NIFL-ASSESSMENT 2005: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:1180] RE: high-stakes te

Archived Content Disclaimer

Please note: This page contains archived content from the lincs.ed.gov e-mail discussion list system, which was disabled in 2012. The content on this page is available for archival purposes only. Hyperlinks on this page may be broken or may no longer link to the content specified from within the archive posting. In addition, information displayed on this page may no longer be relevant.

From: Marie Cora (marie@hotspurpartners.com)
Date: Sun Jul 31 2005 - 15:41:51 EDT 

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 j6VJfpG22437; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:41:51 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:41:51 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <001a01c59608$c7a596f0$0202a8c0@frodo>
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: "Marie Cora" <marie@hotspurpartners.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:1180] RE: high-stakes testing, state/federal accountability, and standardized tests
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
Status: O
Content-Length: 6256
Lines: 119

Dear everyone,
 
Thanks Howard, for starting us off, and thanks to all who have posted
for such a rich discussion.
 
PLEASE!  Carry on!


Here's some stuff I am noting along the way.  This is kinda long.  I
have posted a bunch of different resources - but I would really LOVE to
know what resources you use to help you with these issues.  So if you
have good ones, please let us know what they are.
 
Perhaps the best way to figure out how to implement your accountability
process (i.e.:  standardized assessment) is by hearing and learning from
others experiences, then adapting what you're finding out to fit your
situation.  Case studies are great for this - and Nancy has provided us
one in her reply to Andrea's question about how she goes about working
with learners from the beginning.  In our discussion from early July,
there was some discussion of when to test and when not to test (see the
posts entitled "Literacy Needs" at the NIFL List Archives at
http://www.nifl.gov/nifl-assessment/2005/).  You can find some
'scenarios' as well of suggestions for implementing some of the
standardized assessments at:
http://www.sabes.org/assessment/scenarios1.htm
 
Pauline brings up issues of standardized testing and fairness.and.YAY!!!
I have to thank you Pauline, because that is exactly what
"standardization" actually means:  to provide a level playing field so
that you are doing exactly the same thing with each individual:  i.e.:
being fair.  (See definitions at the Special Collection
-http://literacy.kent.edu/Midwest/assessment/glossary.html, or at the
ALEWiki - http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/AleAssessment).  In my
mind, you cannot do away with standardized tests and the accompanying
extremely important processes of administration and score interpretation
because then you take away the fairness aspect that is the point of
standardization.  
 
One big issue with standardized tests is actually what they are used
for.  I can't stress that enough.  All kinds of tests (standardized and
not) are sometimes used for the wrong purposes.  We need to examine what
a test was developed for in the first place, and determine if that then
matches the need.  Often, this is not done.  (And never mind the fact
that curriculum and assessments must be aligned, however rarely are.)
For some information on making informed choices when selecting
assessments, go to the ALEWiki,
http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/AleAssessment and click on
Selecting Assessment Tools.
 
High stakes DOES NOT EQUAL standardized tests!  I've already hounded you
about what standardization means; high stakes does in fact refer to WHAT
THE TEST IS USED FOR.  That is a huge difference.  We MUST be careful to
understand these nuances, big and little, if we are to effectively
utilize testing for useful purposes.
 
Tina, much has been discussed on TABE here, and I would refer you to the
Assessment Archives (address above) to see some of those discussions
(use the search tool at the Archives to find the TABE posts).  Also,
there is a lot written about TABE at:
http://www.sabes.org/assessment/tabe.htm and how to work with some of
its idiosyncracies (sp?).  The Mass. Dept. of Education Adult and
Community Learning Services has an Assessment Policy Manual that
provides in great detail what part of the accountability system of the
state looks like (i.e.:  all the requirements; I say 'part' because
there are other pieces of the system that are detailed in other
documents.  These include goal-setting with students, and collecting
what are known in this state as Countable Outcomes which basically means
all the other stuff besides the learning gains measured by the NRS).
The Assessment Policy Manual overviews the TABE, BEST Plus, and the REEP
Writing Assessment, which presently are the states 3 high stakes tests.
(Massachusetts is developing it's own assessments now, to match the
state's curriculum frameworks; I believe we will be piloting a low-level
reading test and a math test this year.)  To access the Manual, go to:
http://www.doe.mass.edu/acls/news.html  and scroll down to Assessment
News.
 
Pauline also discussed the CLBs (Canadian Language Benchmarks) - and it
brought right back to me some of what was included in the
recommendations of the NAS report (see that Discussion at:
http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/AleAssessment) - that many folks
must be involved in determining what might constitute a set of standards
or the content before any meaningful way to measure the stuff can be
developed.
 
Finally, Nancy notes in her post that the expectations of advancement
must also be realistic.  (Nancy, I think that's what you are saying, but
please correct me if I am not interpreting this as you intended.)  So
for the people involved (student and teacher) there must be some
discussion of reasonable expectations of goals and advancement (the
goal-setting process is extremely important for this), but at the same
time, the tests we are supposed to use should also be reasonable in how
they measure learning gains.
 
There are some very good resources that address a bunch of the issues
raised here at the LINCS Special Collection in Assessment at
http://literacy.kent.edu/Midwest/assessment/.  Click on Teacher/Tutor
and then Selecting Assessments for a Variety of Purposes and Assessment
for Instructional Purposes.  Also at Teacher/Tutor, check out Volume 16
of Adventures in Assessment (ok, check out EVERY volume of Adventures!
But that's another story!).  Volume 16 has a couple articles that focus
on integrating goal-setting into the curriculum, a basic primer for
understanding and using standardized tests, and using data for program
improvement.  Click on Manager/Administrator and check out the sections
labeled Accountability/High Stakes Testing, and also Guidelines for
Selecting, Administering, and Taking Tests.
 
Finally, I love the metaphors.  They very definitely conjure up accurate
portrayals (in metaphorical ways) of this wild ride we call
accountability right now.  At the same time, because the metaphors use
basic utensils from our daily lives that we probably don't give much
thought to, it feels very close to home.  Got any more?
 
Thanks for patiently reading.  Please write back.
 
marie

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:48:51 EST