You are browsing the archive for Next Generation Assessment Archives - Page 2 of 5 - FWD.

From Digital Desert to Digital Ocean

November 26, 2012 in Next Generation Assessment

This is a Computer Fundamentals class taking a...

For a long time, education operated in a “digital desert” parched for data about what students are doing in their classrooms. Teachers and students worked closely together, but there was no effective way to observe and analytically gather information about these day-to-day processes and interactions.  In order to gather any data about learning, we had to actually interrupt learning and administer assessments unconnected to the learning environment, so-called “drop from the sky” assessments.

Since these assessments were interrupting learning and had to get information about a lot of different, broad domains, a key element of them had to be efficiency. In addition, because our computing power was limited to some optical scanners and computers with amazing 6 MHz processing speeds, large-scale scoring efforts limited the types of questions that could be asked to those that could be scored with the existing technology. Hence, the constraints of the time gave us the multiple choice test—highly efficient at gathering information (although maybe not always the information we most wanted) and easily scored.

Today, we’re in the digital ocean. We can gather information about students’ daily activities and interactions with content as they happen in computer-based instruction. We have finally gotten to the point where there are enough computers in schools that we can have all students doing meaningful activity on them. Computers now allow us to capture all kinds of information about what students do as they interact with learning material, seamlessly recorded as they go about their daily learning activity. These interactions can produce an “ocean” of data, that, if used correctly, can give us a completely different view of how students progress in acquiring knowledge, skills, and attributes.

This ability to capture data from everyday events should fundamentally change how we think about assessment.

Invisible assessments allow us to gather information much more frequently without interrupting the flow of instruction, hence the term “invisible”. This lets us provide teachers, students, and parents with feedback about progress immediately and in time to make adjustments to teaching and learning. It also eliminates the common complaint about the heavy time requirements of traditional assessment.

By capturing many, many observations of a student over time, we are able to build models of student learning and proficiency without the pressure of performance on a single test.

Finally, invisible assessments can allow us to assess things we might not otherwise be able to. For example, I am looking right now at measuring persistence in students, which research tells us is related to successful academic outcomes. This would be difficult to do with much accuracy with a traditional multiple choice test. Gathering information about student interactions “invisibly” in a digital environment allows us to make observations in different, authentic contexts.

There is a lot of research to be done in this area, including statistical research on combining information from multiple sources, learning research about how to model learning progressions, and communication research about how to provide all this data to students, parents, and teachers in helpful, actionable ways. So, don’t abandon your cars for a jet-pack yet, but this work is being done now and the future of assessment will likely look quite different than our current reality.

Infographic: How Standardized Tests Are Created For Your Child

November 8, 2012 in Next Generation Assessment

Intro image to Infographic: How Standardized Tests Are Created For Your ChildStandardized tests. They might seem like a giant unknown that suddenly appears on your child’s desk. But the reality is that this research-based process typically takes three years of hard work and involves a large number of participants, including local teachers and state education experts.

To help combat some of the anxiety around standardized testing, Pearson created an infographic to explain the test development process. Like the famous “How a bill becomes a law,” School House Rock tune, the infographic takes a look at the major steps in developing a standardized test, providing some fact and figures to help explain each a little bit better.

You can view the full infographic on our Parents, Kids & Testing website or Facebook page.

The future of assessment

October 31, 2012 in Next Generation Assessment

The quill. The printing press. The telephone. The tablet device. All of these can be aligned to assessment innovation. While the quill is still the most widely used form of testing – in the shape of pen and paper – all will be replaced by more advanced means. Why? Because technologies, processes and practices evolve – becoming increasingly smarter and efficient.

Whilst assessment technologies are no different – computer-based testing (CBT) has itself evolved rapidly over 20 plus years – the future of assessment for many sectors still has a lot invested in the past.

Pen & paper (P&P) testing remains the bread & butter vehicle of many sectors. For some, it’s understandable and in some cases academic tests cannot justify the investment in CBT (although it is widely used for academic testing). For other professional sectors, P&P is inefficient, inflexible and extremely risky, undermining the integrity of an exam and therefore, a credential. For example, with P&P, you can have thousands of junior doctors emptying hospitals just to test on the same day.

