Category Archives: Testing

Posted on by

The NAEP Spin Room

Yesterday, I wrote about the very rosy interpretation of NAEP data being advanced by Tennessee leaders. Governor Haslam said:

“Today, we’re very excited to say that based on 2015 NAEP results, we’re still the fastest improving state in the nation since 2011. What this means is a new set of fourth- and eighth-graders proved that the gains that we made in 2013 were real.”

After analyzing the Tennessee results and putting them in context with national results (both of which essentially remained steady from 2013) , I noted:

It’s also worth noting that states that have adopted aggressive reforms and states that haven’t both remained flat. The general trend was “holding steady,” and it didn’t seem to matter whether your state was using a reform agenda (charters, vouchers, value-added teacher scores in teacher evaluations) or not.

Again, this makes it difficult to suggest that any one or even a package of educational practices drives change.

Then, I read the statement issued by SCORE (Statewide Collaborative on Reforming Education) Executive Director Jamie Woodson. Here’s what she had to say:

Since 2011, Tennessee has made record-setting gains, held them, and progressed in state rankings because of a multi-faceted strategy of high standards, great teaching, accountability, and common-sense adjustments based on the feedback of educators and citizens.

Note that she assigns causality based on these results. I wonder, then, what to make of the states that didn’t adopt the multi-faceted strategy she references? Last year, a number of states showed significant gains on NAEP. Some, like DC and Tennessee were reform-oriented states, others were not.

Additionally, in a post about the NAEP results two years ago, I noted:

Kentucky and Tennessee have posted gains over time on NAEP — in most categories, Kentucky started out tied or very slightly ahead of Tennessee and today, Kentucky remains ahead.  Kentucky posted some pretty big gains in the mid-90s and again from 2003-2009.  Since then, they’ve held fairly steady.  That’s an expected result, by the way — a big gain followed by steady maintenance of the new level.  For Tennessee, that won’t be enough, but celebrating the big gain is certainly warranted.  It’s also important to take care in assigning causality.

Note here that what I suggested then was an expected result (big gain, followed by holding steady) is exactly what happened in Tennessee this year. That’s good news — it means we’re not declining. But it also means we can’t really say that 2013 was something special.  As I noted last year, Kentucky had a series of big gains in the 1990s and then again in the early 2000s. It wasn’t just a big bump one time. So far, Tennessee has had one banner year (2013) and this year, returned to normal performance.

However, the narrative of “fastest-improving” keeps being repeated. In fact, Bethany Bowman of Professional Educators of Tennessee (PET) released a statement that said in part:
Tennessee students are still the fastest improving in the nation since 2011 according to the 2015 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), commonly known as the Nation’s Report Card. “This year’s results from National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) show that Tennessee has maintained the positive gains that we achieved in 2013.

We had one year in which we made a big splash and then, as I noted in 2013:

As the data shows, Kentucky and Tennessee in many cases posted similar net gains over time, with Kentucky seeing big jumps in the mid-90s and again in the early part of the last decade.

That is to say, over a 20-year period, both states saw similar net gains. This year’s scores, in which Tennessee remained steady relative to the 2013 scores suggest, if anything, that the 2013 jump was likely an outlier. Had the 2013 gains been followed by gains in 2015 and again in 2017, more could be suggested. And frankly, it is my hope that we see gains (especially in reading) in 2017. But, it’s problematic to suggest that any specific reform or set of reforms caused the one-time jump we saw in 2013. Saying we are the fastest improving state in the nation over the last 4 years when we only saw a jump in 2013 is like saying we started the first quarter of a football game way behind, scored a bunch in the second quarter, (so we’re not as far behind), and then scored the same number of points in the third quarter. The result is we’re still behind and still have a long way to go.

So, yes, let’s celebrate that we made a big jump and held it steady. But, let’s also put those results in context and focus on how we can move forward instead of using these results to advance our favorite plays. For example, I’m not a huge fan of vouchers, but NAEP data doesn’t really help me make the case for or against. Likewise, states with and without strong collective bargaining posted gains in 2013 and held steady in 2015 — that is, the presence or absence of bargaining has no impact on NAEP scores.

NAEP can be an important source of information — but, too often, the results are subjected to spin that benefits a political agenda. As that narrative gets reinforced, focus on progress can be lost.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport

 

 

 

Posted on by

NAEP: First Take

The 2015 NAEP results are out today and there is already discussion about what they mean both state-by-state and nationally.

