By Liz Fox and Stephanie Steines This July Stephanie Steines and I participated in the Standard Setting process for generating cut scores for the new Iowa Statewide Assessment of Student Progress (ISASP). Here’s what that looked like from my perspective: Key stakeholders in Iowa education from all corners of the state met for a general session to begin our work. After an overview of the process, we split into our groups ready to dive in. I was assigned to the ELA Grade 9 panel, made up of teachers, administrators, instructional coaches, and others in education–all of us familiar with the Iowa Core Standards and with the students taking the assessment. Our first task was taking the assessment on our computers as the students did. Then we deconstructed the performance level descriptors to be certain we understood what was expected of proficient (adequate competency) and advanced (thorough competency) students. (Link to these descriptors here: http://iowa.pearsonaccessnext.com/performance-levels/) Then we considered what a minimally proficient or minimally advanced student would be able to achieve, writing borderline descriptions of these “bubble” students. (See diagram below). We used those borderline descriptors to help us judge each question on the 9th grade ELA ISASP. We practiced these judgments as a group, discussing test items thoroughly, each panel member sharing insights of their particular student demographic (from special education to extended learning, smaller rural districts to larger urban ones). Our goal was to create a well-defined, standardized, defensible process for the standard setting judgment.
The next day we applied the judgments in three rounds of the process:
I left Cedar Rapids with the following impressions:
Here is the process from Stephanie’s perspective: The vertical articulation team was made up of representatives from each of the grade level teams. My job was to represent the Grade 11 panel, to provide a voice for the work and discussions we had in the previous two days. The vertical team discussions began with an analysis of the performance level descriptors for the grades just below and just above the grade level in which we had worked. We were encouraged to note how certain skills and concepts were developed through the grade levels. The goal, at that point, was to gain an understanding of the growth and progress students would need to show to maintain Proficient or Advanced status from one grade level to the next. We were then provided the cut scores generated by each grade level panel from the work of the previous two days. In addition, we were given data on the proportion of Iowa students who took the ISASP last spring who would be classified as Proficient or Advanced based on those cut scores. At this point there was significant discussion about whether or not these results “made sense” when talking about the progression of student work through the grades. Slight adjustments were made to cut scores within certain grade levels in order to develop a reasonable picture for grades 3-11. However, the adjustments made had to remain true to the discussions held within each grade level panel. Over the course of the day, we came to some consensus on where those cut scores ought to lie and were able to make a final recommendation. I would echo much of what Liz has said about this experience. The dedication shown by each and every teacher I encountered was incredible. Everyone was wholly invested in making good decisions that would do right by not only our own students, but also students across the state. At times, discussions could get a little heated as we debated various opinions regarding proficiency and advanced status. But, these debates were always respectful and always focused on meeting the needs of kids. I am so glad I had the opportunity to participate in this process; it was illuminating in many ways.
2 Comments
Allysen Lovstuen
11/5/2019 06:13:17 am
Thank you for adding a little light to the black box that was the ISASP scoring! Hearing about the process and the dedication of those involved was certainly beneficial to me.
Reply
Andrew Ellingsen
11/5/2019 11:22:08 am
Thanks so much for participating in this and sharing your experience!
Reply
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorsDCSD Teachers, Instructional Coaches, Learner Advocate, and Collaborative Teachers Archives
April 2024
Categories |