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 iBFJLFU03708; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:21:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:21:15 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <012c01c4e2da$80d83f20$203b7780@april> 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: "April L. Zenisky" <azenisky@educ.umass.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:825] Re: guidance in developing job-related X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; reply-type=original; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 Status: O Content-Length: 14645 Lines: 313 No worries, Kevin! This is the kind of conversation psychometricians live for. :-) I like the new acronym (TOECSFL) you devised. As far as the TOEFL itself, I noodled around on the ETS website and found several research reports where they've looked into some of the computer familiarity issues in the TOEFL population (http://www.ets.org/ell/research/download.html). I'm inclined to view such reports are one source of evidence, and also I think that people's real-world experiences are another valuable source of data about how it works out in practice. Has the TOEFL construct changed? I just am not familiar enough with the old and new to answer for sure. According to a report (linked on the above Web page), one 1998 report by Kirsch, Jamieson, Taylor, and Eignor) looked at 90,000 TOEFL candidates and found that "16 percent of the TOEFL population was judged to have low computer familiarity, another 34 percent to have moderate familiarity, and approximately 50 percent to have high familiarity" -- and how those low, medium, and high labels were defined is in the report. Then again, a July 2004 report by Breland, Lee, and Muraki looked at mode analysis for essays and saw a slight difference in scores favoring handwritten over computerized. On one hand, and then the other..... One question you raised -- "do they add new skills that are not part of the domain?" -- is a critical validity question regarding construct-irrelevant variance. In other words, is some part of people's scores due to a skill other than the construct _supposed_ to be measured by the test. As part of those 'good practices' that I was getting into in my earlier posting in response to Eileen question, there's a raft of quantitative and qualitative evidence to be collected to inform practice one way or another. I think there's also some effort to strike a balance in standardized testing here too. I think the term "standardized test" is often viewed as another synonym for "bunch of multiple-choice questions" and one reason folks are looking to the computer is the potential to ask people to demonstrate their knowledge in more contextualized problems. Here's an example of a contextualized question. Given an entire passage about eclipses (sp?), take the sentence "This is the only part of the Sun that can be seen during an eclipse such as the one in February 1979." The task is, if the word "one" is bolded -- what does that refer to? Rather than just four decontextualized answer choices, a test-taker has the entire passage to choose from, thereby minimizing the test-wiseness part of MC questions -- sure it's harder, but perhaps more useful for identifying true mastery of antecedents and the like. What do you think? Kevin, and/or others? --april ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin O'Connor" <koconnor@framingham.k12.ma.us> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 12:18 PM Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:822] Re: guidance in developing job-related > Hi April- > > Yes it's the issue does revolve around the domain being tested. I can see the CPA exam switching > the definition of its behavioral domian to inclusde computer anility. > > However, I don't ever remeber hearing that the TOEFL was redefining the domain it is intended to > test to include computer skills. Sure, an argument can be made the these skills are a part of > college success, but it's the Test of English for Foreign Learners, not TOE and Computer Skills > for FL TOECSFL? doesn't have that ring! :-) > > That arguement ignores thae fact that this creates an uneven playing field. Native English > speakers take no computer literacy exam to determine entry. > > Forgive the vitriol, April; it's not aimed at you; I know that you don't work on the TOEFL. It's > just that this test has become a real gatekeeper for many people who have become close to me. > > This is the problem- the advantages of computer-based-testin are numerous, but do they add new > skills that are not part of the domain> Or, do they compensate for skills that are part of the > domain but may be lacking? Holding a pencil, or scanning text with your finger may be part of the > domain of literacy being tested, and computers don't allow for that. > > -----Original Message----- > From: nifl-assessment@nifl.gov [mailto:nifl-assessment@nifl.gov]On > Behalf Of April L. Zenisky > Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 9:04 AM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:820] Re: guidance in developing job-related > > > > Hi Kevin, > So great to hear from you -- about a year to the day of our scoring meeting in Amherst! > > Your questioning of the comparability of computer-based tests (CBTs) to paper-and-pencil > counterparts is well-founded. I see a lot of research on this topic, and often the results that > are > out there are very dependent on a confluence of domain content and population. Sometimes paper > scores are 'better' (i.e., higher), and sometimes the computer scores are and there's not much > rhyme > or reason to it, but one common thread seems to be that people _like_ computerization more. Many > teachers and ABE students that I have spoken with recently have expressed valid concerns about > fairness with computerized tests, but see how CBTs (and the practice with computer skills that > comes > along with them) have benefits for students --- for example, I've been told that many employers > (Home Depot and others) now require most job applications to be completed at computer > workstations. > > On the issue of score comparability and the TOEFL, often scores from a 'new' computerized test are > not intended to be equivalent to the old paper-based test being replaced. I am less familiar with > the specifics of the TOEFL testing program, but a similar example is the American Institutes of > Certified Public Accountants CPA Exam. The old paper test was based on test specifications from > some number of years ago, and the new computerized version (released April 2004) was created in > response to a more recent job analysis that found that the information entry-level accountants > needed had changed over the years, and that computers were an integral part of how accountants > were > doing their work. Thus, the logical choice for the CPAs was a computerized assessment with funky > new formats (very performance-oriented with actual spreadsheets and tax forms and the like > embedded > in the test). I don't think that anyone at the AICPA, however, would argue that the old paper and > new computerized CPA Exam scores are equivalent -- they measure somewhat different things by > design. > > I do know that the TOEFL folks did a lot of research into items types and what kinds of skills > should be required by those test-takers, and the computer-adaptive test that they came out with is > intended to reflect something a little different than the previous version. > > Thanks also for bringing up the need for test administrator