Collaborating with Teachers for Next Generation Item Development

1. Collaborating with Teachers for Next Generation Item Development National Conference on Student Assessment June 29, 2012

2. Engaging teachers in the process of writing assessment items • Overview of each state’s program • Rationale for the approach involving teachers as item writers • Use of technology in the development process • Benefits including professional development • Lessons learned and next steps • Next-generation assessment systems Presentation Focus

3. John Moon, NeSA Project Director, Nebraska Department of Education Andrew Middlestead, Test Development Manager, Michigan Department of Education Patty McDivitt, Data Recognition Corporation Presenters

4. Item Development by Nebraska Teachers John Moon NeSA Project Director Statewide Assessment Office john.moon@nebraska.gov

5. Summative Assessment administered in Spring Grades 3-8 and 11 for Reading and Math Grades 5, 8, and 11 for Science Grades 4, 8, and 11 for Writing Teacher Developed Items Overview of the Assessment Program: Nebraska State Accountability (NeSA)

6. Summative/Formative Assessment System administered throughout the year State-level Item Bank of Multiple Choice Items For Reading, Math, and Science – all grades Practice Tests for Writing – all grades Teacher Developed Items Overview of the Assessment Program: Check4Learning(C4L)

7. Balanced Assessment System Aligned to State Standards Statewide Assessments (NeSA) Interim/Benchmark Assessments (C4L) Classroom Assessment (C4L)

8. BalancedAssessment • Both formative (C4L) and summative (C4L/NeSA) assessments are valuable and important • Without both, the classroom assessment system is not balanced

9. BALANCED CLASSROOM ASSESSMENT SYSTEM FORMATIVE (C4L) ASSESSMENTS SUMMATIVE (NESA & C4L) ASSESSMENTS A process used by teachers and students during instruction that provides immediate feedback to adjust ongoing teaching and learning to help students improve their achievement of intended instructional outcomes. A tool used after instruction to measure student achievement which provides evidence of student competence or program effectiveness.

10. State-level item bank of multiple-choice items in reading, mathematics, and science that are stored in the C4L online system and used to generate online interim assessments to “wrap around” NeSA tests. Overview of the Assessment Program Check4Learning: What is it?

11. Teachers, principals, or central office staff can identify items to generate mini tests for use at point of instruction so that a check for learning can occur at any time throughout the year. How can C4L be used?

12. Table of Specifications (TOS) – What’s needed? • Examine indicators with highest number of required items • Set grade level goals for the item writing sessions • Item Bank – What do we have? • Inventory items at each grade by indicator • Identify indicators needing additional items • Examine DOK and difficulty levels for additional items Organization of Item Writing

13. To understand a balanced assessment system To develop quality items for tested indicators To identify the characteristics of quality multiple-choice items To acquire adequate information to support others on the balanced assessment system Rationale for the Approach:Work Session Item Development – NeSA and C4L

14. Accurately and appropriately measures what is relevant. • Is consistent and precise. • Does not put any group at a disadvantage. A Quality Test . . . Validity Reliability Fairness

15. Quality Assessment Criteria Assessments reflect the state standards. The students have had an opportunity to learn the content. Assessments are free from bias or offensive situations. Assessment levels are appropriate for students. The mastery levels are appropriate.

16. Content • Style • Item Stems • Response Options Item Writing Guidelines

17. Should be clearly aligned to the identified indicator • Should not reference material or information presented in another item • Should focus on one idea or concept • Should test meaningful content Item Writing Guidelines - CONTENT

18. Spell out acronyms • Minimize the use of “NOT” and “EXCEPT” • Avoid absolutes (e.g., always, never) and vague modifiers (e.g., best, worst) • Use appropriate vocabulary • Ensure correct grammar, punctuation, capitalization, spelling • Use active voice and present tense Item Writing Guidelines - STYLE

19. State clearly and concisely • Use complete sentences with ending punctuation in context • Question appears at the end of the stem • Use which before a noun and what before a verb • Avoid negatives (capitalize if used) • Do NOT use “Which of the following . . .” Item Writing Guidelines – ITEM STEMS

20. Cognitive Demand • The kind and level of thinking required of students to successfully engage with and solve a task • Ways in which students interact with content

21. Three Different DOK Levels DOK 1-Describe three characteristics of metamorphic rocks. (Requires simple recall) DOK 2-Describe the difference between metamorphic and igneous rocks. (Requires cognitive processing to determine the differences in the two rock types) DOK 3-Describe a model that you might use to represent the relationships that exist within the rock cycle. (Requires deep understanding of rock cycle and a determination of how best to represent it)

22. Item Difficulty Difficulty is a reference to how many students answer a question correctly. “How many of you know the definition of exaggerate?” DOK 1 – recall If all of you know the definition, this question is an easy question. “How many of you know the definition of prescient?” DOK 1 – recall If most of you do not know the definition, this question is a difficult question.

