in integrated local school programs, where the level of reading achievement was highest (see Figure 2). White students scored significantly higher than Black or Hispanic students. The highest median scaled scores are: 637 (with a GE of 5.4) for White, non-Hispanic students, 605 (with a GE of 3.6) for Black, non-Hispanic students, and 581 (with a GE of 2.7) for Hispanic students. Minoritystudentsweremostlikelytobeenrolledinnon-integrated local school programs, where the level of reading achievement was lowest (see Figure 2). There is, in general, a high correlation between ethnic group membership and socioeconomic status. However, the data base used in this study does not contain any direct measure of socioeconomic status. It is possible that socioeconomic status had a significant effect on achievement and that ethnic group membership served as a surrogate. Stanford Achievement Test—8th Edition Figure 5. SAT-8 Reading Comprehension Median Scaled Scores, by Presence of Additional Educationally Relevant Handicap(s) Studentswithreportedadditionaleducationallyrelevant handicappingcondition(s)(AHC)scoredsignificantlylower thanthosewithnoadditionalhandicaps.Thehighestmedian scaled scores are: 626 (with a GE of 4.8) for students without additional handicaps and 592 (with a GE of 30) for those with additional handicaps. Students with a cognitive handicap (i.e., emotional/behavioral problem or learning disability) were most likely to be enrolled in non-integratedlocalschoolprograms,wherethelevelofreading achievement was lowest (see Figure 2). ...