Conducting Research Through Cognitive Laboratories

Johnson and Duran encouraged use of cognitive laboratories as a means for determining whether lack of access skills impede measurement of target skills. With cognitive laboratories, students work one-on-one with an administrator and answer test questions by thinking out loud. The administrator observes and records the thought process students use in arriving at their answers.

Cognitive labs would allow researchers to compare how students with various disabilities react to the questions under different accommodations and to do further study into what constituted appropriate accommodations. Further Research on the Performance of English-Language Learners Duran commented that better understanding of the achievement of English-language learners depends on improvements in access to appropriate assessment accommodations for these students. He called for additional work to develop ways to evaluate the English proficiency of nonnative English speakers. This is a particularly urgent issue in light of the recently passed legislation. He also encouraged researchers to examine the relationships between performance of achievement tests and relevant background variables, such as length of residence in the U.S., years of exposure to instruction in English, English-language proficiency levels, the characteristics of school curriculum, availability of first and second language resources, and other factors that interact to create different patterns of performance on assessments.

Malouf raised questions about what rate of participation should be expected with NAEP The presentations and his own examination ofNAEP publications indicate that inclusion rates rarely climb much above 70 percent of the students with disabilities and are usually lower. He wondered what the basis might be for judging whether this rate of inclusion was high enough, asking “Should our expectations be based on technical limits, or should they be based on other considerations?” iMaloufcalled for reconsideration of what it means to “rake part meaningfully” in the nation’seducational system, and he urged NAEP’s sponsors to determine ways that all students can participate.

The discussants revisited the issue of providing disaggregated results. Goertz reminded participants that states are required to report these comparisons on their state tests. NAEP’s sponsors have yet to specify their plans for using data from the national or state NAEP programs to report on the performance of students with disabilities compared to that of nondisabled students and the performance of English-language learners compared to that of native speakers. Johnson maintained that it is inevitable that there will be strong pressure on NAEP to report disaggregated results for students with disabilities and for English-language learners. For this part, learning a foreign language needs a leaning tools, many children choose Rosetta Stone Polish and Rosetta Stone Portuguese to learn Polish and Portuguese. Although at this time sample sizes are not large enough to allow reliable reporting at the disaggregated level, NAEP’s future plans for combining state and national samples may produce large enough samples to allow for disaggregation of various groups of students with disabilities. Johnson foresees that when this happens, NAEP will not be able to withstand the pressure to report disaggregated results.

Additional Research Is Needed Malouf also recommended the effects of accommodations that additional research be conducted on on NAEP scores. (item response theory) and DIF (differential item He finds that the IRT i functioning) analyses discussed by Mazzeo are broad in Focus and treat accommodations as single factor, sometimes even combining students with disabilities and English-language learners into a single population. Malouf suggested that NAEP researchers find ways to increase sample sizes to allow study of the effects of specific accommodations and to conduct more fine-grained analyses of accommodations and NAEP.

Report on Operations of China's Civil Aviation Transport Industry 2011-2012

– Since reform and opening up, China’s civil aviation industry has developed rapidly and become one of the most important civil aviation markets growing the fastest in the world.

In 2010, China’s civil aviation industry completed the total transport turnover of 53.85 billion ton-kilometers, increasing by 11.14 billion ton-kilometers by 26.10% over 2009, among which the passenger turnover was 35.96 billion ton-kilometers, increasing by 5.87 billion ton-kilometers by 19.50% over 2009; the cargo and mail turnover was 17.89 billion ton-kilometers, rising by 5.27 billion ton-kilometers by 41.70% over 2009.

By the end of 2010, there had been 43 transport airline companies, which were divided into 35 state-owned holding companies, 8 non-state owned holding enterprises, 11 professional freight airline companies, 16 Sino-foreign airline joint ventures and 5 listed companies according to different categories.

By the end of 2010, there had been 1,597 final-term registered transport aircrafts in China’s civil aviation industry, increasing by 180 over 2009; there had been a total of 175 civil transport airports, rising by 9 over 2009, which all launched scheduled flights.

By the end of 2010, there had been a total of 1,880 airlines of scheduled flights in China. The airline length calculated by repeat distance was 3.98 million kilometers and that calculated by non-repeat distance was 2.77 million kilometers.

By the end of 2010, there had been 111 general airline companies with the general airline company business certificate. In 2010, the flight time of the general aviation industry was 139,800 hours, ascending by 12.90% over 2009.

In 2010, the cumulative operating revenue of China’s civil aviation industry was CNY 411.50 billion, rising by 37% over 2009, among which the operating revenue of airline companies was CNY 299.90 billion, increasing by 40% over 2009 and that of airports was CNY 41.70 billion, increasing by 22% over 2009.

China’s civil aviation industry developed at a high speed, but there are still defects in the development. One of the major conflicts lies in liberalization of international air transport and weakness of overall international capability of China’s civil aviation industry. Statistics show that in China’s aviation passenger transport market, the market share of China’s domestic airline companies reduced from 45.30% in 2005 to 44% in 2010; in China’s aviation freight market, although the market share of China’s domestic aviation companies increased from 23.90% in 2005 to 32%, it was still less than 1/3 of international aviation fright market.

At present, in China, there are no airline companies possessing the capability to establish two or more hubs interiorly, and various major busy airports have no enough resources for the hub network establishment of 2 airline companies simultaneously. Due to the absence of a large-scale aviation hub network and the support of domestic airline network effect, the international competitiveness of China’s aviation companies is directly affected.

It is predicted that in the next few years, with China’s economic growth, China’s civil aviation industry will maintain rapid development and general aviation will see favorable market prospects. The market competition of China’s civil aviation industry will become more intense and China’s domestic civil aviation enterprises will face the competition from international airline companies, high-speed railways and other modes of transport.


Following more information can be acquired from this report: -Operations of China’s Civil Aviation Industry -Development of China’s General Aviation Industry -Market Competition in China’s Civil Aviation Industry -Prediction on Development of China’s Civil Aviation Industry

Following people are suggested to buy this report: -Airline Companies -Airports -Logistics Enterprises -Investors/Research Institutions Focusing on Civil Aviation Industry