Education Paradigm For The Assessment Of Students example essay topic

Through educational history, various learning theories have been developed. How these theories relate to high-stakes standardized testing has a profound effect on schools in relation to accountability. Traditional learning models are based on two underlying assumptions, namely, decomposition and de contextualization. Yin (as cited in Gimps, 1994) maintains that standardized testing is built upon this perspective.

Training the mind, emphasizing subject matter, and saturating the learner with knowledge and information is viewed as a means for standardized test preparation (as cited in Ornstein, 1999). Current learning theories, however, are based upon cognitive processes which indicate a strong connection between skills and the contexts in which they are used, according to Yin. Social-constructivist view of learning, differentiated learning, motivation theory, meta cognitive strategy of learning and the theory of multiple intelligences have, Yin states, all contributed to the concept of authentic assessment. The models lend insight into students' reflective practices and integrative thinking, on an ongoing basis. Yin cites Glaser's definitions of testing and assessment: Testing is aimed at selection and placement, and attempts to predict success at learning by measuring human ability before a course of instruction in order to appropriately place and diagnose individuals. On the other hand, assessment measures the results of the course of instruction.

In other words, testing stresses the instrument's predictive power, and assessment emphasizes the content validity of an approach, or its ability to describe the nature of performance that results from learning (as cited in Darling-Hammond, 1999). The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) and Sylvan Learning Centers sponsored a national research survey conducted by Harris Interactive. One of the findings of the study relates that a majority of parents from both 'high stakes' and non 'high stakes's tates believe that mandated state testing is not a true and valid measurement of their children's ability (as cited in Harris Interactive, 2001). Kohn, 2000 b, Murray, 1998, Resnick & Kl opfer, 1989, and Shepard, 1997 agree that people believe that test scores are being used inappropriately, that many tests are not accurately measuring student progress, and that standardized tests are damaging school instructional qualities. Yin argues that standardized testing creates inequalities and that the most damaging outcome is the pursuit of inappropriate strategies to address the real problems (as cited in Cizek & Rach or, 1994).

The lack of validity of the test, the altering and narrowing of the curriculum to teach to the test, and the creation of bias and inequity is a dangerous phenom on associated with standardized testing. Yin cites Kohn, Thurlow, and Johnson, who argue that standardized tests may also be biased in the forming process and may contain content bias. This is due to the fact that most standardized tests are designed so that only about half the test = takers will respond correctly to most items. The aforementioned potential biases may lead to inaccurate placement of students for special assistance / remediation (as cited in Kohn, 2000 a, 2000 b; Skyrtic, 1991). Yin concludes that the science of creating reliable and valid assessments that relate to students' genuine mastery of content has not been mastered. Yin emphasizes that an investment of time and the willingness to risk reshaping the education paradigm for the assessment of students is necessary for achieving the creation of reliable assessments.

Marzano discusses how state and local standards apply to local classroom learning, achievement, and assessment. A study conducted by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) reports that there are only 13 out 49 state education documents that are specific enough to be used effectively as a guide for classroom instruction, or as a measure of teacher accountability. Marzano questions: "Where will we get our standards? Who will set the standards? What types of standards should we include?

In what format will the standards be written? At what levels will benchmarks be written? How should benchmarks and standards be assessed? How will student progress be reported? What will we hold students accountable for? Pertaining to assessment, Marzano recommends the use of a variety of frequent assessment platforms as part of regular classroom instruction, as well as for the external development of traditional and performance tests.

Marzano emphasizes that without using assessments to compare student performance in the district to student performance of students drawn from a nor ming sample, tests may not be reliable and valid. Alexander, in her study of the influence of subjective judgements on observational assessment, discovered that preliminary results demonstrated that assessors made subjective judgements of their students. These judgements contributed to the determination of assessment grades, and that in certain cases, these judgements were erroneous. Alexander states that the relationship of subjective judgements to the awarding of grades for a supposedly objective assessment instrument in not yet know.

But, Alexander concludes, given the widespread use of such assessment tools across many different professions, there is question as to whether other observational assessment systems contain similar problems. If students are being graded on criteria not included on assessment instruments, criteria being used must be examined (1996). Alexander's review of literature suggests that assessors may measure student ability based upon the assessor's general impression of performance and that grades may be influenced by student personality. Alexander discovered in her study that many of the clinical tutors observed made a number of non-specific comments about their students during placement assessment.

For example, Alexander found that assessors appeared to think that characteristics such as a "nice manner" and a "caring attitude" were representative of what a "good student" should be. While this particular study involved physiotherapy students, the human subjectivity can be applied to classroom teacher subjectivity. Also, as Alexander notes, lack of clarity is fostered for students in understanding what the expectation is for scoring high grades (1996). In response to calls for the end of social promotion, many states and districts have been requiring grade-level benchmark assessments. There is some evidence (Kilpatrick, 2001) suggesting an inverse relationship between statewide testing policies and student achievement in mathematics: "Among the 12 highest-scoring states in 8th grade mathematics in 1996, ... none had mandatory statewide testing programs in place during the 1980's or early 1990's. Only two fo the top 12 states in the 4th grade mathematics had statewide programs prior to 1995.

By contrast, amon the 12 lowest-scoring states, ... 10 had extensive student testing programs in place prior to 1990, some of which were associated with highly specified state curricula and an extensive menu fo rewards and sanctions" (as cited in Darling-Hammond, 1999). According to Kilpatrick, argument has been that minimum competency rubrics and high expectations are different goals that cannot be measured by the same assessment. Therefore, states are holding systems responsible for criteria, using results that appear discrepant due to the fact that the same categories are used to describe performance on assessment with very different goals. Further, many states and districts are administering standardized tests which may or may not coincide with state assessments.