The future of assessment then starts with education on the technologies of today: computers. We need greater education across mainland Europe, the Middle East and Africa, particularly for high-stakes testing such as medical, finance, government and many other professional exams where protecting the test itself and knowing who the candidate is remains vital and can have life-saving implications.

New methods of assessment

Sectors worldwide are now demanding mobile testing. Assessing candidates outside of traditional environments, such as centres – whether in the workplace or at home – may appeal logistically, but there’s work to be done. More adequate security measures must be in place, ensuring the person who tests is the one who gets certified. Candidate verification technologies – specifically designed for mobile testing – are essential if the platform is to become fully credible and, ultimately, embraced.

The medical industry is benefitting right now from practical assessments, allowing senior professionals to move from testing station to testing station to assess multiple junior doctors at any one time. Uptake of this method will increase, as will interest from other industries where practical test performance is deemed reflective of ability in the workplace.

Game-based/simulation testing is another method gaining momentum. While this may seem, and is, an obvious fit for the transport and medical industries, its appeal is becoming widespread. Sponsors are seeking out the platform to fully engage candidates, and most importantly, determine as best as possible their knowledge and skills – namely, in areas such as professional judgement, situation handling and hazard awareness. For example, hazard perception tests for learner drivers make use of video and CGI – the latter providing numerous testing options, from multiple-choice questions to controlling the driving experience. So rather than just knowing if the candidate was correct or incorrect with an answer, assessors can determine how long it took them to react to a potential hazard and if it was the best way to do so.

Safeguarding the integrity of programmes is sure to remain a priority. While digital signature and photo capture are proven means, advanced biometric measures now lead the way in verifying candidate identity.  Tools such as palm vein technology – which recognises the unique vein formation found in a candidates’ hand – are what owners of testing programmes expect as standard.

What else? Well, sponsors worldwide are now working with CBT providers to deliver programmes internationally. Generally speaking, sponsors with small to medium sized programmes are doing so to broaden their geographical reach –increasing awareness of their role as a business/organisation and also as a certifying body. Bigger players are testing overseas to improve their footprint and gain an advantage on larger rivals. Meanwhile, a number of programme owners are collaborating with each other; sharing best practices and success stories in order to leverage proven exam formats and features, thus raising the standard of skills, performance and people.

Back-to-School “Homework” for Mom

August 30, 2012 in Data and Technology, Next Generation Assessment

It’s that time of year again — back-to-school. The backpacks are ready to go and, soon, my two sons will head out for their first day of school here in our hometown of Cedar Park, Texas, a suburb of Austin. Each year, I’ve happily sent my boys to our public schools, confident that their local school will teach them important new skills, allow them to exchange ideas with classmates, and help them reach new standards that will prepare them for the challenging road ahead.

Each year also brings an understanding that my kids will be held accountable for the progress they make toward these new skills and standards. Like all moms, I want the best for my children – this means doing all I can to gain insights into their learning. By meeting with their teachers, reviewing notes and papers that come home in their backpacks, attending school meetings, and following their progress on the Texas statewide STAAR assessment, I can stay involved in their educations. My oldest, Jace, will be in fourth grade this year. He took the STAAR last year and will take it again this year. His scores on the state assessment are one important way for me to understand and measure his learning progress. But, they are just one of many ways.

As I said in a previous post, “the assessment results help a busy parent understand what’s happening in the classroom because we can’t be there every day.  More importantly, they round out the wider scope of information gathered at the local school level to help us understand how our children are progressing.”

With the new school year on the horizon, I’m committing to some homework of my own. I plan to actively engage with my sons’ teachers from the get-go. I want to understand what my boys are expected to accomplish by the year’s end and how their development will be shared with me. I will ask about how the instruction they will see in the classroom prepares them for a future we haven’t defined yet—how they are learning problem-solving skills and critical thinking skills. I will find out how I can support their learning at home. My open dialogue with my boys’ teachers and with my sons will make the learning process stronger.  These conversations, along with good data from their assessments, can help me understand how my sons are doing at certain points in time.  I can see how they are progressing throughout the year, encourage them when they struggle, and – I think – be an all-round better mom.

Tests: More Opportunities For Learning

July 20, 2012 in Next Generation Assessment

Tests help students to learn.

