DUE IN 6 hrs 10:30 PM TODAY! 4-5 pg.APA----EXAMPLE PAPER INCLUDED

Chapter 1 Introduction to Learning and Assessment A dog looks at a laptop computer. iStockphoto/Thinkstock Focus Questions After reading this chapter, you should be able to answer the following questions: What are the most important purposes of educational assessment? How are summative and formative assessment different? What are simple definitions of assessment, measurement, tests, and evaluation? How do instructional objectives relate to educational assessment? What is NCLB and IDEA, and what are their implications for educational assessment? What are some important ethical issues in assessment? What is a self-regulated learner? I think animal testing is a terrible idea; they get all nervous and give the wrong answers. —A Bit of Fry and Laurie People, too, sometimes give the wrong answers on tests because they get all nervous and scared. That's what often happened to my friend, Louis. Tests scared the pants off him. When he sat to write one, he would quickly forget every sensible thought and well-memorized fact he had stuffed into his brain. His test results were a disaster. They greatly chagrined his mother—especially when, following a series of county-wide achievement tests, the principal called her in. "Louis should probably stop dreaming about going to university and becoming a professor," said the principal. "There's other stuff he can do." But Louis didn't stop dreaming. He just kept trying to educate himself. "They can't teach me more stuff just by giving me more tests," he declared. "That's about as sensible as thinking you can make yourself thinner just by weighing yourself a lot." 1.1 The Purposes of Educational Assessment Louis was a bright lad (the local storekeeper once described him as having a brain as big as a planet). But he was a victim of what psychologists label test anxiety (boldfaced terms are found in the glossary at the end of this book). The thought of any sort of assessment, and the fear that he would not do well, invariably led to an emotional state that interfered with his performance. As Louis explained it, school assessments made him feel like a cat that's falling with its back to the ground and it just can't seem to get its feet pointed the right way. Assessment can be like that for some students: highly threatening and anxiety provoking. This is especially the case when important outcomes depend on the student's performance—a situation labeled high-stakes testing (discussed in Chapter 10). But assessment in many of today's schools is very different from what it was in Louis's school. In fact, the best current approaches to classroom assessment are designed less to determine how well or how poorly students perform than to help them learn. Such approaches to testing might well have uncovered Louis's problem and led to solutions for it before he abandoned all hope. Formative and Summative Assessment Educational assessment has two broad purposes: The most important, strongly reflected in today's assessment literature, is to improve teaching and learning (e.g., Popham, 2011a, 2011b; Stiggins & Chappuis, 2012). That purpose is emphasized throughout this text. The second purpose is that of measuring student achievement with a view to providing a grade. Assessment used mainly to provide a grade is called summative assessment. Summative assessment is what occurs when teachers give their students midterm or year-end tests to arrive at numbers or verbal descriptors that reflect what each learner has achieved. Summative assessment has traditionally been the main function of testing in schools, partly because the historical emphasis has been on sorting learners to select those with the highest probability of future success. Selecting students is no longer the principal mission of our schools, as Stiggins and Chappuis (2012) explain. Now schools also need to ensure that learners learn how to learn—that they become competent, self-directed learners, actively involved in their own learning. But yesterday's approaches to education do not work well for the school's new mission, or for today's students, argues Prensky (2011). Today's learners are very different learners: They are digital natives (also referred to as members of the net generation; Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005). Basically, these are learners so profoundly influenced by digital technologies such as the Internet, video games, and computers that they think and learn differently from older generations of students. (We look at some characteristics of digital learners and at their impact on learning and assessment in Chapter 3). Because today's learner is different, and because what we expect of our schools is also different, contemporary emphases are changing. They reflect our beliefs and intentions regarding the main purpose of schools. Today's model is more egalitarian: It advocates success for all rather than success for the chosen few. Accordingly, today's teacher views assessment mainly as a tool to provide guidance and assistance. Assessment designed to improve the teaching/learning process is formative assessment. Put another way, formative assessment is assessment for learning; summative assessment is assessment of learning. Formative assessment is assessment that is embedded in the teaching–learning process. Much of it is informal rather than structured and formal: It consists of ongoing strategies such as questions, quizzes, and observation of student performances and products. It is designed to provide frequent and timely feedback aimed directly at improving teaching and learning. Instead of summarizing achievement with a number or a grade (summative assessment), formative assessment provides information upon which teacher and learner may act before formal grading occurs. It bears repeating that, as Hattie (2012) puts it, "The primary function of assessment is to support learning by generating feedback that students can act upon in terms of where they are going, how they are going there, and where they might go next" (p. 126). Hence, the primary purpose of assessment in schools is (or should be) formative. Diagnostic assessment is directed specifically at identifying learning problems and the reasons for them. That learners and educational emphases are changing doesn't mean, of course, that all teachers stress the formative role of assessment more than its summative uses. Some critics note that many of today's schools still reflect the approaches and emphases of past centuries. Pletka (2007), for example, quotes a student who says, "Even though we're entering the 21st century, school has barely changed since the last century" (p. 21). Still, there is little doubt that the uses and purposes of educational assessment are changing. And even less doubt that they should. Performance-Based Assessment Another important category of educational assessments is performance-based assessment. Performance-based assessments ask learners to demonstrate their skills, knowledge, and understanding by actually performing a task or producing a product that directly illustrates what is being assessed. Thus, performance-based assessments can be used for both formative and summative purposes. For example, asking first-grader William to read aloud from one of the worksheets that accompanies the Beginning Reader series is a performance-based assessment. Judging William's performance according to the rubric (a type of scoring guide, described in Chapter 7) shown in Figure 1.1 provides a basis for using the descriptor Meets Standard on his electronic report card. This would be an example of the use of performance assessment for summative purposes. Figure 1.1: Sample first-grade rubric for reading Sample rubric for first grade reading. The top of the figure reads: "reading objective #1: understands and applies a range of skills and strategies for reading". The following four strategies are listed below the reading objective in bullet points: "uses strategies such as phonics or pictures to understand unfamiliar words; reads familiar text easily and fluently; has an expanding repertoire of 'sight' words; and recognizes misunderstandings and uses strategies to correct them". At the bottom left of the figure is a scoring scale: 4 equals exceeds standard, 3 equals meets standard, 2 equals approaches standard, and 1 equals below standard. To the right of the scale are the following sentences, corresponding to scale points 4 to 1, respectively: "uses skills and strategies to read material above grade level; uses skills and strategies to read at grade level; sometimes can read at grade level with help; even with assistance, seldom uses skills and strategies to read at grade level" This is a small part of a first-grade rubric for assessing early literacy skills. Other related objectives might have to do with writing skills, punctuation, capitalization, word-attack skills, reading strategies, understanding of what is read, and so on. Each objective would be clearly explained, and the performance criteria associated with each of the numbered grading descriptors would be spelled out. Most school systems provide teachers with similar, detailed scoring and grading guides. If, in the course of observing and assessing William's reading performance, the teacher notes that he consistently confuses the letters b and d as well as p and q—a common error—she can then use this information to adjust her instructional approach and provide William with additional help. This would illustrate how performance-based assessment can be used for formative purposes. To summarize: As Figure 1.2 illustrates, assessment might occur before instruction and might be the basis for decisions regarding placement of learners. This process is referred to as placement assessment. Placement assessment might also provide feedback that would inform instructional procedures and would therefore have a formative purpose. Assessment that occurs before and during instruction is formative to the extent that it provides feedback to assist in the learning process. Formative assessment is an integral part of the teaching–learning process rather than something that occurs only before or after instruction. The main purpose of diagnostic assessment is to identify learner strengths and weaknesses, to diagnose learning problems, and perhaps to uncover the reasons for them. Assessment that occurs after instruction is usually summative: Its purpose is to summarize learner progress and achievement. Formative and diagnostic assessment are discussed in Chapter 5, summative assessment is detailed in Chapter 6, and performance-based assessment is the subject of Chapter 7. Figure 1.2: Uses of assessment in the classroom Figure depicting uses of assessment in the classroom. The top of the figure contains a box for "lesson, course, or year-end 'summative' assessment" with the following information: "Provides information for grading and subsequent placement" and "Important basis for learner and parent educational and career decisions". Directly below is a box for "ongoing 'formative' and 'diagnostic' assessment" with the following information: "Serves as a basis for further "diagnostic" evaluation and instructional intervention", "reinforces learning and motivates learner", "allows evaluation of the effectiveness of instruction and the readiness of learners", and "can lead to increased self-knowledge and self-assessment by learners". Directly below is a box for "pre-instruction 'placement' assessment" with the following information: "Useful for decisions about student placement", "provides information regarding readiness of learners", and "influences choice of content and of instructional strategies". Each box points to a vertical arrow pointing upward on the right of the figure. The arrow on the right is labeled as follows in three different places from top to bottom (in line with the previously described boxes, respectively): "after instruction", "during instruction", and "before instruction." The terms summative, formative, diagnostic, and placement refer to how assessment is used rather than to different