Start Date
19-8-2021 10:00 AM
End Date
19-8-2021 11:00 AM
Subjects
Measurement, Learning progressions, Testing, Standards, Observation, Student assessment, Primary education
Abstract
The underlying model for most formal educational measurement (e.g. standardised tests) is based on a very simple model: the student takes a test (possibly alongside other students). The complications of there being an instructional plan, actual instruction, interpretation of the outcome, and formulation of next steps, are all bypassed in considering how to model the process of measurement. There are some standard exceptions, of course: a pre-test/post-test context will involve two measurements, and attention to gain score, or similar. However, if we wish to design measurement to hold to Lehrer’s (2021) definition of ‘accountable assessment’ – as ‘actionable information for improving classroom instruction’ – then this narrow conceptualisation must be extended. In this presentation, I will posit a simple model that reflects the simple one-test context described above, and then elaborate on it by adding in a) a framework for design of the assessments that is keyed to educational interpretation, b) further rounds of data collection that can indicate changes in a student’s underlying ability, and c) provision for varied assessment modes that will allow for i) classroom-independent tasks that operate at the summative and meso levels, and ii) classroom-dependent tasks that operate at the micro level. The former are designed to provide a basis for triangulating student responses across different contexts, and the latter are designed to closely track the variation of student performance over time in a classroom instructional context. This framing will be exemplified in a in a K–5 elementary school that is seeking to improve the quality of instruction and students’ understandings of measure and arithmetic. The different levels of data collection will be instantiated by two different pieces of software, which operate at the micro level and the meso/summative levels respectively.
Recommended Citation
Wilson, M. (2021, August 16-20). Rethinking measurement for accountable assessment [Keynote presentation]. Research Conference 2021: Excellent progress for every student: Proceedings and program. Australian Council for Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.37517/978-1-74286-638-3_13
Place of Publication
Melbourne Australia
Publisher
Australian Council for Educational Research
ISBN
978-1-74286-638-3
DOI
https://doi.org/10.37517/978-1-74286-638-3_13
Included in
Curriculum and Instruction Commons, Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons, Elementary Education Commons
Rethinking measurement for accountable assessment
The underlying model for most formal educational measurement (e.g. standardised tests) is based on a very simple model: the student takes a test (possibly alongside other students). The complications of there being an instructional plan, actual instruction, interpretation of the outcome, and formulation of next steps, are all bypassed in considering how to model the process of measurement. There are some standard exceptions, of course: a pre-test/post-test context will involve two measurements, and attention to gain score, or similar. However, if we wish to design measurement to hold to Lehrer’s (2021) definition of ‘accountable assessment’ – as ‘actionable information for improving classroom instruction’ – then this narrow conceptualisation must be extended. In this presentation, I will posit a simple model that reflects the simple one-test context described above, and then elaborate on it by adding in a) a framework for design of the assessments that is keyed to educational interpretation, b) further rounds of data collection that can indicate changes in a student’s underlying ability, and c) provision for varied assessment modes that will allow for i) classroom-independent tasks that operate at the summative and meso levels, and ii) classroom-dependent tasks that operate at the micro level. The former are designed to provide a basis for triangulating student responses across different contexts, and the latter are designed to closely track the variation of student performance over time in a classroom instructional context. This framing will be exemplified in a in a K–5 elementary school that is seeking to improve the quality of instruction and students’ understandings of measure and arithmetic. The different levels of data collection will be instantiated by two different pieces of software, which operate at the micro level and the meso/summative levels respectively.