Here’s what Governor Haslam had to say:

“Today, we’re very excited to say that based on 2015 NAEP results, we’re still the fastest improving state in the nation since 2011. What this means is a new set of fourth- and eighth-graders proved that the gains that we made in 2013 were real.”

That’s pretty strong language. Proved. Governor Haslam said this year’s results proved that the gains seen in 2013 were real.

Here’s what we know: Tennessee remained relatively flat – no significant growth, relatively small decline in reading scores. Basically, we are where we were in 2013.

Here’s what else we know: The entire nation remained relatively flat — no significant growth, some decline in math.

So, here’s what that means: In 2013, Tennessee gained faster than the national average. In exactly one testing cycle. In 2015, Tennessee didn’t do worse than the rest of the country. We also didn’t do better. Like the rest of America, we remained steady.

That is, it’s entirely possible the 2013 gains seen in Tennessee were a one-time occurrence. An outlier.

Had Tennessee again made gains that outpaced the nation, one could say the results suggest something special or different is happening in Tennessee that may be causing the gains. It’s important to be cautious until you have several years of data and more thorough analysis.

It’s also worth noting that states that have adopted aggressive reforms and states that haven’t both remained flat. The general trend was “holding steady,” and it didn’t seem to matter whether your state was using a reform agenda (charters, vouchers, value-added teacher scores in teacher evaluations) or not.

Again, this makes it difficult to suggest that any one or even a package of educational practices drives change.

Was Tennessee’s performance on NAEP in 2013 a blip or an indicator of actual progress? The 2015 results don’t provide much insight.

The good news: Tennessee held steady. The related news: So did everyone else.

I’ll be doing some more digging in to the data to examine trends over time and what more can be learned from 2015. Stay tuned…

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport

 

 

 

Posted on by

Quickly Dropped?

Some members of the Knox County School Board are considering action that would result in removing standardized testing “quick scores” from a student’s final grades.

This follows a year of changes to quick score calculations that created confusion for school districts across the state.

Discussing the matter, board member Karen Carson said:

“I think it’s one of those laws that generally you do it to hold students accountable and motivate them to do their best, but frankly it only increases the stakes for students,” she said.

“I don’t see that it benefits our students in any way. I don’t think student test scores, this test, should impact a student’s grade.”

Because of the transition to TNReady, scores will not be ready in time to be included in student grades this year. This prompted the Knox County Board to ponder asking the General Assembly to remove the requirement altogether.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport

Posted on by

Grassroots Education Groups Applaud Testing Task Force Findings

Following the release of Tennessee’s Assessment Task Force findings recommending reduced use of standardized tests in Tennessee schools and transparency for the tests that are administered, a coalition of groups that in June had called for just this sort of testing reform issued a press release applauding the findings and urging timely action to make them reality.

Here’s the release:

Pro-education groups today announced their support for recommendations issued by the Tennessee Assessment Task Force, chaired by state education commissioner Candice McQueen. The recommendations call for the elimination of standardized testing for kindergartners and first graders; fewer standardized tests for older students; a parent advisory group and greater testing transparency.

“This is a great step in the right direction,” said Lyn Hoyt, president of  Tennesseans Reclaiming Educational Excellence (TREE) and public school parent. “Professional educators, teachers, and students all know that the singular focus on standardized tests is counterproductive. The science is clear: Forcing the youngest students to take these tests is both useless and developmentally inappropriate. Hoyt also lamented about the shroud of secrecy that the Department of Education wraps around the tests. Touting their habitual inconsistency with reporting test scores, including delayed release of TCAP scores in 2014 and seemingly artificially inflated “quick scores” in 2015, and cut scores that change every year. “It is time for the secrecy surround these tests to end,” Hoyt said. “We called for testing transparency months ago and now it is time for Governor Haslam and the legislature to act.”

TREE in partnership with a dozen other advocacy groups circulated a petition earlier this summer calling for the publication of standardized test questions and answers; pre-determined cut scores; and a reduction in the use of standardized tests.

“We urge the state to adopt these recommendations in a timely manner and continue to make efforts to both reduce the testing burden, increase instruction time away from test prep and increase confidence in the process,” Hoyt said. “Standardized tests should be used as tools to guide future learning, not as a weapon to use against our teachers and students.”