Research on the “testing effect” shows that taking a test goes beyond simply measuring acquired knowledge, and actually helps better prepare students to remember information than repeatedly studying or re-reading the same material.

In lab trials, one group of students studied a set of materials, was given a practice test, and later given a second test to see how well they remembered what they’d studied. A control group studied the same materials, but instead of taking the initial test they studied the materials a second time and then took a test. The results? The groups that took two tests consistently scored better than the groups that studied longer.

This compelling finding, established through numerous research studies that I have reviewed, at first seems confusing: how can taking a test actually beat studying? But it makes sense, if thought about in terms of learning the skills needed to perform a task: Practicing a skill during learning (taking a practice test) helps students perform better when being tested on that skill later (taking the follow up test). For example, if you want to learn to play tennis, practicing the game is of course more effective than reading about it.

In addition, research on how memory works shows that retrieving information during a test is not a passive process, but instead has an actual impact on the ability to retrieve that information in the future.

Additional studies that I analyzed suggest that if the initial test is short answer or essay format, there is a larger testing effect than if the initial test is multiple-choice; the follow-up test format does not seem to matter as much. However, multiple-choice tests do still show a strong testing effect.

Corroborating these lab findings, classroom studies demonstrate a significant testing effect as well. For example, a study looking at frequent quizzes given in a middle school science class found that these quizzes increased student performance on unit tests from 79 percent correct (for material not previously tested with a quiz) to more than 90 percent correct. And the quizzing effect lasted until the end of the semester test and the end of the school year test.

In a separate classroom study, one section of a psychology course included a test of four short answer questions at the end of each lecture period, while another section of the same class – taught by the same professor – did not use end of class tests. Students in the section using the end of class tests scored considerably higher on the final exams compared with students in the course not using the tests (mean score of 86 percent versus 78 percent).

These and many other studies demonstrate that in addition to serving as a lens into the classroom, or one measure of student performance, tests actually present proactive opportunities for learning and retention of information. Seen in this light, testing effect research adds an important layer of insight into tests as significant tools for academic growth and success.

For further information on the studies cited in this piece, see:

  • Butler, A.C., J.D. Karpicke, and H.L Roediger, III (2007). The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 13(4): 273-281.
  • Glenn, D. (2007). You will be tested on this. Chronicle of Higher Education 53(40): A14. Accessed online on January 10, 2012 at http://chronicle.com/article/You-Will-be-Tested-on-This/14732
  • Lyle, K.B. and N.A. Crawford (2011). Retrieving essential material at the end of lectures improves performance on statistics exams. Teaching of Psychology 38(2): 94-97.
  • McDaniel, M.A., and P.K. Agarwal (2011). Test-enhanced learning in a middle school science classroom: the effects of quiz frequency and placement. Journal of Educational Psychology 103(2): 399-414.
  • Roediger, H.L., III, and A.C.Butler(2011). The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. Trends in Cognitive Science 15(1): 20-27.
  • Roediger, H.L., III, and J.D. Karpicke (2006a). Test-enhanced learning: taking memory tests improved long-term retention. Psychological Science 17(3): 249-255.
  • Roediger, H.L., III and J.D. Karpicke (2006b). The power of testing memory: basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science 1(3): 181-210.
  • Butler, A.C., J.D. Karpicke, and H.L. Roediger, III (2007). The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 13(4): 273-281.

 

Considerations for Next-Generation Assessment

June 27, 2012 in Data and Technology, Next Generation Assessment

Educators, state and federal leaders, and testing experts are all converging this week at the Council of Chief State School Officers’ National Conference on Student Assessment (NCSA). In line with the conference theme of “Teaching, Learning and Assessment through the Next Decade,” much is being said about how states are grappling with the transition to online assessment.

Some states have already taken the plunge and have scars and badges of honor to prove it. Others are just dipping their toes in the waters of online assessment. Either way, everyone seems to be talking about what it means to transition to next-generation assessment. The pluses and the potential pitfalls. That’s because the reality is: it’s coming.

As I’ve said in previous posts, one of the most exciting aspects of this transition is the promise that technology-enhanced assessments not only offer to better inform, but also to provide fresh insight into student learning and performance — ultimately facilitating more personalized instruction for individual students and accelerating overall student growth.

