measuring teachers' use of formative assessment:
DESCRIPTION
Measuring teachers' use of formative assessment: . A learning progressions approach. Why formative assessment?. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
A learning progressions approach
Measuring teachers' use of formative assessment:
Brent Duckor (SJSU)Diana Wilmot (PAUSD)
Bill Conrad & Jimmy ScheRrer (SCCOE)Amy Dray (UCB)
Why formative assessment?
Black and Wiliam (1998) report that studies of formative assessment (FA) show an effect size on standardized tests between 0.4 and 0.7, far larger than most educational interventions and equivalent to approximately 8 months of additional instruction;
Further, FA is particularly effective for low achieving students, narrowing the gap between them and high achievers, while raising overall achievement;
Enhancing FA would be an extremely cost-effective way to improve teaching practice;
Unfortunately, they also find that FA is relatively rare in the classroom, and that most teachers lack effective FA skills.
Measuring Effective FA practice: Toward a cycle of psychometric
inquiryDefine constructs in multi-dimensional spaceDesign items and observations protocolIterate scoring strategy in alignment
construct mapsApply measurement model to validate
teacher and item-level claims and to warrant inferences about effective practice
teachers who practice assessment for learning know
and can understand and articulate in advance of teaching the achievement
targets that their students are to hit;
inform their students about those learning goals, in terms that students understand;
translate classroom assessment results into frequent descriptive feedback
for students, providing them with specific insights as to how to improve;
continuously adjusting instruction based on the results of classroom assessments.
Ask an expert
Research suggestsFA 1.0
Good formative feedback
Types of feedback (Butler, 1998; Butler & Neuman, 1995; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Kluger & DeNisi, 1996);
Level of specificity and task relatedness (Tunstall & Gipps, 1996; Ames, 1992; Dweck, 1986);
The “next steps” required of students (Butler & Neuman, 1995) can influence the effectiveness of formative assessment on classroom learning.
FA 2.0
The Zone of study
Items Design
Outcome SpaceMeasurementModel
Reliability
Validity
Construct Map
Phase 1: Construct Mapping
Knowledge of formative assessment
Mapping a Route …FA 3.0
Novice teaching
Expert teaching
Skills Allocationat “Soliciting responses” level
Construct MapItem Design
MeasurementModel
Reliability
Validity
Outcome Space
Phase 2: Items Design
Align items (tasks, prompts, scenarios) with the levels on the construct map.
Building items to map onto a refined set of formative assessment practices.
Consider various item types and delivery platforms.
Review an example of a simulated scenario with focus on turns of talk.
Consider content and construct validity, as well as inter-rater reliability in construction and use of items.
Consider the context: The Lesson Cycle
Initial framing of a question within a HIGH LEVEL Task.
Study the enactment of formative assessment implementation within a science classroom engaged in HL tasks in ecology.
The evolution of a Task
The Enacted Task
Stein, Remillard, & Smith (2007)
Delivery Platforms for data collection
Traditional “paper and pencil” questionsClassroom based “authentic” tasksLesson planning/enactment/reflectionsLesson study of best formative assessment
practicesInnovative adaptive virtual scenarios (AVS)Video episodesWeb-based virtual platforms
Adaptive VIRTUAL scenarios
Ability to share a range of novice through expert formative assessment practice in video format.
Pause videos throughout teacher enactment to measure teachers level of sophistication.
Potential items within Simulated SCENARIOs
Pause video and ask the teacher:How would you characterize this initial move? What do you notice about the teachers’ questioning strategy?How might you compare one questioning strategy with another?What would you do next?
Replay video and show teachers’ follow up moves.
Pause and ask the teacher what they think:How would you negotiate this student response?What kind of question would you pose next?
Sample of teacher responses
Initial move was “literal”, ”more open ended”.
Teacher’s response to students was: “too directed towards the right answer”, “thoughtfully provoking misconceptions”, “open enough to provoke deeper conceptual knowledge across the
classroom”
I would have asked a question like,”…[a question that uses student thinking as a basis]”
Administration of tools
Administer tools with widest range of teachers possible pre-service Induction yearsVeteran 5-9 yearsVeteran 10+ years
Use adaptive technology to capture teacher’s zone of proximal development in their expertise of formative assessment practices
Examine relationship (if any) between scores on multiple tools
Construct MapItems Design
MeasurementModel
Reliability
Validity
Outcome Space
Phase 3: Defining the outcome space
Link each item response back to the levels on the construct map.
Using scoring guides to capture granularity of formative assessment practices.
Consider various types e.g. rubrics, observation protocols, coding
Provide exemplars of practice to assist in scoring protocols.
Consider content and construct validity, as well as inter-rater reliability in construction and use of scoring guides.
