Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

© 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessment Chapter 16.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "© 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessment Chapter 16."— Presentation transcript:

1 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessment Chapter 16

2 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Objectives Describe how to select and administer an appropriate assessment instrument and interpret and share assessment data Describe the advantages and disadvantages of both norm-referenced and criterion-referenced assessment instruments Provide a comparative example of a product- oriented versus a process- oriented assessment

3 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Objectives Describe these norm-referenced assessment instruments: Bayley III, Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, Basic Motor Ability Test–Revised, and Denver II Describe these process-oriented assessment instruments: SIGMA, Developmental Sequence of Motor Skills Inventory, Fundamental Motor Pattern Assessment Instrument, and the Test of Gross Motor Development–2 Describe two popular assessment instruments used in assessing the disabled Identify several aids to improve your ability to acquire more valid assessment data Describe test batteries specifically designed to assess the physical fitness of children, adolescents, adults, and senior citizens

4 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. “Studies suggest that many physical educators fail to assess their students’ motor behavior properly. The major reason for this is lack of training.”

5 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Guidelines for Assessment Why do you want to assess your students? What variables do you plan to assess? Which tests purport to assess the important variables that you have identified? How will you prepare yourself for collecting the data?

6 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Guidelines for Assessment Do you have the statistical skills to interpret the assessment data? Will you be conducting an informal or a formal assessment? How, and with whom, will you share the assessment results?

7 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Why Assess? Screening –To identify needs –To determine if an individual requires further testing, additional programming, or instruction Program content –Plan the content of a particular program

8 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Why Assess? Student progress –Are individuals meeting the course or program objectives? Program evaluation –Is the program meeting the objectives for enhanced skill development? Classification –Placement of individuals by group

9 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. What Variables to Assess Instructional units that are tied to specific course objectives indicate which variables are assessed Assess variables tied to course objectives

10 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selecting the Best Test Review all available tests Is the test statistically valid, reliable, and objective? If the test is norm-referenced, are the norms established on a population similar to the one you plan to assess?

11 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selecting the Best Test Is the test instrument feasible to administer? Do you have the training and expertise to administer the test as well as interpret the results?

12 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. An Ideal Test Validity –Test measures what it claims to measure Content validity ~ the instrument contains tasks that measure specific content of interest –A subjective measure

13 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. An Ideal Test Reliability –Consistency of test scores Individual scores do not vary significantly from day to day, assuming there has been no additional instruction –Test reliability is the test score’s freedom from error –Measured statistically

14 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. An Ideal Test Objectivity –Interrater reliability –Degree of accuracy to which a test is scored –Determined statistically Statistical determination is performed by computing a correlation coefficient for two sets of scores

15 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. An Ideal Test Correlation coefficient –A set of ratings compiled by one scorer is correlated with the scores obtained by a second scorer A correlation coefficient of 0.80 –1.00 is acceptable Caution: norms are population specific –Height of American children should not be compared with the norms in height for Japanese children

16 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. An Ideal Test Test feasibility –Which test can be administered in the least amount of time? –Must you administer the test to a single student, or can it be administered to groups? –Do you have the training and expertise to administer the test?

17 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. An Ideal Test Test feasibility –Do you have all of the supplies and equipment needed for test administration? –Do you have the training and expertise to interpret the test results?

18 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Preparing Students for Assessment To reduce test anxiety –Test environment can be controlled –Meet the participant’s physical needs Procedure for restroom breaks –Meet the participant’s psychological needs Introduce the test with conversation Reveal what will be done during the test Avoid the word “test” Allow participants to explore the equipment

19 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Instructor Preparation and Data Collection Do you have the necessary equipment to administer the assessment? Can you deliver the standardized directions to students taking the assessment? Do you have an appropriate score sheet with extra pencils on hand?

20 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Instructor Preparation and Data Collection Are you adequately prepared to administer the assessment without constantly referring to the test manual? If assessment requires observation, do you possess valid observational skills? –Are you able to recognize deviations from the norm? –From what point will you observe?

21 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Instructor Preparation and Data Collection You must think through and even pilot (test run) your assessment procedures prior to administering the test to a target population

22 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Interpreting the Assessment Data Need to have an understanding of measures of central tendency and measures of variability Measures of central tendency –Mean – arithmetic average –Median – 50 th percentile –Mode – score that appears most frequently

23 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Interpreting the Assessment Data Measures of variability –Describes the spread of scores A measure of variability –Standard deviation – describes the degree to which the scores vary about the mean of the distribution –δ = sigma (standard deviation symbol)

24 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Interpreting Assessment Data

25 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Formal vs. Informal Assessment When assessment is performed in an informal manner, the student is not generally aware that an observation is being made Playbased assessment –Children are involved in free play within an approved area, but in the presence of an adult facilitator

26 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Formal vs. Informal Assessment Playbased assessment –Facilitator plays along and models the child's play behavior –Later, the facilitator will coax the child into exhibiting new movements –During this time, an evaluation is being conducted –Videotaping is recommended

