history of assessment accountability
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
History of Assessment/ Accountability

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 60

History of Assessment/ Accountability - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 115 Views
  • Uploaded on

History of Assessment/ Accountability. Assessment - historical perspective. Standardized assessment is a relatively recent phenomenon in the history of public education Sparked - by the space race in the midst of the “Cold War” w/ Russia “A Nation at Risk” . “A Nation at Risk”.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'History of Assessment/ Accountability' - waldron


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
assessment historical perspective
Assessment - historical perspective
  • Standardized assessment is a relatively recent phenomenon in the history of public education
  • Sparked - by the space race in the midst of the “Cold War” w/ Russia
  • “A Nation at Risk”
a nation at risk
“A Nation at Risk”
  • Presented data that American public education was deficient
  • This assertion was further reinforced by the public disappointment in loosing the “space race”
  • Began the age of “accountability”
accountability
Accountability
  • Standardized Assessments
  • State Standards - Course of Study
  • Teacher Evaluation
  • Administrator Evaluation
  • SACS
role of assessment
Role of Assessment
  • Effective teachers assess students often with relation to learning goals and modify instructional practice according to those assessments
components of instr
Components of Instr.
  • Integrating Instruction & Assessment
  • Large-Scale Accountability Testing
  • Research on Learning, Motivation, Instr.
  • Recent Trends
  • Assessment & Grading Decisions
  • Assessment Standards
  • Classroom Assessment
integrating instruction assessment
Integrating Instruction & Assessment
  • Realities of teaching: fast paced, hectic, complex
  • Instructional decision making: before instruction, during instruction, after instruction
  • Assessment, in the classroom context is gathering, interpretation, and use of information to aid teacher decision making
examples
Examples
  • What are some examples of integrating assessment in the instruction process? And into instruction decision making?
instructional decision making
Instructional Decision Making
  • Teacher decisions may be classed according to when they are made. (Before, During, or after instruction)
  • Pre-instructional decisions help set learning goals and select appropriate teaching activities.
  • During instruction teachers make decisions regarding material presentation, student attention, and lesson plan adjustment.
  • After instruction student learning is assessed and future plans are formulated.
large scale accountability testing
Large-Scale Accountability Testing
  • High-stakes
  • NCLB
  • AYP
  • SAT 10
  • ARMT
  • Grad Exam
  • ADAW
reasearch on learning motivation instruction
Reasearch on Learning, Motivation, & Instruction
  • Cognitive Theories: meaningful, self-regulated, active construction
  • Thinking Skills
  • Motivation: Feedback
assessment grading decision making
Assessment & Grading Decision Making
  • Teacher Beliefs and Values:
    • Philosophy
    • pulling for student success
    • accommodating individual differences
    • enhancing student engagement
    • motivation
    • promoting student understanding
assessment grading decision making13
Assessment & Grading Decision Making
  • External factors:
    • Large-scale, mandated high stakes tests
    • School and district grading policies
    • Parents
assessment grading decision making14
Assessment & Grading Decision Making
  • Teacher beliefs & values combine w/ external factors to link to Decision making
assessment grading decision making15
Assessment & Grading Decision Making
  • Decision Making:
    • Matching assessments to learning objectives
    • Using many different types of assessment
    • Importance of constructed-response assessments and homework
assessment standards
Assessment Standards
  • Choosing appropriate assessment methods
  • Developing appropriate assessment methods
  • Administering, scoring and interpreting results
  • Using results to make decisions about students or instruction
  • Developing proper grading procedures
  • Communicating results to parents and other lay audiences
  • Recognizing unethical or inappropriate assessment methods
classroom assessment
Classroom Assessment
  • The collection, evaluation, and use of information to help teachers make better decisions.
  • It is much more than testing.
  • There are 4 essential components to classroom assessment:
    • a. Purpose – Why am I doing this assessment?
    • b. Measurement – How will I gather the information?
    • c. Evaluation – How will I interpret the results?
