EDUC 7705
I.
Course Number:
EDUC 7705
Course Title: Assessment and Evaluation in the Content Area
College: Bagwell College of Education
Semester:
II.
Instructor:
III.
IV.
Class Meetings:
Required Texts: Kubiszyn, T. & Borich, G. (2010), 9th Edition: Educational Testing and Measurement: Classroom
Application and Practice, Wiley: Hoboken, NJ.
V.
Catalog Course Description: Assessment and Evaluation
This course focuses on planning, constructing, analyzing, and applying educational assessment to document graduate teacher
candidate performance for instructional and accountability purposes. Specific topics include guidelines for the development of
traditional assessment questions, including the use of multiple-choice questions to measure critical thinking and problem-solving
skills; guidelines and rubrics for the development and scoring of performance, writing and portfolio assessments; assessing affective
outcomes; describing, analyzing and refining data to improve assessment; and the application and interpretation of standardized norm
and criterion-referenced measures. Additionally, attention will be paid to multicultural assessment procedures and concerns relevant
to external assessment programs.
VI.
Professional Portfolio Narrative:
A required element in each portfolio for the Graduate Program is the portfolio narrative. The purpose of the portfolio narrative is to
ensure that every candidate reflects on each of the proficiencies on the CPI with regard to what evidence the candidate has selected for
his/her portfolio. In your portfolio, you need to include a narrative which includes descriptive, analytic and reflective writing in which
you reflect on each proficiency and how you make the case that the evidence you have selected in your portfolio supports a particular
1
EDUC 7705
proficiency, using the Portfolio Narrative Rubric as a guide. The narrative should be comprehensive, documenting research-based
best practices.
Each graduate candidate is required to compile both an online portfolio of evidence that documents each candidate’s proficiencies as
defined by the graduate CPI (the M. Ed. In Adolescent Education Capstone Portfolio) as well as a portfolio of assignments used to
assess this program’s effectiveness (the M. Ed. in Adolescent Education Program Portfolio). Your Test Construction Project
(Assignment #1) is a required elements from this course that must be added as evidence to your Program Portfolio
in Chalk and Wire under Chapter #3: Planning, Implementing and Assessing for Learning. Additionally, you are
required to complete and document in your program portfolio least one diverse field experience each semester. Of course, you will
also wish to add all these assignments to your personal capstone portfolio. An additional required element in each capstone portfolio
for the Graduate Program is description, analysis and reflection on each piece of evidence you place for each of the proficiencies.
Using Chalk and Wire technology, this means identifying the content and role of the evidence, and then describing the importance of
each piece of evidence. Something like the following:
Date: EVIDENCE OF TITLE: To what time period, approximately or exactly, does this presentation refer?
Context: EVIDENCE TITLE: "This/these artifacts were developed to" …describe with one or two sentences the condition under
which the artifact(s) were created (part of a course requirement/field placement requirement/purpose related to licensure)
Role: EVIDENCE TITLE: What was your role in the event(s) described? Were you acting as part of a collaborative team? Alone?
Author? Editor? Researcher? Instructor? This field is placed here to allow you to indicate what your contribution to the overall
development of the artifact(s) presented This is ethically a requirement if you collaborated with others who also made contributions.
Reflection/Importance: EVIDENCE TITLE: This is by far the most significant information. You should concisely and clearly
explain:
What is happening in this presentation?
How does this artifact (or artifacts) used at that time, clearly illustrate your capacity to perform the standard you are presenting?
What next? Upon reflection, what has this experience suggested as "next moves" for you as a developing professional?
Here´s a simple example of the phrasing you might use for this section:
"I have included/associated/linked this….NAME OF ARTIFACT(s) with NAME OF A DOMAIN AND COMPONENT. I
feel….NAME OF THE ARTIFACT(S) belongs under this standard because….PROVIDE RATIONALE IN TWO OR FOUR
SENTENCES. This artifact(s) demonstrate(s) my ability/position/emerging skill/competence with regard to NAME A
STANDARD/COMPONENT in that PROVIDE AN EXPLANATION OF HOW THE EXPERIENCE YOU HAVE HAD CLEARLY
SHOWS YOUR CONFIDENCE/SKILL/CAPACITY RELATIVE TO THE DOMAIN OR COMPONENT. Given my experience, I
2
EDUC 7705
am determined/intend/will/plan….IF APPROPRIATE, DESCRIBE SPECIFIC ACTIONS YOU WILL TAKE TO FURTHER
DEVELOP YOUR PROFESSIONAL SKILLS IN THIS AREA."
VII.
Purpose and Rationale:
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY’S CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK:
Collaborative development of expertise in teaching and learning
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to developing expertise among
candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders who possess the capability, intent and expertise to facilitate high
levels of learning in all of their students through effective, research-based practices in classroom instruction, and who enhance the
structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU fosters the development of candidates as they progress through stages of
growth from novice to proficient to expert and leader. Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of
continued development, not an end-state. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace the notion that teaching and
learning are entwined and that only through the implementation of validated practices can all students construct meaning and reach
high levels of learning. In that way, candidates are facilitators of the teaching and learning process. Finally, the PTEU recognizes,
values and demonstrates collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the community-at-large.
Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, the public and private schools, parents and other professional partners,
the PTEU meets the ultimate goal of assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high levels of learning.
Knowledge Base:
Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases: preservice, induction, in-service, renewal
(Odell, Huling, and Sweeny, 2000). Just as Sternberg (1996) believes that the concept of expertise is central to analyzing the teachinglearning process, the teacher education faculty at KSU believe that the concept of expertise is central to preparing effective classroom
teachers and teacher leaders. Researchers describe how during the continuum phases teachers progress from being Novices learning to
survive in classrooms toward becoming Experts who have achieved elegance in their teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998), believe that
expertise is not an end-state but a process of continued development.
Use of Technology:
3
EDUC 7705
Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission. Telecommunication and information
technologies will be integrated throughout the master teacher preparation program, and all candidates must be able to use technology
to improve student learning and meet Georgia Technology Standards for Educators. During the courses, candidates will be provided
with opportunities to explore and use instructional media. They will master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities,
local-net and Internet, and feel confident to design multimedia instructional materials, and create WWW resources.