27 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Sharing Assessment Results Share results with parents, fellow teachers, school nurse, other professionals Face-to-face communication is the best way to share the written evaluation Avoid using complex statistical terms or terms that the lay public would not understand Have references available for review and have program suggestions available for parents and other professionals

28 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Types of Assessment Instruments Norm-referenced –Quantitative evaluations designed to compare a person’s skill and abilities with those of others from similar age, gender, and socioeconomic categories –Also called psychometric instruments –Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development III, Gesell Developmental Schedules, Bruininks- Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, Test of Gross Motor Development-2

29 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Types of Assessment Instruments Norm-referenced –Advantages Easy to administer Minimal training required to administer the test Scoring procedures are simple Compare results to others in peer group –Disadvantages Provides only “average” results

30 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Types of Assessment Instruments Criterion-referenced –These instruments evaluate the “quality” of a person’s performance –Can determine placement of an individual along the developmental continuum –Compares and individual to him/herself over time –Common testing procedures for motor developmentalists

31 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Types of Assessment Instruments Criterion-referenced –Advantages Provides more insight into programming considerations Provides a true developmental assessment –Disadvantages More complicated to administer than norm- referenced tests

32 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Types of Assessment Instruments Product-oriented assessment –The examiner is more interested in performance outcomes than the technique used to perform the task –Measures quantitative outcomes How far How many –Pass-fail system –Score for each successful completion of a task

33 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Product-vs. Process-Oriented Assessment Process-oriented assessment –Requires a component approach “the identification of developmental characteristics of body parts within a task” –Disadvantages A comprehensive understanding of developmental steps and a prolonged period of study and practice of the techniques is required –Conducting this type of assessment within a large school population is questionable

34 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Product-vs. Process-Oriented Assessment TaskTime Involved Training first observer to code* Training second observer to code 9 hours 40 min 5 hours 45 min Time needed to videotape 206 children 3 hours 17 min Time needed to code performance from videotape 18 hours 46 min * 0.80 criterion agreement

35 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Product vs. Process-Oriented Assessment Component approach assessments not feasible to use with large classes –Takes too much time –Appropriate for small classes Total body approach assessments more feasible with large classes

36 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selected Norm-Referenced (NR) Instruments Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development III (2005) –Subtests to identify deficits in young children (1-42 months) Cognitive Motor Language Social-Emotional Adaptive Behavior Motor subtests –Body control –Large muscle coordination –Fine motor manipulatory skills –Dynamic movement –Dynamic praxis –Postural imitation –Stereognosis

37 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selected Norm-Referenced (NR) Instruments Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (BOTMP) –Test battery of 8 subtests with 46 items –Short and long form –Provides a comprehensive index of motor proficiency and individual measures of fine and gross motor skills in children 4.5 to 14.5 years of age

38 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selected Norm-Referenced (NR) Instruments Basic Motor Ability Test – Revised –Designed to assess selected large and small muscle control responses –Can be used with children 4 to 12 years of age –Some test items: bead stringing, target throwing, back and hamstring stretch, static balance, basketball throw, agility run

39 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selected Norm-Referenced (NR) Instruments Denver II –A major revision and restandardization of the original Denver Development Screening Test –Designed to screen children between birth and 6 years of age for developmental delays in four areas

40 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selected Norm-Referenced (NR) Instruments Areas 1.Personal-social 2.Fine motor adaptive 3.Language 4.Gross motor Test sheet is unique Scoring: pass-fail, refusal, no opportunity to observe grading Training aids available DENVER II

41 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selected Norm-Referenced (NR) Instruments 4 AREAS of child’s development tested in Denver II 1.Personal-social –Drinking from a cup, removing one’s own garments, washing and drying hands 2.Fine motor adaptive –Ability to perform tasks as passing a block from hand to hand, stacking blocks 3.Language –Ability to imitate sounds, name body parts, define words 4.Gross motor –Ability to sit, walk, jump, throw

42 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selected Process-Oriented Assessment Instruments SIGMA –The Ohio State University Scale of Intra-Gross Motor Assessment –A criterion-referenced tool designed to evaluate motor behavior of normal preschool, elementary, and young mentally retarded school children –11 fundamental motor skills in four developmental levels assessed –A Performance Based Curriculum (PBC) is included with the assessment test

43 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selected Process-Oriented Assessment Instruments Developmental Sequence of Motor Skills Inventory –This analysis is based upon the configuration of the total body during performance of a task –Three to five stages of behavior are observed –Level of development is then classified for hopping, skipping, galloping, throwing, catching, punting, striking, kicking, long jumping

44 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selected Process-Oriented Assessment Instruments Fundamental Motor Pattern Assessment Instrument –Used to assess developmental changes over time for fundamental patterns Walking, running, jumping, throwing overhand, catching, kicking –Performer is scored in one of three stages of development Initial stage, elementary stage, mature stage

45 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Selected Process-Oriented Assessment Instruments Test of Gross Motor Development – 2 –Used to identify children between 3.0 and years of age who may be significantly behind in gross motor skill development and eligible for special education services –Locomotor and object-control skills are evaluated –Normative data stratified by age, geography, gender, race, residence

46 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing the Disabled Although individuals with selected special needs perform behind their “normal” peers, both groups follow similar patterns of development Most assessment tests are geared to the “normal” population Comparisons using normative data are inappropriate

47 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing the Disabled Brigance Diagnostic Inventory of Early Development (BDIED) –Criterion-referenced test with norms –Assesses behaviors that are divided into 11 domains –Can assess development from birth to 6 years of age –Easy to administer and interpret

48 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing the Disabled Brigance Diagnostic Inventory of Early Development: Assessment Categories 1.Preambulatory motor skills and behaviors 2.Gross motor skills and behaviors 3.Fine motor skills and behaviors 4.Self-help skills 5.Prespeech behaviors 6.Speech and language skills 7.General knowledge and comprehension 8.Readiness skills 9.Basic reading skills 10.Writing skills 11.Math skills

49 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing the Disabled I CAN –The goal of this assessment is to improve the quality of physical education instruction for all students –Target population: “children whose overall developmental growth is slower than the average, as well as.. children with specific learning disabilities, social, or emotional adjustment difficulties, and or economic or language disadvantages”

50 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing the Disabled I CAN –Criterion-referenced –Easy to administer –Modules include Preprimary motor and play skills Primary skills Sport, leisure, and recreation skills

51 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Aids in Assessing Motor Skills Checklists or reminder sheets that list key descriptive terms for each developmental level to jog the examiner’s memory Videotaping individual performance

52 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness Physical-fitness test batteries –FITNESSGRAM/ACTIVITYGRAM –President’s Challenge –National Youth Physical Fitness Program –National children and Youth fitness Studies I and II –Functional Fitness Assessment for Adults Over 60 Years –Senior Fitness Test

53 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness FITNESSGRAM/ACTIVITYGRAM –Developed by the Cooper Institute for Aerobic Research –Most widely used instrument in the assessment of health-related physical fitness for youth and young adults (5-25 yr) –Web-based version Reference Guide

54 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness FITNESSGRAM –Aerobic capacity –Body composition –Muscular strength –Muscular endurance –Flexibility ACTIVITYGRAM –Behaviorally based physical activity assessment tool –Students record physical activity each 30-min over 3 days –Determines if activity guidelines are being met

55 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness Physical Best program from AAHPERD is an excellent supplement to the FITNESSGRAM –A comprehensive health-related fitness education program –Includes program materials and an instructional videotape on test administration –Special certifications are available from AAHPERD

56 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness Brockport Physical Fitness Test –Designed to assess the health-related fitness of youths yrs of age who have various disabilities –Criterion-referenced for: Visual impairments, spinal cord injuries, cerebral palsy, congenital anomalies or amputations –27 health-related fitness tests

57 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness The President’s Challenge Youth Physical Fitness Program –Sponsored by the President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports –Designed for Americans age 6 and up –Children can receive one of four awards –Awards are based on normative data –Accommodations are made for students with disabilities –President's Challenge GuidelinesPresident's Challenge Guidelines

58 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness Awards Offered by the President’s Challenge Program 1.The Presidential Physical Fitness Award 2.The National Physical Fitness Award 3.The Participant Physical Fitness Award 4.The Health Fitness Award

59 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness National Youth Physical Fitness Program (YPF) –Sponsored by the United States Marines Youth Foundation –Encourages individuals K-college age to maintain a drug-free lifestyle fostering self- respect and self-esteem through physical fitness

60 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness YFP test battery –Push-ups –Pull-ups –Sit-ups –Standing long jump –300-yeard shuttle run 17 Certificates of Athletic Accomplishment available Modifications encouraged for people with special challenges

61 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness National Children and Youth Fitness Studies I and II –Implemented by the Department of Health and Human Services in 1985 –Purpose is to describe the current fitness status of American children and youth (ages 6-17 years)

62 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness Functional Fitness Assessment for Adults Over 60 Years –Older adults need to be able to carry out activities for daily living –The American Association for Physical Activity and Recreation, a part of AAHPERD, developed this test

63 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Fitness Functional Fitness Assessment for Adults Over 60 Years 1.Agility/dynamic balance 2.½ mile walk (endurance) 3.Test of trunk/leg flexibility (sit and reach) 4.Test of muscular strength/endurance 5.Soda pop coordination

64 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessing Physical Performance Senior Fitness Test –Designed to assess the major physiological components of functional capacity in elderly individuals (60-94 years of age) –Contains performance norms, test manual, and video to teach assessment procedures

65 © 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved.


Download ppt "© 2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved. Assessment Chapter 16."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google