2.7 Assessment
Candidates model and facilitate the effective use of diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments to measure student learning and technology literacy, including the use of digital assessment tools and resources.
Candidates model and facilitate the effective use of diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments to measure student learning and technology literacy, including the use of digital assessment tools and resources.
Artifact - Data Inventory
For this artifact I chose the Data Inventory I
conducted for ITEC 7305, Data Analysis and School Improvement. My task was to collect information about what
data is available to administrators and teachers at my school, how it is being
used, and how to analyze this data more effectively.
Gathering information about sources of data in my high
school required me to talk to several individuals in order to get the big
picture. I knew of the high stakes sources: the Georgia High School Writing Test, the SAT,
PSAT & ACT, Advanced Placement exams and the ASVAB. I was also familiar
with the End of Course Tests. This year,
we were introduced to some new assessments called the SLO which is now given to
all courses that do not have an EOCT. I was also familiar with classroom
summative and formative grades. In the
course of my research, I discovered the ACCESS test for students for whom
English is a second language and the GAA which is given to 11th
grade ESEP students. There is a
multitude of survey data available for my school as well.
As I examined the data and how it is being used, I displayed mastery of the standard by facilitating the use of various assessments to measure student learning and technology literacy. The vast majority of information being analyzed was used to determine student demographics and whether students qualify for various programs. I made suggestions to utilize strand data to identify instructional or learning problems and make improvements based on best practices. I also suggested the development of course common assessment data such as writing samples, math challenge problems, science journals and technology literacy inventories, which could form longitudinal student portfolios. Also included in portfolios could be formative classroom assessments for learning such as self-assessments, descriptive feedback, and written response.
I learned from this artifact that, despite the wealth of information available to my administrators and teachers, very little of it is being utilized to identify problems in student learning and make improvements in our instruction. Leadership is needed to disseminate this information and to provide teachers the training in how to analyze the data, the time to do so, and the opportunity to work collaboratively in teams to adjust instruction to improve student learning and research best practices to address known weaknesses. If I had to do this artifact again, I would try to do so through a committee in order to gain the insight of teachers and administrators. Working alone is not the best option. I would have appreciated the insights and recommendations my peers could offer.
This artifact impacted school improvement by identifying sources of data that yield valuable information necessary to identify areas needing improvement. The data inventory also helps in determining the basis of performance problems and steering a course of action. The need for training of teachers in how to analyze strand data in conjunction with summative and formative assessments impacts faculty development. Once data is being analyzed on a consistent and deep level, student learning will be impacted by the adoption of best instructional practices to address identified problems.
As I examined the data and how it is being used, I displayed mastery of the standard by facilitating the use of various assessments to measure student learning and technology literacy. The vast majority of information being analyzed was used to determine student demographics and whether students qualify for various programs. I made suggestions to utilize strand data to identify instructional or learning problems and make improvements based on best practices. I also suggested the development of course common assessment data such as writing samples, math challenge problems, science journals and technology literacy inventories, which could form longitudinal student portfolios. Also included in portfolios could be formative classroom assessments for learning such as self-assessments, descriptive feedback, and written response.
I learned from this artifact that, despite the wealth of information available to my administrators and teachers, very little of it is being utilized to identify problems in student learning and make improvements in our instruction. Leadership is needed to disseminate this information and to provide teachers the training in how to analyze the data, the time to do so, and the opportunity to work collaboratively in teams to adjust instruction to improve student learning and research best practices to address known weaknesses. If I had to do this artifact again, I would try to do so through a committee in order to gain the insight of teachers and administrators. Working alone is not the best option. I would have appreciated the insights and recommendations my peers could offer.
This artifact impacted school improvement by identifying sources of data that yield valuable information necessary to identify areas needing improvement. The data inventory also helps in determining the basis of performance problems and steering a course of action. The need for training of teachers in how to analyze strand data in conjunction with summative and formative assessments impacts faculty development. Once data is being analyzed on a consistent and deep level, student learning will be impacted by the adoption of best instructional practices to address identified problems.