1. Chapter 23
Using Technology to Help Make
Assessment Decisions

2. Computers and Instructional Decision
Making
• Computers and software allow teachers to
individualize curriculum and instruction for
students
• What a student knows
– What skills has the student mastered?
– Should instruction be individualized, or does the
student fit with a group in the classroom?
– Are they behind in the curriculum?
• Rate of learning
– Combine information about what a student knows
with what they need to know

3. Rate of student progress

4. Class and Individual Student
Diagnostic Reports

5. Class and Individual Student
Diagnostic Reports

6. Class and Individual Student
Diagnostic Reports

7. Class and Individual Student
Diagnostic Reports

8. Technology Enhanced Progress
Monitoring Measures
• Periodic
– Completed by hand or by computer on a periodic basis
(e.g. every 3-5 weeks)
• Continuous
– Used daily to monitor overall progress
Measures Reviewed*
Periodic Continuous
AIMSweb Accelerated Math
STAR Reading
STAR Math
* For a more complete list see table 23.1 and 23.2 in the textbook

9. Periodic Progress Monitoring
Measures: AIMSweb
• General
– Collects and manages progress monitoring data
– Enter data from:
• Curriculum based measurement (CBM)
• Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS)
– Web-based
– Comprehensive:
• Allows measures across a broad content domain
• Most recently, screening students at-risk for behavior
problems

10. Periodic Progress Monitoring
Measures: AIMSweb
• Reliability and Validity
– Adequate evidence for reliability and content
validity
– National norms
• Potential disadvantages
– Recent work highlighting problems with
comparability across CBM measures (i.e. high
amounts of error)
– Ease of use (hand scoring and entering)

11. Periodic Progress Monitoring
Measures: STAR Reading
• General
– Computer-adaptive test designed to provide
estimates of students’ reading and
comprehension levels relative to national norms
– Short comprehension and extended
comprehension items
• Scores
– Grade equivalents, percentile ranks, standard
scores, normal-curve equivalents, and scaled
scores

12. Periodic Progress Monitoring
Measures: STAR Reading
• Norms
– 27,807 students in 247 schools
– Sample characteristics approximate the U.S.
population
• Reliability
– High test-retest reliability
• Validity
– Adequate criterion-related validity evidence

13. Periodic Progress Monitoring
Measures: STAR Math
• General
– Computer adaptive test designed to provide
estimates of students’ math achievement levels
relative to national norms
– Grades 1-12
– 3 minutes to solve each multiple choice item
(items are spread across the major strands of
math content)

14. Periodic Progress Monitoring
Measures: STAR Math
• Scores
– Grade equivalents, percentile ranks, standard scores,
normal-curve equivalents, and scaled scores
• Norms
– 29,185 students in 312 schools
– Sample is similar to U.S. population
• Reliability
– Adequate test-retest reliability for screening and
progress monitoring
• Validity
– Moderately high criterion-related validity evidence

15. Continuous Progress Monitoring
Measures: Accelerated Math
• General
– Technology-enhanced system designed to measure
student progress and manage student practice
• Process:
1.Students are placed at an instructional level using
STAR Math
2.Complete exercises (generated by the software) at
instructional level
3.Score work using the software
4.Monitor accuracy and task completion at the student,
class, school, or district level

16. Computer Scoring Systems
• Available for a variety of tests – including those
used for diagnostic and eligibility decisions
• Advantages
– Reduce time
– Reduce human-error
– Assist with more sophisticated analyses
• Note that:
– Human-error is not removed, it is simply minimized
– Great care must be paid to the development of
software used to generate scores that will be used for
important decisions
– Storing electronic data introduces a new challenge for
education professionals

17. Computer Scoring Systems
• Beyond simple calculation
– Software used to evaluate constructed responses
– Educational reports (i.e. interpretation)
• Users should be actively involved in the report writing
process and should refrain from accepting automated
reports “as is”