Assessment Literacy Series 1 -Module 6- Quality Assurance & Form Reviews.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Understanding the ELA/Literacy Evidence Tables. The tables contain the Reading, Writing and Vocabulary Major claims and the evidences to be measured on.
Advertisements

Fundamentals and Best Practices for outcomes and success.
INSTRUCTORS, FACULTY AND COMMITTEES MUST PLAN WHERE WE WANT THE STUDENT TO GO. THE COURSE OUTLINE GUIDES THE STUDENT ON WHERE TO GO AND HOW.
Summative Assessment Kansas State Department of Education ASSESSMENT LITERACY PROJECT1.
The Network of Dynamic Learning Communities C 107 F N Increasing Rigor February 5, 2011.
Assessment Literacy Series
Assessment Literacy Series
Benchmark Assessment Item Bank Test Chairpersons Orientation Meeting October 8, 2007 Miami-Dade County Public Schools Best Practices When Constructing.
ASSESSMENT LITERACY PROJECT4 Student Growth Measures - SLOs.
Assessment Literacy Series 1 -Module 4- Scoring Keys and Rubrics.
Educators Evaluating Quality Instructional Products (EQuIP) Using the Tri-State Quality Rubric for Mathematics.
Group 3 Teachers: No Growth Model Classes
INTRODUCTION TO ASSESSMENT DESIGN. INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE.
Grade 12 Subject Specific Ministry Training Sessions
Overview of Gifted Implementation and Advanced Learning Program (ALP)
STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES (SLOs) 1 Heather Brown Denise Kaminski.
ELA Common Core State Standards Job Alike #8 Assessment.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project Preparing and Applying Formative Multiple Measures of Performance Conducting High-Quality Self-Assessments.
The Lexile Framework ® for Reading Overview and Uses.
New England Common Assessment Program Grades 3-8 & 11 Bias/Sensitivity Review- Part 2 March 26 and 27, 2006 Quechee, VT.
Assessment Literacy Series
Assessment Cadre #3: “Assess How? Designing Assessments to Do What You Want”
Bias and Sensitivity Review Training Module. Overview of Bias and Sensitivity Review Module Purpose of bias and sensitivity review Structure and organization.
PERFORMANCE TASKS. INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE Students create products or perform tasks to show their mastery of a particular skill Students select a response.
The New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP) Alignment Study December 5, 2006.
Creating Assessments with English Language Learners in Mind In this module we will examine: Who are English Language Learners (ELL) and how are they identified?
SCORING. INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE Define what SCORING means for the purpose of these modules Explain how and why you should use well-designed tools, such.
NEXT GENERATION BALANCED ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS ALIGNED TO THE CCSS Stanley Rabinowitz, Ph.D. WestEd CORE Summer Design Institute June 19,
REFLECTING ON ASSESSMENT DESIGN. INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE.
Chapter 8 Measuring Cognitive Knowledge. Cognitive Domain Intellectual abilities ranging from rote memory tasks to the synthesis and evaluation of complex.
The Framework for Teaching Domain 1 Planning and Preparation.
Ensuring State Assessments Match the Rigor, Depth and Breadth of College- and Career- Ready Standards Student Achievement Partners Spring 2014.
 Participants will teach Mathematics II or are responsible for the delivery of Mathematics II instruction  Participants attended Days 1, 2, and 3 of.
Compass: Module 2 Compass Requirements: Teachers’ Overall Evaluation Rating Student Growth Student Learning Targets (SLTs) Value-added Score (VAM) where.
Key messages from Verification  Use valid and reliable assessments  SQA-produced Unit Assessment Support Packs  Centre devised assessments.
ELA SCHOOL TEAM SESSION Welcome to EEA, 2012! 10/2/2015MSDE1.
EDU 385 Education Assessment in the Classroom
The Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum January 29, 2013 Karen M. Beerer, Ed.D.
Technology in the classroom. UM weather Great way to begin a day or class –Links to 300 weather sites –Links to 700 web cams to view weather –Radar and.
Assessment Literacy Series 1 -Module 3- Item Specifications.
Teaching Today: An Introduction to Education 8th edition
English Language Arts Item Review Considerations Training Module.
Developing Assessments for and of Deeper Learning [Day 2b-afternoon session] Santa Clara County Office of Education June 25, 2014 Karin K. Hess, Ed.D.
Assessment Literacy Series 1 -Module 1- Design & Purpose Statement.
An Overview of Virginia Standards of Learning Item and Test Development.
Smarter Balanced Assessment System March 11, 2013.
English Language Arts/Literacy Louisiana Textbook Adoption Publisher’s Orientation March 1, 2012.
ALS Design, Build, Review: Using PDE’s Online Tools to Implement the SLO Process SAS Portal:
4-Day Agenda and Expectations Day 2 Building Formative Assessments linked to deconstructed content and skills Building Formative Assessments linked to.
Student Learning Objectives. Introductions Training Norms Be present Actively participate in activities Respect time boundaries Use electronics respectfully.
Bridge Year (Interim Adoption) Instructional Materials Criteria Facilitator:
PARCC Bias and Sensitivity Review
Core Concepts: CDC Ethics Hypothesis Human subjects Prevalence rate Person, place, and time Surveillance Survey questions Lessons: 1-1 Introduction to.
Brian Parr- The University of Georgia. Lesson Planning Efficient use of time Curriculum alignment Document systematic approach to instruction.
Depth of Knowledge: Elementary ELA Smarter Balanced Professional Development for Washington High-need Schools University of Washington Tacoma Belinda Louie,
Smarter Balanced Scores & Reports. The new assessment, Smarter Balanced, replaces our previous statewide assessment, the New England Common Assessment.
Reviewing, Revising and Writing Mathematics Multiple- Choice Items 1 Writing and scoring test questions based on Ohio’s Academic Content Standards Reviewing,
ELA Grade 11/12 Cohort Common Core Transition Training SY March 7, 2014 Professional Development Center (PDC) Judy Henderson, Emily Jimenez, Elizabeth.
Copyright © Springer Publishing Company, LLC. All Rights Reserved. DEVELOPING AND USING TESTS – Chapter 11 –
How to Use These Modules 1.Complete these modules with your grade level and/or content team. 2.Print the note taking sheets. 3.Read the notes as you view.
Lessons from the Intersection of Adult Literacy and Health Literacy
Assessment Literacy Series
Improving the Accessibility of Locally Developed Assessments CCSSO National Conference on Student Assessment 2016 Phyllis Lynch, PhD Director, Instruction,
Assessment Literacy Series
Professor of Education
Claudia Flowers, Diane Browder, & Shawnee Wakeman UNC Charlotte
Unit 7: Instructional Communication and Technology
Claudia Flowers, Diane Browder, & Shawnee Wakeman UNC Charlotte
Presentation transcript:

