Geographic subjects: Australia ; Oceania. Rights: Reproduction of this work in whole or part for educational purposes within an educational institution and on the condition that it is not offered for sale is permitted by the Department of Training and Workforce Development.
Skip to main content. Corporate author: Western Australia. Department of Training and Workforce Development DTWD Abstract: Assessment tools - also called evidence gathering tools - contain both the instrument and the instructions for gathering and interpreting evidence in an assessment process.
Excerpt from publication [-] Show less. Edition: 4th ed. In this model, the monitoring assessment would be given once in each grade span elementary, middle, and high school, e. The first component would be one of the on-demand assessment options we suggest in Chapter 5.
In this approach, a test that makes use of mixed-item formats including some constructed-response tasks such as those currently used for the New England Common Assessment Program or on the New York state assessments or that were used in the past for the Maryland School Performance Assessment Program, see Chapter 5 , would be used as an on-demand component.
The second component would include several classroom-embedded assessments incorporated into replacement units see Chapter 5. For this model, the on-demand component would be administered in a way that makes use of both the fixed-form and matrix-sampling administration approaches. All students at a tested grade would take a common test form that uses selected-response and constructed-response questions including some technology-enhanced questions, if feasible.
Every student would also have to complete one of several performance assessment tasks, administered through a matrix-sampling design. The common, fixed-form test would yield score reports.
Both parts of the monitoring assessment would be developed by the state. The state would determine when the on-demand assessment is given, but the district or other local education agency would make decisions about when the classroom-embedded assessment components would be scheduled and could select from among a set of options for the topics.
Both parts of the monitoring assessment would be scored at the state level, although the state might decide to use teachers as scorers. Although the assessments in the classroom-embedded component could be administered in a standardized way, one complication of this design is that it would be difficult to keep the assessments secure since they would be administered at different times of the school year.
Thus, they would need to be designed in such a way that prior exposure to the assessment tasks would not interfere with measuring the intended constructs performance expectations. In addition, further work would be needed on the best ways to combine results from the classroom-embedded component and the on-demand component. Another decision would involve which performance expectations should be covered in the on-demand component and which ones would be covered in the classroom-embedded component.
For example, the on-demand component could use currently available standardized tests for the disciplinary core ideas, adding in a set of complex tasks that also address a sampling of the scientific and engineering practices and crosscutting concepts. The classroom-embedded component could then assess a broader sample of the scientific and engineering practices and crosscutting concepts in the context of certain disciplinary core ideas. In addition to the tasks used for the monitoring assessment, the state or possibly a collaboration of states would develop collections of tasks that could be used in the classroom to support formative and summative assessment purposes.
The tasks would be designed to be aligned with the NGSS performance expectations and could be available for use in the classroom for a variety of purposes, such as to enliven instruction or to track progress of course, the same tasks should not be simultaneously used for both. Teachers would be trained to score these tasks, and they would serve as examples for teachers to model as they develop their own assessments to use for classroom and instruction purposes. Accountability policies would be designed to include indicators of opportunity to learn as discussed above, such as evidence that teachers have access to professional development and quality curricular materials and administrative sup-.
Thus, in this example system, the classroom assessment component includes banks of tasks associated with specific performance expectations that demonstrate the learning goals for students and that are available for use in the classroom for instructional decision making. Results from the monitoring assessments, as well as indicators of opportunity to learn, would be used for holding districts and schools accountable for progress in meeting learning goals.
The consistency of the information from the different parts of the assessment system would be used to monitor the system for variation in science learning outcomes across districts and schools.
For this example, the on-demand component would consist of the mixed-item types option described in Chapter 5 that makes use of some selected-response questions and some short answer and extended constructed-response questions such as the types of question formats on the advanced placement biology test discussed in Chapter 5 or some of the formats included in the taxonomy in Figure , in Chapter 5.
The on-demand component would be administered as a fixed-form test that produces scores for individuals. Instead of replacement units, the classroom-embedded component would involve portfolios assembled to include examples of work in response to tasks specified by the state. The state would be in charge of scoring the assessments, including the portfolios, although it would be best if teachers were involved in the scoring.
This example shares some of the same complications as Example 1. Decisions will be needed as to which performance expectations will be covered in the on-demand assessment and which ones would be covered in the portfolios. It would also be difficult to maintain the security of the portfolio tasks if they are completed over the course of several weeks. In addition, assembling portfolios and evaluating the student work included in them is time and resource intensive.
A research and development effort would be needed to investigate the best way to combine scores from the two types of assessments. States or districts might collaborate to. Decisions about the exact materials to be included in the portfolios would be determined by the state, the district, or the school.
