1 / 23

Teacher Use of SOL Test Score Data To Improve Instruction: A Review of the Literature and Proposed Research Design ME

MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02. Teacher Use of SOL Test Score Data To Improve Instruction: A Review of the Literature and Proposed Research Design. Purpose Review of Literature Research Questions Proposed Methodology. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02. VCUJim McMillanSusan

midori
Download Presentation

Teacher Use of SOL Test Score Data To Improve Instruction: A Review of the Literature and Proposed Research Design ME

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Teacher Use of SOL Test Score Data To Improve Instruction: A Review of the Literature and Proposed Research Design MERC Planning and Policy Council June 4, 2002

    2. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Teacher Use of SOL Test Score Data To Improve Instruction: A Review of the Literature and Proposed Research Design Purpose Review of Literature Research Questions Proposed Methodology

    3. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 VCU Jim McMillan Susan McKelvey Chesterfield Glen Miller Colonial Heights Gwen Moseley Diane Corrigan Hanover Carol Cash Kathy Morrison Henrico Kris Herakovich Rosa Atkins Richmond Cynthia Gentry Charlene Brooks Jacqueline Roberts Victoria Oakley Greg Muzik Powhatan Carol Pettis Sandy Lynch Hopewell Janet Covington Gayle Keith Sue Jones Study Team

    4. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Purpose

    5. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Review of Literature General Literature Professional Standards Test-Specific Guidelines State-Specific Guidelines

    6. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 General Literature Verify standardized test scores with other data and information Recognize potential sources of error Identify patterns of student achievement over several years Avoid overwhelming teachers with data Disaggregate data Prioritize standards to be stressed

    7. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 General Literature Ensure teacher understanding of technical and statistical concepts (e.g., validity and reliability) Provide professional development in appropriate test score interpretation and use

    8. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Professional Standards Code of Fair Testing Practices in Education, 1988 Standards for Teacher Competence in Educational Assessment of Students, 1990 Code of Professional Responsibilities in Educational Measurement, 1995 Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, 1999 What Teachers Should Know and Be Able To Do, NBPTS, 2000 Student Evaluation Standards, 2002

    9. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Professional Standards: Purpose and Use of Standardized Tests Provide teachers with information about purpose, limitations, and uses for proper interpretation Identify appropriate and inappropriate interpretations and negative consequences Use multiple sources of information in decision-making Avoid using tests for purposes not specifically recommended Limit use to those with adequate training Have a clear and defensible rationale for each intended use of test scores Clarify the extent to which the test samples targeted domains

    10. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Professional Standards: Technical Areas

    11. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Test-Specific Suggestions Use test results to supplement teacher observation and classroom assessment Focus on subscale scores Focus on class or group averages Examine scores for outliers Determine reasons for unexpected individual scores Use scores to identify individual or group strengths and weaknesses

    12. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 State-Specific Suggestions (MD, KY, CN) Use graphs Compare school scores to state and county Use trend data Use disaggregated scores Provide staff development and strategies for using test scores Identify other variables influencing test scores

    13. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 State-Specific Suggestions Texas Item analysis and reports by objective Indicator of areas that warrant further investigation Mechanism for providing a “level playing field” Results used in conjunction with other information Generalizations made to content domains

    14. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 “Objective-level information can be used as a preliminary survey to help identify skill areas in which further diagnosis is warranted.” “Data gleaned should be used in conjunction with other evaluations of performance.” “Once a possible weakness has been identified, supplementary data should be gathered to further refine students’ instructional planning needs.” State-Specific Suggestions Texas

    15. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 State-Specific Suggestions: Virginia Workshop: Analyzing Your SOL Test Data: Improving Instruction Through Data-Based Decisions Stress staff collaboration and consistency in all schools Identify overall characteristics of SOL tests (e.g., 46% of Grade 5 math test used graphs) Align content and instruction to emphasis based on SOL reporting categories Align with level of cognitive skill assessed

    16. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 State-Specific Suggestions: Virginia Interpret means with caution Verify low scores with other information Do not compare % correct for different items Target individual students Provide staff development Compare students who pass with students who do not pass

    17. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Alignment: Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy

    18. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Alignment: Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy

    19. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Division Practices Varied according to: Nature of the data provided Use of commercial packages Reports requested from HEM Involvement of principals Training provided

    20. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Proposed Research Questions What is the nature and extent of teacher use of SOL test score data? To what extent has usage differed according to grade level and subject? How have teachers used SOL test data to change instruction? What procedural factors influence test usage? To what extent is “recommended practice” being utilized in interpreting and using test score data? What suggestions do teachers have for increasing the use of test scores for changing instruction? What is the nature of the training or inservice that teachers have found useful? What suggestions do teachers have for teacher training institutions related to effective use of SOL test scores?

    21. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Proposed Design: Phase 1 Large-scale survey Design and pilot test survey (early fall) Stratified random sample of 1200 teachers Grades 3, 5 Grade 8 in four subjects High school in six subjects Distribute survey (early November)

    22. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Proposed Design: Phase 2 Teacher interviews Develop and pilot test interview questions (fall) Principal nomination of teachers who have changed instruction based on SOL test scores (fall) Conduct interviews (winter)

    23. MERC Policy and Planning Council 6/4/02 Teacher Use of SOL Test Score Data To Improve Instruction: A Review of the Literature and Proposed Research Design MERC Planning and Policy Council June 4, 2002

More Related