Miller Guidance Assessment Hierarchy
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Miller Guidance Assessment Hierarchy

on

  • 244 views

The Assessment Hierarchy, a Miller Guidance tool, helps schools to organize their assessments by grade level, type and targeted student group. This activity eliminates costly gaps and overlaps in the ...

The Assessment Hierarchy, a Miller Guidance tool, helps schools to organize their assessments by grade level, type and targeted student group. This activity eliminates costly gaps and overlaps in the data that is collected and minimizes the impact on instruction.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
244
Views on SlideShare
244
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Miller Guidance Assessment Hierarchy Miller Guidance Assessment Hierarchy Presentation Transcript

  • The Assessment Hierarchy How to choose effective and efficient assessments. A New Methodology for Public Education Copyright Miller Guidance 2009
  • 1. Introduction  The Assessment Hierarchy (page 9) is a tool that is used to structure school district discussions regarding the assessments that are given to their student population.  The Hierarchy can be used for all age groups and skills. It is important to specify what each Hierarchy represents. For example, Kindergarten through 5th grade reading or middle school social emotional development may be a focus.  Begin by taking an inventory of the assessments that are currently in use in the district. List all tests including those used with subgroups such as students requiring special education and English language learners. Also, don’t forget to ask classroom teachers if they use any formal or informal assessments. Copyright Miller Guidance 2009
  • 2. Introduction  As you complete this list be sure to record what grades and groups of students each assessment measures. For example, the list may include assessments given to 2nd grade students referred for speech articulation errors or all H.S. juniors.  It is also important to record the assessments that are required by the district and/or state. Copyright Miller Guidance 2009
  • 3. Directions  Begin by separating assessments into grade and skill clusters. (K-5 reading, K-5 math, K-5 social emotional development, K-5 other, 6-8 language arts etc.)  Decide which cluster will be your first focus.  For this cluster, separate assessments into two piles. The assessments given to all students in one pile and assessments given to a subgroup of the total cluster in another pile.  Next, each assessment is classified by function. (See #5, 6, 7) Copyright Miller Guidance 2009
  • 4. Directions  If there is not a universal screener among the assessments for this cluster, then the next task is to choose a valid and reliable universal screening tool that has been constructed for this purpose.  If there is a universal screener among the assessments for this cluster, then the next task is to decide how you will use the universal screening data to define “risk”. For example, “intensive risk” could be defined as the students whose scores are in lowest 10%, “strategic risk” as the students whose scores fall between 11% and 25% and “benchmark” as the students whose scores fall above 25%.  Look at the remaining tools and place them on the hierarchy in the appropriate boxes.  Be attentive to areas where assessments overlap (i.e. two or more assessments are used with the same group of students for the same function) or where there are gaps (i.e. there are no assessments for a group or particular function).  If needed, create lists of assessments that will be suggested for abandonment or that are needed to fill in gaps. Copyright Miller Guidance 2009
  • 5. Functions and Definitions The four functions of school assessments  Universal screening; screening Who are the “at risk” students?  Global view (General outcome measure)  Diagnostic What skill development or instruction is needed to close the gap?  Formative  Common Formative  Mastery Measurement  Diagnosis  Progress monitoring Is the program that we are using working to close the gap?  Program evaluation As a result of our instructional programs, have students made the expected growth? Copyright Miller Guidance 2009
  • 6. Functions and Definitions  Universal Screening assessments are conducted regularly (a benchmark program) on all students to monitor progress and identify those students who are at risk. This data provides a standard of performance for comparison purposes. Because they are conducted regularly on all students they are best if brief and inexpensive.  General Outcome Measurements are designed to serve as indicators of general achievement in a skill area and are the most effective universal screening tools. General Outcome Measures (i.e. CBM) are not tied to a specific curriculum and measure progress on long term goals.  They don’t measure everything, but measure important things.  They are standardized assessments and are sensitive to improvement in short periods of time.  Screenings are brief assessments conducted on a subgroup of all students, generally following a referral, to identify those students who are at risk in a specific area (i.e. speech articulation screenings). Copyright Miller Guidance 2009
  • 7. Functions and Definitions  Diagnostic assessments give information on specific skills that need to be taught and take longer to administer and score. They are best when tied to the curriculum and include a variety of item types. Standardized diagnostic tests are often used for determining eligibility for programming. Because they take longer to administer and score they are generally not used for universal screening.  Formative assessments often look more like instruction in that they include tasks typically used during the instructional process. As such, formative assessment is often referred to as curriculum based assessment. Formative assessment serves to further define the specific focus for instruction.  Common Formative assessments are formative assessments that are administered to all students in a grade, department or course.  Mastery Measurement is summative assessment (occurs after instruction has occurred) of a child’s mastery of a concept or curriculum presented.  Progress monitoring is a scientifically based assessment practice that is used to assess students’ academic performance and evaluate the effectiveness of instruction. Progress monitoring can be implemented with individual students, an entire class or an entire school. Because it is not for the purpose of designing instruction, it is efficient to use a general outcome measure (brief and inexpensive)for progress monitoring.  Program evaluation assessments are summative assessments that provide programmatic information for large groups of students. Summative assessment usually leads to summative evaluation, which represents a final judgment about a program’s strengths and weaknesses. Copyright Miller Guidance 2009
  • Copyright Miller Guidance 2009 Program evaluation Universal screening Intensive risk Diagnostic Progress monitoring Strategic risk Diagnostic Progress monitoring Benchmark Common Formative Some students All students
  • 10. Sample Copyright Miller Guidance 2009 List of K-5 Reading Assessments All students Some students State accountability test Progress monitoring (R-CBM and TEL) – at risk K-5 NWEA Measures of Academic Performance Story Town Weekly Tests – all students in select classrooms Reading Curriculum Based Measurement (R-CBM and TEL) Diagnostic Reading Assessment – 2 – at risk K-5 Story Town Theme Tests Phonics survey – select students in select classrooms Leveled Literacy Assessment – all students in select classrooms Reading Mastery placement test - at risk K-2 Corrective Reading placement test – at risk 3-5 Wilson placement test – at risk K-5
  • Copyright Miller Guidance 2009 Program evaluation State accountability test NWEA MAP Universal screening Reading Curriculum Based Measurement R-CBM and TEL Intensive risk Diagnostic Reading Mastery, Wilson, Corrective Reading DRA-2 Progress monitoring Reading Curriculum Based Measurement R-CBM, TEL Strategic risk Diagnostic Phonics Survey Story Town Weekly Leveled Literacy Progress monitoring Reading Curriculum Based Measurement R-CBM, TEL Benchmark Common Formative Story Town Theme Tests NWEA MAP Some students All students For the purpose of planning instruction Frequency of progress monitoring is greater with greater risk
  • 12. Conclusion  Tests on the inventory that are not given to all students and/or are not deemed appropriate for use with all “at risk” students can be used by classroom teachers as formative assessments.  Like the assessments on the Hierarchy, these assessments need to have a function that is clearly defined by the teacher using them. It is helpful to state in question form what the assessment is seeking to answer.  The process (pages 3-7) is repeated with each cluster. Copyright Miller Guidance 2009