Reports/Publications

ONPAR

Carr, T. G. & Kopriva, R.J. (2013). Greater than the sum of its parts: Theoretical and conceptual underpinnings of the ONPAR methodology for conveying meaning through multiple, multi-semiotic representations.

Kopriva, R.J. (2013). The ONPAR methodology teachers can use in classrooms: Why and how it seems to work for measuring challenging content for ELs with English proficiency challenges.

Kopriva, R.J., Winter, P.C., Triscari, R., & Carr, T.G., Cameron, C., & Gabel, D. (2013). Assessing the knowledge, skills, and abilities of ELs, selected SwDs and controls on challenging high school science content: Results from randomized trials of ONPAR and technology-enhanced traditional end-of-course biology and chemistry tests.

Wright, L.J., Staehr-Fenner, D., Moxley, K., Kopriva, R.J., & Carr, T.G. (2013). Exploring how diverse learners interact with computerized, multi-semiotic representations of meaning: Highlights from cognitive labs conducted with ONPAR end-of-course biology and chemistry assessment tasks.

Kopriva, R.J., Carr, T.G., Gabel, D., & Cameron, C. (2011). Improving the validity of mathematics results for students with learning disabilities in reading and other SwDs who struggle with language and literacy: Findings from the ONPAR elementary and middle school mathematics experimental study.

Wright, L.J., Kopriva, R.J., & Carr, T.G. (2011) ONPAR elementary and middle school mathematics cognitive lab results: How students interact with traditional and dynamic assessment tasks with novel features.

Logan-Terry, A., & Wright, L. J. (2010). Making thinking visible: An analysis of English language learners’ interactions with access-based science assessment items. AccELLerate!, 2(4), 11–14.

Kopriva, R.J. (2009). Assessing the skills and abilities in math and science of ELs with low English proficiency: A promising new method. AccELLerate!, 2(1), 7–10.

Kopriva, R.J., Gabel, D., and Cameron, C. (2009). Overview of results from the ONPAR elementary and middle school science experimental study with ELs and non-ELs: A promising new approach for measuring complex content knowledge of English learners with lower proficiency levels.

Wright, L.J., & Kopriva, R.J. (2009). Using cognitive labs to refine technology-enhanced assessment tasks and ensure their accessibility: Insights from data collected to inform ONPAR elementary and middle school science task development.

Related Topics

Accessible Item and Test Development

Cawthon, S., Leppo, R., Carr, T.G., & Kopriva, R.J. (2013, in press). Towards accessible assessments: The promises and limitations of test item adaptations for students with disabilities and English language learners. Educational Assessment.

Kopriva, R.J. (2013) Second-generation challenges for EL content-assessment accessibility researchers.

Kopriva R.J. & Albers, C. (2013, in press). Considerations of achievement testing for students with individual needs. APA handbook of testing and assessment in psychology.

Shaw, J., Abedi, J, and Kopriva (2013). The future of content assessment. Accepted for special issue of Educational Assessment.

Kopriva, R.J. & Winter, P.C. (2012). Designing a cognitive skills framework for item development.

Carr, T.G. & Kopriva, R.J. (2008). Digging deeper: Using expert reviews of distractor distributions for parallel test item dyads to analyze effective and ineffective item characteristics for English learners, students with learning disabilities, and students who are deaf/hard-of-hearing.

Kopriva, R.J. (2008). Getting started: Issues of participation, alignment and validating access with test specifications (pp. 67-81). In R.J. Kopriva, Improving testing for English language learners. New York, NY: Routledge Publishers.

Kopriva, R.J. (2008). Improving testing for English language learners: A comprehensive approach to designing, building, implementing, and interpreting better academic assessments. New York, NY: Routledge Publishers.

Kopriva, R.J. (2000). Ensuring accuracy in testing for ELLs. Washington, D.C.: Council of Chief State School Officers.

Classroom Assessment of English Learners

August D., Valdez, G., Heritage, M., Herman, J., Kopriva, R.J. & Bailey, A. (2013). Instructional strategies and tools for teaching and assessing ELs in classrooms. Accepted for special issue of Educational Assessment.

Kopriva R.J. & Sexton, U. (2011). Using appropriate assessment processes in the classroom: How to get accurate information about the academic knowledge and skills of English language learners. In M. del Rosario-Basterra, E. Trumbull, & G. Solano-Flores (Eds.), Cultural validity in assessment: Addressing linguistic and cultural diversity. New York, NY: Routledge Publishers.