The coalition includes the following groups:

Strong Schools (Sumner County)
Williamson Strong (Williamson County)
SPEAK (Students, Parents, Educators Across Knox County)
SOCM (Statewide Organizing for Community eMpowerment)
Momma Bears Blog
Gideon’s Army, Grassroots Army for Children (Nashville)
Advocates for Change in Education (Hamilton County)
Concerned Parents of Franklin County (Franklin County)
The Dyslexia Spot
Parents of Wilson County, TN, Schools
Friends of Oak Ridge Schools (City of Oak Ridge Schools)
TNBATs (State branch of National BATs)
East Nashville United
Tennessee Against Common Core (Statewide)
Coalition Advocating of Public Education (CAPE)

 

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport

 

Posted on by

PET Talks Testing

Audrey Shores, Director of Communications and Technology for Professional Educators of Tennessee (PET) offers some thoughts on standardized testing in Tennessee.
The 2015-2016 school year ushers in some big changes to assessments that have been developed as the state has reacted to changing standards and legislation. Professional Educators of Tennessee Board President Cathy Kolb and Director of Technology & Communications Audrey Shores participated in the Assessment Practices Task Force that convened in April and continued meeting each month throughout the summer. A final report from the TN Department of Education on the findings and recommendations of the task force was released today.

The task force was established by the Department of Education to gather and analyze information regarding opinions about the assessment landscape in Tennessee form a variety of stakeholders including classroom teachers, district leaders, legislators and parents. The goal was to establish a set of principles and recommendations to guide decision-making around assessments, particularly in regard to the new TNReady assessments that will be implemented this year for ELA and Math.

While a university degree is not appropriate for everyone, studies show wide income gaps for those who do not go on to some type of post-secondary training. This is why standards are developed with “college and career readiness” in mind, and TNReady is designed to assess student’s proficiency in relation to the standards. One feature of the new tests is the more varied and interactive nature of the questions. Designed to be administered online, TNReady will utilize a variety of question types in addition to multiple choice. Some math questions will allow the use of a calculator instead of banning them outright, and ELA questions will involve activities such as highlighting passages. Sample questions are available online through MICA, a platform designed to be available to students and the public accessible through any browser. This also gives students who would like more practice with the system the ability to access it outside of the classroom. The MIST system will be
available to teachers for creating practice tests for students in the classroom. There is a waiver option for districts who are not ready for online test-taking, but overall the online system will reduce costs, and after the first year should reduce the time it takes the department to provide results.

A series of surveys this past year,including a statewide survey we conducted last spring (https://proedtn.site-ym.com/news/249809/) , uncovered a pattern of concerns regarding the culture of testing. Disruptions to regular instruction that affect the entire school and the amount of testing are two of the key concerns expressed, and that the Department says they are working hard to address.

Scheduling and Class Disruption
One of the biggest complaints that surfaced from teachers and district leaders was how disruptive assessments are, leading to a loss of valuable instruction. Past assessments were not designed with the variety of schedules utilized by different districts, which often led to a virtual shutdown of the entire school during testing. First, the new TNReady assessments are designed to fit within a regular 45-60 minute class period. Rules regarding the surrounding environment have also been relaxed, so teachers will no longer have to paper their entire rooms to cover walls or move the class to another location. Testing windows have also been developed to provide more flexibility on both the school and district level. Districts can choose their own windows within those provided by the state, and not all school within a district have to test on the same day. The Scheduling and Logistics Task Force began meeting over the summer to develop exemplary schedules based on a variety of scheduling models. It will continue to meet throughout the next year to provide feedback and guidance.

Too Much Testing!
The message has been clear – kids are getting too many tests, and not enough learning. Parents are upset by the stress they see their children coping with as they are pressured to perform well on tests throughout the year. Teachers are frustrated that they lose opportunities to teach more freely because they are constantly preparing the students to perform well on tests. Superintendents are stressed by trying to meet accountability requirements while responding to the concerns of educators and the community.

The amount of tests must be addressed at the summative, interim and formative levels. The state-required assessments are summative tests, of which there are only a few. Interim assessments are often required at the district level to address potential gaps that will affect student performance on the summative tests, and formative assessments include a wide array of test typically administered at the classroom level. Many feel that the high-stakes nature of testing at the state level drives a large quantity of tests at other levels, and leads to a disproportionately large amount of instructional time being devoted to test prep. While studies have found that most people believe that assessments and accountability are importance pieces of the education puzzle, they also feel that too much importance is placed on these aspects to the detriment of overall student learning.

Better Feedback
Relevance was a recurring topic that came up during the task force. Assessments need to provide feedback that is useful to students, teachers and parents. The Department of Education will be designing new reports this year to be both more aesthetically pleasing and easier to read in order to provide relevant information more clearly to parents and students. Clear, specific recommendations based on areas of weakness to help students improve is one of the primary goals of the new reports in order to provide more actionable information.