Field Based Activities
While completing your graduate program at Kennesaw State University, you are required to be involved in a variety of leadership and
school-based activities directed at the improvement of teaching and learning. Appropriate activities may include, but are not limited
to, attending and presenting at professional conferences, actively serving on or chairing school-based committees, attending
PTA/school board meetings, leading or presenting professional development activities at the school or district level, and participating
in education-related community events. As you continue your educational experiences, you are encouraged to explore every
opportunity to learn by doing.
VIII: Goals and Objectives:
As a result of satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of this course, the candidate will accomplish the objectives listed in the table
below.
Course Goals and Objectives
KSU M.Ed
CPI
NBPTS
Link
PSC/NCATE Link
Outcome 2
Core 3
Professional and
pedagogical skills
and knowledge
Specific Objectives: The graduate teacher candidate will
a. be able to recall basic definitions of assessment, measurement, evaluation and
test.
b. differentiate between criterion-reference measurement and norm-reference
measurement.
c. construct adequate objectives, both general and specific.
Assessment: Formal Examination
Applied Assignment #1 (Individually shared and collaboratively shared)
General Objective #2: The graduate teacher candidate will construct a traditional
Outcome 2
Core 3
Professional and
Assessment
General Objective: 1. The graduate teacher candidate will demonstrate an understanding
of the components of assessment.
4
EDUC 7705
assessment instrument with particular attention paid to utilizing sound guidelines for writing
true/false, multiple-choice, and higher-order multiple-choice questions.
Specific Objectives: The graduate teacher candidate will
a. demonstrate the use of the overall objective of a table of specifications.
b. apply the categories of the Taxonomy of Educational Outcomes.
c. analyze the criteria for evaluating measurement instruments.
d. recall the guidelines for writing test items: supply, true-false, essay, multiple
choice, and matching items.
e. apply specific suggestions for writing test items: supply, true-false, essay,
multiple choice, and matching items.
f. calculate item discrimination indexes for the items of a test.
g. interpret item analysis data for distractors of multiple-choice items in terms of
the direction and extent to which a distractor discriminates.
h. calculate item difficulty indexes for items of a test.
h. interpret item difficulty indexes.
i. make appropriate suggestions for the revision or reuse of an item on the basis of
item analysis data.
Assessment:
Test Construction Project
Applied Homework Assignments #2,#3,
General Objective #3: The graduate teacher candidate will be able to recognize and utilize Outcome 1
fundamental statistical procedures.
Specific Objectives: The graduate teacher candidate will be able to
a. recognize the characteristics of a frequency distribution and frequency
polygons.
b. recognize the characteristics of percentiles.
d. interpret percentiles.
e. recognize the characteristics of percentile ranks.
f. interpret percentile ranks.
g. calculate percentile ranks.
h. find ranks for a given set of scores.
j. recognize the characteristics of a mean.
pedagogical skills
and knowledge
Core 3
Professional and
pedagogical skills
and knowledge
5
EDUC 7705
l.
recognize the relationship between the mean and median for distributions of
different shapes.
m. recognize the relationship of the range to the standard deviation.
o. recognize the characteristics of the standard deviation and its square, the
variance.
p. interpret standard deviations as measures of dispersion.
q. recognize the characteristics of the normal curve.
r. recognize the characteristics of derived scores.
s. recognize the characteristics of standard scores.
u. interpret z-scores.
v. calculate standard scores that have a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of
10.
w. interpret standard scores having a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10.
x. recognize the characteristics of a correlation coefficient.
y. interpret a correlation coefficient.,
Assessment:
Formal Examination
Homework Applications #4-5
Presentation
General Objective #4: The graduate teacher candidate will be able to identify and utilize
various methods of estimating and factors influencing instrument reliability.
Specific Objectives: The graduate teacher candidate will be able to
a. recognize the role of the concept of reliability in evaluating tests.
b. recognize appropriate interpretations of reliability coefficients.
c. recognize the relationships among observed scores, true scores, and errors of
measurement.
Assessment: Homework Application #5-6
Formal Examination
6
EDUC 7705
General Objective # 5. The graduate teacher candidate will be able to identify and utilize
various approaches to establish the validity of measuring devices.
Specific Objectives: The graduate teacher candidate will be able to
a. recognize the role of the concept of validity in evaluating tests.
b. recognize the relationships among reliability, validity, and item analysis.
c. select an appropriate procedure to obtain evidence of a specific type of
validity.
Assessment:
Formal Examination
Homework #6
General Objective #6: The graduate teacher candidate will demonstrate critical reflection
on the use and misuses of today’s high-stakes tests and be able to communicate this
knowledge to others, including colleagues, parents and graduate teacher candidates
Assessment:
Formal Examination
Presentation Assignment
General Objective #7: The graduate teacher candidate will plan and construct a valid
performance assessment rubric for their capstone applied project.
Assessment:
Assignment #1
General Objective #8: The graduate teacher candidate will recognize, detect, and control
measurement bias in testing and become familiar with techniques to ensure multicultural
validity.
Assessment:
Formal Examination
Presentation Assignment
General Objective #9: The graduate teacher candidate will write descriptively, analytically,
and reflectively.
Assessment:
All written assignments
General Objective #10: The graduate teacher candidate will work collaboratively and
provide feedback to peers.
Outcome 3,
Outcome 1
Core 5,
4
Disposition
Professional and
pedagogical skills
and knowledge
Outcome
1,2
Core 3
Professional and
pedagogical skills
and knowledge
Outcome 2
Core 1,
4
Professional and
pedagogical
knowledge and
skills.
Dispositions
Outcome 3
Core
propositi
ons 4
and 5
Outcome 3
Core
propositi
Professional and
pedagogical
knowledge and
skills.
Dispositions
Dispositions
7
EDUC 7705
Assessment:
Professionalism Evaluation
General Objective #11: The graduate teacher candidate will follow institutional policies
and professional guidelines of academic honesty, and exhibits professional behavior in
interactions with professors and colleagues.
Assessment
Peer and Professor Feedback
IX.
