Return-Path: <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id i8HJqol06422; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:52:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:52:50 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <007d01c49cef$4b0fa5d0$ff00370a@cshank> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Cathy Shank" <cshank@access.k12.wv.us> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:658] RE: Instructional hours/re-test/which guidelines? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 2288 Lines: 65 Our programs are driven by the need to retest before students exit to meet NRS core measures established for our state. Any student who is not retested or does not show progress counts against a program. Our MIS system reminds teachers to retest between 75 and 100 hours of instruction (previously they had to retest BEFORE 75 hours, but we had changed that to reflect best assessment practices). However, now teachers are saying that if they wait that long, they often lose the student before post-testing occurs. Previously, our state measured progress by using achievement in meeting Instructional Goals and Objectives as a means to show progress. Now we are forced to only use post-testing. Teachers feel caught between a rock and a hard place. Cathy Shank phone: 304-766-7655 ext. 112 or 1-800-257-3723 ext. 112; fax: 304-766-7915 email: cshank@access.k12.wv.us -----Original Message----- From: nifl-assessment@nifl.gov [mailto:nifl-assessment@nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Marie Cora Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 8:45 AM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:653] Instructional hours/re-test/which guidelines? Hi everyone, Thanks to all who are posting information on recommendations for number of instructional hours before re-test. I'm understanding that there are a few things going on with this: 1. The test publishers will have guidelines to follow, based on the development of the test; 2. The federal government has guidelines as well I believe; 3. States also have guidelines to follow. *Please correct me if any of these notions are not accurate.* So my questions are: Which guidelines does your program follow? Why? Is it ok to have a series of guidelines? Why or why not? Would it be better to have one set? Is that possible? Why or why not? How might selecting different guidelines affect data within the testing process? Or does it? I think some discussion around this would be very interesting and helpful. I know that the test/re-test issue is a big part of the effectiveness of the assessment tool. Thanks, marie cora Moderator, NIFL Assessment Discussion List, and Coordinator/Developer LINCS Assessment Special Collection at http://literacy.kent.edu/Midwest/assessment/ marie.cora@hotspurpartners.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:46:20 EST