A cross sectional exploratory study of the New York state global history/geography regents, 2001-2007.

摘要

The purpose of this cross-sectional, exploratory study is to better understand after years of testing (2001--2007) the Global History and Geography Regents Exam how students are performing throughout the state and in selected geographical/economic regions of New York State. Through the converging of both quantitative data provided by the New York State Education Department and qualitative analysis of the scoring conversion chart used to convert raw scores to percentage evaluations of the Regents Exam this cross-sectional, exploratory study created qualitative guiding questions for future research.;Historically New York State has been using the Regents Exam as a measure of curricular mastery for student achievement since 1865. Using the backdrop of increasing Federal involvement in education and the recent reform trends put forth by both the Federal Government and the University of the State of New York the researcher develops the context for this cross-sectional, exploratory study.;The passing rate of "All Students" in New York State has declined significantly from 2001 to 2007; Students With Disabilities, who have lower percentages of students who receive passing grades, have a statistical stagnation in terms of passing rate from 2001--2007. Further study of schools who are classified as having "middle level of student needs" from four distinctly different socio-economic/geographical areas reveal below average to average performance levels of students from the "All Student" and "Students With Disabilities" categories. Most disturbing is the performance of New York City Schools and Urban Schools (exclusive of New York City Schools) whose students underperformed the other selected grouped schools (suburban and rural) especially within the "Students With Disabilities" categories.;The scoring of the Global History/Geography Regents Exam has been under attack throughout its existence. Many question how the test design can perform two distinctly different purposes of measuring standards acquisition and ranking the achievement. In analyzing the annually different scoring charts it becomes apparent that there is a built in scoring error margin built in to the conversion chart thus making it extremely difficult to quantify the difference in percentage scoring within the four major scoring levels used to assess standards competency.;The result of the study is to provide qualitative guiding questions for future research that could help quantify and explain some of the variables that account for the declining and stagnating performances by New York State students on the Global History/Geography Regents Exam.