Outcome 3
ons 4
and 5
Core
Dispositions
propositi
ons 4
and 5
Requirements/Assignments:
A. Assignment #1: Evaluate and Improve Your Classroom Assessment Instrument employed in the Graduate Candidate’s
teaching area. An outline, instructions, example, and scoring rubric for the test construction project are available at the end of this
syllabus and in WebCT. (30 points)
B . Assignment #2: As a member of a 4-person team, Evaluate and Critique a CCDS Benchmark Assessment employed in your
content area. An outline, instructions, and examples, for project are available at the end of this syllabus and in WebCT. (30 points)
C. Assignment #3: Plan and Deliver a Group Presentation – Each teacher candidate will be assigned two partners. This team will
develop a presentation comparing each candidate’s school and the high-stakes, large scale testing present in the schools. Specific
requirements and a grading rubric are available at the end of this syllabus and in WebCT. Time will be made available during class for
this activity; however, students may need to meet outside class to complete preparations for the presentation. (20 points)
E. Assignment #4: Complete Practice Exercises and Questions – “Truth in Grading”(hand-out 5 points) and “Education Watch
Georgia” available at http://www2.edtrust.org/edtrust/summaries2006/states.html . Questions on pages 2, 3, 6,7. (5 points). (10 points total)
D. (Assignment #4 in WebCT) Professionalism: Behaviors that indicate professional skill may be demonstrated in a graduate
teacher candidate’s approach to participating in and completing the requirements for any particular course, such as this one.
Professional behavior will be monitored in this course. Should concerns arise regarding an individual teacher candidate; the instructor
of this course will communicate these concerns to the graduate teacher candidate and to the program coordinator of the teacher
candidate’s major program with the purpose of drawing attention to deficiencies so that they may be remedied. Indicators of
professionalism that will be monitored are addressed in the questions below. (10 points)
Does the teacher candidate:
 Model high standards and expectations for him or herself?
8
EDUC 7705










Display a commitment to the profession of helping students learn?
Enjoy learning and indicate enthusiasm toward working with students to facilitate their learning?
Regularly reflect on and assess his or her performance and effectiveness for self-improvement?
Learn from experiences and show improvement over time?
Manage interpersonal relationships effectively?
Demonstrate courtesy, respect, and civility in interactions with others?
Work collaboratively with professional colleagues and faculty?
Accept responsibility for actions and non-actions, placing the locus of control upon him or herself rather than shifting
blame or claiming inability to control outside factors?
Maintain appropriate attire and appearance?
Promote and model standards of academic honesty?
Habitual absences, tardiness, and leaving class early are issues of professionalism. In case of emergencies, please email or call to
inform me of your conflict/emergency.
Finally, one final issue regarding professionalism-please turn off all cell phones and pagers during class. Disturbances by these
devices are disrespectful, disrupt the flow of ideas during discussions, and are nuisances that can be easily avoided. Seldom is there a
reason to speak on the phone that could not wait until the end of class.
One-half of your professionalism points will be determined by your peers as they evaluate your group work contributions. The
professionalism rubric is available as Assignment #4
All written assignments should be typed using 12-point font, double-spaced, on white 8 ½ X 11
paper. They should represent quality, college level work, which includes correct spelling,
grammar and punctuation - utilizing APA ( 5th ed.) style formatting. (See our WebCTCourse
Menu for APA and grammar style sources.)
X:
Evaluation and Grading:
90 – 100 = A
80 – 89 = B
70 – 79 = C
60 – 69 = D
9
EDUC 7705
below 60 = F
XI.
Policies
Diversity: A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs of the different learning styles of
diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as well as an understanding of differentiated strategies and curricula for
providing effective instruction and assessment within multicultural classrooms. One element of course work is raising candidate
awareness of critical multicultural issues. A second element is to cause candidates to explore how multiple attributes of multicultural
populations influence decisions in employing specific methods and materials for every graduate teacher candidate. Among these
attributes are age, disability, ethnicity, family structure, gender, geographic region, giftedness, language, race, religion, sexual
orientation, and socioeconomic status. An emphasis on cognitive style differences provides a background for the consideration of
cultural context.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons defined as disabled under Section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. A number of services are available to support students
with disabilities within their academic program. In order to make arrangements for special services, students must visit the Office of
Disabled Student Support Services (ext. 6443) and develop an individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is
required.
Please be aware there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State University that address each of the
multicultural variables outlined above.
Academic Honesty: KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their academic programs in an ethical, professional manner. Any
work that students present in fulfillment of program or course requirements should represent their own efforts, achieved without
giving or receiving any unauthorized assistance. Any student who is found to have violated these expectations will be subject to
disciplinary action.
Course Outline
10
EDUC 7705
Week/Date
June 9
Why is assessment such a big
deal today?
PRE-READING CHAPTER
Text (Gronlund or Popham)
Chapter #1: Introduction
Chapter #3: The Purpose of Testing
How does your school use data
to focus instruction?
Pre-Reading (Articles and
Important To-Do/Turn
Handouts)
In Dates
Trimble, S., Gay, A., & Matthews, J.
(2005). Using test score data to
focus instruction. Middle
School Journal, 2005, 25-31.
Using this handout as a reference
and benchmark compare and
contrast the assessment activities in
your school with those of Camden
County teachers.
Class Expectations and
Assignments
Chalk and Wire
June 11
What is the relationship
between assessment,
instruction, and learning?
Chapter #5: Measuring Learning
Locate, print and read:
http://www.fairtest.org/NCLBAfter-Six-Years
Chapter #2: High Stakes Testing
http://www.edaccountability.org/Ass
essmentExecSumm061207.pdf
How do you measure learning?
Writing Behavioral Objectives
Taxonomy Verb List
Retrieved from:
http://www.iloveteaching.com/steac
her/verbs/taxonomy.htm
High Stakes Testing…….
GPS
http://www.georgiastandards.org/
June 16
What is my link between the
Chapter #4: Norm- and CriterionReferenced Tests and Content Validity
Hand-out
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C.,
Assignment 1: Part 1
11
EDUC 7705
new standards, benchmarks and
my teaching and my
assessment?
Evidence
GPSs, Benchmarks, CRCT,
EOCT…and all that jazz.
Any research on effectivenessy of
benchmarking?
June 18
How hard can writing test items
be?
June 23
What is an instructional rubric?
#6: Writing Objective Test Items
#7: Writing Essay and Higher Order
Chapter #10: Administering, Analyzing
and Improving the Test or Assessment
June 25
Should grades be “sacred” if
they are not valid or reliable?
Marshall, B, & Wiliam, D.
(2004). Working inside the black
box: Assessment for learning in
the classroom. Phi Delta
Kappan.85(1), 9-21.
Available at
http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/kbla
9810.htm
Make sure you bring
your unit test.
Hand-out
Andrade, H. G. (2003). Teaching
with rubrics: The good, the
bad, and the ugly. College
Teaching, 54(1),27-30.