Commercially published standardized achievement tests are frequently not aligned with the teaching materials used in districts or with districts goals. Teaching efforts are diluted by the misalignment, as teachers must add to their long list of goals and topics to be covered. Kilpatrick maintains that teachers are in a dilemma. Many school districts are using standardized tests that are not necessarily aligned with textbooks, state goals, or state competency tests. Kilpatrick recommends that standards-based assessments be accompanied by a clear set of grade appropriate goals.

Legally and ethically, and in an age where the stakes are high, students must be provided with sample assessments or sample items that are representative of the actual assessments (as cited in Herbert & Hauser, 1998). Merrow, in looking at Harvard's students grade reports. In the 1950's, 15% of students got a B+ or better. Today, 70% receive B+ or better. Merrow maintains that today's students are not smarter or better prepared. In fact, the statistics reveal that, during the past 30 years, SAT scores of students entering college have declined.

One third of freshmen entering college today are enrolled in at least one remedial reading, writing, or math course. George Kuh of NOSE believes students are getting higher grades for less effort because of an unspoken agreement between professors and students. Students wield power with professor evaluations. Students learn which classes yield the highest grades with the least efforts, thus higher GPAs... the easy way. What actually correlates with academic success, Merrow reports, is not grades. Student engagement and real learning vs. memorizing, then forgetting after an exam is where academics should be.

Small, private schools are dropping ranking practices in an effort to attract students. Markle in reports that officials say students focus on higher GPAs, not higher learning. In many cases, the movement is prompted by parents, who feel that by dropping the ranking system, their own children will gain an advantage in school admissions. However, school officials report that the preoccupation with class rank prompts top students to select schools, as well as classes based on how it will affect GPAs. Pomona College dean of admissions, Bruce Pock states, "The unfortunate consequence {of dropping class ranking as a prerequisite for acceptance} is that we tend to go to standardized tests, which is exactly what many people do not want us to do". Schools with reputations for academic rigor are more apt to have students accepted to college on a high GPA basis, than schools with lesser academic reputations.

Rick Shelly, in Principal Leadership, addresses classroom assessment. The context of testing and assessment may be the frame for improved education, but the subject and focal point of the the picture is the schoolhouse and what goes on inside it: teaching and learning. Shelly point out that many principals and teachers have not been thoroughly grounded in their professional preparation programs in the areas of testing and assessment. An urgency for training in order to develop best practices strategies for assessment is evident. The quest for all educators to know valid and reliable research methods is necessary for valid assessment practices. Shelly concludes that standardized testing alone cannot address the achievement gap facing students today.

In conjunction with improved classroom assessment, effective teaching and learning can lead to improvement in standardized testing. Extraneous factors can influence a teacher's grading decisions / distract him / her from what students have actually learned. Characteristics such as behavior, participation, absences, tardieu, homework completion, and teacher expectation are all factors that may influence a teacher when assigning report card grades (Arbor, 1995). Arbor suggests that asking 10 educators for lists of academics and behaviors will yield 10 individual reports. The intent of grades is to describe student progress, yet many other of the aforementioned factors influence the assignment of report card grades. Research indicates that giving students zeros, for whatever reason, not only ruins an average quickly, but kills student motivation.

Periodic examination of grading rubrics for classrooms, school, and districts is imperative for academic success. Although there is a variety of assessment methods, one of the most common ways to gather assessment data is through the administration of norm-referenced tests. The tests can be quickly administered; however, the content often does not match state academic standards or local curriculum. Norm-referenced data often lacks a direct link to school / classroom instructional practices (Hargrove, Church, Y ssl, & Koch, 2002).

Teachers need current and accurate data while they are preparing lessons and actually teaching students. Most schools across the nation, receive student performance data from state assessments after students leave for the summer. The relationship between classroom student performance and standardized test performance is important knowledge. Frameworks for curriculum alignment, mapping benchmarking and differentiation must be established for the successful demonstration of student learning. Schools providing ongoing embedded assessment and detailed student performance data offer the best system for aligning what the school is doing and providing real-time data for standardized testing correlation (Decker, 2003). Researchers at Vanderbilt University's Peabody Center for Education Policy conducted a yearlong study, visiting 15 Department of Defense middle schools in 10 different school districts in the USA, Germany, and Japan.

Smredar, the lead researcher, reported both domestic and overseas DOD fourth and eighth graders were higher in math than the national average on the spring 2000 National Assessment of Educational Progress, congressionally mandated tests. Black eighth-grade students in DOD domestic schools were top scorers over public school black students and had the greatest increase in schools of any group nationwide (as cited in Henry, 2001). The Vanderbilt researchers attribute the DOD's success to: Each school's curriculum is about the same, based o set standards of what students should know. Equipment, materials, and other resources are about the same at each school in the system. Students are tested frequently, and the results are used by headquarters to give principals detailed analyses of student performance. The schools, in turn, identify student improvement needs and set learning goals.

Parents are required to be involved in their children's schools. Soldiers are instructed that their 'place of duty' is at their child's school on parent-teacher conference day, and are given time off to volunteer at school each month. Teachers get extensive training, and few are forced to teach out of field. Besides earning competitive salaries, they also know the learning goals set for them. The schools are smaller. Students have a connection with adults and teachers.

Researchers said 94% of the DOD students were of enlisted personnel; 35% changed school each year, and 50% qualify for free or reduced price lunch, the common measurement for determining children form low-income households (Henry, 2001).