The Assessment of Education Goals and Academic Performance

Abstract

This paper will speak to assessment being an important too; used to measure academic performance and the overall effectiveness of instruction. There are two governmental levels that use assessment, and while similar they have very different purposes. The two governmental levels that use assessment are the national and local levels. State leaders, congress, and the President use national assessments. They use the assessments to learn about trends and to develop policies that will provide greater structure to education nationally. Assessments at the national level, are used to compare a state’s individual results against national results. Assessment at the local level allows schools to provide parents with the academic standing of their student’s strengths and weaknesses. Additionally, assessment will tell the student’s readiness for grade promotion, graduation and post-secondary education. Once the assessment results are in, that information should be disseminated to all stakeholders of the school district.

Purpose of National & Local Assessments

“Although there are some similarities between statewide, national, and international assessments, they differ in purpose and level of reporting. For example, the purpose of statewide (local) assessments is primarily to inform statewide accountability systems and provide information on individual achievement. By contrast, the purpose of large-scale assessments is to highlight achievement gaps, track national progress over time, compare achievement within the United States, and compare U.S. achievement to that of other countries. Results of these assessments are not reported for individuals” (www.everycrsreport.com). By assessing at the local level, administrators are able to track the progress toward state education goals. Assessments are vital as they generate information and, depending on the nature and use of the information obtained, can play multiple roles in education (Weiss, 2002). 

Framework

The National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) develops the frame work at the national level. NAGB also establishes the educational benchmarks of what students should know in each content area for every grade level. Creating a valuable conceptual framework for standards-based reform is by having “meaningful ways for communicating with and informing parents and the public about what the assessments mean” (Lambert, 1999). Teachers, school administrators, parents, and content area experts assist in setting the standards that will be used in the district based on the national standards. At the state level, the framework is established by the state based on their own content standards. The following stakeholders assist at the state level: policymakers, teachers, administrators and parents.

Performance Standards

Performance standards at the national level has three achievement levels set by the National Assessment Governing Board: basic, proficient and advanced levels. Each individual state sets the performance standards that are measured by achievement levels. As it relates to state level, proficient is defined as performing ‘at grade level.’ Assessment, traditionally used by individual teachers to monitor student learning and to provide a basis for assigning grades, has always been a critical component of the education system (Glaser and Silver, 1994).

Types of Assessments

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) uses a carefully designed sampling procedure that allows the assessment to be representative of the geographical, racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity of the schools and students in the United States. Data is also provided on students with disabilities and English language learners. Since NAEP assessments are administered uniformly to all participating students using the same test booklets and identical procedures across the nation, NAEP results serve as a common metric for states and select urban districts that participate in the assessment (www.nces.edu.gov).

Governmental stakeholders such as the President, congressional and state leaders use national assessment results to understand trends and to implement policies that will improve education nationwide as previously stated.

Analyzation and distribution of assessment data. While a students’ score on outcome assessments are valid predictors of their course work preparation, they only reflect a fraction of what students know and can do (Hendel, 1991). By properly reporting the data collected, one can monitor, and understand, how students are progressing on individual standards that are established by the district and how these students are academically trending as compared to their peers. By drilling down to the individual level, a district can provide detailed information on the student that highlights their overall score, specifically which questions they may have missed and which subjects the student demonstrated mastery and where they may have fallen short of understanding.

To properly analyze and interpret the assessment information, the district should compare the collected data to the established goals and objectives. By understanding how the data compares to the stated goals and objectives, changes can be recommended and implemented for improvement. The district will be able to utilize the data analysis to identify and address specific needs for students, create an educational plan that addresses deficiencies and allow the district to be flexible in addressing issues as new data becomes available. When assessments are aligned with learning goals, accountability systems can motivate classroom instruction to focus on those outcomes (Stecher, Barron, Kaganoff, and Goodwin, 1998). 

The overall report should describe why the assessment process was implemented, what the goals and objectives were and how the analysis was conducted. The major findings should be highlighted and should describe how these finding will be used to improve the educational experience. Finally, an implementation plan should be incorporated into the report prior to distribution.

Biblical Understanding of Assessment

When one is assessed, their academic abilities are being measured. While academic testing can be a stressful process, it allows the district to have an understanding of the effectiveness of the teaching but to also identify an individuals strengths. As stated in Corinthians 12:5-6, everyone has different skills and talents. “There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but in all of them and in everyone it is the same God at work.” The assessment process is vital in helping to identify an individual’s strengths and weaknesses.

Engaging Stakeholders

When an assessment is conducted, how the data is analyzed and distributed to internal and external stakeholders is a vital part of the process. For a complete understanding of the overall educational effectiveness of a school or district, stakeholders should receive a detailed description of the assessment process and the results. For parents, a description of a student’s level of understanding needs to be more than just receiving a quarterly report card. Simply seeing a B or a C on the student’s report card does not adequately communicate to parents what the child’s strengths or weaknesses are (Mohnsen, 1998).

For many stakeholders, just understanding the process that goes into many of the decisions within the district is enough. Assessments can drive change at different levels of the system, for example, by informing the public about the overall state of achievement or by informing those who make decisions about teacher certification, allocation of resources, or rewards and sanctions for schools (Weiss, 2002). When the district provides transparency about the assessment process and the overall state of the district, the stakeholders, both internal and external, will provide tremendous support.

References

1. Cruz, L., & Peterson, S. (2002). Reporting Assessment Results to Parents. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance,20-25.
2. Education Week. (2001, January). Special Report: Quality counts 2001: A better balance: Standards, tests, and the tools to succeed. Seeking Stability for Standards-Based Education 20(17).
3. Glaser, R., and Silver, E. (1994). Assessment, Testing, and Instruction: Retrospect and Prospect. In L.Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Review of Research in Education. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
4. Grissmer, D., and Flanagan, A. (1998). Exploring rapid achievement gains in North Carolina and Texas. Washington, DC: National Education Goals Panel.
5. Hendel, D. D. (1991). Evidence of Convergent and Discriminant Validity in Three Measures of College Outcomes. Educational and Psychological Measurement,51(2), 351-358.
6. Kuh, G., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J., Bridges, B., & Hayek, J. (2006). What Matters to Student Success: A Review of the Literature. Report Commissioned for the National Symposium on Postsecondary Student Success.
7. Lambert, L. (1999). Standards-based Assessment of Student Learning: A Comprehensive Approach. National Association for Sport and Physical Education.
8. Liu, O. L., Bridgeman, B., & Adler, R. M. (2012). Measuring Learning Outcomes in Higher Education. Educational Researcher,41(9), 352-362.
9. Mohnsen, B. (1998). Assessing and Grading Middle School Students. Teaching Elementary School Physical Education,13-15.
10. Stecher, B.M., Barron, S., Kaganoff, T., and Goodwin, J. (1998). The effects of standards-based assessment on classroom practices: Results of the 1996–97 RAND survey of Kentucky teachers of mathematics and writing. CSE Technical Report 482. Los Angeles: Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
11. The Holy Bible: Old and New Testaments. (2010). London: Trinitarian Bible Society.
12. Weiss, I. R. (2002). Investigating the influence of standards a framework for research in mathematics, science, and technology education. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.