23. Item Stem • Content – alignment and focus • Style – clear and concise • Responses –plausible and homogenous • Key – correct answer • DOK – appropriate and correct • Difficulty – appropriate and correct Item Review Check List

24. Item Development by Michigan Teachers Andrew Middlestead Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability in the Michigan Department of Education middlesteada@michigan.gov

25. Michigan currently has 6 separate assessment programs which it develops and administers • Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) • Michigan Merit Examination (MME) • MEAP-Access (2% population) • MI-Access (1% population) • English Language Proficiency Assessment(ELPA) • Michigan Interim Assessments (K-12) Overview of the Assessment Program

26. Michigan uses Michigan educators throughout the development process of the majority of test items that are needed for all of these assessment programs. Overview of the Assessment Program

27. Michigan educators: • Write items based on Michigan content expectations and any guidance from Michigan and DRC staff • Review all items through both a Content and Bias/Sensitivity review session • Review field-test data from both a content and bias/sensitivity perspective Teacher-Written Items: Development Model

28. Michigan educators: • Michigan published children’s authors: • Write commissioned passages for use in our assessments. Teacher-Written Items: Development Model (continued)

29. Michigan has been using educators to write and review assessment items for up to 10 years. Having educators involved heavily in the test development provides some sense of ownership of the Michigan assessments their students see. (though it doesn’t mean they like it  ) Items are only developed by state or contractor staff as a last resort in unique situations. Rationale for the Approach

30. Michigan has developed its own online Item Banking and Test Development system. Educators are able to work online in Item Writer Training sessions, or independently on tasks Tasks are able to be done quicker and more efficiently with far less paper (we use hardly any) Use of Technology in the Teacher-Written Item Development Process

31. Use of Technology in the Teacher-Written Item Development Process

32. The largest benefit I see in having Michigan educators be so involved in our item development process is: • They can go back to their school and talk about the process to hopefully increase educator buy-in of the assessment program. Benefits

33. Benefits I see in having our item development online is: • Faster turn-around time from item writing, to reviewing, to consolidated comments. • Less paper • Consistent with the times. Benefits (continued)

34. Importing items and their attributes from various sources into one item bank isn’t so easy. Transition time to realize efficiencies With such high educator involvement, regularly evaluate your training materials and methods Lessons Learned

35. Goal of 100% commissioned passages • 12 Michigan published children’s authors have been writing pieces across several assessment programs for the past 18 months • These authors are thrilled! • Commissioned work has it’s benefits! • Enhancing Michigan’s Item Banking System • To provide more flexibility in program and item types • Technology-based items Future Plans and Next Steps

36. Summary Patty McDivitt Data Recognition Corporation pmcdivitt@datarecognitioncorp.com

37. Two Models for Teacher-Developed Items • Nebraska • Centralized training and item writing workshops; immediate feedback provided • Decentralized training is not an option • Teachers use a user-friendly MS Word template; items imported into the item bank • Michigan • Centralized training and item writing workshops; immediate feedback provided • Decentralized training is an option • Teachers receive training and write directly inside the item banking system

38. Two Models for Teacher-Developed Items • Nebraska • External formatting of items for publication • Once the item is submitted and accepted, the involvement of the teacher in writing the item is done • Michigan • Internal formatting of items for publication • Once the item is submitted and accepted, the involvement of the teacher in writing the item is done

39. Seek to provide support to the process Seek to ensure that the specific concerns of assessment such as source of challenge are considered without losing the intent of the writer Seek to ensure that the items adhere to style specifications and pre-determined technical quality Role of the Vendor in Teacher-Developed Items

40. Much as teachers have new and novel ways to approach instruction in the classroom, teachers as writers will display creativity in addressing the standards in new and novel ways, including • becoming invested in the deep understanding of the standards and the development of the assessments • helping to promote the link between assessment and instruction in the classroom, and • viewing assessments in a more positive light due to peer involvement in the process. Next-Generation Assessment Systems

41. Teachers will become familiar with the use of templates and/or the entire item-banking process (shared item components). • Teachers will use what they have learned in the item-writing workshops to develop classroom-based assessments. Next-Generation Assessment Systems

42. Teachers will become familiar in the use of item-writing guidelines and item specifications. • Teachers will gain understanding in the structure of items designed to measure the standards, including • Evidence-based design items • Selected-response items • Technology-enhanced items • Other Next-Generation Assessment Systems

43. Writer’s workshops (professional development) • Focus upon collaboration among teachers and/or the department • Engage teachers in direct writing; providing regular and direct feedback • Engage teachers is peer review • Empower teachers with responsibility and ownership of the development process Next-Generation Assessment Systems

44. Questions and Answers