Focus on Student Assessment
TU speaks with Barbara Nielsen, former South Carolina State Superintendent of Schools

1. What types of student assessment data do you feel states should collect and how should they use the data?

This question addresses what I think has been missing from the whole conversation about assessment. Curriculum, instruction, and assessment must be aligned as the three legs of standards-based reform efforts. The types of assessments, how often they are administered, and how the data are used are very critical components of the process.

In the past, standardized tests have lent themselves to the sorting of students against each other rather than the benchmarking of students towards content standards. They created winners and losers. Today, our goal is to have all students winners in terms of reaching high standards — recognizing that this progress comes at different rates. Performance-based assessments are being used to determine progress towards student mastery. It is important for us to know what each student knows, and can do, vis-à-vis each standard.

The two primary purposes of assessments should be to provide direction and information about student progress on what is designated as important and to gauge the success of schools and districts. To help achieve both these goals, data should be accumulated on a variety of variables to clearly see the progress of students and schools and to determine where additional efforts need to be placed.

It is also important for us to know where our students stand in relation to other countries. For this reason, I think that participation in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is very important. This sample provides valuable trend information that allows us to benchmark nationally and internationally. In partnership with state performance-based tests it provides a foundation of valuable data for parents, teachers, administrators, and policymakers.

2. The movement to use student assessment scores to evaluate teachers and schools appears to be gaining momentum. What do you think of this trend?

I am in favor of using strong assessments to provide parents, policymakers, and the public with information they can use to evaluate schools, districts, and school boards. These entities are responsible for ensuring that all students are learning and have access to a quality education system.

But at the same time, policymakers must realize that teachers share the responsibility for the daily teaching and learning process with a variety of key players in this system. Students, of course, must be accountable for their own learning, and research shows that family participation in the education process also plays an important role in student achievement. Principals, superintendents, district office staff, support staff, and school board members make the key decisions on operations and are an equally significant part of the equation. While student assessment is one piece of the puzzle, it would be inappropriate to assign teachers sole responsibility for the performance of their students on standardized assessments.

Assessment developers must ensure that assessment content aligns with accepted standards and that it addresses the technical issues of validity, reliability, and cultural bias. Our goal is to improve instruction and practice while ensuring the public that all children are learning.

3. What is your reaction to the movement to require students to meet a passing score on a standardized assessment in order to graduate or be promoted?

Many states have moved to a policy of an exit exam, end-of-course testing, or specific scores before promotion. In concept, this has merit because we cannot continue promoting students or letting them graduate with insufficient knowledge. These types of assessments should not be seen as punitive, but rather, as a means to identify and define where extra help and additional interventions such as summer school, tutoring, and testing for learning problems are needed.

Testing is valid and nondiscriminatory when the other parts of a standards-based instructional program are present. The development of assessments must be closely aligned with curriculum and instruction. If implemented as designed-starting early where interventions can make a real difference — exit or promotion exams are fair and in the best interest of children.

4. Approximately what percentage of a typical state's budget is spent on student assessment? Is that a sufficient allocation?

In most cases, it is a relatively low percent (2%) of the total state budget for K-12 education depending on the size of the state. This budget has often been used to purchase outdated standardized tests.

I am happy to see states shifting to more performance-based items rather than strictly knowledge regurgitation. Students must have knowledge and skills, but they also must be able to think, analyze, apply, and explain how they arrived at answers. It is important that more open-ended questions that demonstrate depth of understanding are included in assessments.

We will have to spend considerably more if we are to get superior performance items that are necessary for a standards-based curriculum. Budgets will need to include dollars for the following: multiple testing times throughout the year, hand scoring of open-ended performance responses, a variety of informational reports useful to local decision makers, and training on how to use this information effectively to improve instruction.

Technology costs of instructional management systems and record keeping will need to be an annual part of the budget. Development costs should also be projected for an online assessment system that incorporates samples of students' work with student profiles. In addition, we need to budget for research and evaluation efforts that link results, program implementation, best practice, and dollars spent.

5. What challenges do states face in implementing assessment programs?

The most difficult challenge that most states face is the fast pace of the reform effort itself and the immediate demand for high quality assessments. The kinds of assessments that fairly reflect results for accountability and diagnosis are more difficult and time-consuming to develop, align, and score. It is very difficult to explain to the public and policymakers the need to spend the money and take the time to "do it right" without looking defensive. As with any reform movement, the shift to performance assessments has not always been smooth:

"The test is too hard…It doesn't measure everything I teach…It is not valid and takes too long to score…These are not the kinds of tests I took…This makes me look like I am a bad teacher."

Our biggest challenge is staying the course and having the moral courage to do what is right for children!

As a TU Advisory Board Member, Barbara Stock Nielson provides expertise in education, education policy, technology policy, and contacts within state and federal education world.

Home | Professional Development | Features | Student Assessment

©2001 Riverdeep Interactive Learning Limited. All rights reserved.