Teacher Qualifications
From LiteracyTentWiki
- Read excerpts of a discussion from the NIFL-Assessment Listserv entitled "Teacher Qualifications in Assessment."
Back to Assessment Information
This discussion took place on the NIFL-Assessment Listserv during March, 2004.
From: "Marie Cora" <mariecora@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu Mar 04 2004
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:358] Teacher Qualifications in Assessment?
Hi all, I was wondering what you all thought of Lisa Soricone's second question regarding teacher qualification - but in the area of assessment.
2) teacher qualification
We are trying to move beyond simply saying that programs need to hired "qualified staff." What exactly does it mean to be a qualified teacher/administrator/counselor in ABE? More specifically, what do you consider the most essential qualifications for ABE instructors in general? GED instructors? ESOL instructors? ABE administrators? ABE counselors?
As an assessment specialist, I have found that mandates and changes are demanded much too quickly for the majority of practitioners to stay with or ahead of the learning curve.
Do you feel that a solid background in assessment is an essential qualification for an ABE practitioner? What are the assessment basics that you want teachers (and programs managers) to know in order to feel prepared in their work?
Or this question: If a teacher does not have a good sense of assessment basics, but administers the TABE or BEST test to students, is this an issue?
What do you think?
marie cora
NIFL Assessment List Moderator
From: "Bonnie Odiorne" <bonniesophia@adelphia.net>
Date: Thu Mar 04 2004
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:359] RE: Teacher Qualifications in Assessment?
As a former practitioner for a literacy organization and a program facilitator for my program for the state, I was required to take CASAS trainings in administering, interpretation and incorporating into instruction. This is in the standard reading and math portions, as well(now) as writing. I think training in the assessments is invaluable. Not to"teach to the test," but to remain mindful of the importance of the skills that are tested as I move about in our curriculum and trying to highlight them, as well as developing individualized plans of instruction where the class and the individual students have gaps. In writing, I can address the writing process from very specific performance guidelines. The shortcoming of the CASAS is that there is no skills breakdowns in specific items to identify tasks/skills that would be needed in order to successfully complete
a test item. Not is there a breakdown on exactly where in the reading process errors occur. The literacy organization had its own assessment for level determination which, while not adequately formulated or standardized, did address specific difficulties. Equally, in ESL there is no specific for grammar level, particular errors encountered, or to account for the student who is orally and perhaps even reading proficient, but who has difficulty speaking and/or writing. This is an interesting question for one who, despite an academic background, is proficient in the field "hands on" and through self-education. So the trainings I have received have been invaluable.
Warmest Regards,
Bonnie Odiorne Ph.D
Waterbury, CT
Integrating Technology, ABE and ESL Instruction
From: "kate.diggins" <kate.diggins@slc.k12.ut.us>
Date: Thu Mar 04 2004
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:360] Re: Teacher Qualifications in Assessment?
Hi, Marie.
We use the BEST (and now, the BEST Plus) at our school. As part of my MA, I took a couple of classes in assessment(one in test design and evaluation, and one in statistics). I wouldn't say that I am an expert by any means, but these classes provided me with the following fundamentals:
1. An understanding of "validity", "reliability" and some skills to ascertain the quality of a test before we use it.
2. An appreciation of "standardization" as a concept, and how standardized testing is a valuable tool both in student assessment and program evaluation.
3. A basic knowledge of statistics and how to translate a spread-sheet of data into usable prose about a program.
4. An understanding of which extraneous variables need to be controlled in order for a test to be administered fairly, and how to control these variables.
Over time, I have observed that there is a difference between instructors who have studied assessment and those who have not. We have experienced our best levels of interrater reliability when all testers on the staff have equal academic background in assessment.
From: "Marie Cora" <mariecora@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri Mar 05 2004
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:362] Re: Teacher Qualifications in Assessment?
Hi everyone,
Wow, Kate, this is great stuff. Where did you complete your MA? Those 4 points you describe are certainly fundamentals of assessment knowledge. It would be great if all educational programs required practitioners to have a good sense of these. Kate notes that:
>Over time, I have observed that there is a difference between instructors who >have studied assessment and those who have not. We have experienced our >best levels of interrater reliability when all testers on the staff have equal >academic background in assessment.
Do others have this same experience?
Does everyone understand concepts of interrater reliability and why this might be important? How about the other concepts that Kate outlines: V & R; adhering to tenets of standardization and exactly what standardizing means; using data for program improvement?
Do people feel that they have enough information or have places where they can access this information?
What pieces of assessment do you feel you're missing and would like more of?
This area that Kate has responded to is a high priority for myself - my grand wish is for all ABE practiitoners to have a good foundation in at least the elements that Kate has outlined above.
What do you think?
marie
NIFL Assessment List Moderator
From: "Virginia Tardaewether" <tarv@chemeketa.edu>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:376] Re: Teacher Qualifications in Assessment?
I think it is important that the instuctor has the skills to link
instruction to assessment so that assessment is integral to the program.