Problem of Practice:Formative assessment
Teachers have difficulty scaffolding student thinking and reasoning through discourse
As a result, the cognitive demand of a task often declines during implementation (e.g., TIMSS, QUASAR)
A Tool for Measuring Teachers’ use of most-formative assessment
1. Initiate participation in classroom discussions
2. Respond to students contributions during a discussion
Scherrer & Stein (In Press)
An Example of How to Apply the Codes in Context
1. Teacher: What can you tell me about this shape?
2. Juan: It has 4 right angles.
3. Teacher: What else can you tell me?
4. Kayla: It is a rectangle.
5. Teacher: Okay, a rectangle. Why do you think it is a rectangle?
6. Kayla: It has 4 sides.
7. Teacher: Are all shapes that have 4 sides rectangles?
8. Yasmin: It could also be a quadrilateral.
9. Teacher: Wait. I am asking if all shapes with 4 sides are rectangles.
Launch
Collect
Repeat, Uptake
Uptake-Literal
Terminal, Reinitiate
Scoring the Codes
1. Teacher: What can you tell me about this shape?
2. Juan: It is a quadrilateral.
3. Teacher: What else can you tell me?
4. Kayla: It is a rectangle.
5. Teacher: Okay, what else?
6. Yasmin: It has four right angles.
7. Teacher: Okay, what about this shape over here? What can you tell me about this one?
Launch
Collect
Collect
Launch
In this example, the teacher did not “do” anything with the student responses.
+1
+0
+0
+1
Scoring the Codes
1. Teacher: What can you tell me about this shape?
2. Juan: It is a quadrilateral.
3. Teacher: What else can you tell me?
4. Kayla: It is a rectangle.
5. Teacher: Okay, Juan said this shape is a quadrilateral, and Kayla said it is a rectangle. What is similar about quadrilaterals and rectangles?
Launch
Collect
Connect
In this example, the teacher asked an open-ended question, gathered an additional response to that question, and then connected the two responses.
+1
+1
+2
Connecting codes to response levels on the construct map
Response Levels
Launch, Collect, Connect, Uptake
Launch, Collect, Uptake
Launch, Collect, Literal
Launch, Literal, Literal
Literal, Literal, Literal
Scoring designations
L4
L3
L2
L1
L0
Construct MapItems Design
Outcome Space
Reliability
Validity
Measurement Model
Phase 4: applying measurement models
Cross reference qualitative construct maps with technically calibrated Wright Maps using IRT.
Employ person and item statistics to check on model fit
Consider various types of measurement models including facets.
Provide individual and group level data on progress.
Consider “internal structure” validity evidence for construct maps, in addition to checks on reliability of tools.
Berkeley Evaluation And Assessment Research Center
Item response theory can model a “learning progression” within a particular domain. For example:
KSC: Knowledge of science content
KST: Knowledge of student thinking
KFA: Knowledge of formative assessment
Berkeley Evaluation And Assessment Research Center
Case study: Developing an integrated assessment system (DIAS)
for teacher educationPamela Moss, University of Michigan
Mark Wilson, University of California, Berkeley
Goal is to develop an assessment system that:focuses on teaching practice grounded in professional and disciplinary knowledge as it develops over time;addresses multiple purposes of a broad array of stakeholders working in different contexts; andcreates the foundation for programmatic coherence and professional development across time and institutional contexts.
Case study: DIAS
The research team identified the ways in which student teachers can learn to use formative and summative assessment to guide their students’ learning.
Developed a construct map that outlined a progression of learning in “Assessment.”
Described the different aspects of “Assessment,” such as: Identifying the mathematical target to be assessed;Understanding the purposes of the assessment;Designing appropriate and feasible tasks (such as end of class checks); Developing accurate inferences about individual student and whole class
learning.
Case study: DIAS
The research team collected data from student teachers enrolled in the elementary mathematics teacher education program at the University of Michigan.
Designed scoring guides based on our construct map.Coded videotapes from over 100 student teachers as they conducted
lessons in the classroom.Coded associated collected data, such as lesson plans and
reflections, since these documents contain information about what the student teachers hope to learn from the assessment(s), and what they infer about the students in their classroom.
Using item response methods to determine which aspects of assessment practice are easier or more difficult for the student teachers and to thereby inform the teacher education program.
Synopsis
Incredible partnership
Filling an important educational research space
Identified the assessment space
Focus on the content
Emphasis on student thinking
Contributions to instrumentation and methodology
Marry qualitative and quantitative data using IRT framework
Next steps: pilot study
Contact Information
Bill Conrad Jimmy ScherrrerSanta Clara County Office of Education [email protected] (Office)510-761-2007 (Cell)[email protected]
Brent Duckor, Ph.D. Diana Wilmot, Ph.D.Assistant Professor Coordinator, Research & EvaluationCollege of Education Palo Alto Unified School DistrictSan Jose State University [email protected]@sjsu.edu
Amy Dray, Ph.D. UC Berkeley Graduate School of [email protected]
A learning progressions approach
Measuring teachers' use of formative assessment:
Brent Duckor (SJSU)Diana Wilmot (PAUSD)
Bill Conrad & Jimmy ScheRrer (SCCOE)Amy Dray (UCB)