Chapter 11: Grading and Reporting
Inferential Statistics
Assignment 1 DUE
The Case Study of Sarah Hanover
June 30
Chapter 12 Summarizing Data and
Measures of Central Tendency
Video: Models of Distributions,
Spread and the Bell Curve
Assignment 4a. Truth
in Grading Assignment
Chapter 13: Variability
12
EDUC 7705
July 2
Chapter 15: Validity
Chapter 16: Reliability
Movie or Video
U-Tube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1
brINlIxvKU
Chapter 18: Standardized Tests
17: Accuracy and Error
Video: Confidence Intervals
Consistency and Use
Assignment
#2:Benchmark Rough
Draft,
Recommendations 1 -2
Collaborative Group Time
July 7
Truth in Testing?
Collaborative Group Time
July 9
Expanding assessments for
classroom teachers.
Collaborative Group Time
July 16
Chapter 19: Types of Standardized Tests Video: Misleading, Distorting, and
Chapter 20: Assessing Children
Lying
Assignment 4b: The
Education Trust (2006).
Education Watch:
Georgia.Retrieved
12/19/06 from
http://www2.edtrust.org/e
dtrust/summaries2006/Ge
orgia.pdf
Assignment
#2:Benchmark
Presentations
Assignment#3
July 18
Assignment #5
13
EDUC 7705
Presentations
Assignment #3
14
EDUC 7705
15
7705-Test Construction Project
XIV. References/Bibliography
Airasian, P.W. (1997). Classroom assessment. (3rd ed.).New York : McGraw-Hill.
Banks, J. A. & Banks, C. A. M. (Eds.). (1995). Handbook of research on
multicultural education. NY: Macmillan.
Dana, R. H. (1993). Multicultural assessment perspectives for professional
psychology. Boston: Allyn and
Bacon.
Crocker, L. & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory.
New York: Holt, Rinehart, &
Wilson.
Haney, W. (1989). Testing reasoning and reasoning about testing. Review of
Educational Research, 54(9), 557-654.
Haney, W. M., Maduaus, G. F., Lyons, R. (1993). The fractured marketplace for
standardized testing. Boston: Kluwer.
Hibbard, K. M. and others. (1996). A teacher's guide to performance-based
learning and assessment. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research. Boston:
Allyn and Bacon.
Gronlund, N. E. & Linn, R. L. (1995). Measurement and evaluation in teaching
(7th ed.) New York: Macmillan, Chapter 6,
“Constructing Objective Test Items.”
Katz, M. (1961). Improving classroom tests by means of item analysis. Clearing
House, 35, 265-269.
Kohn, A. (2000). The case against standardized testing: Raising the scores,
ruining the schools. Westport, CT:
Heinemann.
Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N. (1995). Measurement and evaluation in teaching (7th
ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Messick, S. (1981). Evidence and ethics on the evaluation of tests. Educational
Researcher, 10, 9-20.
16
7705-Test Construction Project
Popham, W. J. (2002). Classroom assessment- What teachers need to know. (3rd
ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Stiggins, R. J. (2001). Student-involved classroom assessment. (3rd ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Wiggins,G. (1998). Educative assessment: designing assessments to inform and
improve student performance. San
Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass.
17
7705-Test Construction Project
OUTLINE OF
REQUIREMENTS FOR TEST CONSTRUCTION PROJECT
Part I. Development of a Test Plan.
1. Locate your lesson plans and unit test from a course you have taught and assessed
in the past. The unit should probably have lasted 2-3 weeks and have involved a
major test.
2. Provide a brief summary of the course, level of student involved, place of course in
curriculum, etc.
3. Provide the GPSs (or ??) this unit addressed. These are your general objectives.
4. Using your located lesson plans, rewrite the activities the student did each day as
behavioral objectives. You should have at least two behavioral objectives for
each day. The requirements for behavioral objectives will be discussed in class
and in your text. At the end of the behavioral objective, place the number of
minutes the students spent doing the activity. These are you specific objectives.
5. Complete a table of specifications showing the general standards and specific
objective and the process dimension. You must also note now many classroom
minutes were spend on this objective. Your Table of Specification should be set
up as below.
6. Finally, total the total minutes spend on the unit. Then calculate the percentage of
this total spend on each objective. EXAMPLE BELOW:
Remember
Understand
Apply
Analyz
Evaluate
Create
Specific
Total
e
Objectives in
Behavioral Terms
Time
Cells include time in minutes, percentages of time spent on each objective,
and test items that correspond (section and number from the test- when it is
donet).
1.Realize
1a. After
5 min.
the
independently
1.4%
importance reading the text and
of
discussing
ecological examples in class
balance.
(5 minutes), all
students will
describe vocally,
three logical effects
on an ecosystem if
an organism is
removed.
General
Standards
(GPS or
QCC)
1b.) After
independently
10
min
18
7705-Test Construction Project
reading the text and
discussing logical
outcomes in class,
students will be
able to predict in
writing the two
effects of adding a
foreign organism to
an ecosystem.
2.8
%
DUE MONDAY JUNE 16…………….PEER FEEDBACK
PART II: B. Review and Construction of test items
1. Review your of test items based on the table of specifications you have prepared.
Your questions must proportionally test what and how you taught. That is, if you
spend 30% of your instructional time on a certain concept, the test should have
approximately 30% of the points devoted to the concept. Also, your question type
should also match how you taught the concept. Again, if your instructional and
activities were devoted to the memorization of materials, the test items should also
test this process.
2.. Review the quality of your items. Rewrite as needed and develop a test which you
feel would be a worthwhile measuring instrument.
3.. Any type of items may be used (in accordance with your TOS) , but try to include
as great a variety of item types as feasible. As a minimum include:
ITEM TYPE- AT LEAST
A. 4 completion items;
directions and points per
item
B. 3 multiple choice
items; directions and
points per item
C. 3 true false items;
directions and points per
item
SPECIFICATIONS (ALL MUST FOLLOW
GUIDELINES SPECIFIED IN TEXT, NOTES, AND
HANDOUTS)
Items (4)
YES
NO
Directions (clear and complete) and points for
each item
Items (3)
Directions (clear and complete) and points for
each item
Items (3)
19
7705-Test Construction Project
D. One set of 4-6
matching items;
directions and points per
item
E. 2 multiple-choice
questions that involve
critical thinking and
stimulus material,
directions, and points per
item
Directions (clear and complete) and points for
each item
Item set
Directions (clear and complete) and points for
item set
Items (2)
Stimulus material
Directions (clear and complete)
F. One restrictedEssay item
response essay with
directions and points for
item with analytic scoring
rubric
Directions (clear and complete)
Analytic scoring rubric content
Rubric design
G. One extendedEssay item
response essay with
directions, points, and
with a holistic scoring
rubric
Directions (clear and complete)
Holistic scoring rubric content
Scoring rubric design
4. Correct answers are to be indicated for all items.
C. Test Analysis and Using the Test Results to Support Learning
Describe (not do) the procedures or techniques that you might use to analyze the results
of this test considering the following categories: (Remember you do not have to actually
administer the test. Be creative and idealistic and assume that time and money are of no
concern.