Kopriva, R.J. (2010). Classroom assessment of ELs in content areas: What to consider and how to do it (Part 1). AccELLerate!, 3(1), 2–4.

Kopriva, R.J. (2010). Getting down to the nitty gritty: Making content assessment work for ELs in classrooms (Part 2).

Differential Accommodations Assignment

Carr, T.G. & Kopriva, R.J. (2009). It’s about time: Matching English learners and the ways they take tests by using an online tool to properly address individual needs.

Kopriva, R.J. & Koran, J. (2008). Proper assignment of accommodations to individual students. In R.J. Kopriva, Improving testing for English language learners (pp. 221-258). New York, NY: Routledge Publishers.

Kopriva, R.J., Emick, J.E., Hipolito-Delgado, C.P., & Cameron, C.A. (2007). Do proper accommodations assignments make a difference? Examining the impact of improved decision-making on scores for English language learners. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26(3), 11-20.

Kopriva, R.J., Koran, J. and Hedgspeth, C. (2007). Addressing the importance of systematically matching student needs and test accommodations. In C. Cahalan-Laitusis & L.L. Cook (Eds.), Large-Scale assessment and accommodations: What works? Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.

Scoring Practices

Kopriva, R.J. & Sexton, U. (1999). Guide to scoring LEP student responses to open-ended science items. Washington, D.C.: Council of Chief State School Officers: Council of Chief State School Officers. 

Kopriva, R.J. & Lara, J. (1997). Scoring English language learners' papers more accurately. In Y.S. George and V.V. Van Horne (Eds.), Science education reform for all: Sustaining the science, mathematics, and technology education reform. Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Kopriva, R.J. & Saez, S. (1997). Guide to scoring LEP student responses to open-ended mathematics items. Washington, D.C.: Council of Chief State School Officers.

Koran, J. & Kopriva, R.J. (2006). Teacher and STELLA assignment of test accommodations for English language learners: Does it work?

Policy Issues

Kopriva, R.J., & Lara, J. (2009). Looking back and looking forward: Inclusion of all students in the National Assessment of Educational Progress. National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) Historical Paper commissioned for National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) 20th Anniversary Conference. Washington, DC. http://www.nagb.org/who-we-are/board-anniv.html#his-papers

Kopriva, R.J. (2008). Getting started: Issues of participation, alignment and validating access  with test specifications (pp. 67-81). In R.J. Kopriva, Improving testing for English language learners. New York, NY: Routledge Publishers.

Rigney, S.L., Wiley, D.E., & Kopriva, R.J. (2008). The past as preparation: Measurement, public policy and implications for access. In R.J. Kopriva, Improving testing for English language learners (pp. 39-66). New York, NY: Routledge Publishers.

Technical Considerations

Kopriva, R.J. (2010). Where are we and where could we go next? In P.C. Winter (Ed.), Evaluating the comparability of scores from achievement test variations. Washington, D.C.: Council of Chief State School Officers.

Kopriva, R.J. (2008). Selected technical considerations. In R.J. Kopriva, Improving testing for English language learners (pp. 283-322).New York, NY: Routledge Publishers

Kopriva, R.J., Cameron, C.A., Taylor, M., & Carr, T.G.  (2008). The limits of DIF for Special populations: Why this item evaluation tool is flawed for English learners, students with learning disabilities, and students who are deaf/hard-of-hearing.

Kopriva, R.J., Wiley, D.E., & Winter, P. C. (2006). Analyzing change in skill complexity using specially constructed test scores.

Testing Students with Disabilities

Cawthon, S., Leppo, R. Carr, T., & Kopriva, R. (in press, 2013). Towards accessible assessments: The promises and limitations of test item adaptations for students with disabilities and English language learners. Educational Assessment.

Kopriva, R.J., Carr, T., Gabel, D., & Cameron, C. (2011). Improving the validity of mathematics results for students with learning disabilities in reading and other SwDs who struggle with language and literacy: Findings from the ONPAR elementary and middle school mathematics experimental study.

Carr, T. & Kopriva, R.J. (2008). Digging deeper: Using expert reviews of distractor distributions for parallel test item dyads to analyze effective and ineffective item characteristics for English learners, students with learning disabilities, and students who are deaf/hard-of-hearing.

Technology

Kopriva, (2013). The ups and downs of using technology to assess ELs.