Assessment Literacy Series 1 -Module 6- Quality Assurance & Form Reviews

SAM-L Development participants will: 1. Apply a quality assurance checklist to the developed materials to ensure all documents meet the requirements. 2. Verify the item is measuring the intended content and standard. 3. Ensure the scoring key/rubrics are correct. 2 Objectives

Participants may wish to reference: Guides Handout #10 – Quality Assurance Checklist QA Screening Tool Performance Measure Rubric-Teacher Other “Stuff” “Smart Book” 3 Helpful Tools

4 Outline of Module 6 Module 6: Form Reviews Content Review Fairness, Sensitivity, Bias Apply Checklist to all forms Alignment Rigor

Form Review Reviewing forms involves the following components:  Content Review  Bias  Fairness  Sensitivity  Accessibility  Alignment Note: Refer to “Smart Book” for detailed explanations of these components. 5

Content Review  Determine if each item/task clearly aligns to the targeted content standard.  Evaluate all items for accuracy.  Judge if each item is age and grade appropriate for students. Reading level is appropriate. Vocabulary is appropriate. Required reasoning skills are appropriate.  Review each item stem and answer options to be sure they are clear and understandable. Student response expectations are clear. 6

Item Bias  Bias is the presence of some characteristic of an item that results in the differential performance of two individuals with the same ability but from different subgroups.  Bias is not the same as stereotyping.  Bias-free items/tasks provide an equal opportunity for all students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills. 7

Fairness and Sensitivity Review to ensure:  Items are sensitive to different cultures, religions, ethnic and socio-economic groups, and disabilities.  There is a balance of gender roles.  Use of positive language, situations, and images.  Items avoid text that may elicit strong emotions in specific groups of students and prevent those students from accurately demonstrating their skills and knowledge. 8

Sensitive Topics to Avoid Abortion Birth control Child abuse/neglect Creationism Divorce Incest Illegal activities Occult/witchcraft Questioning parental authority Rape Religious doctrine Sex/sexuality Sexual orientation Weight Suicide Sexually transmitted diseases *Note: The above list does not contain every sensitive topic that item developers should avoid and does not consider test-taker’s age/maturity. 8

What is Accessibility?  Test accessibility is defined as the extent to which a test eliminates barriers and permits the test-taker to demonstrate his or her knowledge of the tested content.  All items should be reviewed to ensure they are accessible to the entire population of students.  Item reviews must consider: Readability Syntax complexity Item presentation Font size Clarity of images, graphs, tables Amount of work space 10

Alignment Categorical Concurrence ◦ The same categories of the content standards are included in the assessment ◦ Items might be aligned to more than one standard Source of Challenge ◦ Students give a correct or incorrect response for the wrong reason (bias) Balance of Representation ◦ Ensures there is an even distribution of the standards across the test Range of Knowledge ◦ The extent of knowledge required to answer correctly parallels the knowledge the standard requires Depth of Knowledge ◦ The cognitive demands in the standard must align to the cognitive demands in the test item Source: Webb, N. L. (1997). Research Monograph No. 6: Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science education. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers 11

Quality Assurance QA Screening Tool ◦ Use to examine first draft materials ◦ Outlines key criteria Quality Assurance Checklist [Handout #10] ◦ Use with final drafts ◦ Examines each developed component of the performance measure. Performance Measure Rubric-Teachers ◦ Comprehensive self-assessment of teacher- made performance measures. 12

Process Steps 1. Apply the Quality Assurance Checklist [Handout #10] to the performance measure and supporting documents. Apply the checklist to each individual item /task, and then evaluate the measure in its totality. 2. Make notes directly on the paper copies of the documents. 3. Review areas that may need additional focus. 4. Print and conduct a final team review of all documents, particularly the operational form and scoring keys. 5. Turn your packet in to the facilitator, and destroy draft material. 13

14 Summary Module 6: Form Reviews Evaluated the documents created by the performance measure development process, and ensured the measures were of high-quality, rigorous, and aligned to the targeted content standards. All documents went through a quality assurance process prior to finalization.