Chiefs Weighing Use of NAEP for Pupil Comparisons

Article Tools
  • PrintPrinter-Friendly
  • EmailEmail Article
  • ReprintReprints
  • CommentsComments

New York--The nation's chief state school officers, who a year ago set themselves the task of developing a way to compare student achievement on a state-by-state basis, will consider a proposal at their meeting next month to use test questions from the National Assessment of Educational Progress for that purpose.

Initial proposals also call for giving states a more influential voice in the operations of the national assessment itself. Possibilities range from influencing the areas to be tested to awarding of the contract for its administration.

Preliminary recommendations presented here last week call for the Council of Chief State School Officers to test students at the same grade levels and ages that the NAEP does, but to develop its own pool of test items based on the NAEP questions rather than use the examination itself.

The initial draft of the plan--called for by the council last year--will be presented to its committee on coordinating educational information and research next week.

If the recommendations are then approved in November, the first state-by-state report on student achievement--in the areas of English, mathematics, reading, science, and social studies--probably will not occur until 1988, said Stephen S. Kaagan, commissioner of education in Vermont and chairman of the research committee. Testing in other areas, such as the arts and higher-order thinking skills, would not occur until after that.

The next two years will be spent gathering and reporting on educational indicators that are already available, he said, such as states' per-pupil expenditures.

Initial List

Mr. Kaagan presented the proposed recommendations in New York City, at the annual conference of the council's study commission.

The commission, which includes representatives from each of the 50 states, last year drafted the policy statement on educational indicators that was adopted by the chiefs.

This year, it is developing a series of proposals related to international education. (See related article on page 12.)

According to Mr. Kaagan, the proposed plan will recommend that the chiefs report on educational indicators in three areas: contextual factors that schools cannot change, such as demographics; educational policies and practices that schools can change, such as graduation requirements; and educational outcomes, such as student achievement.

The preliminary list of indicators was chosen on the basis of three criteria: whether the indicators are important and useful to policymakers and the public; whether it is technically possible to gather information about them; and whether they are feasible in terms of the cost and data-gathering difficulties involved.

Classification System

To help make state-by-state comparisons that are "fair," Mr. Kaagan said, the commission recommended the development of a state-classification system based on broader information about each state.

"This is the apples and oranges issue," he said of the problem of preventing people from inappropriately comparing educational outcomes between states like Texas and Vermont or Connecticut and Mississippi.

The recommendations also ask the council to develop a classification system for comparing school districts. The CCSSO, however, would not gather or report that information, but would ask individual states to do so.

The proposed plan also calls on the chiefs to develop a scaling system that would compare states' educational progress in a more descriptive way than simple state rankings, Mr. Kaagan said.

The recommendations also ask the council to establish national standards on selected educational policies, practices, and outcomes, "with the intent that all states would meet them," Mr. Kaagan said. And they call for a second list of "goals" toward which states would aim but would not be expected to meet in the near future.

The council will report both national and state data, according to the draft plan. The form these might take would vary, depending on the audiences and the issues addressed.

Mr. Kaagan said the draft plan also includes a list of principles for changing the NAEP program itself.

"The theme behind the principles is that if the states are going to be involved heavily in the use of NAEP items, then we would need greater influence, greater control over what happens within the national-assessment system," he said.

In particular, he noted, states might have greater influence over the subject areas tested, the governance of the national assessment, the awarding of the NAEP contract, sampling procedures, and reporting. In addition, he said, state officials should be involved more closely in the work of the national assessment.

Mr. Kaagan cautioned that even if the chiefs adopt the proposed recommendations, their implementation would be slow. "The theme," he said, "is walk before we run. If we need to go a little bit slow, we will, rather than being precipitous as some others have."

Many of the indicators that states now use lack "standardization and definition," said John Pisapia, assistant state superintendent of the bureau of learning systems in the West Virginia Department of Education and chairman of the steering committee for the council's new center on assessment and evaluation.

"We didn't want to follow in that path," he said, "reporting information that was not technically sound or credible at the end. There were very few indicators that could be reported in a credible, valid way immediately."

He said the recommendations will be "phased in" over time. And he reassured state officials that "nothing is going to be dumped on you immediately that you can't live with."

Mr. Kaagan said that at least in the area of student achievement, the plan recommends that each state pay for testing its own students, with a possible infusion of federal funds in "appropriate" areas such as test development.

He added that states that already have statewide testing programs administrated in the spring would only have to administer the proposed sample of NAEP test items to some of their students along with their regular test.

"We're attempting to do this in a fashion that binds onto existing testing programs as much as possible," he said.

Although he gave examples of possible indicators that may be included in the draft plan--such as attendance rates and the allocation of state funds--Mr. Kaagan cautioned that the list may change considerably before it is presented to the chiefs in November.

Vol. 05, Issue 06, Page 5, 12

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.
Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.

Back to Top Back to Top

Most Popular Stories





Sponsor Insights

Stop cobbling together your EdTech

Integrate Science and ELA with Informational Text

To Address Chronic Absenteeism, Dig into the Data

Can self-efficacy impact growth for ELLs?

Disruptive Tech Integration for Meaningful Learning

5 Game-Changers in Today’s Digital Learning Platforms

Keep Your Schools Safe and Responsive to Real Challenges

Hiding in Plain Sight - 7 Common Signs of Dyslexia in the Classroom

The research: Reading Benchmark Assessments

Shifting Mindsets: A Guide for Training Paraeducators to Think Differently About Challenging Behavior

All Students Are Language Learners: The Imagine Learning Language Advantage™

Shifting Mindsets: A Guide for Training Paraeducators to Think Differently About Challenging Behavior

How to Support All Students with Equitable Pathways

2019 K-12 Digital Content Report

3-D Learning & Assessment for K–5 Science

Climate Change, LGBTQ Issues, Politics & Race: Instructional Materials for Teaching Complex Topics

Closing the Science Achievement Gap

Evidence-based Coaching: Key Driver(s) of Scalable Improvement District-Wide

Advancing Literacy with Large Print

Research Sheds New Light on the Reading Brain

3 Unique Learner Profiles for Emerging Bilinguals

Effective Questioning Practices to Spur Thinking

Empower Reading Teachers with Proven Literacy PD

Dyslexia: How to Identify Warning Signs at Every Grade

Increased Social Connectedness Through Digital Peer Learning

Student Engagement Lessons from 3 Successful Districts

Response to Intervention Centered on Student Learning

The Nonnegotiable Attributes of Effective Feedback

SEE MORE Insights >