This is a powerpoint presentation of my cummulative research of educational assessment for my Master's degree in Educational Technology

1. At the Crossroads of
Reform
Standards
Educational
Reform
High quality
21st cent.
Assessment
learners
for learning

2.  For over 20 years U.S. policymakers,
educational experts, involved citizens and
business leaders have been moving
hurriedly toward educational reform
 At the outset, it started as a call for
accountability and increased achievement
results. Eventually the movement
transformed into the ingrained idea of
Standards Based education

6. Reform started well over 20 years ago…
1983
A Nation at Risk—
publication by Sec. of Ed—
comparing U.S. students to
other competitive nations

7. "The educational foundations of our
society are presently being eroded by
a rising tide of mediocrity that
threatens our very future as a nation
and a people. . . . We have, in effect
been committing an act of
unthinking, unilateral educational
disarmament“
(National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p. 5).

8. 1989
1st National Education
Summit—
•President George H. W. Bush and the
50 state governors proposed that every
U.S. Child should meet challenging
academic standards by the year
2000

9. 1994
•President Clinton signed
Goals 2000: Educate America Act
•The purpose was to certify national and
state content and performance standards,
opportunity-to-learn standards, and state
assessments
•National Education Standards and
Improvement Council (NESIC) was created as a
result of that law.

10. 1996 & 1999
•2nd & 3rd National
Education Summits
Goals from these summits included:
•Improving educator quality
•assisting all students
•reach high standards
•strengthening accountability
requirements.

11. As the reform progressed, every state
was developing their own
unique criteria and guidelines for standards.
So it was suggested that
Standards-referenced tests
with classifications such as
Developing, Mastering, and Exemplary
be established as a performance norm.
(Cizek 1998)

12. •2000
•the revision of the federal Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA), was
re-christened the No Child Left Behind
(NCLB) Act.
•The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of
2001 was signed into law by President
George W. Bush on January 8, 2002.

13. NCLB
•called for extensive
implementation of
state educational standards
which addressed
national criteria—
and was linked to
federal funding.

14. The stated purpose of NCLB was to
―Ensure that all children
have a fair, equal, and
significant opportunity to
obtain a high quality education‖
(section 1001 NCLB Act)
…And though this is a worthy vision,
the implementation
of it has caused major concerns .

15. …

16. …Just the thought
can send chills
down a teacher’s
spine!

17. The implementation, which is the
“the most difficult piece of the
standards-raising puzzle”
has historically been left up to teachers.
“Teachers will not take up ideas that
sound attractive, no matter how extensive
the research base, if the ideas are presented
as general principles that leave the task
of translating them into everyday practice
entirely up to the teachers. Their classroom
lives are too busy and too fragile
for all but an outstanding few to
undertake such work.”
(Phi Delta Kappan)

18. In their convention resolutions, the
published their belief statements…
“Whereas,…the AFT strongly supports standards-based
reform, including appropriate testing, it is especially
outrageous that this critical reform is threatened
by uninformed implementation.
The public and teachers are understandably deeply
troubled that standardized tests are all too often being used
inappropriately, are usurping too much instructional time,
and are crowding out recognition of
other important subject areas…” (AFT 2003)

19. Two major issues seemed to negatively affect implementation:
1. Ignoring the power of classroom teachers while putting
much of the responsibility on their shoulders.
“A focus on standards and accountability that ignores the process
of teaching and learning in classrooms will not provide the direction that
teachers need in their quest to improve.”
( Phi Delta Kappan )
2. Concentrating too much time and effort on the external
standardized tests to relay achievement.
“Test scores need to take a back seat to more educationally significant
outcomes. As long as schools treat test scores as
the major proxies for students achievement and educational
quality, we will have a hard time refocusing our attention on
what really matters in education.
(Preparing for today and tomorrow –Eliot Eisner)

20. At the beginning of the reform practices,
researcher Cizek, not wanting the
‘ ideal to be the enemy of the good’, stated…
“that no tests were available to measure
attainment of the ultimate aims of
education—and until they are, if ever, U.S.
schools must continue to assess students‟
academic achievement using the best
available test instruments that predict their
eventual success at being responsible and
productive citizens.” (Vaughan 2002)