20
7705-Test Construction Project
a. Item analysis (What type?)
b. Descriptive statistics (How would you go about describing student performance on
your test?)
c. Reliability and validity (What type? How determined?)
Finally, briefly describe how and when you will return this test in a manner that
supports student learning.
21
7705-Test Construction Project
RUBRIC FOR Course 7705 Assignment #1 and Program Assessment #3: Plan, Implement and Assess An Instructional Unit
Criterion
Level 1-Poor
Description of
Students and
Curriculum
Little or No description of
targeted students or
curriculum is offered.
10%
0
Alignment of State
Standards with
Classroom Objectives
1.0
points
Little or no alignment of
state standards and
classroom objectives is
offered.
10%
0
1.0
points
Level 2Unsatisfactory
Students identified in
broadest terms (grade).
Curriculum is
described, but little
connection is offered
between the course
curriculum the specific
unit being taught.
Level 3-Satisfactory
Level 4-Exceptional
Students are described by
grade and two subgroups.
Both course curriculum
and unit curriculum is
described and connections
are made between course
curriculum and unit
curriculum.
1.5
2.2
Students are described by
grade and subgroups
including gender,
achievement level, ethnicity
and pertinent groups
identified with special
classroom needs. General
curriculum is described and
connections are made
between course curriculum
and unit curriculum. Special
attention is paid to the
curricula and exceptional
classroom needs of the
students.
1.7
2.1 points
Either the state
standards or the
classroom objectives
(in behavioral terms)
are not adequately
described; or both are
included but appear
incomplete.
2.3
2.5 points
Both the complete state
standards and the
classroom objectives (in
behavioral terms) are
adequately described.
There is a clear alignment
between processes
described in standards and
processes of the objectives.
2.7 2.8 3 points
Both the complete state
standards and the classroom
objectives (in behavioral
terms) are adequately
described. There is a clear
alignment between processes
described in standards and
processes of the objectives.
Additionally, there is some
22
7705-Test Construction Project
1.5 1.7 2.1 points
2.2 2.4 2.6 points
Completion Table of
Specifications (TOS)
with Specific
Objectives as
Behavioral Objectives
No or very basic Table of
Specifications was
completed
0
2.0
points
20%
Table of Specifications
was completed but
included only limited
or incorrect indicators
for processes involved
and the time devoted to
each objective.
3.0
Alignment TOS and
Test Content (Type of
Item and
Instructional/Test
Time Match – Am I
Testing What I
Taught, How I Taught
It?)
20%
No or very limited
alignment between test
content and TOS is
attempted.
0
2.0
points
3.5
4.2 points
Either an alignment
between process
involved in answering
item and processes
involved in instruction
or an alignment
between instruction
time and test time is
missing. Or both are
attempted but
incomplete.
2.7
2.8
3 points
Table of Specifications was Table of Specifications was
completed and includes
completed and includes
80% of the indicators for
100% of the indicators for
processes involved and the processes involved and the
time devoted to each
time devoted to each
objective.
objective. If appropriate,
there is evidence that some
4.4
4.8
5.2 points
differentiation of
instructional time based on
student needs occurred.
Both an alignment between
processes involved in
answering items with
processes involved in the
classroom instruction and
an alignment between time
in the classroom and
number of test items is
displayed for 80% of the
rows.
4.4
3.0
3.5
evidence that differentiation
of objectives based on
student needs occurred.
4.8
5.2 points
5.4
5.8
6 points
Both an alignment between
processes involved in
answering items with
processes involved in the
classroom instruction and an
alignment between time in
the classroom and number of
test items is displayed for all
rows. There is differentiation
of some test items if
differentiated instruction
took place.
4.2 points
5.4
5.8
6 points
23
7705-Test Construction Project
Quality and Quantity
of Items
Few if any items are
attempted.
30%
0
3.0
points
Adequate Methods for Few or no methods for
Assessing Reliability, assessing and reporting
Validity and Reporting results are presented.
Correct Answers in a
timely manner.
0
1.0 poins
10%
Some test items are
attempted. However,
the question types do
not match the minimal
requirements of the
assignment or if the
minimal number of
item types is written,
more than 20% of the
items violate good
writing guidelines for
the type of questions.
Not all rubrics or item
answers are included.
4.5 5.1 6.3 points
Incomplete or incorrect
description of process
for analyzing
reliability, validity, and
item analyze of test
items is presented.
Limited description of
the method for
reporting scores is
presented and no
provision is present that
turns the test into an
instructional tool.
The minimal number of
required question types is
attempted. Eighty percent
of the questions adhere to
the writing guidelines for
the type of question
presented. All necessary
rubrics and answers are
included.
6.6 7.2 7.8 points
The number of questions and
types exceeds the minimal
requirements and 90% of the
questions adhere to the
writing guidelines for the
type of question. Answer
keys and rubrics are clear
and concise. If appropriate,
some questions clearly
involve differentiation based
on student choices or needs.
8.1
Two of three descriptions
for analyzing items,
reliability and validity are
accurately presented. An
accurate method for
calculating test scores is
available. The corrected
test information is returned
to the students soon after
the test.
8.4
9 points
All of the descriptions for
analyzing items, reliability
and validity are accurately
presented. An accurate
method for calculating test
scores is complete. The
method for returning
corrected test information to
the students immediately
following the test is
described.
2.2 2.4 2.6 points
2.7
2.8
3 points
1.5 1.7 2.1 points
24
7705-Test Construction Project
25
7705-Test Construction Project
Assignment #2: Benchmark Assessment Project
The Cobb County School District (CCDS) is in the process of developing and implementing
benchmark 9-week assessments. Personnel from CCCD have been extremely open to
scrutiny of these benchmarks and have requested our feedback. To allow this, collaborative
groups (of three to four members) of graduate students will be assigned a content and grade
level. Utilizing the recommendations from the National Center for Research on Evaluation,
Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST; available at
http://www.cse.ucla.edu/products/reports.asp ), each group will review their assigned
benchmark assessments through the lens of the Center’s six conditions or recommendations.
Groups will present their findings in the form of a paper and/or presentation to administrators
from the CCSD.
Overview: CRESST Report 723 suggests a valid benchmark system must meet the following
conditions:
1. The purposes of the assessment are clearly defined.
2. The domain to be assessed is clearly specified.
3. Alignment: there is credible evidence on the match between assessments and
domain specifications.
4. Item development and selection procedures as well as administration and
scoring procedures are accurately documented.
5. (Omitted)
6. Validation: evidence is assembled to support the intended interpretations and
uses of the assessments. (p. 2)
CITATION: Recommendations for Building a Valid Benchmark Assessment System:
Interim Report to the Jackson Public Schools
CRESST Report 723 David Niemi, Julia Vallone, Jia Wang, and Noelle Griffin
CRESST/University of California, Los Angeles,July, 2007
The following pages flush out the six recommendations above, utilizing citin text from
Report 723. Each group will carefully evaluate their assigned benchmark test based on the
criteria below. You will also have access to PICASSO….CCSD’s online curriculum and
instruction system. Please note the following request:
Due to the sensitive nature of some of the materials, please don’t share your access nor
resources from the site outside your class and professional duties. Absolutely no copies of
PICASSO materials or benchmark test are to be used for any activities other than this
assignment.
26
7705-Test Construction Project
Structure your report/presentation around the following major queries:
Recommendation #1: Assessment Purposes
CRESST Report 723 states
High quality assessment is not possible without clearly identifying the purposes of
the assessments. Assessments have to be judged against their intended uses. There is no
absolute criterion that can be used to judge assessments and assessment systems that do
not have clearly spelled out purposes. It is not possible to say, for example, that a given
test is good for any and all intents and purposes; it is only possible to say, based on
evidence, what purposes the test is valid for. Furthermore, professional assessment
standards require that assessments be validated for all their intended uses (e.g., AERA,
APA, NCME, CRESST, National Research Council). A clear statement of assessment
purposes also provides essential guidance for test and assessment item developers.
Different purposes may require different content coverage, different types of items, etc.
Thus it is critical to identify with as much precision as possible how assessment information
is to be used, and to validate the assessments for those uses. (pp.2-3)
Questions to Answer:
1. What is the assessment purpose for these benchmark assessment?
2. Where is this stated?
3. How might these purposes effect the items chosen for the benchmark?
Recommendation #2. Domain Specification utilizing Models of learning, cognition,
and expert performance in the domain should be
used to develop assessment specifications. CRESST Report 723 states……..
To insure that assessments reflect the content domain to be assessed, assessment
design and validation should be preceded by a cognitive analysis of the domain or by
an analysis of the cognitive demands of the performances to be assessed. To analyze the
“cognitive demands” of a performance means to specify the knowledge and mental
skills required to complete that performance successfully. A recent report by CRESST
(Herman & Baker, 2005) suggested that analysis of the domain should at least take into
account, in addition to the specific content of individual state standards, both the
intellectual demands of the domain and the “big ideas” or key principles underlying the
content standards. An analysis of “key principles” obviously pre-supposes a theoretical
understanding of the content area under consideration (i.e., language arts, math, social
studies). Cognitive demands can be viewed through a number of
models/categorization systems. In the above referenced article, Baker and Herman
propose a frame work based on the work of Webb (1997), which identifies four general
categories of cognitive demands: recall, conceptual understanding, problem
solving/schematic thinking, and strategic thinking/transfer. For the tests to have
any additional valid uses by teachers, schools, or administrators these “big ideas” need
to be considered in test design and validation.
27
7705-Test Construction Project
Some issues to consider are:
Not all equally objectives are equally important, and this should be taken into account in
benchmark test design. Conducting an analysis of the domain that takes into account both the
intellectual demands of the domain and the “big ideas” or key principles underlying the
content standards would allow one to make “educated” judgments about what content
should be focused on.
As all objectives are not created equally it would make the most sense to focus on
what makes the greatest difference in student performance and long-term learning. To
achieve this goal it may be necessary to cut objectives from the benchmark tests and
focus more heavily on the concepts that will have the greatest impact once they are
mastered. Each test should cover major state test content that is also covered by district
curricula within the nine week time frame. If the main purpose of the test is not to provide
comprehensive diagnostic information, the test does not need to be overly long. It is
estimated that 30 items should provide a reasonable sample of state test content taught
within a nine-week period.
Activities to complete:
Go to http://www.georgiastandards.org/ and locate the appropriate standards. For
example, here are a portion of the 7th grade social studies standards:
Grade Seven AFRICA and ASIA: In seventh grade, students conclude the study of
major world regions. The four strands are integrated, with history as the central
strand. The history strand focuses on historical developments essential to
understanding a specific region in the modern world. The geography strand relates the
importance of geography to each region’s development. The civics strand examines the
political structures in each region. The economics strand continues to build basic
economic concepts and introduces students to the economic development of each region.
AFRICA Historical Understandings
SS7H1 The student will identify important African empires.
a. Describe the development of African empires including Ghana, Mali, Songhai,
and Ethiopia.
b. Explain the importance of cities such as Timbuktu as a center of learning,
Djenne as one of the oldest cities in Africa, and Zanzibar as a center of commerce.
Now go to http://picasso.cobbk12.org and locate the appropriate page describing your
content and level. Locate the standards to be covered within your 9-week benchmark
test. For purposes of this example only, let’s agree they are the standards listed above.
Then locate any suggested activities or exemplar units. Construct a table ( See Table 1
28
7705-Test Construction Project
below) that lists the all the relevant standards, the content of the standard, the cognitive
demands, the learner outcomes, and time allocation.
Table 1........Relevant Standards, Content , Cognitive Demands, Learner Outcomes, and
Time for (Grade, Content, Benchmark Period)
Standard
Content
Performance
Learner
Time in
Process/Cognitive Objective:
minutes
Demands
What is the
student doing
Level: Knowledge, to let us know
Comprehension,
he/she is
application,
learning this?
analysis,
Identify from
synthesis,
suggested
evaluation
activities
(CCDS: Bloom)
SS7H1 The
African
Describe
Read pages
2 days
student will
Empires
development
504-506 in the
identify
Ghana, Mali,
textbook.
important
Songhai,
Knowledge
100 minutes
African
Ethiopia
Discuss the
empires.
importance of
a. Describe
trade in the
the
growth of an
development
empire.
of African
(Don’t know
empires
what the
including
student is
Ghana, Mali,
doing?