kinds of assessment procedures. In each case, assessment might be either structured and formal or highly informal. Although an assessment procedure might seem mainly summative, diagnostic, or intended for placement decisions, one of the overriding general purposes of most approaches to educational assessment is formative in the sense that it is meant to improve student learning. The Curriculum Planning–Assessment–Teaching Cycle in the Classroom Three fundamentally important points need to be kept in mind from the outset: Assessment is an integral part of the teaching–learning process. Assessment is not simply something that teachers do to students; it's something that is accomplished collaboratively by learners and teachers. The most important purpose of educational assessment is to provide information to enhance student motivation and learning, and to improve instructional approaches. Figure 1.3 illustrates these three points. Note that although assessing, planning, and teaching are shown as distinct activities, they constantly overlap. Assessing occurs while teaching, before teaching, and after teaching. And planning, changing, modifying approaches to instruction as well as to learning—all of which rely on good assessment—are continuous, ongoing processes. Similarly, the most useful assessments for instructional purposes are informal and frequent ungraded assessments that inform both the teacher's and the students' minute-to-minute and day-to-day activities. Figure 1.3: The teaching–planning–assessment cycle Figure depicting the teaching-planning-assessment cycle. A circle in the middle of the figure is labeled "instructional objectives". Surrounding this circle are three circles connected by one circular line. These three circles, moving clockwise, are labeled: "assessing", "planning", and "teaching". Two circles independent of the cycle circle are labeled "teacher" and "learner." The teaching–assessing–planning cycle is just that—a cycle. Events are continuous and overlapping. Assessing and planning occur during instruction, before instruction, and after instruction. In addition, it is a collaborative effort: Learners are closely involved in the entire cycle. Some Definitions Many of the commonly used terms in assessment literature—terms like test, assessment, measurement, and evaluation—are treated as though they were synonymous. They aren't. In education, the word test typically refers to specific instruments or procedures designed to measure student achievement or progress, or various student characteristics. Tests typically consist of a sample of behaviors (responses) that serve as a basis for making inferences. For example, a ninth-grade algebra final test does not examine candidates' complete body of algebraic knowledge or their ability to solve all algebraic problems related to the entire course. Instead, the test consists of a representative sample of problems. If a student responds correctly to 84 percent of the problems, the examiner infers that the student also would have responded correctly to 84 percent of the entire pool of relevant problems. Test results are often quantitative (they provide a numerical measure), but sometimes they are qualitative (they describe some particular quality). Measurements are usually quantitative: They are used to provide an indication of amount. Thus, I measure the length of my foot in inches or centimeters; but I can test its suitability for running by putting it through a series of movements. Strictly speaking, measurement in education is a set of procedures for manipulating and interpreting the results of tests. Assessment is a more general term. In an educational setting, it refers to all the activities—including testing and measuring—undertaken by a teacher to obtain information about student characteristics, their progress and achievement, and the effectiveness of instructional methods in relation to desired outcomes. There is a strong belief that in the 21st century, assessment should be a collaborative process, engaging both learner and teacher, and perhaps involving parents as well. In this sense, assessment reflects a commitment to achievement and progress, and the recognition that assessment-based feedback is an essential component of the teaching–learning cycle. Educational assessment is no longer viewed as a mysterious, secretive, teacher-controlled process. Today's learner should be able to access assessment-based, formative feedback in collaboration with the teacher—perhaps by means of face-to-face interactions or via online digital technology. Literally, evaluation refers to the process of making a value judgment. It may involve deciding that something is good or bad, moral or immoral, effective or ineffective. In education, however, evaluation is seldom as subjective as this definition might imply. It is usually based on the results of one or more assessments, and it often takes the form of an appraisal based on whether certain prespecified criteria have been met. For example, qualifying for special needs services in primary grades usually requires meeting specific criteria that define categories descriptive of problems such as those related to speech and language difficulties, social and emotional problems, or behavioral problems. Grades are generally numbers, letters, or verbal descriptors that describe a particular rank or quality. Thus there are different grades of beef, of lumber, of wheat, of paper—and yes, even of students. In education, grades are typically summative; they are not formative. They are usually based on the results of tests or other forms of assessment. Occasionally, as we see in Chapter 11, they might also reflect other factors such as performance on assignments or class participation (see Table 1.1). Table 1.1 Some definitions Term Definition Test A specific instrument or procedure that measures student progress and achievement and that may or may not produce quantifiable results. Measurement A procedure or instrument that produces quantifiable results. Assessment A general term that includes all testing, measuring, and evaluating activities. Evaluation An appraisal based on specified criteria. Grade Usually a number or a letter that summarizes a student's achievement. What We Measure and Evaluate Assessments, measurements, and evaluations are a huge part of everyday life. You have been subjected to assessments of one kind or another all your life. In all likelihood, within moments of being born, a nurse or attending physician gave you the well-known Apgar test—a test which assessed your general appearance (blue or pink), your pulse (heart rate), your grimace (reflexive reactions such as coughing, sneezing, crying, or, yes, grimacing), your activity level (muscle tone described as limp, weak, or strong), and your respiration. (Note how the boldface letters are an acronym that spells Apgar.) The maximum score on this test is 10: a score of 9 or 10 is considered "excellent," 7–8 is "good," 4–6 is "intermediate," and lower scores are "poor." Incidentally, almost 90 percent of U.S. infants score 9 or 10, and only 0.5 percent score below 4 (Martin et al., 2010). Had your score been zero on this first test, you would in all likelihood not be reading about it today (see Table 1.2). Table 1.2 The Apgar scale—one of your first tests Score Appearance (color) Pulse (heart rate) Grimace (reflex irritability) Activity level (muscle tone) Respiratory effort 0 Blue, pale Absent No response Flaccid, limp Absent 1 Body pink, extremities blue Slow (less than 100) Grimace Weak, inactive Irregular, slow 2 Entirely pink Rapid (over 100) Coughing, sneezing, crying Strong, active Good, crying Source: Based on Virginia A. Apgar, 1975, "A Proposal for a New Method of Evaluation of a Newborn Infant," in Current Researches in Anesthesia and Analgesia, July–August, 1953. The Apgar test is only one of many assessments you might have had even before you started school. For example, perhaps your vision was tested, the condition of your teeth appraised, or your health evaluated. Your general developmental progression might have been formally assessed by one or more developmental experts. And it would most certainly have been informally evaluated by proud or concerned parents: I wonder why Johnny's not walking yet; Sarah's not even 8 months and she can walk! In many ways, life is a series of formal and informal assessments. Some show how well you are performing compared to your peers; others appraise your performance relative to some standard or norm that describes expected or average behavior or achievement. And, of course, the preschools and schools that follow bring with them a whole range of new assessments. At the very least, schools typically measure student achievement; most also assess various kinds of aptitude or ability. They might also examine personality, vocational and career interests, and actual performance in different subject areas. Some of the assessments used involve formal measuring instruments, often developed by professional test developers. Others are constructed by teachers. Often, too, assessment is based on more informal kinds of observations both in and out of the classroom. Some of the various types of school assessments are described in Table 1.3. Click here to view alternative text. Specific Purposes of Educational Assessment It is important to keep in mind that the chief purpose of all the different approaches to educational assessment is to foster learning. However, each of the broad approaches to assessment described in Table 1.3 might serve a variety of different purposes in the classroom, including Determining whether instructional goals are being met Assessing the effectiveness of instructional methods Gauging the extent to which learners are engaged in learning Monitoring student achievement Providing information for parents Satisfying administrative and judicial requirements Appraising learner satisfaction and happiness Determining student background information and readiness to learn Helping learners make wise decisions Developing self-assessment skills among learners Making decisions about student advancement and placement Advising students regarding career and vocational decisions Tailoring instructional methods to student aptitudes and interests Most of the purposes for which educational assessment might be used are not mutually exclusive. A single well-constructed, teacher-made, end-of-unit test might serve every one of the purposes just listed. However, the kind of assessment information the learner needs is quite different from the assessment information that might be given to parents. Parents, prospective employers, university admissions officers, and others are interested in summative information that allows them to compare and evaluate. That is, they need to know what the learner has achieved relative to educational goals and relative to other learners. On that basis, they can predict what the learner is capable of. In contrast, what learners need in the day-to-day business of learning is immediate, personalized, confidential information about their learning. They need formative information that will enhance a learning process that is ongoing and current. Goals of Assessment A fourth grade teacher and an elementary principal talk about the purposes of classroom assessment. Critical Thinking Questions: How can classroom assessment help students think about their own learning? What is the teacher's role in creating opportunities for students to reflect on what they have learned? How does this approach differ from your experiences as a student in elementary school? 