A Framework for Evaluating and Planning Assessments Intended to Improve Student Achievement

Nichols, Paul D.; Meyers, Jason L.; Burling, Kelly

doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.2009.00150.x

Cited by 31 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This framework has been widely adopted in the validation of several summative assessments such as certification testing (Kane, ) and admission testing (Chapelle, Enright, & Jamieson, ). Furthermore, Nichols, Meyers, and Burling () attempted to use the approach for formative assessment. They especially focused on the proposed use of assessment information, without making demands on the instrument or methodology from which the information was collected.…”

Section: Definition and Characteristics Of Formative Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

A General Framework for the Validation of Embedded Formative Assessment

Otter¹,

Wools²,

Eggen³

et al. 2019

J Educational Measurement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In educational practice, test results are used for several purposes. However, validity research is especially focused on the validity of summative assessment. This article aimed to provide a general framework for validating formative assessment. The authors applied the argument‐based approach to validation to the context of formative assessment. This resulted in a proposed interpretation and use argument consisting of a score interpretation and a score use. The former involves inferences linking specific task performance to an interpretation of a student's general performance. The latter involves inferences regarding decisions about actions and educational consequences. The validity argument should focus on critical claims regarding score interpretation and score use, since both are critical to the effectiveness of formative assessment. The proposed framework is illustrated by an operational example including a presentation of evidence that can be collected on the basis of the framework.

show abstract

Section: Definition and Characteristics Of Formative Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

A General Framework for the Validation of Embedded Formative Assessment

Otter¹,

Wools²,

Eggen³

et al. 2019

J Educational Measurement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are many ways to deter bias and other issues that Finally, age is an important factor to take into consideration when delivering a type of formative assessment. For example, a study done by Nichols, Meyers & Burling (2009) found that for children under the age of eight, any type of formal assessment would not be appropriate and that individualised testing would need to be done. This is an important admonition for student variables in language assessment, such as dialectical and cultural differences.…”

Section: Preventing Misinterpretationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Construct Validity in Formative Assessment: Purpose and Practices

Rix¹

2012

JELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teacher judgments have always been the foundation for assessing the quality of student work. More often than not, teachers use their own personal knowledge of the subject area, their understanding and feelings toward the student, and the years of experience in teaching to assess students' academic capabilities. Today, teaching methodology has taken a leap toward integration, by which the fields of psychology, education, and the sciences have coalesced to better fit the needs and strengths of all learners. st Technology in the 21 century has also taken a leap, and with it the availability of standardised testing. While standardised testing can be a convenient tool for teachers as it is less time consuming, it doesn't always fit the needs of students. For teachers, standardised testing can also have an ambiguous element for, once the test has been given, many teachers are hesitant as how to interpret these results. This paper will delve into the idea of teacher hesitancy and the judgments they bring with them about the test and their students. As well as looking specifically at formative assessment, a common testing form in many schools, construct validity can be elucidated to help educators interpret the results. Validity The origin of the word validity comes from Latin, validus, By meaning strong. Validity requires strong evidence in order to be able to support a claim or an idea. For the purpose of this paper, validity will be linked with the idea that wellfounded evidence will be interpreted through test scores. Kane (2001) stated that "the process of validation involves accumulating evidence to provide a sound scientific basis for the proposed score interpretations (p. 328, as cited by the 1999 Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing). Kane (1992) stressed that these scores also need to have a level of appropriateness, wherein the process itself and the conclusions of the analysis correlate with other factors, such as student variables and teacher judgments. Consequently, the General Validity Theory implies that the actual interpretation of the test scores and how it is utilised is more important than the actual grade or numerical value the test displayed (Nichols, Meyers & Burling, 2009). The framework of this theory has two parts: actions and structures (Nichols, Meyers & Burling, 2009). The action part conveys the instructional practices of the teacher, for example, how lesson plans are presented and how subsequent testing should cover "a student's current understanding of the subject matter" as presented by the teacher (Nichols, Meyers & Burling, 2009, p. 15). The structures portion implies that the material is taught in a manner that is conducive for student learning (Nichols, Meyers & Burling, 2009). For example, teaching should

show abstract

“…In recent years, the paradigm shift in educational culture emphasizes the importance of assessment that provides information for formative purposes (Rushton, 2005), where relevant feedback can be used to minimize the existing gap between the actual and desired levels of performance (Nichols, Meyers, & Burling, 2009;Perie, Marion, & Gong, 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Formative Information Using Student Growth Percentiles for the Quantification of English Language Learners’ Progress in Language Acquisition

Taherbhai

Seo

O’Malley

2014

Applied Measurement in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

English language learners (ELLs) are the fastest growing subgroup in American schools. These students, by a provision in the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, are to be supported in their quest for language proficiency through the creation of systems that more effectively measure ELLs' progress across years. In the past, ELLs' progress has been based on students' prior scores measuring the same construct. To disentangle effectiveness from achievement, the reporting has generally targeted mean-group activity. In contrast, student growth percentiles (SGPs) provide a comparison of students' growth with others who have the same achievement score history. By examining the construct measured by an English language proficiency test as manifested in student scores in Speaking, Listening, Reading and Writing, this article outlines the use of SGPs in providing information on how much each student needs to grow, which will allow educators to more effectively apply differential formative instructional strategies.In recent years, the study of English in K-12 settings has taken center stage in the United States because of the growing numbers of English language learners (ELLs) enrolled in schools across the nation (Meyer, Madden, & McGrath, 2004; U.S. Government Accountability Office [GAO], 2006;Van Roekel, 2008). However, many of these students' academic performances fall well below those of their non-ELL peers, not because of the lack of academic achievement but because of the inadequacy of their English language skills (Abedi, 2008).Under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, each state is required to assess language proficiency via the four recognized English Language Proficiency (ELP) modalities (i.e., Speaking, Listening, Reading, and Writing). As McCarthy (1999) points out, the use of modality results is necessary because it helps educators demarcate the underlying reasons of student differential performances, look for parallels between the processes in the learning of each modality, and use the information constructively in a classroom setting.According to Abedi (2008), most states use a compensatory model for assessing students' language acquisition. Unlike conjunctive models where students must achieve "targets" in each of the modalities of ELP to be considered proficient, students assessed by the compensatory Correspondence should be addressed to

show abstract

A Framework for Evaluating and Planning Assessments Intended to Improve Student Achievement

Cited by 31 publications

References 30 publications

A General Framework for the Validation of Embedded Formative Assessment

A General Framework for the Validation of Embedded Formative Assessment

Construct Validity in Formative Assessment: Purpose and Practices

Formative Information Using Student Growth Percentiles for the Quantification of English Language Learners’ Progress in Language Acquisition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About