Songhai, and
Taking notes
Ethiopia.
from
discussion,
listening?)
Create an
newspaper ad
for the newest
model of
camel
Additional questions:
1. Are there any “Key Principles” that should be emphasized?
29
7705-Test Construction Project
2. Did you locate evidence that the content and process of each standard are taught in
each classroom? If not, what does that mean? How could that issue be addressed?
Recommendation #3: Alignment
CRESST Report states that ……………Alignment generally describes the extent to which
tests reflect state standards and assessments. You should analyze and identify the match of
each item to the table created above……The number of dimensions that incorporate both
curricular content and skill level.
• Content checking (i.e., is the item at face value an example of the “what”,
‘how” and “why” of specific standard(s) ostensibly being tested, as detailed in
the blueprint)
• Cognitive skills/demands (i.e., what cognitive abilities does the item draw on).
• Content coverage (or, specifically, the extent of match between the item and the
“key principles” or big ideas underlying the specific standard). This dimension
should address whether the item under consideration is a good representation
of the core concept underlying the standard, or only peripherally/ superficially
linked. Also, the percentage of items on the benchmark test ought to reflect the
percentages of classroom instruction.
For this recommendation, develop Table 2. based on the following example.
Table 2: Item Alignment with Standard Content and Process
Item # and
Does this Item Does this Item
If either or both column is
Question
Match A
match
“no”; circle the item
Content
Process/Cognitive number and use this
Standard
Demand of the
column to explain the
Standard?
misalignment.
Additionally questions to answer:
1. Have all the standards and key concept been covered? What standards or key
concepts should have been included that were not?
Recommendation #4. Then the CRESST Report 723 suggests each benchmark test
should have written documentation of:
 1. Item and test development procedures
– Test length: 30 items per test should be sufficient for purposes of predicting outcomes on
state tests. These items should focus on the most important knowledge
and skills taught before the test. If the district decides that the tests
should provide diagnostic information, there would need to be 3-5
items per topic reported.
30
7705-Test Construction Project
– Item development: Items have been reviewed for wording, clarity, bias, test directions for
test takers.
 2. Information about the test
– Students, teachers, and schools should receive advance information
about the content and format of the test. For this purpose it is
reasonable to release a representative sample of items for each test,
 3. Scoring procedures
– Documentation on scoring should describe: scoring and training
methods for open ended items, possible differential weighting of items,
instructions and possibly training for interpreting and using scores,
procedures for determining proficiency levels, criterion and/or
norming procedures, and scaling procedures, if any. There should be a
rubric and examples of performance at different score levels for
constructed response tasks.
– In addition, the meaning of scores should be clearly stated, and
justification for score interpretations provided.
 4. Student characteristics
– Who is the test intended for and who is it not appropriate for should
be outlined. For example, are there assumptions about language ability,
prior knowledge, format familiarity, special education students, etc.
Activities:
1. Please review the item construction and scoring directions. Please rewrite any items
that need improved wording, clarity, layout, removal of bias, improved distracters, etc.
2. Are there any test items that query the appropriate standard content but involve the
wrong cognitive demand? That is, does the standard ask the learner to describe two
forms of government, and the test question asks for an evaluation of these two
governments? Rewrite these questions.
3. Please review and improve test directions for test takers.
4. After reviewing Tables 1 and 2, are there any topics that should be queried? Make a
list of any topics or key standards omitted.
Recommendation #5: Omitted
Recommendation #6 Validation: For discussion only; no questions to
answer
31
7705-Test Construction Project
CRESST Report 723 states……..Validation is another major focus which covers the
following considerations for the benchmark assessment and summarizes the evidence and
theory bearing on the intended use or interpretation.
Validation evidence should include:
• Expert review
• Empirical studies
• Relationships among different measures
• Criterion group comparisons
• Utility:
– Does the assessment provide useful information?
– Can results be used to improve learning and instruction?
• Item analyses
• Difficulty
• Discrimination
• Cognitive demands
• Test properties
• Difficulty
• Inter-item correlations
• Reliability
• Evidence on differential validity
• Investigation and elimination of irrelevant variance
Appendix C: Example
Preliminary Analysis of the Jackson School District’s
First Term Algebra 1 Test, 2005-2006
Recommendations regarding reliability and validity analyses will be addressed in
greater depth in the second deliverable to JPS. However, as an example of what some
of this work might entail, we present an example of a preliminary test analysis. This
example is based on findings from JPS’s first term Algebra 1 test in 2005-06.
In the school year of 2005-06, 2,244 students at the Jackson School District took the
35-item Algebra 1 test. The students who took the test were enrolled in Grades 8-12,
with the majority of students in Grades 8-10. There were 458 8th-graders, 780 students
in 9th-grade, 850 in 10th-grade, 99 in 11th-grade, and 34 in 12th-grade. The gender
breakdown for the student population was relatively even, with 54% female and 46%
male. Of the total, 98% of the students were African Americans and about 90% received
free or reduced fee lunch.
Descriptive Analysis
To describe how these students performed on the test, we started with descriptive
analyses. First we calculated the percentages of students who scored correctly by item
in order to give us an initial indication of item difficulty. Please see Charts A and B for
the detailed results. Chart A has results on the first 18 items, and Chart B has the
remaining 17 items. Note that 1.00 on the axis indicates that 100% of students answered
32
7705-Test Construction Project
an item correctly.
As shown in Charts A and B, there is a wide variation in the percentages of
students answering each item correctly across this 35-item test. Only about 31% of the
students passed item 18, while 86% of the students passed item 22. Caution should be
directed to items with passing rate less than 50%. These items should be examined in
terms of content and phrasing to determine if they are addressing the specific
knowledge/skills that they were designed to address. This process helps to ensure the
content validity of the items. Items that, after analysis, are determined to have content
validity problems should be deleted from the test or at least deleted from the calculation
of the final scores for the students.
If the low pass-rate items are found to be valid in content, both students and
teachers should be considered in investigating reasons for the pass rate. For example, it
could be the content was not covered adequately in the classroom, or it could be the
students did not master the content because they did not possess the requisite
background knowledge or skills.