But, this is a reality too: transitioning to an online assessment system is complex. States are faced with no simple task. Invariably, they will need to address challenges and overcome uncertainties along the path toward progress. Yet, careful planning and management at both the state and local levels of the education system can help mitigate these challenges and uncertainties, resulting in successful implementations that reflect today’s world and help prepare our students for their futures.

To help states navigate this next big adventure, Pearson developed – with support from education technology-focused associations and state assessment and technology leaders – a Next-Generation Assessment Roadmap. You can find the roadmap, webinars and case studies here: www.PearsonAssessments.com/NextGenRoadmap.

Realizing the Full Promise of Next-generation Assessments: Tablet Style

June 21, 2012 in Next Generation Assessment

Apple recently announced a change to iPad operating systems, called Guided Access features, which will allow students to use the devices for high-security summative assessments. These new features were a welcome bit of news for those of us who are working to help realize the full potential of next-generation assessments.

Once these Guided Access features, like the ability to disable the home button, become available, they will represent a terrific first step in addressing some of the most critical issues involving current generation tablets and high-stakes testing.  I previously covered some of the biggest issues on that front here.

Yet, there are also a lot of reasons to be excited about tablets and assessments. Tablets’ mobility, personalization, and other unique features speak strongly to the promise of next-generation assessments—namely, the ability to leverage technology and offer a richer understanding of students’ curricular proficiency, and feed that back into decisions about how we teach and grow our students across the nation.

This, in effect, is one of the best answers to a recent charge set out by the U.S. Department of Education’s Peter Cunningham. In response to parents voicing concerns about standardized tests, Peter recommends that the education community not abandon tests. Instead, he charged us to “make better tests.” (see: http://reut.rs/NDLbOQ)

Imagine, for instance, a biology assessment project (the term “assessment question” may become increasingly less apt) where students use tablets outdoors to photograph, videotape, categorize, compare, and contrast features and behaviors of insects. Then they create—perhaps even in pairs or groups—a presentation on their tablet organized around a central theme, such as adaptations.  The presentation, verbally delivered and recorded, becomes part of a performance-based portfolio assessment where the entire body of student project work, including a wide range of cross-disciplinary skills and proficiencies, is scored and measured.

This kind of deep and personal assessment of student understanding and performance is what makes the vision of next-generation assessments compelling. With digital tools, the assessment evolves to become more like the instruction, delivered on devices students already know and use for learning and for fun.

As we progress ever closer to this vision, I’m reminded of an expression you often hear in the flatter parts of our country: “Don’t mistake a clear vision for a short distance.”  We still have a number of shorter-term tactical issues that will need to drive our transition thinking and planning.

At the top of that list will be equity and access to devices, given that the quality of devices changes all the time and that schools will not likely be able to purchase and maintain the same types of devices for all students. Furthermore, students come to school with different experience levels on certain devices.

Another issue on the list is how to best address statewide comparability of scores.  We may need to start looking not only at differences between paper and online assessments, but perhaps also pay close attention to comparability between “traditional” online platforms and the newer tablets. In particular, the full embrace of tablet-specific features may need to follow the adoption pace of tablet-based computing in schools.

But won’t it be refreshing for all of us when the discussion progresses from how do we move assessments online to how do we leverage even further the technology base in schools (which is itself continuing to evolve)? We’re excited to see technology companies like Apple continuing to work with Pearson and the assessment industry as a whole to promote and support the journey to realize that vision, the full promise of next-generation assessments.

Testing and Pearson

June 7, 2012 in Next Generation Assessment

This spring testing season, we’ve received a lot of questions from New York parents about testing. The parent voice is especially vital to the discussion around statewide student testing, and we want you to know that we’re listening.

New York is a leader in a bold, nationwide effort to raise academic standards for students so that they are prepared to succeed in college and in the demanding, well-paying jobs of the economy that awaits them. New Yorkers deserve praise for making this commitment to their students and their futures, and we at Pearson are proud to serve the state in this endeavor.

After a rigorous and competitive public procurement process, New York awarded Pearson a five-year contract to develop and implement new assessments for grades 3-8 in English Language Arts and Mathematics. Academic assessments are an essential part of the information needed for teaching and learning—but they are only one important indicator of whether our students are on the path to being ready for college and careers when they graduate.

