Teacher Assessment Literacy: Implications for Diagnostic Assessment Systems

IF 1.1 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Applied Measurement in Education Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/08957347.2022.2034823
Amy K. Clark, Brooke L. Nash, Meagan Karvonen
{"title":"Teacher Assessment Literacy: Implications for Diagnostic Assessment Systems","authors":"Amy K. Clark, Brooke L. Nash, Meagan Karvonen","doi":"10.1080/08957347.2022.2034823","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Assessments scored with diagnostic models are increasingly popular because they provide fine-grained information about student achievement. Because of differences in how diagnostic assessments are scored and how results are used, the information teachers must know to interpret and use results may differ from concepts traditionally included in assessment literacy trainings for assessments that produce a raw or scale score. In this study, we connect assessment literacy and score reporting literature to understand teachers’ assessment literacy in a diagnostic assessment context as demonstrated by responses to focus groups and surveys. Results summarize teachers’ descriptions of fundamental diagnostic assessment concepts, understanding of the diagnostic assessment and results produced, and how diagnostic assessment results influence their instructional decision-making. Teachers understood how to use results and were comfortable using the term mastery when interpreting score report contents and planning next instruction. However, teachers were unsure how mastery was calculated and some misinterpreted mastery as representing a percent correct rather than a probability value. We share implications for others implementing large-scale diagnostic assessments or designing score reports for these systems.","PeriodicalId":51609,"journal":{"name":"Applied Measurement in Education","volume":"35 1","pages":"17 - 32"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Measurement in Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2022.2034823","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT Assessments scored with diagnostic models are increasingly popular because they provide fine-grained information about student achievement. Because of differences in how diagnostic assessments are scored and how results are used, the information teachers must know to interpret and use results may differ from concepts traditionally included in assessment literacy trainings for assessments that produce a raw or scale score. In this study, we connect assessment literacy and score reporting literature to understand teachers’ assessment literacy in a diagnostic assessment context as demonstrated by responses to focus groups and surveys. Results summarize teachers’ descriptions of fundamental diagnostic assessment concepts, understanding of the diagnostic assessment and results produced, and how diagnostic assessment results influence their instructional decision-making. Teachers understood how to use results and were comfortable using the term mastery when interpreting score report contents and planning next instruction. However, teachers were unsure how mastery was calculated and some misinterpreted mastery as representing a percent correct rather than a probability value. We share implications for others implementing large-scale diagnostic assessments or designing score reports for these systems.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
教师评估素养:对诊断性评估系统的启示
摘要使用诊断模型进行评分的评估越来越受欢迎,因为它们提供了关于学生成绩的细粒度信息。由于诊断评估的评分方式和结果的使用方式存在差异,教师解释和使用结果所必须知道的信息可能与传统上包含在评估素养培训中的概念不同,这些概念用于产生原始或量表评分的评估。在这项研究中,我们将评估素养和成绩报告文献联系起来,以了解教师在诊断性评估背景下的评估素养,如对焦点小组和调查的回应所示。结果总结了教师对基本诊断性评估概念的描述,对诊断性评估和产生的结果的理解,以及诊断性评估结果如何影响他们的教学决策。教师了解如何使用结果,在解释成绩报告内容和计划下一步教学时,他们很乐意使用“掌握”一词。然而,老师们不确定掌握率是如何计算的,有些人将掌握率误解为正确率的百分比,而不是概率值。我们分享了对其他人实施大规模诊断评估或为这些系统设计评分报告的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
13.30%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Because interaction between the domains of research and application is critical to the evaluation and improvement of new educational measurement practices, Applied Measurement in Education" prime objective is to improve communication between academicians and practitioners. To help bridge the gap between theory and practice, articles in this journal describe original research studies, innovative strategies for solving educational measurement problems, and integrative reviews of current approaches to contemporary measurement issues. Peer Review Policy: All review papers in this journal have undergone editorial screening and peer review.
期刊最新文献
New Tests of Rater Drift in Trend Scoring Automated Scoring of Short-Answer Questions: A Progress Report Item and Test Characteristic Curves of Rank-2PL Models for Multidimensional Forced-Choice Questionnaires Impact of violating unidimensionality on Rasch calibration for mixed-format tests Can Adaptive Testing Improve Test-Taking Experience? A Case Study on Educational Survey Assessment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1