Being the first year of implementation for TNReady means that results will likely be delayed relative to previous years. One of the proposed benefits of the online system is that results will be available sooner in subsequent years. Criticism from teachers remains, however, because there is little they can do with this information once the child has left their classroom.

Testing and Evaluation
This spring, the 109th Tennessee General Assembly passed the Tennessee Teaching Evaluation Enhancement Act (http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB0108) to lessen the effect that implementation of a new assessment will have on accountability measures for educators. The key portion of this legislation is the adjustment of the weighting of student growth data in teacher evaluations. This applies to the new TNReady ELA and Math assessments as well as the social studies and science TCAP tests. New assessments will only represent 10% of the evaluation for the 2015-2016 school year, 20% in the following year, and returning to 35% for the 2017-2018 school year. Only the most recent year’s data will be used if it results in a higher rating for the teacher. The act also decreases the weighting of growth data for teachers in non-tested subjects from 25% to 10% in for the 20-15-2016 school year, rising to a maximum 15% thereafter. For graphs showing growth score weighting for test v. non-tested subjects and more view the Tennessee Teaching Evaluation Enhancement Act page on the TEAMTN website.

Developing a plan for the new assessments has involved having conversations with and gathering feedback from a variety of stakeholders across the state. Legislators have taken steps to ease the transition and a variety of resources (see Resources, right) have been developed to assist everyone involved in understanding the changes that are being implemented this year. The process of gathering feedback and developing various components will continue throughout the year as the new tests are put to the test themselves.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport

Posted on by

Does TCAP Measure Proficiency or Poverty?

Ken Chilton, a professor at Tennessee State University, has a column in yesterday’s Chattanooga Times-Free Press in which he theorizes that poverty is a much better predictor of student performance on TCAP than teacher performance or other school-based factors.

Moreover, Chilton argues that the current emphasis on testing is misplaced and that frequent changes in standards and tests prevent meaningful long-term trend analysis.

He says:

Despite the proclamations of systemic failure, we don’t have enough longitudinal data to really know what is or is not working. The standards and the tests used to measure success change frequently. Consequently, it’s difficult to compare apples to apples. So, when scores change in one year we tend to mistake one data point for a trend by touting success or placing blame. Yet, most of us don’t know what proficiency means.

And he laments the expectations game played by policymakers and state education leaders:

Educators are under immense pressure to show improvement. Resources, careers and jobs are on the line. But, is it realistic to expect big jumps in proficiency from one academic year to the next, to the next and to the next? No, it’s incredibly unrealistic. And, it sets up a series of public expectations that are crushed year after year.

These unmet expectations contribute to the false perception that public schools are broken and thus are undeserving of additional tax revenues.

As for education reforms that get much attention in our state, Chilton says:

…but the annual TCAP gnashing of the teeth suggests that our expectations are out of whack with reality. None of the education reforms implemented in Tennessee address the underlying root causes that threaten the viability of our public schools — inequality.

Chilton’s analysis and claims regarding inequality and the impact of poverty are supported by (admittedly short-term) analysis of TCAP data from the top- and bottom-performing districts in the state:

An analysis of TCAP performance over time indicates that those school systems with consistently high levels of poverty tend to have consistently low scores on TCAP. Likewise, those systems with the least amount of poverty tend to have consistently higher scores on TCAP.

Additional analysis suggests:

The top 10 districts spend an average of 3 times more than the bottom 10 in terms of investment over the BEP formula. They also have an ACT average that is 5 points higher and a TCAP average that is nearly 20 points higher than the bottom ten.

In short, as Chilton suspects, there is a glaring inequality in terms of the educational opportunities offered Tennessee students. Add to that a growing inadequacy in terms of state investment in schools, and you have a recipe for certain failure.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport

 

 

Posted on by

Testing Time

While Tennessee teachers are raising concerns about the amount of time spent on testing and test preparation, the Department of Education is lauding the new TNReady tests as an improvement for Tennessee students.

According to an AP story:

However, the survey of nearly 37,000 teachers showed 60 percent say they spend too much time helping students prepare for statewide exams, and seven out of ten believe their students spend too much time taking exams.

“What teachers recognize is the unfortunate fact that standardized testing is the only thing valued by the state,” said Jim Wrye, assistant executive director of the Tennessee Education Association, the state’s largest teachers’ union.