The first installment of these assessments entered New York classrooms this spring. During this process, some errors were identified. Pearson responded immediately and is working diligently with the New York State Education Department (NYSED) to address these issues and make sure that none of these problems re-occur when the state’s new Common Core assessment is administered in 2013.

We also plan to work with the NYSED to help make the entire assessment process as transparent and open as possible. The students and educators of New York deserve the very best that we as a company can deliver. We are steadfast in our commitment to the state of New York and our work on behalf of its students.

Explaining “Field Tests”: Top Six Things Parents Should Know

May 29, 2012 in Next Generation Assessment

Field testing is a routine part of standardized test administration and many such field tests are occurring in a number of states this spring in one form or another.  Because such field testing is so important and because it comes in many different varieties, it is important to understand some of the background.

1)      Let’s start with the basics.  What is a field test?

Students taking a test at the University of Vi...

A field test (as defined by the National Council on Measurement in Education) is a test administration used during the test development process to check on the quality and appropriateness of test items, administration procedures, scoring, and/or reporting.  Basically, this means that an “item” / test question (including reading passages, essay prompts) itself is tested, enabling educators and test developers to make sure that an item does measure what it is intended to measure—that the questions provide an accurate, fair and valid representation of what students know and can do.

2)      Do field tests count toward my child’s grades or impact his or her achievement?

No. Field tests (be they separately administered tests or groups of items embedded within a ongoing assessment) never count toward a student’s score or ability to advance to the next grade. Students’ scores on these field-test items are only used to evaluate how well the items or test questions capture the knowledge and skills they are designed to measure.

3)      If field tests aren’t used for scoring or grading, why are they done?

They are a vital element to the development of fair, high-quality tests.  Field tests are done to help ensure questions used in upcoming standardized tests that count are fair for all students, of high quality and rigorous enough to comply with professional standards.  It’s important for a state to know that questions, prompts, reading passages, or other test elements are worthy of being used to assess skills and knowledge appropriately.

Many needs are balanced when field testing is conducted, but two are very critical: (1) minimizing burden on students and schools and (2) administering tests that meet recommended industry standards. Minimizing field testing is vital so that time can be spent on instruction, but it’s also important to gather enough data to be able to evaluate the fairness of questions, to eliminate flawed items, and to build tests each year that cover a range of curriculum from the very easy to the very difficult.

4)      What does field testing mean for my child?

Field testing is conducted to make sure that the standardized assessments used in your school or your state meet professional standards for quality and fairness. The goal of field testing is to make sure all questions are free from bias, are aligned to academic standards of your state and function appropriately.  However, if you are concerned with how field testing may impact your child then contact your child’s school to learn more.

5)      What kinds of field tests are there?

Generally, there are two approaches to field tests: embedding questions within assessments that count for students and standalone field-testing. In both cases, any question deemed unfair after field testing is thrown out and won’t appear on any future assessments.

Embedded Field Tests

Students take embedded field-test questions at the same time they take the rest of their standardized test.  This is typically done for multiple-choice assessments. Whenever possible, states embed field-test questions in multiple forms of “live” tests so that these field-test questions are randomly distributed to a representative student population. Experience shows that these procedures can give the state an appropriate amount of data to ensure fairness in a very efficient manner.  The embedded field-test questions are not counted on a student’s score.

Standalone Field Tests

Sometimes separate field tests are necessary due to factors like test structure (i.e., tests with open-ended questions, tests that required students to perform tasks or lengthy essays), a small student population, or method of test delivery. States administer these separate field tests at a different time than the state assessments that are reported publicly.  As with embedded field-test items, a separate field test does not count toward student scores.

6)      Once gathered, how is the information from field tests used?

After field testing, a range of stakeholders – generally teachers, school administrators, curriculum and assessment specialists who represent a range of ethnicities, genders, types and sizes of schools district, and geographical regions – all gather to review the data collected from the field test. This “data review” committee examines each test question (and related collateral like reading passages) to determine if each question is free from bias (economic, regional, cultural, gender, and ethnic) and that each is appropriately measuring what it was expected to measure.  Questions that pass all stages of development—including field testing and this data review process— become eligible for use on future tests. Rejected questions are precluded from use on any test.