21. Much criticism has been made of the standardization of learning and tests
because they are too general, whereas deep learning happens through more
individual engagements.
“Do standardizing practices fail academically diverse learners?
Of course they do. Whatever practices invite us to be paint-by-
number teachers will largely fail students who do not fit the template.”
“An education approach that does not invite
us to teach individuals is deeply flawed.”
(reconcilable differeneces)
“Learning is an ongoing process in which students
actively receive, interpret, and relate information to what
they already know, understand, and have experienced.
Effective assessment, in turn, promotes this process.”
(Phye, 1997a)

22. Where are we headed?
…The need to infuse
21st century skills into
the reform

23. The Partnership for 21st Century Skills, formed in 2002, is a
combination of 27 members which include businesses like AOL
Time Warner, Dell and others as well as educational
organizations—like AFT, and ISTE, among others.
They believe ―that every student in this nation
must be an analytical thinker, a problem solver,
innovative and creative, an effective communicator,
and effective collaborator, information and media
literate, globally aware, civically engaged, and
financially and economically literate.‖
(NEA)
This is a tall order which includes assets and skills that would be difficult to
assess in a standardized test format!

24. How are those skills developed?
“..rigorous opportunities
in the arts, foreign languages,
and social studies are
uniquely positioned to
develop students‟
21st century skills and global
awareness.” (Carter—2008)

25. However, many of these
curricular „opportunities‟,
have recently been
diminished by the superiority
of instructional and curricular
time dedicated to
“teaching to the test”

26. • Elementary teachers reported
spending
“75% of their time teaching
reading and math,
leaving inadequate instructional time
for other subjects.‖
(2006 NCLB: Taking stock, looking forward)

27. “…as our curriculum becomes more
sophisticated , our assessment systems
must follow suit and require students to
apply their knowledge to real-world
problems that test complex skills.
ASCD supports the use of multiple
assessments to better measure student
learning and to create a globally competitive
education system.”
(assessment and accoutnability for improving schools and learning…June
2007 Gene carter Exec. Director of ASCD Jan 08

28. How can current trends in
assessment help us address
21st cent. mandates as well as
more effectively aid in the
achievement of our learning
standards?

29. “The promotion of testing as
an important component for
establishing a competitive market
in education can be very harmful.
The more recent shifting of emphasis
toward setting targets for all,
with assessment providing a touchstone
to help check pupils‟ attainments,
is a more mature position.”
(Phi Delta Kappan:Black)

30. Balancing the tension between
standards and achievement
Multiple assessment
strategies, differentia
ted, local control
Externally imposed
standardized tests
Recent research in assessment promises great
results in student achievement and shifts the paradigm
of standards implementation back into the classroom!

31. Assessments are used for learning
•A newer focus is emerging for “standards-based,
locally-developed assessments” that are
comprehensive and use mulitple indicators.
(june 2007 assessmet and accountability)
•We need to “look to assessment as a source
of insight and help instead of an occasion
for meting out rewards and punishments.”
(Lorrie Shepard)
•“There is a body of firm evidence that formative
assessment is an essential component of
classroom work and that its development can
raise standards of achievement” (Phi Delta Kappan)

32. “In the past decade,
some clear trends have emerged in
classroom assessment. More established
traditions of focusing assessment on
„objective‟ testing at the end of instruction
are being supplemented with, or in some
cases replaced by, assessments during
instruction…and with what are called
„alternative‟ assessments.”
(McMillan 2007)

33. •Authentic
•Performance
•Portfolios
•Exhibitions
•Demonstrations
•Journals
•Other forms that are more
individualized and constructed

34. Ongoing assessment means
•Before
•During
•After

35. Before…During…After
Each has powerful and
unique capabilities to
increase student learning…
and thereby
raise the standards!

36.  Pre-assessment:
Backward design identifies what evidence is
needed to document student learning in order
to set that as a goal so that appropriate steps
(learning targets) can be made to reach that
goal!
•Set learning goals
•Select appropriate teaching activities
•Prepare materials

37. During:
•Delivery and Pace
•Keep student’s attention
•Control behavior of students
•Make adjustments in lesson plans

38. After:
Evaluate student learning, activities
and self for revision
Grade students
Make plans to improve instruction

39. References for presentation