Uncommon Measures Equivalence and Linkage Among Educational Tests (1999) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
1 Tests and the Challenge of Linkage
1 Tests and the Challenge of Linkage
Pages 7-19
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 7... ...
test scores argue that many Americans need more informal tion about how incliviclual students in the United States are performing in relation to national anc3 international benchmarks of performance, information that is not readily available from existing tests. Moreover, they claim that parents, students, anc3 teachers would profit from know' ing how incliviclual students' performance on key subjects compares with the performance of students in other schools, other states, anc3 even other countries, where different tests anc3 assessments are used.
|
From page 8... ...
, to evaluate the feasibility of developing a common scale to link scores from existing commercial and state tests to each other and to NAEP.1 Under the auspices of its Board on Testing and Assessment, the National Research Council established the Committee on Equivalency and Linkage of Educational Tests in January 1998. The primary focus of the committee's study is linkage among the tests currently used by states and districts to measure individual students' educational performance.
|
From page 9... ...
Despite large investments of public anc3 private clollars in tests anc3 testing, current tests JO not readily tell us whether Leslie in Louisiana is performing as well as or better than cousin Maciclie in Michigan or whether either has attained the level of mathematics skills anc3 knowledge of Kim, who lives anc3 attends school in Korea. These competing trencis in the testing arena greater reliance on state anc3 local initiatives anc3 increased ciemancis for national indicators of incliviclual student performance reflect long-stancling tensions in the
|
From page 10... ...
Viewed through this lens of our unique experiment in pluralism anc3 federalism, the question motivating this study is both predictable anc3 sensible. Given the rich and increasingly diverse array of tests used by states anc3 districts in pursuit of improved educational performance, can information be proviciec3 on a common scale?
|
From page 11... ...
it is not feasible to link the full array of existing tests to NAEP anc3 report results in terms of the NAEP achieve' ment levels. The committee reached these negative conclusions with some reluctance, given our appreciation of the potential value of a tech' nical solution to the dual challenges of maintaining diversity anc3 innova' tion in testing while satisfying growing clemancis for nationally bench' marked data on incliviclual student performance.
|
From page 12... ...
Chapter 3 examines special issues regarding links to NAEP anc3 the NAEP achievement levels. Chapter 4 returns to the broacler policy context of this study and addresses three overlapping features of the testing "lanclscape" in the Ignited States that together determine the feasibility of linkages: diversity in testing technology (test clesigns, formats, etc.)
|
From page 13... ...
Second, choices at the stage of test specification determine how a test will be built to represent the subclomain ciefinec3 by the framework. Test specifications, which are sometimes called the test blueprint, specify the types anc3 formats of the items to be used, such as the relative number of selectec3-response items anc3 constructec3-response items.
|
From page 14... ...
A set of items is chosen, for a given test, from a large number of prepared items, so that the selected set matches the test specification. Many testing programs have several equivalent forms of their tests in use and produce additional forms at regular intervals.
|
From page 15... ...
This is the case of multiple forms of the same basic test, such as the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) , the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT)
|
From page 16... ...
Therefore, the only thing one could say with confidence is that the NAEP scores reflect mastery of the NAEP framework, and the TIMSS scores reflect mastery of the TIMSS framework. It is unclerstanciable that a student might score better on one assessment than on the other, that is, finc3 NAEP easier than TIMSS.
|
From page 17... ...
When a test is used in a low~stakes fashion that is, if no serious consequences are attached to scores teachers and students may have little incentive to focus carefully on the specific sample of content reflected in the test. In contrast, when stakes are high, teachers or stu' cients have reason to care a good cleat about scores, and they may focus much more on the specific sample of knowledge, skills, task types, and response expectations reflected in the specifications for that test.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.