    • d. Use – How will I use the results (Diagnosis, Grading, Instruction)
accommodations
Accommodations
  • Many assessments can be given with accommodations
  • Such as: reading portions of the test to the student, using large print, allowing extra time
  • Some states identify “allowable accommodations” available to all students
accommodations20
Accommodations
  • Some states designate “specific accommodations” for students with disabilities or specific conditions
accountability workbook
Accountability Workbook
  • A plan submitted by each state specifying how they would address the various issues detailed in the NCLB legislation
additional indicator
Additional Indicator
  • NCLB requires that each state include an additional academic indicator, over and above the test score requirement, that each school and each school system must also meet
  • Many states use attendance rate as the additional indicator for elementary (usually 95%) and graduation rate for high schools
alternative assessment
Alternative Assessment
  • Some students are not capable of participation in the regular state assessment program
  • To insure that these students are included in the required assessment program, states have designed alternative assessments for them to take
alternative assessment24
Alternative Assessment
  • States are limited to counting no more than 2 percent of the students taking alternative assessments as proficient, in the accountability model
annual calculations
Annual Calculations
  • States are required to administer assessments annually and calculate student performance each year to determine if a school or school system has accomplished Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
  • Many states have a procedure for averaging up to three years of data in the AYP calculation, but the assessments must be given annually
annual measurable objectives or annual performance targets
Annual Measurable Objectives or Annual Performance Targets
  • reflect the percentage of students in each subgroup that must score in the proficient range at a school or in a school system for the group to accomplish Adequate Yearly Progress
  • AMO’s were established the first year that the state administered assessments in connection with NCLB
annual measurable objectives or annual performance targets27
Annual Measurable Objectives or Annual Performance Targets
  • Baseline performance was established for that year as well as a progressive proficiency requirement for each state leading to 100% proficiency rate for the 2013-14 school year
  • Some states have opted to increase the proficiency requirement annually in equal intervals until the 100% standard is met
annual measurable objectives or annual performance targets28
Annual Measurable Objectives or Annual Performance Targets
  • Regardless of how the state opts to increase the scale, all states must end up with the 100% proficiency requirement by 2014.
adequate yearly progress ayp
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
  • Adequate Yearly Progress is the determination of whether or not a school or school system has met its annual accountability goals
  • AYP is based on the percent of students scoring proficient on the state assessments as well as the school or system’s performance on the “other academic indicator”.
criterion referenced test crt
Criterion Referenced Test (CRT)
  • A CRT assessment is similar in design to an assessment that a teacher would make for classroom use
  • At the state level, learning objectives are identified that the state wants to see accomplished, then contracts with a test developer to design the assessment to cover those objectives
criterion referenced test crt31
Criterion Referenced Test (CRT)
  • Scores for a CRT assessment are usually reported as the percent correct or as proficient/non-proficient
confidence interval
Confidence Interval
  • A confidence interval is a statistical procedure that is useful in determining if a specific score is statistically different from an established goal or target
  • It allows for anticipated fluctuation in scores that might be accounted for by chance errors, motivation, or other confounding events during a test
confidence interval33
Confidence Interval
  • Once the confidence interval has been calculated for a group of scores, it can be added to any single score to determine if the score is significantly different from the target. If not, the score is assumed to have met the target expectation
curriculum alignment
Curriculum Alignment
  • It is an attempt to insure that all objectives that will be assessed are being included in the instructional program
curriculum alignment35
Curriculum Alignment
  • Curriculum alignment can be very simple in format, or can become sophisticated to the level that pacing guides are established to insure that all teachers are covering the same material and spending equal amounts of time on each learning objective
full academic year
Full Academic Year
  • The idea is that students should not be counted in the accountability program for a school or state unless they have benefited from the instructional program for the entire academic year
full academic year37
Full Academic Year
  • Example = a student would be included in the AYP calculations if they were enrolled as of October 1 of the school year and continuously enrolled in that school until at least the first day of the testing window.
irregularity
Irregularity
  • An assessment irregularity is when something unusual takes place during the assessment program
  • Rarely is a testing irregularity serious enough to require a modification in the scoring or a nullification of a score
  • Important to record all irregularities
included grade levels
Included Grade Levels
  • NCLB requires that CRT assessments be given in reading/language and mathematics annually in grades 3-8 and at least once during high school.