Besides analyzing the individual item passing rate for all the students who took
the test, we also analyzed the individual item passing rate by various student
background variables including gender, ethnicity, status in receiving free or reduced fee
lunch, and grade level. There is no one specific pattern for the passing rates by grade
level. In other words, some items seem to be of the same difficulty level for all grades,
some items are more difficult for 8th-graders than for the students of higher grades, and
sometimes items are more difficult for 12th-graders than for the students in lower
grades.
The gender differences in passing items are relatively small; the maximum
differences are 6% (for items 23, 25, 26, and 30). There were differences in students’
passing rates by ethnicity, some as large as 23%. For example, for item 19, African
American students had a passing rate of 47% while the other students had a passing
rate of 70%. The differences in pass rate based on free/reduced lunch status are
relatively minor when compared to the ethnic differences we found.
Correlational Analysis
The reliability coefficient for the 35-item test is .80, which is in the range generally
considered to be acceptable for instrument reliability. In terms of investigating
individual items, we found the Pearson correlation coefficients between each item and
the mean score range from .19 to .49. After deleting 10 items with the lowest
correlations with the grand mean, the reliability coefficient for the remaining 25 items is
.78, which is only slightly lower than the original one. The items dropped are items 31,
27, 5, 10, 3, 22, 1, 2, 8 and 11, whose correlations with the grand mean range from .19 to
33
7705-Test Construction Project
.31. It seems deleting these 10 items yields a more efficient test without reducing the
general reliability of the test. These analyses suggested that the test internal reliability
is reasonably high and that many items can be removed without seriously impairing
that reliability.
34
7705-Test Construction Project
Assignment 3: Final Project: Applied Assessment and Georgia Test Results
Directions and Absolute Analytical (Present/Absent) Rubric (20 Points total)
C. (Assignment #3 in WebCT) Plan and Deliver a Group Presentation –
Each teacher candidate will be assigned three partners. This team will develop a presentation
comparing each candidate’s school and the high-stakes, large scale testing present in the
schools. Basic requirements of this assignment include summaries and comparisons of data
located on school report cards, an in-depth examination and critique of one high-stakes test
used in each school, and the comparison of this state’s performance in 4th and 8th grade
national achievement tests for 2005 (or 2006 if available), compared to those same scores
from three other states. The presentation must employ technology, and a copy of the
presentation must be supplied to the professor. This assignment is designed to allow teacher
candidates to critically examine high stakes testing in their individual schools, while
comparing data on Georgia’s national testing performances. Specific requirements and a
grading rubric are available at the end of this syllabus and in WebCT. Time will be made
available during class for this activity; however, students may need to meet outside class to
complete preparations for the presentation. (20 points)
The purpose of this assignment is to integrate in PowerPoint presentation the applied
educational assessment materials presented by the authors of our text(s) with the information
available to educators in the state of Georgia concerning statewide assessment of student
learning, and then contrasting Georgia students’ test data with test scores from students in
other states .
35
7705-Test Construction Project
The descriptors presented below will serve as the analytical checklist rubric as valued
by the below assigned points.
+ = present, full credit
0= absent = no credit
Possible Total = 20; Obtained =__________
__A. Introductions (2 points)
1. Identify yourselves and your schools, grades and content areas.
___B. Demographics of Your Schools (Total = 6 points)
1. Compare and Contrast Your INDIVIDUAL schools. This data will be located by to
http://reportcard2007.gaosa.org/
School Reports
Then go to
Top Tabs = Student and School Indicators
Compare and contrast one piece of data that you find relevant to assessment from each of the
____Community data
____Compensatory programs
____Selected Programs
____Enrollment by demographics
Top Tab=Indicators
Include one piece of data that you find relevant to assessment from each of the
_____Retained Students
____Graduation Rate
____7-12 Drop Outs
____Attendance
2. Did your school fulfill the accountability demands of AYP? Go to Accountability Profile.
Compare and contrast each schools AYP that
now requires schools to meet criteria in three areas: Test Participation (for both
Mathematics and Reading/English Language Arts), Academic Performance (for
both Mathematics and Reading/English Language Arts), and a Second Indicator. What is
your school’s second indicator?
36
7705-Test Construction Project
____C. Assessment/Test Results – CRCT (Middle Schools) GHSGT (High Schools) in
Georgia (Total = 6 points)
Locate information about your school’s testing program What state level tests are used?
Any national tests?
1. Write, using bullets, very short descriptors of the test that includes test purpose, state
mandates, content domains and content descriptions.
http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/curriculum/testing/scores.asp
2. Compare and contrast your various schools’ scores.
____D. Assessment/Test Results- National 8th Grade NAEP Science, Math and Reading,
2005 (Total 6 points)
Now, go to http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/states/
Compare and contrast scores from the 2006 8th grade math, reading, and science tests for
Georgia and one northern, one western, and one eastern state.
Then do the same for the states based on black/white ethnicity and gender.
Use the data analysis tools (http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nde/criteria.asp)
to determine if these states produced 8th grade math test scores significantly higher than
comparable scores from Georgia.
37
7705-Test Construction Project
Professionalism Assignment #5
As indicated on your syllabus, professionalism will be evaluated in this course. I certainly am able to assess some aspects of
professionalism, but as a class member, you all are more capable of assessing professionalism from your interactions with those in your
group. When completing this form, remember that your group members, as KSU graduates will represent us all as a KSU graduate. So,
here is your opportunity to evaluate yourself and your colleagues against the standards set by the College.
If you and your class members have been professional in interactions as described below, then the expectations have been met and full
credit should be given. If, on the other hand, you or your class members have let colleagues down by not interacting as described below,
then full credit for professionalism should not be given.
Please evaluate the professionalism and participation of your group members AND yourself as you reflect on the experiences of working
with your class members. What is most important is that over time, the individual was consistently meeting or exceeding expectations,
or that they improved over time.
1. Write the names of each of your class members across the top row of cells.
2. Score each class member’s participation and professionalism using the following scale placing the appropriate number in the space
provided.
2= Meets or exceeds expectations. No improvement necessary.
1.5= Just meets expectations. A little improvement would make this person a better group member.
1= Below expectations. Needs improvement.
0= Really below expectations. Really needs improvement.
GROUP MEMBERS
Consistently and actively contributes
knowledge required for assignment
completion.
Demonstrate punctuality and
timely completion of responsibilities.
Values the knowledge, opinion and
skills of all group members and
encourages their contribution.
38
7705-Test Construction Project
39