Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byPaige Brady Modified over 4 years ago

1
Michigan Assessment Consortium Common Assessment Development Series Module 14 – Presenting the Results of an Assessment

2
Developed by Bruce R. Fay, PhD & Ellen Vorenkamp, EdD Assessment Consultants Wayne RESA

3
Support The Michigan Assessment Consortium professional development series in common assessment development is funded in part by the Michigan Association of Intermediate School Administrators in cooperation with …

4
In Module 14 you will learn about Score types… Score types… Standards-based reports… Standards-based reports… Graphical Representations… Graphical Representations…

5
So, youve… Developed a test (for use as a common assessment) Developed a test (for use as a common assessment) Pilot / field-tested it (right?) Pilot / field-tested it (right?) Looked at the field test results (of course) Looked at the field test results (of course) Now what? Now what?

6
Presenting Your Results Before you present the results of your test, you need to be clear about: Before you present the results of your test, you need to be clear about: Who the audience is Who the audience is Why they are seeing this data? (What?) Why they are seeing this data? (What?) Why they should care about it? (So what?) Why they should care about it? (So what?) What you want them to do as a result of seeing it? (Now what?) What you want them to do as a result of seeing it? (Now what?)

7
SCORE TYPES

8
A score by any other name Many score types that you may have heard of are really only appropriate for Norm-Referenced Tests (NRT), such as percentile rank, stanine, and grade level equivalent. Many score types that you may have heard of are really only appropriate for Norm-Referenced Tests (NRT), such as percentile rank, stanine, and grade level equivalent. Your common assessment is a Criterion- Referenced Test (CRT), so lets focus on score types that are appropriate for that. Your common assessment is a Criterion- Referenced Test (CRT), so lets focus on score types that are appropriate for that.

9
Raw Scores Number of items correct or Number of items correct or Number of points earned Number of points earned Q? Whats the difference? Q? Whats the difference? A! None, if each item has the same point value, otherwise… A! None, if each item has the same point value, otherwise…

10
Scaled Score (equal weight) If each test item has the same weight, say 1 point (1 if correct, 0 if wrong) then % correct is: If each test item has the same weight, say 1 point (1 if correct, 0 if wrong) then % correct is: The simplest scaled score you can create The simplest scaled score you can create The same as %points earned The same as %points earned Puts the raw score on a scale of 0 – 100 Puts the raw score on a scale of 0 – 100

11
Scaled Score (unequal weight) If each test item does not have the same number of points (there are weighted and/or partial credit items on the test) then If each test item does not have the same number of points (there are weighted and/or partial credit items on the test) then % correct becomes % of total possible points earned % correct becomes % of total possible points earned You still end up with a 0 – 100 scale You still end up with a 0 – 100 scale

12
% Correct Features (Issues) Features A common scale, as in widely used A common scale, as in widely used A common scale, as in the same regardless of raw score points A common scale, as in the same regardless of raw score points Intuitively interpretable (maybe) Intuitively interpretable (maybe) Permits comparisons between different tests Permits comparisons between different tests Issues Can/will be misinterpreted Can/will be misinterpreted Can make a 10 point test and a 100 point test appear equally important Can make a 10 point test and a 100 point test appear equally important Widely held belief that scores in certain ranges (60-70, 70-80, etc.) have some inherent meaning Widely held belief that scores in certain ranges (60-70, 70-80, etc.) have some inherent meaning

13
Interpretation of % Correct Q? Is 50% correct good or bad? Q? Is 50% correct good or bad? A!: We dont know yet. We dont discuss standard–setting until the next module (15). A!: We dont know yet. We dont discuss standard–setting until the next module (15). But most people think it is intuitively obvious that this is a bad score. But most people think it is intuitively obvious that this is a bad score.

14
Other ways to scale? Yes, but we dont really need them… Yes, but we dont really need them…

15
STANDARDS-BASED REPORTS

16
Two kinds of standards Content Standards Content Standards The definition of the content to be learned; what students are to know and be able to do The definition of the content to be learned; what students are to know and be able to do Performance Standards Performance Standards The definition of how good is good enough on a test to determine if, or the extent to which, students know and can do The definition of how good is good enough on a test to determine if, or the extent to which, students know and can do

17
Reporting by Content Standards This is our concern in this module This is our concern in this module The next module (15) deals with performance standards The next module (15) deals with performance standards

18
Lets consider… A test covering 5 GLCEs with 5 selected- response items per GLCE, with each item worth 1 point (25 points total). Q? What does a raw score of 20 (a % correct scaled score of 80%) mean? Q? What does a raw score of 20 (a % correct scaled score of 80%) mean? A! It depends A! It depends

19
Depends on What? Student A GLCE 1: 4/5 GLCE 1: 4/5 GLCE 2: 4/5 GLCE 2: 4/5 GLCE 3: 4/5 GLCE 3: 4/5 GLCE 4: 4/4 GLCE 4: 4/4 GLCE 5: 4/5 GLCE 5: 4/5 Student B GLCE 1: 5/5 GLCE 1: 5/5 GLCE 2: 5/5 GLCE 2: 5/5 GLCE 3: 5/5 GLCE 3: 5/5 GLCE 4: 3/5 GLCE 4: 3/5 GLCE 4: 2/5 GLCE 4: 2/5 Same or different?

