1. C R E S S T / U C L A Validity Issues for Accountability Systems Eva L. Baker AERA 50.09 April 2002 UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies Center for the Study of Evaluation National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing

2. C R E S S T / U C L A Theory of Action for Accountability Systems  Accurate data and reports  Valid interpretations  Willingness to act  Alternative actions available  Requisite knowledge  Action implemented  Action will improve subsequent results

3. C R E S S T / U C L A Purposes and Uses  Assignment into summer school  High school diploma  Awards for teachers  Parents allowed to transfer students  Special assistance to schools  Accreditation of schools

4. C R E S S T / U C L A Validity  “… the degree to which evidence and theory support the interpretation of test scores entailed by the proposed use of tests”  “… validity is, therefore, the most fundamental consideration in developing and evaluating tests” Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA, APA, NCME, 1999, p. 9)

5. C R E S S T / U C L A Areas of Validity Discussion  Assessment purposes  Test specification and representation  Special issues with high stakes  Student and school classification errors Multiple ways of demonstrating knowledge Multiple occasions  Student characteristics

6. C R E S S T / U C L A Strong Forms of Validity Will Not Be Preconditions for Use  Which is most important? Instructional sensitivity — test is sensitive to growth substantially due to instruction

7. C R E S S T / U C L A Improving Accountability  Guidance and targets CRESST/CPRE Standards CCSSO (Gong); organization reports AERA/APA/NCME Test Standards, Code of Fair Testing…, Responsible Test Use (Eyde et al.), NRC reports (Elmore & Rothman), Heubert and Hauser Models (ECS, CRESST, ACHIEVE)  Bar setting

8. C R E S S T / U C L A Quality Accountability System Standards 5.The weighting of elements in the system, different test content, and different information sources should be made explicit. 9. The validity of measures that have been administered as part of an accountability system should be documented for the various purposes of the system. 10. If tests are to help improve system performance, there should be information provided to document that test results are modifiable by quality instruction and student effort.

9. C R E S S T / U C L A Quality Accountability System Standards (Cont.) 11. If test data are used as a basis of rewards or sanctions, evidence of technical quality of the measures and error rates associated with misclassification of individuals or institutions should be published. 12. Evidence of test validity for students with different language backgrounds should be made publicly available.

10. C R E S S T / U C L A Evaluation 21. Longitudinal studies should be planned, implemented, and reported evaluating effects of the accountability program. Minimally, questions should determine the degree to which the system a. builds capacity of staff; b. affects resource allocation; c. supports high-quality instruction; d. promotes student equity access to education; e. minimizes corruption; f. affects teacher quality, recruitment, and retention; and g. produces unanticipated outcomes.

11. C R E S S T / U C L A Evaluation (Cont.) 22. The validity of test-based inferences should be subject to ongoing evaluation. In particular, evaluation should address a. aggregate gains in performance over time; and b. impact on identifiable student and personnel groups.