1 / 15

Mini Project I--Evaluation of a Standardized Test

Mini Project I--Evaluation of a Standardized Test. By Marcia Luebbe. California Achievement Tests, Fifth Edition. Published by CTBS Macmillan/McGraw Hill 1992 $90.30 for 30 third-graders, using consumable books Requires 330 minutes to administer. Description of Purpose and Nature of Test.

damisi
Download Presentation

Mini Project I--Evaluation of a Standardized Test

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mini Project I--Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe

  2. California Achievement Tests, Fifth Edition • Published by CTBS Macmillan/McGraw Hill • 1992 • $90.30 for 30 third-graders, using consumable books • Requires 330 minutes to administer

  3. Description of Purpose and Nature of Test • “Designed to measure achievement in the basic skills taught in schools throughout the nation” • Applicable for Kindergarten through Twelfth grades

  4. Content/Appropriateness • Basic skills K-12 • Complete Battery: Reading, Language, Spelling, Math, Study Skills, Science, Social Studies • Basic Battery: Reading, Language, Spelling, Math, Study Skills • Survey • Performance Component

  5. Content/Appropriateness • Review by Bruce G. Rogers, UNI, Cedar Falls, IA • “Well-developed achievement series whose authors are responsive to suggestions for improvement • “Suitable for schools that emphasize the ‘three R’s’ across the curriculum” • Grade 9 assessment may have questionable appropriateness • 12 to 25 constructed response items per subject

  6. Content and Appropriateness • Review by Victor Willson, Texas A&M, College Station, TX • “As good as any norm-reference multi-level basic skills test” • K-1 tends to be give somewhat poor results • “Good, interpretable test”

  7. Technical Evaluation • Types: • Objective Mastery • Grade Equivalent (also Grade Mean Equivalent) • National Percentile (also Median National Percentile) • Number-Correct Score • National Stanine (also Mean National Stanine) • Scale Score (also Mean Scale Score) • Normal Curve Equivalent (also Mean Normal Curve Equivalent)

  8. Standardization Sample • Spring 1991 • 115,888 students • K-12, geographic groupings • 734 Schools responded to questionnaire • 261 Public Schools, 112 Private/Parochial Schools, all volunteer • Fall 1991 • 109,825 • K-12 • 265 Public Schools, 96 Private/Parochial Schools

  9. Factors Considered • Microcomputers in home • Average annual teaching salary • Mobility • Ethnic • ELL • Working parents • Single-parent homes • Number of children in family • %-age of students receiving ADC • Parent Jobs • Parent Education

  10. Judges--Three Groups • Bias--41 reviewers, ethnic balance • Content--20 content and curriculum specialists • Teachers--17 at appropriate grade levels

  11. Reliability • KR20 • Split-half coefficients • Conclusion: .94 - .98 on total battery, spring, fall, and winter

  12. Validity • Item-by-item bias • Ethnic • Black • Hispanic • Other • Gender • Results: “little evidence of biases”

  13. Summary • Anthony J. Nitko, University of Pittsburgh • Strong assessment tool • Be careful about educational decisions for individuals • CHECK YOUR CURRICULUM FOR ALIGNMENT. The CAT5 matches most 1980’s curriculums, changes may (and should) have been made to curriculum since 1980.

  14. Summary • Robert F. McMorris, EdPsych/Stats, State Univ. of New York, and others • “New-questions” sentiment • Great effort to follow curriculum • CTB provides terrific assistance • Fairly small number of items per objective

  15. Summary • Marcia Luebbe, Curriculum Director and Educator, Pierce Public Schools • Good tool • Easy for teachers to interpret • Some concern with support personnel

More Related