“Teachers and parents know there are so many things that affect future student success that are not measured by these tests, like social and emotional skills, cooperative behaviors, and academic abilities that do not lend themselves to be measured this way.”

Despite teacher concerns, the Department of Education says the new tests will be better indicators of student performance, noting that it will be harder for students to “game” the tests. That’s because the tests will include some open-ended questions.

What they don’t mention is that the company administering the tests, Measurement, Inc., is seeking test graders on Craigslist. And, according to a recent New York Times story, graders of tests like TNReady have, “…the possibility of small bonuses if they hit daily quality and volume targets.”  The more you grade, the more you earn, in other words.

Chalkbeat summarizes the move to TNReady like this:

The state was supposed to move in 2015 to the PARCC, a Common Core-aligned assessment shared by several states, but the legislature voted in 2014 to stick to its multiple-choice TCAP test while state education leaders searched for a test similar to the PARCC but designed exclusively for Tennessee students.

Except the test is not exactly exclusive to Tennessee.  That’s because Measurement, Inc. has a contract with AIR to use test questions already in use in Utah for tests in Florida, Arizona, and Tennessee.

And, for those concerned that students already spend too much time taking standardized tests, the DOE offers this reassurance about TNReady:

The estimated time for TNReady includes 25-50 percent more time per question than on the prior TCAP for English and math. This ensures that all students have plenty of time to answer each test question, while also keeping each TNReady test short enough to fit into a school’s regular daily schedule.

According to the schedule, the first phase of testing will start in February/March and the second phase in April/May. That means the tests are not only longer, but they also start earlier and consume more instructional time.

For teachers, that means it is critical to get as much curriculum covered as possible by February. This is because teachers are evaluated in part based on TVAAS — Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System — a particularly problematic statistical formula that purports to measure teacher impact on student learning.

So, if you want Tennessee students to spend more time preparing for and taking tests that will be graded by people recruited on Craigslist and paid bonuses based on how quickly they grade, TNReady is for you. And, you’re in luck, because testing time will start earlier than ever this year.

Interestingly, the opt-out movement hasn’t gotten much traction in Tennessee yet. TNReady may be just the catalyst it needs.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport

Posted on by

Reform is Working

That’s the message from the Tennessee Department of Education based on recently released TCAP results and an analysis of the data over time.

You can see for yourself here and here.

The one area of concern is reading, but overall, students are performing better than they were when new TCAP tests were started and standards were raised.

Here’s the interesting thing: This is true across school districts and demographic subgroups. The trend is positive.

Here’s something else: A similar trend could be seen in results before the change in the test in 2009.

Tennessee students were steadily making gains. Teachers and schools were hitting the mark set for them by policymakers. This in an age of collective bargaining for teachers and no TVAAS-based evaluation or pay schemes.

When the standards were made higher — certainly a welcome change — teachers again hit the mark.

Of course, since the standards change, lots of other reforms have taken place. Most of these have centered around teachers and the incorporation of TVAAS in teacher evaluation and even pay schemes. The State Board of Education even gutted the old state salary schedule to promote pay differentiation, ostensibly based on TVAAS scores.

But does pay for TVAAS actually lead to improved student outcomes as measured by TVAAS?

Consider this comparison of Putnam County and Cumberland County. Putnam was one of the original TIF recipients and among the first to develop a pay scheme based on teacher evaluations and TVAAS.

Putnam’s 2014 TVAAS results are positive, to be sure. But neighboring Cumberland County (a district that is demographically similar and has a similar assortment of schools) also shows positive TVAAS results.  Cumberland relies on the traditional teacher pay scale. From 2012-13 to 2013-14, Putnam saw a 50% increase in the number of categories (all schools included) in which they earned TVAAS scores of 5. So did Cumberland County.

Likewise, from 2012-13 to 2013-14, Putnam saw a 13% decline in the number of categories in which they earned TVAAS scores below a 3. In Cumberland County, the number was cut by 11%.

This is one example over a two-year cycle. New district level results for 2015 will soon be available and will warrant an update. But, it’s also worth noting that these results track results seen in Denver in analysis of their ProComp pay system. Specifially, University of Colorado’s Denver ProComp Evaluation Report (2010-2012) finds little impact of ProComp on student achievement, or on teachers’ professional practices, including their teaching practices or retention.

The Putnam-Cumberland initial analysis tracks with that of the ProComp studies: Teacher performance pay, even if devised in conjunction with teacher groups, cannot be said to have a significant impact on student performance over time.

