mini project i-- evaluation of a standardized test by marcia luebbe
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Mini Project I--Mini Project I--Evaluation of a Evaluation of a
Standardized TestStandardized Test
Mini Project I--Mini Project I--Evaluation of a Evaluation of a
Standardized TestStandardized Test
ByBy
Marcia LuebbeMarcia Luebbe
![Page 2: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
California Achievement Tests, Fifth Edition
• Published by CTBS Macmillan/McGraw Hill
• 1992• $90.30 for 30 third-graders, using
consumable books• Requires 330 minutes to administer
![Page 3: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Description of Purpose and Nature of Test
• “Designed to measure achievement in the basic skills taught in schools throughout the nation”
• Applicable for Kindergarten through Twelfth grades
![Page 4: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Content/Appropriateness• Basic skills K-12• Complete Battery: Reading, Language,
Spelling, Math, Study Skills, Science, Social Studies
• Basic Battery: Reading, Language, Spelling, Math, Study Skills
• Survey• Performance Component
![Page 5: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Content/Appropriateness
• Review by Bruce G. Rogers, UNI, Cedar Falls, IA• “Well-developed achievement series whose
authors are responsive to suggestions for improvement
• “Suitable for schools that emphasize the ‘three R’s’ across the curriculum”
• Grade 9 assessment may have questionable appropriateness
• 12 to 25 constructed response items per subject
![Page 6: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Content and Appropriateness
• Review by Victor Willson, Texas A&M, College Station, TX
• “As good as any norm-reference multi-level basic skills test”
• K-1 tends to be give somewhat poor results• “Good, interpretable test”
![Page 7: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Technical Evaluation• Types:
– Objective Mastery– Grade Equivalent (also Grade Mean
Equivalent)– National Percentile (also Median National
Percentile)– Number-Correct Score– National Stanine (also Mean National
Stanine)– Scale Score (also Mean Scale Score)– Normal Curve Equivalent (also Mean
Normal Curve Equivalent)
![Page 8: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Standardization Sample
• Spring 1991– 115,888 students– K-12, geographic groupings– 734 Schools responded to questionnaire– 261 Public Schools, 112
Private/Parochial Schools, all volunteer
• Fall 1991– 109,825– K-12– 265 Public Schools, 96 Private/Parochial
Schools
![Page 9: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Factors Considered• Microcomputers in home• Average annual teaching salary• Mobility• Ethnic• ELL• Working parents• Single-parent homes• Number of children in family• %-age of students receiving ADC• Parent Jobs• Parent Education
![Page 10: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Judges--Three Groups• Bias--41 reviewers, ethnic balance• Content--20 content and
curriculum specialists• Teachers--17 at appropriate grade
levels
![Page 11: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Reliability• KR20• Split-half coefficients• Conclusion: .94 - .98 on total
battery, spring, fall, and winter
![Page 12: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Validity
• Item-by-item bias• Ethnic
– Black– Hispanic– Other
• Gender• Results: “little evidence of biases”
![Page 13: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Summary• Anthony J. Nitko, University of
Pittsburgh– Strong assessment tool– Be careful about educational
decisions for individuals– CHECK YOUR CURRICULUM FOR
ALIGNMENT. The CAT5 matches most 1980’s curriculums, changes may (and should) have been made to curriculum since 1980.
![Page 14: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Summary• Robert F. McMorris, EdPsych/Stats,
State Univ. of New York, and others– “New-questions” sentiment– Great effort to follow curriculum– CTB provides terrific assistance– Fairly small number of items per
objective
![Page 15: Mini Project I-- Evaluation of a Standardized Test By Marcia Luebbe](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022072011/56649e395503460f94b29eb9/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Summary• Marcia Luebbe, Curriculum
Director and Educator, Pierce Public Schools– Good tool– Easy for teachers to interpret– Some concern with support personnel