 

 

Standardized testing. What is it and how does it work?

May 17, 2012 in Next Generation Assessment, Next Generation Learning

Standardized assessment is a lens into the classroom. It sheds light on why a child might be struggling, succeeding, or accelerating on specific elements of their grade-level standards. Results from standardized tests help inform the next step in learning for our students. But, sometimes it isn’t always crystal clear to students, parents and the public how and why the tests are developed. Let’s delve into that.

As it stands, most states are still administering end-of-year tests as required by federal law under No Child Left Behind. For the most part, this means students take annual tests in English Language Arts and Mathematics in grades 3-8; they are tested at least once in high school. Science is tested at least once in elementary, middle and high school. Additional testing in high school often is seen after completing specific courses, like Algebra or Biology, or as a gateway to graduation.
Each state plans the specifics of its testing program, deciding elements like how many questions to put on a test, the dates for testing, whether tests are given on paper or on computer, to name a few. But, some similarities in the creation of the tests cut across the board.

Standardized tests undergo a very rigorous development process so here’s a bit about the five major steps that go into making a test.

  1. States Adopt Content Standards – This is where it all begins. Everything starts with the content standards developed by states and/or a group of states, as seen with the Common Core State Standards. Content standards outline what a student should be able to know at the end of each school year. These standards are the foundation for instruction in the classroom as well as the assessment.

Given the huge range of knowledge and skills each student is supposed to master by year’s end, the assessment development process includes a determination of what will be assessed on each test for each grade. Because we can’t test everything covered in a year (no one wants the test to be longer than necessary), decisions must be made.

  1. Item Development – Here’s where we get into the nitty gritty. Experts, most of whom are former or current teachers with experience and knowledge of the subject matter and grade level, create “items” that test the content selected in step two. These items can be multiple-choice questions, essay prompts, tasks, situations, activities, and the like.

Of note, significant time is even spent deciding which WRONG answers to make available for multiple-choice questions. Why’s that? Every item is a chance to identify what our students really know. Incorrect answers can actually tell us a lot about what students misunderstood. For instance, did they add instead of subtract? Multiply instead of divide? Every bit of data helps disentangle what kids really, truly know, which makes the assessment process complex and the final product a very powerful education tool.

Once the items are developed, then teachers, content experts, higher education faculty, and the testing entity at the state level review them. This diverse group of stakeholders works together to create items that are fair, reliable and accurate. Lots of revisions happen at this stage. And, during this process many items are thrown out — for any number of reasons — and never see the light of day.

  1. Field Testing or Field Trials – Now, we test the items by giving them to students. Items developed in step three are “field tested” to gauge how each works when students respond to them. Here, and I can’t stress this enough, we’re testing the item itself – not the kids. We want to know that the question itself is worthy of being used to assess skills and knowledge appropriately. Students’ scores on these field-test items are only used to evaluate the items; they are not used to calculate a student’s score for the year.

By doing these trials, we can see if gender, ethnicity or even English proficiency impact a child’s ability to successfully perform the task at hand. All of this is done to verify that each and every question is fair. Yet again, a range of stakeholders and experts are involved in the process, reviewing the results and making decisions along the way. The reality is this: if an item doesn’t meet expectations, it’s cut.

  1. Build the Test – Using field-tested and approved items, systematically and thoughtfully the test takes its final form. Easy and hard items, tasks, and activities are incorporated. Items that assess varying skills and content areas are added. This part of the process helps us understand what a child really knows at the end of the assessment. As they say, variety is the spice of life. Same goes for an assessment. A mixture of challenging and easy items enable a range of knowledge and skills to be assessed.
  1. Setting Performance Standards – Finally, states with teachers and their testing partners to make decisions about how well students must perform to pass, or be proficient. For example, performance can be defined as basic, passing, proficient, or advanced. These “performance standards” provide a frame of reference for interpreting the test scores. They help students, parents, educators, administrators, and policymakers understand how well a student did by using a category rating.

After – and only after – this rigorous, multi-step, multi-year process involving a range of stakeholders is complete, do the tests enter the classroom.

Updated 5/21