1 / 7

Beyond Peer Review: Developing and Validating 21st-Century Assessment Systems

Beyond Peer Review: Developing and Validating 21st-Century Assessment Systems. El len Forte , edCount, LLC Les Morse , Alaska Department of Education & Early Development Steve Sireci , UMass-Amherst Michael Hock , Vermont Agency of Education Thanos Patelis , Center for Assessment

rogan-rich
Download Presentation

Beyond Peer Review: Developing and Validating 21st-Century Assessment Systems

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. Beyond Peer Review: Developing and Validating 21st-Century Assessment Systems Ellen Forte, edCount, LLC Les Morse, Alaska Department of Education & Early Development Steve Sireci, UMass-Amherst Michael Hock, Vermont Agency of Education Thanos Patelis, Center for Assessment Kristen Huff, New York Regents Research Fund Six 10-minute presentations followed by a 30-minute discussion period National Conference on Student AssessmentNew Orleans, LA June 25, 2014

  2. An Overview ofFederal Peer Review of States’ Systems of Standards and Assessments Ellen Forte, Ph.D.CEO and Chief Scientist, edCount, LLC Presentation at the National Conference on Student AssessmentNew Orleans, LA June 25, 2014

  3. History: IASA • OESE reached out to members of the CCSSO Title I SCASS in 1998 to draft peer review guidance under the 1994 Improving America’s Schools Act • This guidance was used to review states’ standards, assessment, and accountability systems beginning in 1999 • Only about 1/3 of states had systems that met basic requirements for assessments in math and reading/language arts in the grade ranges • Major problem areas: • Alignment • Alternate Assessments

  4. History: NCLB • OESE convened two small groups of consultants to draft two guidance documents: • Standards and Assessments • Accountability • The Standards and Assessments peer review process took the same form as had been used under IASA: centralized review by panels of 3-4 ‘peers’ • For the Accountability peer review process, peers and feds traveled to each state

  5. Criteria – the peer review guidance ESEA legislation Joint Standards Reliable and Valid Structure

  6. Process

  7. Concerns • The US Department of Education is obligated to ensure that states’ systems meet federal mandates, but who in that agency is qualified to or should make judgments about validity? • States’ experiences varied widely depending on the peers and the federal program officer assigned to them • What role could or should NCME play?

More Related