State and Classroom Assessment Analysis Guidelines

Here are the requirements for the State and Classroom Assessment Analyses

 

1. Critical Analysis of State Exam (200 points)

This assignment requires you to evaluate a “high stakes” accountability test of achievement, such as the Regents. You will be asked to identify a copy of a recent exam and evaluate it in terms of technical soundness (particularly relationship to the (common core) curriculum, it’s fairness in assessing all students, and its usefulness for the purposes to which it is used. In developing your review, consider the following questions:

 

1. Does this test adequately measure what it purports to measure? (Consider its relation to the common core standards)

2. Is it reasonable and fair to administer this test to all learners? (Consider accommodations that can be applied)

3. To what extent is the scoring of responses reliable?

4. What are valid uses of the results obtained from this test? (Consider decisions about students, teachers, and schools)

5. What suggestions can you make for improving the quality, fairness and/or usefulness of this measure?

 

There will be three parts to your review:

1. Identifying information – to whom is this test administered and what content is covered?

2. Critical analysis of the test (see questions 1-4 above; provide examples whenever possible)

3. Summary and suggestions (see questions 4 above)

 

2. Critical Analysis of a Classroom Assessment (200 pts)

This assignment requires you to complete a critical analysis a classroom assessment. You may use a unit test, midterm or other teacher-made measure of student learning. Once again consider the following questions:
 

1. Does this assessment adequately measure what it purports to measure? (Consider its relation to classroom instruction and/or the common core standards)

2. Is it reasonable and fair to administer this assessment to all learners in the class? (Consider accommodations that can be applied)

3. To what extent is the scoring of responses reliable?

4. What are valid uses of the results obtained from this assessment?

5. What suggestions can you make for improving the quality, fairness and/or usefulness of this measure?

 

Rubric for Analysis of State and Classroom Assessments

 

Exceeds Standards

 

5

Meets Standards

 

3

Does not meet Standards

1

Technical adequacy and fairness

(6)

Accurately describes and evaluates the content validity (e.g., relation to common core standards, and if possible, taught curriculum), ease of administration, and scoring reliability. Critically analyzes fairness to all students, including students with disabilities and English language learners. Supports all ideas with examples and detailed explanations.

 

Describes and evaluates the content validity (e.g., relation to common core standards, and if possible, taught curriculum), ease of administration, and scoring reliability. Clearly analyzes fairness to all students, including students with disabilities and English language learners. Supports most ideas with examples and detailed explanations.

 

Does not accurately describe or evaluate the content validity (e.g., relation to common core standards, and if possible, taught curriculum), ease of administration, and scoring reliability. Fails to critically analyze fairness to all students, including students with disabilities and English language learners. Does not adequately support ideas with examples and detailed explanations.

Usefulness of results

(6)

Provides a coherent and well supported discussion of the purposes or decisions for which the results can be used. Response reflects an understanding of measurement principles and ethical responsibilities in testing.

Provides a generally coherent and well supported discussion of the purposes or decisions for which the results can be used. Response reflects an emerging understanding of measurement principles and ethical responsibilities in testing

Provides a weak and not well supported discussion of the purposes or decisions for which the results can be used. Response does not reflect an understanding of measurement principles and ethical responsibilities in testing.

Summary and recommendations

(6)

Provides a clear and coherent summary of the key points of the analysis and offers recommendations that flow logically from this analysis. Suggestions are reasonable and well-supported.

Provides a clear and coherent summary of the analysis and offers recommendations that flow logically from this analysis. Most of the suggestions are well-supported.

Does not provide a clear and coherent summary of the analysis and does not offer logical, reasonable, or well-supported suggestions..

Quality of writing

(2)

The analysis is clear, concise, and grammatically correct. The report is informative, clear and all opinions are well supported.

The written report is generally clear, concise, and grammatically correct. The report is informative, and opinions are well supported

The written report is not clear, concise, and/or grammatically correct. The report is not informative, clear and/or well-supported.

 

EDG 605 Summer 2019

EDG 605 Summer 2019

This is the online home for EDG 605 Summer 2019