The portfolios would be scored at the district level by teachers who had completed training procedures as prescribed by the state for the monitoring assessment.
The portfolios could be used as part of the data for assigning student grades. As in Example 1 , above, accountability would rely on results from the monitoring assessments as well as indicators of opportunity to learn. Samples of portfolios would be sent to the state for review of the quality of the assignments given to the students and the feedback teachers give them, providing one measure of opportunity to learn that could be combined with others, such as evidence that teachers have access to professional development and quality curricular materials and administrative supports, that they are implementing instruction and assessment in ways that align with the framework, and that all students have access to appropriate materials and resources.
Thus, in this system, the descriptions of materials to be included in portfolios exemplify the learning goals for students and are available to use in the classroom for instructional decision making.
Results from the monitoring assessments as well as indicators of opportunity to learn would be used for holding schools accountable for meeting learning goals. In this chapter, we have discussed the importance of a systems approach to developing science assessments and described the system components that will be needed to adequately assess the breadth and depth of the NGSS. An assessment system intended to serve accountability purposes and also support learning will need to include multiple components: 1 assessments designed for use in the classroom as part of day-to-day instruction, 2 assessments designed for monitoring purposes that include both on-demand and classroom-embedded components, and 3 a set of indicators designed to monitor the quality of instruction to ensure that students.
The design of the system and its individual components will depend on multiple decisions, such as choice of content and practices to be assessed, locus of control over administration and scoring decisions, specification of local assessment requirements, and the level and types of auditing and monitoring. These components and choices can lead to the design of multiple types of assessment systems. We also note that designing reports of assessment results that are clear and understandable and useful for the intended purpose is an essential and critical aspect of the system design.
Given the widespread concerns expressed above about adequate representation and coverage of the NGSS performance expectations, we make three recommendations related to the monitoring of student learning and the opportunity-to-learn functions that a state assessment system should be designed to support. Recommendations about the classroom assessment function are in Chapter 4 ; this function is one of the three pillars of any coherent state system even though it is not the primary focus of the recommendations in this chapter.
To signify and make visible their importance, the monitoring assessment should include multiple performance-based tasks of three-dimensional science learning.
When appropriate, computer-based technology should be used in monitoring assessments to broaden and deepen the range of. The system design approach contained in Recommendation will be necessary to fully cover the NGSS performance expectations for a given grade. Including a classroom-embedded component as part of the monitoring of student learning will demonstrate the importance of three-dimensional science learning and assessment to local educators while simultaneously providing them with examples and data to support ongoing improvements in instruction and learning.
This information should be collected through inspections of school science programs, surveys of students and teachers, monitoring of teacher professional development programs, and documentation of curriculum assignments and student work.
For some monitoring purposes, individual student scores are not needed, only group-level scores. Whenever individual-level scores are not needed, the use of matrix-sampling procedures should be considered. Matrix sampling provides an efficient way to cover the domain more completely, can make it possible to use a wider array of performance-based tasks as well as equating techniques. In addition, hybrid models—that include some items or tasks common to all students and others that are distributed across students using matrix sampling—could also be used for monitoring functions such as described above for Example 1.
Variation in matrix-sampling designs—such as some that include a few questions or tasks common to all students and others that are distributed across students—should be considered for optimizing the monitoring process.
We caution against systems that place a primary focus on the monitoring assessment; rather, we encourage policy makers to take a balanced approach in allocating resources for each component of an assessment system. To ensure that all of the resources for developing assessments are not devoted to the monitoring component of the assessment system, we encourage policy makers to carefully consider the frequency with which the monitoring assessment is administered.
Designing the links among the components of an assessment system, particularly between the on-demand components and the classroom-embedded assessment information, will be a key challenge in the development of an assessment system. Such links will be especially important if the information is to be used for accountability purposes. As noted throughout this report, if significant consequences are attached only to the on-demand assessments, instructional activities are likely to be focused on preparation for those assessments teaching to the test.
The kinds of learning objectives that can only be assessed using classroom-embedded assessments, such as student-designed investigations, are too important to exclude from the purview of the assessment monitoring and accountability system. Since the kinds of linkages that are needed have not yet been implemented in the United States, education decision makers face a challenge in trying to meet the goals of the Next Generation Science Standards. Assessments, understood as tools for tracking what and how well students have learned, play a critical role in the classroom.
These documents are brand new and the changes they call for are barely under way, but the new assessments will be needed as soon as states and districts begin the process of implementing the NGSS and changing their approach to science education.
The new Framework and the NGSS are designed to guide educators in significantly altering the way K science is taught. The Framework is aimed at making science education more closely resemble the way scientists actually work and think, and making instruction reflect research on learning that demonstrates the importance of building coherent understandings over time.
It structures science education around three dimensions - the practices through which scientists and engineers do their work, the key crosscutting concepts that cut across disciplines, and the core ideas of the disciplines - and argues that they should be interwoven in every aspect of science education, building in sophistication as students progress through grades K Developing Assessments for the Next Generation Science Standards recommends strategies for developing assessments that yield valid measures of student proficiency in science as described in the new Framework.
This report reviews recent and current work in science assessment to determine which aspects of the Framework's vision can be assessed with available techniques and what additional research and development will be needed to support an assessment system that fully meets that vision. The report offers a systems approach to science assessment, in which a range of assessment strategies are designed to answer different kinds of questions with appropriate degrees of specificity and provide results that complement one another.
Developing Assessments for the Next Generation Science Standards makes the case that a science assessment system that meets the Framework's vision should consist of assessments designed to support classroom instruction, assessments designed to monitor science learning on a broader scale, and indicators designed to track opportunity to learn. New standards for science education make clear that new modes of assessment designed to measure the integrated learning they promote are essential.
The recommendations of this report will be key to making sure that the dramatic changes in curriculum and instruction signaled by Framework and the NGSS reduce inequities in science education and raise the level of science education for all students. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website. Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.
Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text. To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter. Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available. Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free?
Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released. Get This Book. Visit NAP. Looking for other ways to read this?
No thanks. Suggested Citation: "6 Designing an Assessment System. Page Share Cite. Value of a System of Assessments Clearly, no single assessment could possibly serve the broad array of purposes listed above. Curriculum and Instruction It important to point out that no assessment system operates in a vacuum. Accountability Policies The science assessments developed to measure proficiency on the NGSS performance expectations will likely be used for accountability purposes, so it is important to consider the ways in which accountability policies might affect the ways in which the assessments operate within the system.
Communicating Assessment Results A key consideration in developing an assessment system is the design of reports of assessment results. Classroom Assessments The changes in science education envisioned in the framework and the NGSS begin in the classroom. Monitoring Assessments In Chapter 5 , we discuss assessments that are used to monitor or audit learning and note that it is not feasible to cover the full breadth and depth of the NGSS performance expectations for a given grade level with a single external large-scale assessment.
Indicators of Opportunity to Learn The work of identifying indicators of progress toward major goals for education in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics STEM —is already underway and is described in a recent report Monitoring Progress Toward Successful K Education National Research Council, b. Several connected sets of questions can guide thinking about the components of an assessment system: What is the purpose of the system and how will it serve to improve student learning?
For what purposes are assessment components needed? Yet, to advance critical thinking skills, learners need to confront new challenges by constructing new knowledge. Such a constructivist approach to assessment often includes a social element. Learners work together in teams to address new problems. Given a simulated scenario, they synthesize confirmed knowledge to create possible solutions to new problems. They use analysis to identify the essence of the problem, as well as constraints that could hinder solutions.
They use synthesis to consolidate the constraints and possible solution approaches identified by the team. They use evaluation to determine which solutions could be effective. Finally, they use negotiation to agree upon a group solution, which likely will involve some level of compromise. Such assessment activities take longer to accomplish, certainly longer than answering multiple choice or short answer questions. A skilled test writer can even craft multiple choice questions to require analysis or synthesis.
However, these types of assessments still provide only indirect evidence. Did the student guess to get the correct answer? Direct evidence of skill acquisition involves application of the skills. Can the student in a highly technical course apply the information to create new code, or write a Help file that explains a software application in language a user would understand? Can a physics student develop a protocol for conducting an experiment in a simulated setting?
Such authentic assessments can provide for direct evidence of skill acquisition as well as being a learning activity itself. Authentic assessments often include an element of reflection. While some instructors may not consider reflection activities as assessments, they can promote self-assessment and transfer of learning.
Asking learners to identify what they learned, how they learned it, and how this new knowledge can be applied nurtures metacognition, which promotes critical thinking, life-long learning, and skill in problem solving.
As you identify your objectives and design your course, consider adding authentic assessments to your course design. Students will engage in the learning process even while engaged in assessment activities. Finally, because these assessments apply skills and knowledge, and empower students to set the direction of their learning, this approach can also increase motivation, and retention. We use cookies in order to personalize your experience, display relevant advertising, offer social media sharing capabilities and analyze our website's performance.
Cookie Preferences. How can we help you?
0コメント