  • Many states are meeting the high school requirement by administering a high stakes graduation exam that must be passed before graduation
included grade levels40
Included Grade Levels
  • The reading/language portion and the math portion of the exam is doubling as the NCLB assessment requirement for the calculation of AYP.
n value group size
N Value (group size)
  • Each state has established a minimum group size for inclusion in the AYP calculation. Any school or school system with fewer than the established number of students in that specific group will have that group excluded from accountability calculations
n value group size42
N Value (group size)
  • The “n” values vary significantly from state to state which is confusing for local school administrators
  • Many “n” values are in the range of 40 to 45
  • Alabama = 40; Tennessee = 45
normal curve equivalent nce
Normal Curve Equivalent (NCE)
  • An NCE is a testing statistic usually associated with a norm referenced test
  • It is based on a 100 point scale, similar to a percentile, but unlike a percentile is considered an equal interval score.
  • The distance between any two scores on the scale is viewed as identical. The midpoint of the NCE scale is 50.
norm referenced test nrt
Norm Referenced Test (NRT)
  • A norm referenced test is designed to compare the performance of students taking the test to a national norm group
  • The test is normed using groups of randomly selected students from across the country exhibiting a variety of ability levels
norm referenced test nrt45
Norm Referenced Test (NRT)
  • Norm referenced tests are constructed by testing companies and are very difficult to align a curriculum to because the objectives being assessed come from a national pool and are not shared with local systems in detail.
participation rate
Participation Rate
  • It is the intent of NCLB that all students in appropriate grade levels participate in the state assessment program
  • The federal standard has been set at a 95 % participation level
  • Any school or school system that fails to assess at least 95% of the enrolled students will not make AYP based on participation
percentile
Percentile
  • A percentile score is associated with a norm referenced assessment
  • The interpretation of a percentile score is based upon a comparison to the group on which the test was normed
  • A percentile score of 68 indicates that an individual scored at or above 68 percent of the individuals in the norm group
proficient percent proficient
Proficient (Percent Proficient)
  • For NCLB, the percent proficient on any given assessment is the percent of students, either all, or identified subgroups, that scored at or above the minimum score to be considered proficient in the subject
proficient percent proficient49
Proficient (Percent Proficient)
  • Many states identify student performance as either below proficient, proficient, or advanced.
  • In these cases, both proficient and advanced scores are considered successful performance on the assessment
safe harbor
Safe Harbor
  • A school or school system that has been identified for school improvement can make AYP even if the percent proficient is not high enough to meet the current state requirement
safe harbor51
Safe Harbor
  • If the school or system successfully reduces the number of non-proficient scores by at least 10% and meets all additional indicators, the school or system is judged to have met AYP under the safe harbor provision
sanctions
Sanctions
  • Sanctions are penalties that are imposed on schools or school systems for ongoing failure to meet AYP
  • The progression of sanctions may be different for schools that receive Title I funds than that of non-Title I schools
sanctions53
Sanctions
  • All schools will experience some form of progressive sanctions if they fail to meet AYP under NCLB
school improvement
School Improvement
  • Any school or school system that fails to meet the accountability goals over a specified period of time will be identified for school improvement
  • School improvement is based on failing to meet the standard in the same content area for two consecutive years
school improvement55
School Improvement
  • If a school continues to fail to meet the proficiency standard, classifications such as school improvement-2 and school improvement-3 are applied
  • The amount of sanctions that are applied are related to the number of years the school has been in school improvement
security breach
Security Breach
  • A security breach is a term associated with some inappropriate action that takes place during the assessment program
  • Teachers can create a security breach by inappropriately administering a test or having students practice skills using actual items from the test
security breach57
Security Breach
  • The penalties for a security breach are serious and can result in the loss of an individual’s teaching credentials
  • Security breeches can also cause groups of student scores to be invalidated by state scoring services
subgroups
Subgroups
  • Data at the school and system level in NCLB must be analyzed by specific subgroups
  • Subgroups that are required to be analyzed in NCLB include Special Education, Limited English Proficient, Poverty (free and reduced lunch) and five ethnic classifications
subgroups59
Subgroups
  • One additional group consisting of “all students” is also identified
  • To make AYP, a school or school system must meet the proficiency standard for each subgroup
subjects included
Subjects Included
  • NCLB has identified reading/language and math as the two subject areas to be included in AYP calculations
  • Some states also include a writing assessment as a part of the language calculation
ad