1.2 Instructional Goals and Assessment Educational assessment has an enormous influence on what students study and how they learn. In the final analysis, students try to learn what they expect teachers to test—which is, presumably, what they teach. Unfortunately, what teachers test is not always what they claim is important. For example, one of my high school English teachers, Sister Thérèse Marie, constantly emphasized the importance of critical thinking and independent reflection. She spent hours of class time analyzing and critiquing various literary works, speculating on the moral virtues of the characters, and asking us to offer personal opinions on abstract literary matters. But during the last class of every Friday, the good Sister routinely presented us with a fill-in-the-blank quiz consisting of questions like these: The author of Wuthering Heights is __________. The person who said, "Beware the ides of March" was __________. Supply the missing line: You blocks, you stones, you worse than senseless things! O you _________________________________________ Knew you not Pompey? We quickly learned that if we were to do well, we should memorize as much as we possibly could. And the Sister's main objectives—teaching us how to think critically, to reflect, to analyze and synthesize, to evaluate—went unrealized. Educational Goals Educational goals are the broad intentions of educational systems. They describe what educational systems are designed to accomplish. They summarize the purposes of educational institutions and, indirectly, the goals of societies and of parents for children. Educational goals might be expressed in broad terms, such as "The goal of schools is to develop decent, worthwhile citizens" or "The goal of education is to teach students how to learn." As an example, Table 1.4 shows some of the very general educational goals outlined in the No Child Left Behind Act, or NCLB (2002). Table 1.4 Educational goals specified by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) NCLB goals General indicators for assessment Goal 1: By 2013–2014, ALL students will reach high standards and attain proficiency in reading and mathematics. Percentage of students at or above state-defined proficiency levels on standardized achievement tests in reading and math. Schools are required to make adequate yearly progress (AYP). Goal 2: ALL limited English proficient students will become proficient in English. Percentage of students with limited English proficiency at the beginning of the year who have attained proficiency by the end of the year Goal 3: By 2005–2006, ALL students will be taught by highly qualified teachers. Percentage of students taught by teachers who are deemed "highly qualified" Goal 4: ALL students will be educated in learning environments that are safe and drug-free. Number of schools defined as persistently dangerous in the State (students in these schools are allowed to transfer to other schools) Goal 5: ALL students will graduate from high school. Percentage of students who graduate from high school; percentage who drop out before finishing Many critics claim that most of the goals described in Table 1.4 are unrealistic. Clearly, not all students will reach the high standards described; nor will they all graduate from high school. But even if the goals are not entirely reachable, they provide important standards that can guide educational efforts and that the success of those efforts can be measured against. Instructional Objectives Broad educational goals such as those described by the NCLB act are useful for guiding the development of curricula and influencing the values of educators and perhaps of students and parents as well. But they are not nearly as helpful in the day-to-day business of teaching as are more specific statements of instructional objectives—also commonly referred to as learning targets or as learning objectives. Learning targets describe what the teacher and the student aim to achieve. They are statements of what schools expect students to know and be able to do. Uses of Instructional Objectives Whereas educational goals describe the broad, general intentions of educational endeavors, instructional objectives are the more specific intended outcomes of instructional activities. Instructional objectives tell the teacher: A young Caucasian boy dressed in a suit looks at a whiteboard containing advanced mathematical equations. One goal of NCLB is that all students attain proficiency in reading and mathematics. But note that state-defined standards of proficiency do not imply that all students have to be pointed toward nuclear physics or rocket science. © Getty Images/Jupiterimages/Photos.com/Thinkstock What needs to be taught What needs to be assessed How it will be assessed Teachers cannot assess the effectiveness of their instructional procedures unless they know what these procedures are intended to accomplish. And they cannot determine what has been accomplished without some form of assessment. Instructional objectives often take the form of statements about the kinds of performance or behavior that can be expected of students once they have completed a lesson, a unit, or perhaps an entire course. As a result, statements of instructional objectives typically don't describe a lesson or a course but rather spell out the precise behaviors or skills that students should be able to perform following instruction. For this reason, instructional objectives are sometimes called behavioral objectives. The most useful instructional objectives, explains Mager (1997), should specify clearly what the learner should be able to do following instruction. That is, instructional objectives should be worded in terms of actual intended performance of learners. When objectives are worded in this way, they provide a clear description of course or lesson objectives. Equally important, they serve as a guide for instructional strategies and for assessing the performance of learners and teachers. Approaches to Writing Instructional Objectives Consider the following two examples of instructional objectives: The learner should be proficient in mathematics. The learner should be able to add two-digit numbers without using computers or other mechanical or electronic devices—and without resorting to fingers or toes. Mager (1997) argues that the second of these objectives is more useful than the first, because it specifies what the student must be able to do following instruction. As a result, it offers specific guidance for instruction and for assessment. Not only do useful instructional objectives specify what the learner should be able to do, but they also provide definite criteria for meeting goals. For example, look at these instructional objectives: The learner will be able to input material using a blank keyboard. On a 5-minute test using a blank keyboard, the learner will be able to input 40 words per minute with no more than 3 errors when transcribing a randomly assigned passage from Catcher in the Rye. The second of these statements establishes clear criteria for meeting instructional goals. As a result, it is more useful than the first for suggesting instructional and assessment procedures. Although precise, performance-oriented approaches to instructional objectives are most useful for guiding instruction and assessment, more general statements of objectives can also be helpful. For example, Waugh and Gronlund (2013) suggest that teachers should express main objectives in general rather than specific terms. Each main objective can then be developed in terms of actual behaviors that reflect the more general objective. Examples of these actual behaviors can then be used as a basis for assessment (see Figure 1.4). (Chapter 4 presents a more detailed description of instructional objectives.) Figure 1.4: Instructional objectives Figure depicting examples of instructional objects. The left side of the figure is labeled "Waugh and Gronlund: General objective followed by related specific objectives". The following text is included in the box underneath it: "Primary objective: The student understands how to perform simple division. Specific learning target: (a) can define what division means in his or her own words, (b) can define and give examples of relevant terms such as dividend, divisor, quotient, and remainder, (c) can solve multiplication problems". The right side of the figure is labeled "Mager: Specific learning targets". The following text is included in the box underneath it: "The student can solve nine out of ten division problems of the type: 12 ÷ 5 = ?". Examples of instructional objectives. The fairest and most valid teacher-made tests typically reflect specific instructional objectives. 1.3 The Implications of Current Legislation Table 1.4 lists the five main goals of the legislation known as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), a U.S. act of Congress first passed in 2001. NCLB reflects the tremendous concern that the public has about the quality of American education. And this act, along with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the Race to the Top (R2T) Program, has enormous implications for education. Common Standards Initiatives One of the implications of this legislation is an increased emphasis on common standards within and even across states. It is clear that today's students are part of an increasingly global society. They will need to compete against people from around the world for jobs. They need to have the knowledge, skills, and disposition to be successful in this changing world—skills such as those involved in collaboration, critical thinking, communication, creativity, and innovation (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2013). Common Core A principal talks about aligning assessments to the Common Core State Standards. Critical Thinking Questions: How has the Common Core changed the way teachers use educational assessment? What other changes to classroom practice are the result of the implementation of the Common Core? What might happen if the classroom assessments are misaligned with the Common Core? How can this be prevented? As leaders across the country considered this issue, they recognized the need to move beyond individual state standards for learning. They concluded that states need to agree on common standards in education—standards that allow all children to develop the skills and knowledge required for success in a global society, regardless of where they live. Common standards help ensure equity in education across states and prevent fragmentation of education for those students who move to new communities that might otherwise have their own different standards—an increasingly common event in a mobile population. Two organizations, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, spearheaded a movement to bring state leaders, administrators, teachers, and other stakeholders together to design standards that are rigorous, innovative, and focused on the most important knowledge and skills required for today's students. First introduced across the country in 2009, the Common Core State Standards Initiative sought feedback from parents, teachers, state leaders, and the general public before being finalized in 2010. States were invited to adopt the Common Core Standards, but the choice was voluntary. To date 45 states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity have adopted the standards (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2013). Common Core Standards have been developed in the disciplines of English/Language Arts and Mathematics for kindergarten through 12th grade. These content areas were chosen due to the foundational aspect of these subjects. (Work in other content subjects is being undertaken by individual professional groups associated with those disciplines.) The Common Core Standards are focused on establishing a balance between content knowledge and thinking skills. In English/Language Arts, the standards are organized so that reading, writing, listening and speaking, and language cross all grade levels with technology embedded in each component. Students are expected to read a variety of fiction and nonfiction genres from both print and nonprint sources and to think critically about the content of the reading. Even at the lower grade levels, they are encouraged to form opinions and support them, and to develop writing skills for a variety of purposes. Under the Common Core Standards, students have multiple opportunities to engage in dialogue in a variety of arenas, formal and informal, as they practice both listening and speaking skills. Similar to the English/Language Arts Standards, Mathematics Standards require students to employ higher levels of thinking. In a global society, it is not enough that students master procedures for doing calculations—termed procedural knowledge. In addition to procedural knowledge, they need to be able to reason mathematically, solve problems, and use logic to deduce answers. And they also need to be able to communicate their mathematical thinking and justify their answers and solutions. Standards that attend to both procedural competence and conceptual understanding equip students with the ability to assess a situation, determine a plan of action, carry out that plan, and evaluate its effectiveness. The Common Core Standards present a framework that can help unify the content knowledge and thinking skills students will need in the 21st century. As states adopt these standards, they are helping to ensure that all students have a high-quality education focused on knowledge and skills required of a contributing member of today's society. However, the standards are very clear on what they are not. The Common Core State Standards Initiative clearly states that the standards do not dictate How teachers should teach All that can or should be taught The nature of advanced work beyond the core The interventions needed for students well below grade level The full range of support for English language learners and students with special needs Everything needed to be college and career ready (Common Core State Standards Initiative Webinar, June 30, 2010) But as more states adopt the Common Core Standards, potential obstacles are beginning to appear. One of these has to do with the costs of changing assessment systems and reporting student progress. The old methods of assessment will not work in an educational arena that fosters critical thinking and problem solving. Tests need to go beyond recall and recognition. In addition, teachers who have operated in a standards system that focuses on discrete knowledge need to develop new tools for instruction. Instructional materials that engage students in problems that don't always have a clear, right answer must be developed. When does that happen, and who pays for it? These are issues yet to be resolved. With the emphasis on common standards, there is a corresponding increase in emphasis on standardized testing and the resulting phenomenon termed high-stakes testing—testing with potentially huge implications. Note, however, that not only is high-stakes testing a reflection of the demands imposed by legislation such as NCLB, but it stems as well from an increasing emphasis on making decisions that are data based. Tests serve an important function in this regard: They provide numerical data that can be analyzed, sorted, transformed, modeled, and otherwise manipulated to reveal key insights—a process that defines data analytics. The emphasis in data analytics—as opposed to data analysis—is on using information for decision making. Data analytics in education uses statistics (see Chapter 9), computer programs, learning theories, and information from educational research in an effort to improve teaching and learning. APPLICATIONS: Making Data-Driven Decisions Data-driven decision making is a concept gaining wide acceptance from educators, parents, and policy makers. First, let's define what we mean by data-driven decision making. Simply put, it means exactly what it says: Decisions are based on data. This means supporting your choices with evidence that says these are the best among available alternatives. In the past, schools have been known to operate on "gut feelings." The teacher feels that his students benefit when he combines music with instruction. The principal believes this reading program is the best for her school. The board of education thinks that eliminating recess will improve test scores because more instructional time is available. With the obligation to prepare students for the 21st century and the goal for students to flourish in a global society, we can no longer "feel," "believe," or "think": We need to know. With data-driven decision making, we look at the data, the evidence. Teachers conduct action research within their classes to determine if music truly does benefit students. Principals and boards of education read the research that has been done or systematically investigate the topic so they have data on which to make decisions. Consider this scenario: A local school has received its test scores from a statewide assessment of science in the third grade. The principal has shared the results and asked the third-grade team to review the data. They lay out the individual teacher's results and start looking for patterns. They consult the assessments blueprints and determine that across the four classes, one strand from the science curriculum is problematic. All four classes did poorly on the Interrelationships in Earth/Space Systems strand. They discuss why this might have occurred and discover that for all the other science strands, they have ample supplemental teaching materials. However, for this strand they are limited to their textbook for teaching the concepts in the state's standards. Armed with these data, they suggest to their principal that not only do they need more materials, but they need training to use the materials. Without data to support their request, their case would be far less convincing. But cautions do arise as we consider using data-driven decision making. First, we need to be aware that one data set is not enough. Our third-grade teachers could strengthen their case by including further evidence that the Science strand is problematic. What has been the performance of the students during the actual science unit? Do their scores on quizzes and tests reflect the same low scores seen on the statewide assessment? Do the informal checks for understanding conducted while teaching indicate confusion and misconceptions? Quality data-driven decision making does not rely on a single data set from which to draw conclusions. In addition, just because you have the data does not mean you will make the right decision. In our third-grade scenario, the data point to a problem with the one Science strand. The teachers provide the evidence to their principal, hoping that she will reach the same conclusion they have—more materials and training are needed. Instead, the principal might decide to increase the amount of instructional time for this unit. Instead of just two weeks on this unit, she decides teachers should spend four weeks, stealing time from the two units that surround this one in the curriculum pacing guide. Based on data? Yes. Good decision? We'll have to wait to see what the later data reveal. Data-driven decision making has the potential of anchoring decisions to evidence. However, just like with most things, potential is not always reached. NCLB: The No Child Left Behind Act Among other things, the NCLB act seeks to make teachers and schools more accountable. It does this in various ways. First, as shown in Table 1.4, it specifies what the goals of education are and it lays out minimum standards that will be acceptable. More than this, it ties funding directly to the performance of students, of schools, and, by the same token, of teachers. And, as we see shortly, this leads very directly to high-stakes testing. Note that among the goals of NCLB is that all students reach certain educational standards. An educational standard is basically a description of a required or expected level of knowledge or performance. Educational standards described in NCLB have to do with attaining proficiency in reading and mathematics, becoming proficient in English, graduating from high school, and being taught by highly qualified teachers. How can you tell if all students have reached the required standards? High-Stakes Implications The simple answer is by using tests. And these tests have very high stakes indeed, because their consequences can be life changing—or at least system changing. Tests that assess the proficiency of students can be system changing, because federal funds are often tied directly to how well students perform on these tests. States are required to set yearly performance targets with a view to reaching certain levels of proficiency within the allotted period. Results on high-stakes standardized tests provide information for data analytic processing, the results of which then allow the U.S. Department of Education to determine how every public school in the country is performing. The consequences of not making what is deemed adequate yearly progress (AYP) are spelled out by the NCLB act. For example, schools that don't reach AYP during two successive years are designated as schools in need of improvement and are required to provide additional remedial services for students. Schools that fail to meet AYP four or more years in a row may be required to replace staff, to hire outside consultants, or even to transfer administration to outside personnel (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 2013). It's important to note that legislation such as the NCLB has not been enthusiastically received by all (Guisbond, 2012). In fact, many consider it a total failure. We look at this issue, and at some of the more negative implications of this legislation, in Chapter 10 in relation to the consequences of increased emphasis on high-stakes testing. Assessing Teacher Competence Also potentially very high stakes are the tests used to assess teacher competence. The tests most commonly used for this purpose are the Praxis™ tests. These are based on 10 basic principles that describe the skills, attitudes, and behaviors thought to be characteristic of the most effective teachers (Table 1.5). The standards of effective teachers and teaching outlined in this table were developed by a consortium of school administrators, the Council of Chief State School Officers, and are known as the InTASC principles (InTASC stands for Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium; CCSSO, 2011). Many teacher-training institutions use a form of this test, the Praxis I, as a basis for admission into their teacher-training program. A second form of the test, the Praxis II, looks at minimum levels of competence in basic skills such as reading, writing, and arithmetic. And a third form of the test, the Praxis III, is used to assess teachers' actual classroom performance. Table 1.5 Core InTASC (Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium) standards describing the characteristics of effective teachers Broad area of teacher expertise Description of standard Standard 1 Learner Development The teacher understands how children learn and develop, and can provide learning opportunities that support their intellectual, social and personal development. Standard 2 Learning Differences The teacher understands how students differ in their approaches to learning and creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse cultures and individual differences. Standard 3 Learning Environments The teacher fosters relationships with school colleagues, parents, and agencies in the larger community to support students' learning and well-being. Standard 4 Content Knowledge The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students. Standard 5 Application of Content The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage students' development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills. Standard 6 Assessment Skills The teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of the learner. Standard 7 Planning for Instruction The teacher plans instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, students, the community, and curriculum goals. Standard 8 Instructional Strategies The teacher uses knowledge of effective instructional strategies and verbal, nonverbal, and media communication techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the classroom. Standard 9 Professional Learning and Ethical Practice The teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of his or her choices and actions on others (students, parents, and other professionals in the learning community) and who actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally. Standard 10 Leadership and Collaboration The teacher fosters relationships with school colleagues, parents, and agencies in the larger community to support students' learning and well-being and to advance the profession. The Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) standards were developed by the Council of Chief State School Officers and member states. Copies may be downloaded from the Council's website at http://www.ccsso.org. Source: From Council of Chief State School Officers. (2011, April). Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Model Core Teaching Standards: A Resource for State Dialogue. Washington, DC: CCSSO. Reprinted by permission. It's important to note that these tests are designed to screen individuals rather than to rank them. They are not meant to be used for hiring—or firing—decisions. Nor are they intended to be used as a basis for salary adjustments or for promotions or demotions. Race to the Top (R2T) Program The Race to the Top program is a federally funded ($4.35 billion) competition for funds announced in 2009. Both the R2T funding program and NCLB are based on the principle of teacher and school accountability (McNeil, 2010). Under the R2T program, funds are awarded to school jurisdictions based on points that are earned for demonstrating performance-based standards, complying with national educational standards, promoting charter schools, and encouraging the use of computers in classrooms. The points received reflect such things as the competence of teachers and principals, the effectiveness of preparation programs for teachers and principals, progress in raising school achievement, and the development of high-quality assessment procedures designed to reflect increasingly high standards. The Race to the Top funding program is designed to bring about educational reforms relating to four specific areas having to do with standards, assessments, teacher qualifications, and low-achieving schools. It proposes to do this by bringing about the following improvements in each area (U.S. Department of Education, 2012): Standards: Adopting higher standards and developing assessments to increase students' success in college and work and to promote greater competitiveness in the global economy Assessment: Developing and gathering assessment data regarding student growth and achievement that can be used for improving instruction Teacher qualifications: Recruiting, developing, and rewarding the most effective teachers and principals Low-achieving schools: Improving performance in the lowest achieving schools One effect of the R2T funding program is that more than three quarters of U.S. states have now adopted common test standards largely reflecting the InTASC standards developed by the Council of Chief State School Officers and described in Table 1.5 (CCSSO, 2011). A second outcome is that many states have encouraged the formation of more charter schools. The Race to the Top funding program is not without controversy. Because only some states "win" this funding competition, many of those that "lose" have incurred significant additional expenses without seeing any corresponding increase in educational funding. In addition, many critics argue that the tests used are a poor way of assessing teacher competence. Others maintain that the resulting high-stakes testing may have an effect opposite to that intended: Specifically, it can lead to a narrowing of educational offerings and, ultimately, a weakening of the educational system. And there are others who suggest that the federal government should not try to influence education at a local level (United Opt Out National, 2012). As of this writing, some states have opted out of this program. For example, Texas, South Carolina, and Virginia have not applied for R2T funding. Even schools that have been successful in obtaining funds have sometimes later opted out. Some find that the small amount of money allocated to each school is not worth the time-consuming and expensive assessment and record-keeping requirements (Keany, 2012). IDEA: The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act With the passage of a series of federal laws, beginning with Public Law 94–142 in 1975, updated and changed to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1990, and later, to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) in 2004, the education of children with special needs has increasingly become one of the responsibilities of regular classroom teachers. The act is most often referred to simply as IDEA. It has had important implications for the assessment of children with special needs. A young Caucasian boy with Down syndrome smiles with a picture book on the table in front of him. IDEA provides important guarantees for those with special needs, including inclusion in regular classrooms whenever possible and free and appropriate educational services. It's enough to make one smile. George Doyle/Stockbyte/Thinkstock Public Law 94–142 gave most of the responsibility for identifying and providing services for children with special needs to special education teachers (teachers specifically trained and charged with looking after children with special needs). But the provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, together with a series of related court decisions, have been largely instrumental in revolutionizing how schools assess and deal with exceptionality. Among other things, the law provides important guarantees for children with exceptionalities and for their parents (Center for Appropriate Dispute Resolution, 2010). The guarantees include Zero rejection and parent participation Education in the "least restrictive environment" Free and appropriate educational services Fair, nondiscriminatory assessment and due process of law An individualized education plan (IEP) Although these guarantees were initially intended to apply to learners with special needs, they are increasingly being applied to all learners. As a result, it is important for all teachers and educational authorities to understand the implications of IDEA. Zero Rejection and Parent Participation All children, no matter how severe their disabilities, are entitled to all the provisions of the act. That is, each child is entitled to education in the least restrictive environment, to nondiscriminatory assessment, to all required educational services at no cost, and to an individualized education plan. The guarantee of parent participation grants parents the right to participate in meaningful ways in all aspects of their child's education including assessment, development of individual education plans, school placement, and transition from school. Education in the Least Restrictive Environment Certain precedent-setting legal decisions have specified that children with disabilities have the right to education in the least restrictive environment. For practical purposes, that environment is usually interpreted to mean a regular classroom as opposed to one designated as a "special education" classroom. This interpretation has led directly to the practice of main-streaming or inclusion, the inclusion of children with special needs in the regular classroom (see Figure 1.5). Figure 1.5: Summary of the main provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Figure summarizing the main provisions of IDEA. One center circle is surrounded by five circles connected by a circular line. Arrows point from the center circle to each outer circle. The center circle contains the following information: "Zero rejection and parent participation; education in the 'least restrictive environment'; individualized educational plans (IEPs); free and appropriate educational services; and fair, nondiscriminatory evaluation and due process of law". The first outer circle contains the following information: "All children, no matter how severe their disabilities, are entitled to all provisions of the act". The second outer circle contains the following information: "The 'least restrictive environment' is generally interpreted to mean the regular classroom ('inclusive education')". The third outer circle contains the following information: "Optimal educational experiences are to be provided at public expense". The fourth outer circle contains the following information: "Identification of children with special needs must be based on fair, non-discriminatory, and relevant assessment procedures". The fifth and final outer circle contains the following information: "Detailed, written, individualized plans prepared by specialists, teachers, and parents are mandated for all children with special needs". IDEA is often described as the Bill of Rights for those with special needs. A Free and Appropriate Education Children with special needs must be given optimal educational experiences at public expense. Optimal or appropriate educational experiences are typically guided by a detailed education plan developed by parents, teachers, and other specialists specifically for each child. Fair Evaluation and Due Process IDEA requires that the identification of children with special needs, and the detailed analysis of their needs, be based on a variety of relevant and appropriate assessment procedures. Parents and teachers are usually the first to notice that a child might have special needs. IDEA mandates that subsequent assessment be undertaken by trained professionals using nondiscriminatory procedures. One of the practical implications of this guarantee is that assessment for minority-language learners must take place in their native language. Individualized Education Plans Individualized education plans (IEPs) are written programs that are required by law for every child with special needs. They are usually prepared by a team that includes the child's parents, regular classroom teachers, special education teachers, and one or more specialists as required. On occasion, the child might also be involved in developing an IEP. IDEA specifies that IEPs must be written documents that contain the following: A clear description of the student's current performance and achievement A list of short-range objectives and of longer-term goals A detailed description of the special services that will be provided for the student The duration of the program Assessment procedures that will be used to evaluate the extent to which goals are being met Developing detailed IEPs can be enormously challenging and time-consuming. And carrying out the provisions of these plans—including assessing the extent to which goals are being met and modifying approaches and goals as required—can be even more challenging. See Table 1.6 for a summary of the guarantees explicit in IDEA and some of their practical implications. Table 1.6 Main guarantees of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Guarantee Practical implications Zero rejection and parent participation Appropriate educational services must be provided to all children, no matter how serious their disability, including those who present discipline problems. Parents have the right to participate in their child's education, to be fully informed, and to grant or withhold consent for evaluative or instructional procedures. Education in the least restrictive environment Because the least restrictive environment is interpreted by the courts to mean the most normal environment that can meet the child's special needs, this provision effectively mandates inclusive education (mainstreaming). Free and appropriate public educational services Publicly funded special education programs must be provided without charge to all children with special needs. Fair, nondiscriminatory evaluation and due process of law Students must be evaluated by experts using instruments that are free from bias and that take into consideration specific disabilities and problems the child might have (such as a different first language); parents have a right to be informed and to grant or withhold consent regarding assessment and educational plans for their children. Individualized education plans (IEPs) For each child with special needs, an individually designed education plan must be developed by a team of teachers, administrators, specialists, and parents. It must contain statements of goals, instructional programs, and assessment procedures together with specific timelines for each. 1.4 The Ethics of Testing and Assessment It was clear right from the beginning that Mr. Lowen, our 12th-grade physics teacher, didn't know squat about physics. Yet there were many who flocked to his classes. And although most students were extremely bored with his classes, many were quite happy with the inflated grades they took home with them. You see, Mr. Lowen had a cupboard full of old departmental exams, complete with answer keys. And that's what he taught: the answers to old exam questions! Hardly a recommended or ethical procedure, as Figure 1.6 illustrates. Teaching to the test, as illustrated by Mr. Lowen (and shown in Figure 1.6), might have two distinct meanings. The one illustrated here has to do with the teacher's desire to boost marks with no concern for reaching instructional objectives. The other sense in which teaching to the test might be employed relates to instructional procedures that are aimed directly at achieving instructional goals and, therefore, indirectly at ensuring that learners do well on assessments that look at the extent to which those goals have been met. The expression teaching to the test is most often used in connection with approaches such as Mr. Lowen's. This practice, according to some critics, is one of the by-products of high-stakes testing. As an example, if a teacher takes a list of vocabulary words from a high-stakes state test and teaches them, that would be teaching to the test in its negative sense. In contrast, a teacher might approach vocabulary development in a reading class by helping students find new words in hard-to-read texts and learn them. That would be teaching to the test in its more positive sense. As we see in Chapter 10, when there is a great deal of pressure on teachers to have their students perform well, and when the consequences of doing so—or of not doing so—are massive, instructional and assessment decisions might suffer. Figure 1.6: Two approaches to instruction This figure shows two different approaches to instruction: ethical and less ethical. The first is an ethical approach to preparing students for tests. In this approach, instructional procedures are designed to develop knowledge, skills, attitudes, or values that can be tested by well-designed assessment procedures. The second approach is a less ethical way to test preparation of students. In this approach, instructional procedures bypass the development of skills and knowledge and concentrate solely on preparation for answering test items. The ethical approach to preparing students for assessment seeks to develop relevant knowledge and skills. A less ethical approach teaches "to the test." Guidelines for Educational Assessment There are now guidelines for teachers such as Mr. Lowen, whose assessment practices are less than ideal. One set of guidelines is that developed by the joint committee on test practices, a group made up of representatives from the American Psychological Association (APA), the American Counseling Association (ACA), the American Educational Research Association (AERA), the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA), the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), the National Association of Test Directors (NATD), and the National Council on Measurement in Education (Code of Fair Testing Practices, 2004). The resulting set of guidelines, called the Code of Fair Testing Practices in Education, is intended to apply to all kinds of educational assessment including paper-and-pencil tests, computer-based tests, and performance tests. It is designed to provide guidance for test developers as well as those who use tests. It lists specific recommendations with respect to the following areas: Developing and selecting appropriate tests Administering and scoring tests Reporting and interpreting test results Informing test takers Because of its importance, the code is reprinted in its entirety in Chapter 2 (Table 2.3). Much of the information in the part of the table that deals with fair testing practices for test users is especially relevant for classroom teachers and school administrators. The part that deals with the responsibilities of test developers is most relevant for professional test-development companies, although it too has implications for many kinds of teacher-made tests (discussed in Chapter 8). Most educational and psychological organizations also have other codes that specify what ethical—and unethical—behavior is for their members (e.g., the Code of Ethics of the American Educational Research Association, 2011). Figure 1.7 summarizes ethical principles that are most relevant for educational assessment. Teacher Responsibilities As is apparent in Figure 1.7 and in the Code of Fair Testing Practices in Education (Table 2.3, Chapter 2), teachers have important responsibilities relating to assessment. These include choosing or developing assessments that are appropriate for what as well as for whom they are intended. This means that assessment instruments, procedures, and strategies need to reflect intended instructional goals and that they must also be free of cultural, social class, or religious bias. When required, assessments must also be appropriate for learners with special needs. And perhaps most important, assessment needs to be seen as an integral part of the teaching–learning process deliberately geared toward improving student learning and achievement. Figure 1.7: Ethical principles This figure reviews the ethical principles relevant for educational assessment. The figure contains the following information on ethical principles: No testing procedure should be undertaken where there is a possibility of harming participants physically or emotionally; When assessments are part of a research project, informed consent of participants is generally mandatory. That is, participants must understand the implications and possible consequences of the assessment and must be free to refuse without coercion or fear of reprisal. By definition, being a student in school or college constitutes implied consent with respect to normal educational testing procedures; Steps should be taken to ensure that test results as well as individual responses remain anonymous; Test records must be kept private or disclosed only within the provisions of the law; Caution and good sense need to be used if the results of standardized psychological tests (intelligence or personality tests for example) are to be shared with students or parents. Given the limited reliability of many of these tests, and given the implications of the labels often attached to their results, these should not always be fully disclosed; Tests need to be as valid, reliable, fair, and unbiased as possible (see Chapter 2); The use of deception in psychological research is justified only when the study has significant potential value, no alternative methods are readily available, there is minimal risk to participants, and the research has been approved by an ethical review board. These ethical principles apply not just to the use of formal tests, but to all kinds of educational assessment. Based in part on the AERA Code of Ethics (2011). One of the most important characteristics of educational assessments from the student's point of view is that they be fair—or at least seem to the learner to be fair. That chapter also describes how assessments need to measure what they are intended to measure (they need to be valid), and they need to measure as accurately and consistently as possible (they need to be reliable). An important aspect of the teacher's responsibilities with respect to assessment is to ensure that assessment procedures be as fair, valid, and reliable as possible. Teachers also have key responsibilities relating to scoring, interpreting, reporting, and using the results of assessment procedures. Scoring and interpreting a test should be accurate and unbiased. Further, the results of a single assessment should never be the basis for major decisions. Finally, teachers are responsible for communicating assessment results to students, parents, and administration. It is important that they understand the limitations and significance of their assessments. And it is also important that they help learners and parents interpret test results and understand their meaning. Student Rights Students, too, have responsibilities with respect to schooling and assessment—and rights as well. Among their responsibilities are obvious requirements, such as showing up in school or examination rooms at the appointed place and time; acquiring educational materials as needed; making an honest effort to participate and learn; and being honest and ethical in the completion of assignments and in test taking, avoiding plagiarism, and other forms of cheating. The Right to an Education Student rights vary considerably throughout the world. As we saw earlier, the NCLB and IDEA specify that in the United States, all students have the right to a "free and appropriate" education, to be taught by highly qualified teachers, and to be taught in such a way that all will reach a minimum level of proficiency in reading, writing, and arithmetic and all will graduate from high school. And although the probability that all students will fulfill these ideals is unrealistic, that each should have a legitimate opportunity to do so is really the most important goal. The Right to Assembly and Expression Within certain legal limits, students in U.S. schools also have rights relating to freedom of expression and of assembly. And in the event of a grievance, they have a right to due process of law. A declaration of school students' rights adopted by the general assembly of the Organizing Bureau of European School Student Unions (OBESSU) also stipulates that all students should have a right to a legally recognized school council; that they should have a legally guaranteed right to participate in important school decisions including the content of lectures, selection of texts, and teaching methods; that they have the right to appeal decisions they deem unfavorable; that they be guaranteed all normal civil rights; and that they have the right to high-quality education (Light on the Rights, 2006). Recently, too, there has been increasing emphasis on privacy laws, many of which guarantee the individual's right to confidentiality with respect to personal information. Determining whether this also includes test results is an important issue for educators. Young adult students in Italy protest in the streets. In many parts of the world, educational systems are inadequate or deteriorating. Here in Bologna, Italy, in 2011, students protest ministry of education cutbacks they claim are demolishing the educational system. © Silvia Morara/Corbis The Right to Privacy The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act is the U.S. federal law which protects the student's right to privacy (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). Its main provisions are the following: It gives students access to their education records. It provides an opportunity for students to petition to have records changed if they think these are unfair or inaccurate. It grants students some control over the disclosure of personal information from these records. In practice, what the law means is that schools typically require written permission from students or their parents (or other adults legally responsible for them) to release any information from student records. Similarly, postsecondary institutions are prohibited from releasing information about student grades, the programs in which they are enrolled, financial records, or other personal information unless they have express written permission to do so. Note that this law applies to formal school records; it does not apply to informal grading in school. For example, a fourth-grade teacher is not in violation of privacy rights when she puts up an informal chart indicating the number of assignments turned in, or even if she puts up different numbers of little stars on the chart to indicate how well the assignments were done. But she would be in violation of privacy laws if she reported how little Johnny did on his arithmetic test to, say, his Aunt Beatrice—unless Aunt Beatrice is Johnny's "authorized representative" as defined by the act (usually a parent or legal guardian), or unless the parents or legal guardians have granted express and informed consent that Aunt Beatrice be given that information. And if little Johnny were 18 or more, teachers and postsecondary educators would be in violation of his legal right to privacy were they to divulge, even to a parent, any personal information in Johnny's records without his consent. Note that the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act does not mean that school records, test results, and other private information is available only to teachers, school administrators, parents, and students. The law also stipulates that student information may be used for funding applications, research, or other legitimate purposes providing that a student identifier system protecting the individual identity of each student is used. It's also clear that the results of various student assessments sometimes need to be shared among other individuals and institutions for what are considered legally defensible—and sometimes legally mandated—purposes. For example, IDEA stipulates that all children with disabilities must be provided with a "free and appropriate education." Doing so typically requires what are sometimes major accommodations in the educational system. These accommodations are usually based on those aspects of a student's record that indicate the nature of the learner's abilities and disabilities. As a result, information that might otherwise be considered private and confidential now needs to be shared at least among all who are involved in developing individualized education plans (IEPs) for that student. That doing so is legitimate and legally defensible seems clear. Sometimes less clear is the legal defensibility—and the ethics—surrounding the identification of children with special needs. As we see in Chapter 2, even professionally developed, standardized tests are often far from completely reliable or valid. As a result, schools sometimes make errors in identifying learners with disabilities. Furthermore, whenever someone is identified as being in need of special educational services, that person's record is essentially being flagged and brought to the attention of a variety of people. This practice might have serious, life-changing consequences for the individual involved, and it might also be a violation of that person's privacy rights. In such cases, schools need to work closely with parents; they also need to obtain express and informed consent before releasing information from student records. The Right to Informed Consent Informed consent implies that parents understand clearly how and to whom private information will be disclosed, the extent to which they are free to require that information remain confidential, the implications of disclosure, the purposes for which the information will be used, and how the student's records will be maintained and protected. In summary, three basic concepts underlie the laws and rules that govern student privacy (National Center for Education Statistics, 2012b): notification, disclosure, and informed consent. Notification has to do with the school's responsibility to inform legal guardians (or students when they are over 18) about any private data that will or has been collected, how it will be used, and the reasons for its use. Disclosure relates to the release of private information. Without informed consent, disclosure can be made only to education officials for use in the provision of educational services or for defensible statistical or administrative purposes (such as for funding applications). Informed consent implies three conditions: that parents (or mature students) be fully informed about why personal information will be collected and used; that they have the capacity to refuse to participate or to accept; and that accepting or refusing be entirely voluntary without fear of penalty or reprisal (see Figure 1.8). Figure 1.8: Concepts underlying notions of student privacy This figure shows that the basic concepts underlying laws governing student privacy are: notification, disclosure, and informed consent. With notification, parents (or students aged 18 or more) must be informed about any private data collected and about its use. With disclosure, private information can be disclosed only to education officials where its release is justified for statistical or administrative purposes. All other release requires informed consent. With informed consent, parents (or mature students), must be fully informed, must have the capacity to accept or refuse participation, and must be able to do so voluntarily without fear of penalty or promise of reward. In many jurisdictions, student privacy is governed by laws based on the notion of fully informed consent and includes safeguards regarding disclosure of personal information. 1.5 Self-Assessment and What Works in Education In the beginning, our parents tell us how smart and nimble we are. They smile and clap their hands and say, "Wow, good speaking, Guy." It makes us proud 3-year-olds, and it reinforces our good speaking and our nimble and smart behaviors. Later, we go to schools and now teachers tell us how clever and witty we are. They mark our tests and clap their hands and say, "Wow . . . oh, wait a minute, they're not so good, your number skills, Guy." And somewhere along the road we ask ourselves, "How ethical and moral am I?" "How agile and alert?" "How bright?" Gradually, we learn to look at our behaviors, at our small accomplishments, at our failures. We discover how to compare our actions, our gifts, our failings, to those of others. We develop notions of how things should be or how we would like them to be. We build up personal standards that we can now use to become judges of our own strengths and weaknesses. Thus, gradually, we learn the skills of self-assessment—the skills that allow us to evaluate our own abilities and accomplishments. Self-assessment is a fundamental aspect of learning how to learn. It is a cognitive strategy of the utmost importance. Self-assessment is fundamental to improvement. In the same way as athletes have to be able to evaluate their performance to improve it, learners have to know how well or how badly their cognitive processes are functioning if they are to improve. Self-Regulated Learners One of the important goals of schools is to teach students how to learn—to teach them the skills involved in knowing (the skills of what is termed metacognition—knowing about knowing; see Chapter 3). Metacognitive skills provide learners with ways of estimating the effects of their efforts. They allow students to predict the likelihood that they will succeed and that they will later be able to remember what they have learned. In other words, they are skills based on self-assessment. Too, they are skills that are centrally involved in what is termed self-regulated learning. Self-regulated learning is autonomous learning where learners are responsible for setting their own instructional objectives, applying strategies to reach these targets, and evaluating their performance as they strive to reach them. A young African American boy sits at his desk in his classroom with a pencil in hand. One main goal of schools is to teach children how to learn—to make of them autonomous, self-directed learners. Digital Vision/Thinkstock The Bases of Self-Assessment Students' self-assessments—their personal notions about their progress and achievements, and about their strengths and weaknesses—are based in part on the information they receive from peers and teachers. And at least some of that information derives from the formal and informal assessment procedures that schools and teachers provide. Self-assessment is also based on comparisons students make between themselves and others. It may also reflect a range of sometimes subtle influences, including personality characteristics. Some people are naturally confident, possess high opinions of themselves, and have a strong sense of their ability to succeed. Others, not so much. Research supports the notion that self-assessment is an important aspect of formative assessment (assessment designed to promote learning). That is, strong self-assessment skills contribute to learning (e.g., Chang & Tseng, 2011; Volante & Beckett, 2011). One purpose of educational assessment is to foster the skills involved in self-assessment. Some students learn and use those skills exceptionally well; they have realistic appraisals of their abilities and their weaknesses, and they use their self-appraisals wisely to guide their efforts. Others are prone to self assessments that exaggerate their gifts—or that depreciate them. Do those of us afflicted with poor self-assessment skills ever learn that we do not really know ourselves? That we really are far more gifted than we believe? Or—surely not—less? What Works in Education? There is no simple answer to what works in education. Otherwise, the heading would not be a question. Instead, it would be a statement: What works in education. But this is a textbook: It tries to answer questions rather than simply ask them. What works, Black and Wiliam (1998) inform us after an extensive review of literature on classroom assessment, is assessment that is designed for learning rather than simply of learning. It is assessment that is conducted for learners rather than simply to learners. In brief, it is formative assessment. Formative assessment, the authors explain, is based on three key processes: Establishing where the learners are in their learning Establishing where they are going Establishing what needs to be done to get them there (Black & Wiliam, 2009, p. 7) They note that while teachers have traditionally assumed responsibility for each of these processes, current research suggests that learners need to be centrally involved at all stages. This means that learners, like teachers, need to understand instructional objectives and they need to know what the criteria for success are. It also means that they need to be involved, in collaboration with their teachers and their peers, in selecting and carrying out the learning tasks that will move them toward relevant instructional objectives. More specifically, Black and Wiliam (2009) identify five strategies they consider to be the key to what works in education: Clarifying and sharing learning intentions and criteria for success Engineering effective classroom discussions and other learning tasks that elicit evidence of student understanding Providing feedback that moves learners forward Activating students as instructional resources for one another Activating students as the owners of their own learning (p. 8) These strategies are the cornerstones of formative assessment. The key, basically, has to do with the decisions that the teacher makes in the classroom on a minute-to-minute basis and on the assessment strategies that are activated. The primary focus of these decisions and strategies should always be to enhance student motivation and learning, argues Woytek (2004). Accordingly, teachers have the professional responsibility of being aware of and using the best of all possible instructional practices. Formative assessment—assessment for learning—is one of those practices. Developing self-regulated, highly motivated learners is an enormously important task. But how can we accomplish this? The feature called In the Classroom: Strategies to Improve Motivation and Learning lists a number of suggestions. Many of these suggestions are recurring themes in this book. IN THE CLASSROOM: Strategies to Improve Motivation and Learning The best of today's learners are highly motivated and self-regulated. They set and understand their own goals, and they are skilled at monitoring and directing their activities in pursuit of these goals. The strategies listed here can be useful in helping students become self-directed learners. Suggestions Some specific strategies Set students up for success Allow learners to practice relevant test formats. Involve learners in determining grading criteria. Provide proof of student success Arrange for students to succeed. Help them avoid failure. Encourage them to develop expectations of high marks. Provide opportunities for self-assessment. Involve learners in learning and assessment Give them a role in determining goals. Make technological resources available to learners. Encourage them to reflect on their efforts and achievements. Reward their efforts toward self-assessment and self-direction. Use high-quality assessments Use a variety of approaches to assessment. Use authentic assessments when possible (assessments that reflect the constraints and demands of real life). Communicate results: Feedback is the cornerstone of formative assessment Conduct brief, informal, ungraded classroom assessments frequently. Use a variety of minute-to-minute assessment strategies. Help learners determine their progress and select optimal learning strategies. Source: Based in part on "Utilizing Assessment to Improve Student Motivation and Success," by A. Woytek, 2004. Retrieved March 29, 2013, from http://www.usca.edu/essays/vol142005/woytek.pdf. Chapter 1 Themes and Questions Section Summaries 1.1 The Purposes of Educational Assessment Historically, the main purpose of educational assessment was to provide a grade (summative assessment ); increasingly, assessment has become an integral part of the day-to-day functioning of schools, where it is used to provide feedback for guiding and improving teaching and learning (formative assessment ). The emphasis is now on assessment for learning rather than simply assessment of learning. Performance-based assessment, unlike many paper-and-pencil or computer-based tests, asks learners to perform or construct what is being assessed. In education, tests are usually specific instruments or procedures used to measure achievement and progress; assessment is a more general term for all the activities involved in educational testing and measurement. Evaluation refers to making a value judgment or appraising something relative to certain criteria. 1.2 Instructional Goals and Assessment Students tend to study what teachers test and (hopefully) teach; hence the importance of educational assessment that measures the intentions (educational goals) of educational systems. Instructional objectives, the explicit intended outcomes of instructional activities, are critical for determining both what needs to be taught and what should be assessed. For these purposes, clear and specific statements of objectives are most useful. 1.3 The implications of Current Legislation The No Child Left Behind Act describes some highly specific, measurable goals of U.S. education and ties funding directly to school performance relative to these goals (leading to testing with important consequences, labeled high-stakes testing). This act and the Race to the Top (R2T) program are based on the notion of school and teacher accountability. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) outlines the school's responsibilities with respect to providing services for children with special needs. It guarantees zero rejection, parent participation, education in the least restrictive environment, free and appropriate education, fair evaluation, and individual education plans (IEPs) for all learners with special needs. 1.4 The Ethics of Testing and Assessment Most professional organizations in education and psychology have developed codes of fair and ethical practices in assessment. A consortium of many of these organizations has developed a set of guidelines for test construction, selection, administration, interpretation, and use of results. These guidelines underline that teachers are responsible for choosing and developing tests that are fair, appropriate, and unbiased as well as valid and reliable. Student rights vary considerably throughout the world. In the United States, these rights are often implicit in legislation such as IDEA and NCLB, as well as in relevant court decisions. They include the right to an education as well as important privacy and nondisclosure rights. 1.5 Self-Assessment and What Works in Education One important function of formal and informal educational assessment is to promote the skills of self-assessment—skills that are importantly involved in learning how to learn. These skills require knowing about knowing (metacognition) and allow learners to begin to guide and control their own learning (self-regulated learning). Extensive research in education suggests that among the strategies and approaches that work best are those that emphasize the formative functions of assessment. Applying formative assessment requires frequent, brief, collaborative, ongoing assessment designed to provide immediate feedback for teachers and learners. It is based on three key processes: establishing what learners know; determining what they should know; establishing what needs to be done. Applied Questions What are the most important purposes of educational assessment? Generate a list of the uses to which educational assessment might be put. Which of these uses do you think is most important? Why? How are summative and formative assessment different? Explain how an assessment might be used for summative and formative purposes. What are simple definitions of assessment, measurement, test, and evaluation? Distinguish among these terms using classroom examples of each. How do instructional objectives relate to educational assessment? Write three or four specific instructional objectives reflecting the goals of this chapter. What are NCLB and IDEA, and what are their implications for educational assessment? Summarize the most important provisions of IDEA or of NCLB. What are some important ethical issues in assessment? Using Internet and library resources, research laws and regulations that might apply to student rights in your area. What is a self-regulated learner? Defend the proposition that one of the most important functions of schools is to develop self-regulated learners. Key Terms Click on each key term to see the definition. adequate yearly progress (AYP) A measurement of the annual progress schools and school districts are making with respect to mathematics and reading proficiency targets mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act. Apgar test Widely used standardized assessment procedure for newborns that looks at their heart rate, respiration, muscle tone, color, and reflexive responses. assessment A general, inclusive term referring to all the activities undertaken to obtain information about learners and teaching methods. May be based on tests and measurements or on a variety of less formal approaches such as questioning, observing, and various performance-based approaches. charter school A publicly funded school that offers nontraditional school options (for example, a sports emphasis; an academic emphasis; a foreign language emphasis) but that has to be accountable for producing certain results to maintain its charter. data analytics The process of manipulating, organizing, transforming, and modeling data to uncover useful information. diagnostic assessment In education, assessments designed to discover which educational objectives, if any, have not been met and to suggest reasons why. digital natives Includes those who grew up with digital technology. Sometimes referred to as generations Y and Z, or as the net generation. educational goals Expressions of the broad, ideal, desired outcomes of the educational process. Overriding purposes that guide the formulation of more specific objectives. educational standards Expectations or norms that describe a required or desired level of knowledge or performance. evaluation In education, the act of making a value judgment. Often based on different forms of educational assessment. formative assessment An assessment undertaken before and during instruction, designed primarily to assist the teaching–learning process. See also summative assessment. grades Usually letters, numbers, or verbal descriptors used to summarize and describe student achievement. A summative and evaluative indicator. high-stakes testing Tests whose outcomes have significant consequences for one or more individuals or institutions including testees, schools, teachers, or parents. For example, tests upon which promotional or funding decisions depend are high-stakes tests. inclusion See mainstreaming. individualized education plans (IEPs) Individualized instructional programs tailored to a child's specific pattern of needs and abilities. Also termed individualized program plans (IPPs). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) The U.S. special education law that provides funding for special education and guarantees certain rights for learners with special needs and their parents. instructional objective A specific, intended result of instruction usually expressed in terms of actual, measurable behaviors. An important guide for classroom instruction and assessment. learning targets The specific goals that guide instruction and learning of specific curriculum units. Clear statements of intended learning. Educational goals denote broader, all-encompassing objectives. mainstreaming The practice of placing students in need of special services in regular classrooms rather than segregating them. Also termed inclusion or inclusive education. measurements In education, instruments or procedures used to arrive at an indication of quantity (amount). metacognition Knowing about knowing. Includes strategies that allow learners to recognize limitations and to monitor progress. Involved in "learning how to learn" and in self-regulated learning. net generation Generic label to describe those born after the development and popularization of digital technologies. Mostly born after 1980, and also referred to as digital natives. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) A U.S. act designed to ensure that all students and teachers achieve specified standards, that all students become proficient in English, and that all students graduate from high school. performance-based assessment An assessment that looks at the actual performance of students, where the performance selected is one that directly demonstrates the skills, understanding, knowledge, or accomplishments that define educational targets. placement assessment Pre-instruction assessment designed to provide information about learner readiness. Useful for learner placement and for suggesting the most effective teaching strategies. Race to the Top (R2T) program A competitive grant program whereby participating states receive educational funding based on improvements in student achievement evident in graduation rates and performance on standardized tests. rubric A written set of guidelines for assessing the quality of a performance or product. self-assessment The process of critically examining and assessing one's personal strengths and weaknesses, of judging the adequacy and value of one's behaviors. self-regulated learning A situation in which the learner is responsible for setting learning goals and selecting and applying strategies to reach these goals. Autonomous, self-directed learning. special education teacher A teacher whose training or functions deal specifically with the education of children with exceptionalities. summative assessment The type of assessment that occurs at the end of an instructional sequence and that is designed primarily to provide a grade. See also formative assessment. test In education, usually a specific instrument or procedure designed to measure student achievement and progress. test anxiety Test-related feelings of fear, worry, and concern that have a negative impact on test performance.