Federally mandated standardized testing (i.e., in core subject areas and certain grade levels), as an element of educational accountability, began in 2002 with the No Child Left Behind Act. With that step, large-scale assessments came to serve as one of the foundations of accountability-based systems and policies not only for districts, schools and students, but for teachers as well.
Yet, as a result of
identified weaknesses of such practices, especially at the student and
teacher levels, Congress passed the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act
(ESSA). The new law reduced federal oversight and gave states more
control over their state assessment and accountability systems.
The National Education Policy Center released a brief today
that offers a thematic analysis of state-level assessments in ESSA
plans from every state and the District of Columbia. It also includes
results of a detailed survey, completed by department of education
personnel from 34 states and the District of Columbia, which explores
additional information pertinent to state teacher evaluation systems.
Kevin Close, Audrey Amrein-Beardsley, and Clarin Collins of Arizona State University authored the brief, titled State-Level
Assessments and Teacher Evaluation Systems after the Passage of the
Every Student Succeeds Act: Some Steps in the Right Direction.
Analyses
of the ESSA plans and the survey responses indicate that, in general,
states continue to use the same large-scale student assessments that
were in place before ESSA. Further, states continue to give those test
results a role in evaluating teacher effectiveness. However, greater
local control has led to some signs of change, which the report’s
authors describe as encouraging. These include the following:
- Efforts to redefine student growth as something other than growth in just test scores;
- Movement toward more varied multiple measurement tools, including student learning objectives and student surveys (although the efficacy of these instruments for accountability purposes still warrants research);
- Emphasis by fewer states on value-added assessments in teacher evaluations; and
- A move away from high-stakes consequences and toward formative rather than summative assessments.
No comments:
Post a Comment