20
How about these two? Student C GLCE 1: 5/5 GLCE 1: 5/5 GLCE 2: 5/5 GLCE 2: 5/5 GLCE 3: 4/5 GLCE 3: 4/5 GLCE 4: 3/5 GLCE 4: 3/5 GLCE 5: 3/5 GLCE 5: 3/5 Student D GLCE 1: 5/5 GLCE 1: 5/5 GLCE 2: 5/5 GLCE 2: 5/5 GLCE 3: 5/5 GLCE 3: 5/5 GLCE 4: 5/5 GLCE 4: 5/5 GLCE 5: 0/5 GLCE 5: 0/5 These 4 examples all have a raw score of 20 (80% correct) but represent 4 different performances by the students.

21
Another way to see it GLCEA #A %B #B %C #C %D #D % 148051005 5 248051005 5 348051004805100 44803603 5100 548024036000 total2080208020802080

22
Scores by Standard Remember, we havent set performance standards yet, so we really cant say what these scores mean Remember, we havent set performance standards yet, so we really cant say what these scores mean Even so, 5 out 5 may suggest that a student knows the material and 0 out 5 may suggest that they dont (depends on item-GLCE match) Even so, 5 out 5 may suggest that a student knows the material and 0 out 5 may suggest that they dont (depends on item-GLCE match) However…even though this is a CRT, you cant make instructional decisions without the context of the overall pattern of scores However…even though this is a CRT, you cant make instructional decisions without the context of the overall pattern of scores

23
Say what? There will often be extreme scores (outliers) that are not representative of most of the scores in a set. There will often be extreme scores (outliers) that are not representative of most of the scores in a set. Q? What if most of the students scored a 0 or a 1 on GLCE 5 in the example? Q? What if most of the students scored a 0 or a 1 on GLCE 5 in the example? A! Maybe a picture would help A! Maybe a picture would help

24
GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATIONS Or, I can see clearly now

25
Guidelines for Good Graphs Title & Subtitles Title & Subtitles Data Source and Time Frame Data Source and Time Frame Axis Labels Axis Labels Legend Legend Viewable Colors Viewable Colors Readability (3-D doesnt make it better) Readability (3-D doesnt make it better)

26
Appropriate Type Bar Graphs Bar Graphs Line Graphs Line Graphs Scatterplots Scatterplots Stem & Leaf Stem & Leaf Pie Charts (evil) Pie Charts (evil)

27
Results for 25 students (# scoring at each score point for each GLCE)

28
The Data Heres how the spreadsheet is set up Heres how the spreadsheet is set up 012345 GLCE 1124963 GLCE 20121075 GLCE 3148930 GLCE 4742246 GLCE 5875320 Note: This will be replaced with a table so it looks better

29
Lets Assume… We have established that 3 out of 5 on each standard is an acceptable standard of evidence that a student understands the GLCE in question (hey, these were hard items) We have established that 3 out of 5 on each standard is an acceptable standard of evidence that a student understands the GLCE in question (hey, these were hard items) Then students who score a 3, 4, or 5 on the cluster of items for a GLCE can be considered proficient while students with a 2, 1, or 0 are not. Then students who score a 3, 4, or 5 on the cluster of items for a GLCE can be considered proficient while students with a 2, 1, or 0 are not.

30
Proficiency by Standard (for 25 Students) GLCE# Not Prof% Not Prof# Prof% Prof 17281872 23122288 313521248 413521248 52080520 This is what the previous data looks like in table form. Would a picture help?

31
Proficiency by Standard (for 25 Students)

32
Heres the data GLCENPProf 1718 2322 31312 41312 5205 Note: this will be replaced with a table so it looks better

33
Repeated Measures If you test the same content on more than one occasion, you can look at your test results over time. If you test the same content on more than one occasion, you can look at your test results over time. As an example, lets look at test results for our class of 25 students on a pre-test, two intermediate tests, and a post-test covering the same five GLCEs. We will look only at GLCE 1, with 5 points possible each time. As an example, lets look at test results for our class of 25 students on a pre-test, two intermediate tests, and a post-test covering the same five GLCEs. We will look only at GLCE 1, with 5 points possible each time.

34
The Data – Results for 25 students on GLCE 1 on 4 test administrations by score point Score Points Pre-TestTest 1Test 2Post-Test 09631 16421 24322 33565 42479 51357 (This is a somewhat idealized example), but interpret it with caution!

35
And heres the picture – Results for 25 students on 4 tests by score point

36
The Excel spreadsheet Score543210 Pre-test964321 Test 1643543 Test 2322675 Post-test112597 Note: This will be replaced with a table for better viewing

37
Conclusions Audience Audience Purpose Purpose Technical Considerations Technical Considerations What? So what? Now what? What? So what? Now what?

38
Next Module

Similar presentations

OK

Michigan Assessment Consortium Common Assessment Development Series Module 16 – Validity.

Michigan Assessment Consortium Common Assessment Development Series Module 16 – Validity.

© 2018 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

To make this website work, we log user data and share it with processors. To use this website, you must agree to our Privacy Policy, including cookie policy.

Ads by Google