This does not mean teaching to the test, whatever it might be.
Instructors should use the assessment to inform and design instruction
that integrates needs, skills, goals to the assessment results.
Va
From: "Eileen Eckert" <eileeneckert@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:386] Re: Teacher Qualifications in Assessment?
Hi Tanya and others,
Actually, I think some of the people who do this are highly knowledgeable about assessment. For the record, I'm not one of those who mis-administers standardized tests (I don't have to give them at all right now, lucky me). However, I think the rationale goes, if I have to give a standardized test
that by its nature is not going to yield meaningful results because it's not really valid for this particular use, then I don't really care if it gives results that are also not reliable, so I'm going to do what I think is best for my students whether that means complying with or breaking the rules.
Is it possible to say someone doesn't do their job well based simply on how they give standardized tests?
And is "knowledgeable" about assessment the same as "fully trained"?
By the way, I'm new to this list but not NIFL lists in general, and I often play the devil's advocate, but I am really trying to add to some important discussion. I hope you'll take my points in the spirit of dialogue in which they are intended!
Eileen
From: "Dianna Baycich" <dbaycich@archon.educ.kent.edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:387] Re: Teacher Qualifications in Assessment?
Hi,
I'm going to agree with Eileen. When I was givng the TABE, before NRS, I
was interested in what the results would tell me about my students'
abilities in certain areas, not in how well or how quickly they could
take a test. So I was guilty of breaking the time limit rules even
though I had received some formal training in TABE administration. I'm
not in the classroom these days but I think what I might do now would be
to give the TABE by the rules to satisfy NRS and then do some informal
or authentic (whatever you want to call it) assessment to get a better
picture of what my students know.
Dianna
From: "Marie Cora" <mariecora@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:391] Re: Teacher Qualifications in Assessment?
Hi Eileen,
Thanks for your reply. Yes, this is an interesting quandry: really, standardization is supposed to produce a level playing field. That's what it's really all about. But when you are asked to use and report with tests that don't seem to be exactly appropriate for particular purposes, or whose results are not really all that useful in the classroom (more useful at the accountability level), then it becomes pretty hard to understand why timing, and 'complete battery' issues are relevant.
That's our lot right now - together we're changing and building our system. It's a slow process.
Knowledgeable versus fully trained - GREAT question - I would love to hear your answers!!! What do you think?
marie cora
From: Roberta K McKnight/AC/VCU <rmcknight@vcu.edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:388] Re: Teacher Qualifications in Assessment?
I would like to chime into this discussion to say that grounding in instructional design is essential to understanding alignment between instruction and assessment (content and performance standards). To summarize this process:
1- assess learners and contextual factors to see where you need to begin;
2 - determine goals & objectives (this is what you assess later);
3 - develop content;
4 - select or devise instructional strategies;
5 - assess learning gains.
Educators must have an understanding of this process in order to develop effective assessments.
Roberta McKnight, PhD, RN
Virginia Adult Learning Resource Center
From: "Marie Cora" <mariecora@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 18
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:401] Re: Teacher Qualifications in Assessment?
Hi Roberta, thanks for your reply,
You raise some interesting issues here - that people need a broader understanding of 'teaching' and all that that implies, in order to adequately carry out assessment. Eileen might have alluded to something similar in her email regarding "training versus being knowledgeable" -
What do you think about that? Roberta's comments bring us pretty far beyond, say, what might be needed to accurately administer the TABE for example.
marie cora
NIFL Assessment List Moderator
From: Roberta K McKnight/AC/VCU <rmcknight@vcu.edu>
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:403] Re: Teacher Qualifications in Assessment?
Yes, Marie, we need a broader understanding of 'teaching' in order to adequately carry out assessment. My point is that assessment is simply a small part of the instructional process. The process in its entirety is what ensures validity - are we measuring what we want to measure.
The purpose, or at least one purpose of assessment is to improve the teaching process. We assess what learners already know, so we can decide where to begin (formative) and we assess at the end to see what learning has occurred (summative). Of course, determining the psychometric properties of assessment instruments is important. For example, the CASAS is being studied to determine its correlation with the GED. But, we sometimes lose sight of the purpose of assessment related to informing the instructional process. I will try to make this point a bit clearer, and hope this helps:
First, we assess the particular needs of students and needs related to the context such as accreditation requirements or the capacity to provide instruction (space, time, etc). Next, we determine what goals and objectives we wish to accomplish based upon this assessment. Then, we design/determine the content to be included to meet the needs identified. Then, we decide which instructional strategies and materials to use to cover the content. Finally, we assess the success of this process. Once we have completed all these steps, we start over again, repeating the entire process, modifying what we did before based upon the assessment results. If the student didn't succeed, we must, once again, assess the contextual and learner needs, and begin again.
And so on, and so on ... Its a never-ending process.
Roberta McKnight, PhD, RN
Virginia Adult Learning Resource Center
Virginia Commonwealth University