support -- as procedures and practices > change from one mode of testing to another, _standardization_ between test administrations (a > critical part of ensuring fairness for all test-takers) has to be maintained. > > Cheers! > --april > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kevin O'Connor" <koconnor@framingham.k12.ma.us> > To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> > Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 6:19 PM > Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:819] Re: guidance in developing job-related > > >> Hi April- >> >> This is a great question. So often we turn to computers to help us solve our problems, taking >> for >> granted that using a computer relies on skills that are far from universal. When the TOEFL >> switched to a computer-adaptive test I felt like I was the only one who noticed that they were >> comparing apples and oranges- a lone voice crying in the wilderness. >> Suddenly students were required to write and essay on the computer instead of on paper, and they >> could no longer look back at questions once they had passed. Working in a second language is >> enough of a barrier to higher ed- forcing people to wait for computer literacy on TOP of that was >> seen by many learners as yet another hurdle. I don't think we can assume literacy. >> One thing I have realized in working with the BEST Plus is how much Tech Support the TESTERS >> need- >> starting up a computer, opening a file, loading a CD, using a touch pad, even plugging it in. >> These are teachers; they are people who have graduated college, people with email accounts. We >> really need to be careful not to presume too much computer ability. Just because it seems like >> second nature to me, using a computer relies on a whole new set of reading, writing and cognitive >> skills compared to pencil and paper testing. >> >> Thanks for asking! >> >> Kevin O'Connor >> Assessment Specialist >> Framingham Adult ESL PLUS >> 508-626-4282 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: nifl-assessment@nifl.gov [mailto:nifl-assessment@nifl.gov]On >> Behalf Of April L. Zenisky >> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 2:04 PM >> To: Multiple recipients of list >> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:815] Re: guidance in developing job-related >> >> >> >> Hi, all, >> To follow up with Marie's reposting, this was a question that was especially interesting to me as >> my >> own research interests as a test developer involve alternate item types (not multiple-choice) >> that >> are computer based. Specifically, I am interested in uses of innovative or novel types that are >> highly engaging to the test-taker but still auto-scored. In many cases, there might be one >> correct >> answer, but the questions might be written to allow for more than one right (or wrong) answer. >> >> For example, the different item formats for use in computerized testing allow you to incoporate >> different actions such as clicking, drag-and-drop, scrolling, and typing. The drag-and-drop >> option >> is nice because people can rearrange onscreen items in different ways given the frame of the >> question (for example, put things in some order (numerical, alphabetical, chronological, etc.)) >> and >> it lets them visualize the groupings they are creating. >> >> So, here in Massachusetts my colleagues at the Center for Educational Assessment and I are >> working >> with the Massachusetts DoE and practitioners in the state to develop new, computerized >> assessments >> that are directly based on the Massachusetts curriculum. The MA assessments will be different >> from >> the computerized BEST Plus in that the student willl enter answers directly into the computer, >> which >> is different from the BEST Plus' approach (which works well for that domain being tested -- a >> test >> administrator scores a student's spoken answers on a few dimensions and enters those into the >> computer). >> >> One thing I'm interested in learning more about myself about is people's experiences with adult >> learners and computerized testing. Some work I'm involved in now is finding out about adult >> learners' familiarity with computerized response actions (clicking, drag-and-drop, scrolling, and >> typing). Does anyone out there have any experience with or thoughts about using computer >> technology >> for testing with adults that they'd be interested in sharing with the list? More broadly, for >> practitioners, what do you find that your students can do with respect to using a computer and >> what >> skills do you see them needing assistance with? What might you consider to be the important >> navigational and other features of computerized activities/assessments? >> >> I'm looking forward to hearing from you! >> --april >> >> >> >> *********************************************** >> April L. Zenisky, Ed.D. >> Director of Computer-Based Testing Initiatives >> Center for Educational Assessment >> University of Massachusetts Amherst >> Amherst, MA 01003 >> 413.577.2180 >> azenisky@educ.umass.edu >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Marie Cora" <marie.cora@hotspurpartners.com> >> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 12:50 PM >> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:814] guidance in developing job-related assessments for critical >> thinking >> >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I am re-posting Julie's question from October 14 because it is relevant >>> to the discussion this week, and I don't think she ever received much in >>> reply. Julie - have you made progress on this project to date? Perhaps >>> April, and others who wish to, can comment on some of your questions. >>> marie >>> >>> >>> >>> I am working with large organization to develop assessments for managers >>> in >>> training. They want the questions to focus on measuring whether or not >>> a >>> management trainee can think critically and problem solve. The questions >>> will focus >>> on IMPACT and INDICATIONS of daily company procedures. >>> >>> The types of questions need to assess if the trainee understands the >>> impact >>> of a particular procedure on the productivity, bottom-line, etc. for the >>> >>> business. We also want to assess whether or not the trainees can >>> identify the >>> indicators that something is, or is not, going (or set up) according to >>> procedures. >>> >>> For example, does the trainee understand the IMPACT if department >>> materials >>> are unorganized and/or dirty? That the mailbag has gone unopened? Can >>> s/he >>> identify the INDICATORS that something is not running according to >>> procedure, is >>> out of place or that an employee is not performing their job >>> requirements? >>> >>> This assessment needs to written in standardized format (i.e., multiple >>> choice, true false, some fill in the blank and a few short answers). >>> >>> I've created many assessments for basic skills, so have an understanding >>> of >>> assessment development. However, I can see that testing intangible >>> problem >>> solving skills, will require a different approach. (By the way, the >>> precise >>> training modules have not been developed.) >>> >>> I am working with the company to identify the proficiencies, but would >>> very >>> much appreciate samples of how to phrase the questions so that they will >>> >>> accurately measure the proficiencies in the above mentioned format. >>> >>> Does anyone have samples or guidelines I might use? >>> >>> Thanks for your input. >>> >>> Julie Baker >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:46:27 EST