NIFL-ASSESSMENT 2005: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:1027] Re: Use of test sc

Archived Content Disclaimer

This page contains archived content from a LINCS email discussion list that closed in 2012. This content is not updated as part of LINCS’ ongoing website maintenance, and hyperlinks may be broken.

From: Connor, Bill (Bill_Connor@ctb.com)
Date: Fri Mar 25 2005 - 13:23:11 EST


Return-Path: <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id j2PINBG19232; Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:23:11 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:23:11 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <96EFE09A72BF1D4588C129811A782F9347F531@mhemtymsg01.mhe.mhc>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Connor, Bill" <Bill_Connor@ctb.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:1027] Re: Use of test scores
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
Status: O
Content-Length: 2834
Lines: 71

Some thoughts for you all:
Use of data from a single item is the LEAST reliable piece of
information provided for an individual. With that in mind TABE is set up
so that clusters of items with a commonality of higher level objective
are reported.
While these are usually not sufficient, in themselves, to target
specific instruction they can be used to target further assessment in an
area or to suggest broad areas of instruction.
The current version of TABE (9 and 10) does provide a correlation to the
GED.  The estimate is at the 85% confidence level and also provides a
single letter indicating a recommendation.  "T for test" indicates that
students with a similar score passed the GED 85% of the time and the
tested student should take the GED. "R for Review" indicates that
students with a similar score passed the GED between 50 and 84% of the
time and that review in the content area is indicated prior to the
student taking the test.  "I for instruction" means less that 50% passed
and an instructional program is indicated.


Bill Connor
Senior Product Manager
CTB McGraw-Hill LLC
1-831-393-7429

-----Original Message-----
From: nifl-assessment@nifl.gov [mailto:nifl-assessment@nifl.gov] On
Behalf Of KHennessy@LIMACITYSCHOOLS.ORG
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:02 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:1019] Re: Use of test scores






List discussion regarding assessments,

  Here's what I feel is needed with the TABE and all assessments to
better
facilitate instruction both as a group and as individual instruction.
  Each question should be keyed to a specific skill that that question
is
trying to measure, and that skill or skills could be listed in numerical
order so that if a student missed question number 7 in TABE 7- M
Language
you would know that they may need to review the correct "use of
pronouns"
or "commas in a series" or whatever.
    The TABE gives a correlation chart but it is too general and not
formatted for easy information retrieval.
I made up my own for all of the TABE tests and all of the GED Practice
tests. I am not teaching to the test but rather teaching the skills that
that student missed.
   What is lacking in the TABE(which most ABLE programs use) is that
grade
level scores do not indicate when the student is ready to take the GED
Practice test. This is why I use skills to measure when a student should
take the GED Practice test and not TABE scores. I have had some students
with a grade level score in Language of 5.2 take the GED Practice test
and
pass it and go on to take the Official GED test and pass that also with
high scores. As of February's testing, our program has 67 graduates with
42
of them having scores of over 500, and we have 2 with scores over 700.
This
systems works for us.

Kathy Hennessy
ABLE Coordinator
Lima City Schools



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:48:47 EST