So, prior to 2008, student academic achievement as measured by Tennessee standardized tests showed steady improvement over time. This occurred in an environment with no performance pay. Again from 2009-2015, across districts and demographic groups, student achievement is improving. Only a small number of Tennessee districts have performance pay schemes — so, that alone would indicate that performance pay is not driving improved student outcomes.  Then, a preliminary comparison of two districts suggests that both performance pay and non-performance pay districts see significant (and similar) TVAAS gains.

Reform may be working — but it may not be the reform the reformers want to push.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport

Posted on by

TNReady for E-Rate Dispute?

45 school districts across Tennessee could lose up to $50 million depending on the outcome of a dispute over the federal E-rate program which provides funding for internet services to schools.

Dessislava Yankova reports on the impact to Sumner County and gives an overview of the issue.

The dispute is a result of an FCC ruling regarding the bid to provide internet service to the “Sweetwater Consortium,” a group of 45 school districts in Tennessee that joined together for the purpose of gaining access to high-speed internet services at a more affordable price.

Yankova summarizes the issue:

“USAC evaluated Sweetwater’s competitive bidding process and the services requested and determined that the applicant did not select the most cost-effective offering,” the letter stated.

While evaluating AT&T’s appeal, USAC ceased E-Rate funding to ENA, which continued providing phone and Internet to the schools without receiving full payment.

On June 9, ENA Senior Director of Sales Mark Smith wrote a letter to Sumner County schools seeking a $1.4 million payment for services over the last three years and informed Sumner schools that next year’s bill would be for an additional $550,000.

“While waiting on approval of your E-Rate funding over the last three years, ENA has delivered and billed the district for 100% of the services contracted for, while collecting only the discounted portion of the services provided,” Smith stated. “The school district is ultimately responsible for full payment for services received.”

While Sumner County has funds available to shift to cover the costs, other districts may not be able to do so without making cuts elsewhere. The alternative could be a loss of access to quality high speed internet service, a service that is essential to the new TNReady tests being administered in 2016.

Chuck Cagle, an attorney representing the consortium, notes the impact to local school systems:

On May 21, 30 months after payments stopped, USAC notified all 45 systems that federal funding was denied and no back or future payments would be made. Based on the provisions of the consortium’s contract, individual systems are now responsible for full payments to the ENA, Cagle said.

“That is an egregious and seriously harmful outcome of decisions made by an over-reaching federal agency,” Cagle said. “It is crucially important to note here that this move by the FCC is unprecedented. In our collective experience, we have never known this agency to reach down into the state’s legal and proper procurement process and override an award.

“These 45 school districts are reeling from this decision by the FCC and USAC,” Cagle said. “Without accessibility to adequate broadband, advanced statewide student testing and digital learning hangs in the balance — as does the fiscal health of the districts.”

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport

 

Posted on by

Quickly Inflated

Jon Alfuth has a piece over at Bluff City Ed that answers the question: Did this year’s method of calculating quick scores on TCAP result in grade inflation? The short answer is yes.

The post is complete with math and graphs that explain the two different methods for calculating quick scores and the possible grade inflation that resulted this year when the TN Department of Education switched to the cubed root method.

Here’s an excerpt that explains the point difference that would be expected based on the different methods for calculation:

The cube root method yielded on average a quick score, the score that goes for a grade, of 4.46 points higher. In other words, a student scoring basic with a raw score of 30 or higher would, on average, receive an extra 4.46% on their final quick score grade, which goes on their report card. A student who scored a 70 last year could expect to receive a 74 under the new quick score calculation.

The additional points do drop as one goes up the raw score scale, however. For the average basic student grades 3-8 with a raw score between 30 and 47, they would receive an extra 5.41 extra points under the new method.

The average proficient student grades 3-8 with a raw score between 48 and 60 would get 4.32 extra points under the new method.

The average advanced student grades 3-8 with a raw score of between 61 and 67 would receive an extra 1.97 extra points under the new method.

The difference varies much more widely for below basic students, but the difference can be as much as 25 points in some cases.

In short, final grades in subjects required to factor in TCAP scores were higher this year than they have been in the past. In some cases, these “extra points” would have moved a student up a full letter grade.

Commissioner McQueen has indicated that this method will be used going forward as the state transitions to the TNReady test, starting next year. Of course, that test is entirely different from TCAP, so comparisons between the two are of limited value — at least until there are multiple years of TNReady data to use for comparative analysis.

More on Quick Scores:

A Call for Testing Transparency

That Was Quick

Quick and Confusing

 

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport