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 j6EEuSG24518; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 10:56:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 10:56:29 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <005601c58885$48737040$0202a8c0@frodo> 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: "Marie Cora" <marie.cora@hotspurpartners.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:1163] Q&A for Teachers X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 5871 Lines: 104 Hello everyone, I wanted to let you all know that I will be on vacation next week. I have completed the summary of the discussion on performance levels for adults, and it is up at the ALEWiki (http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/AleAssessment), and it should be up at the Special Collection On-line Discussion page soon. I think that we had a rich discussion of that material, and I was hoping to hear even more - perhaps from classroom teachers who may have followed the discussion. I'm wondering how all of that broad and intense subject matter affects you and your students? We see how it affects things like policy and funding, but what about for the practitioner in the classroom? How do you work with performance levels within your classroom? What do you need to know and understand from this discussion that will help you in your practice? What are the pieces of assessment that you need to know and understand in order to be a better teacher? Below I have posted 3 question/answer excerpts from the discussion that focus on NRS and NAAL levels and how they might affect the teacher in the classroom. If you are so-inclined, I would really enjoy hearing some of your comments on both my questions above, and on the excerpts below. Thanks! marie cora Moderator, NIFL Assessment Discussion List, and Coordinator/Developer LINCS Assessment Special Collection at http://literacy.kent.edu/Midwest/assessment/ Q&A #1: A primary concern of many direct providers of literacy services like me is the accountability standards of the National Reporting System in relation to the lowest level learners. Do you know if the new data will be used or could be used to establish two very low levels in the NRS system? Many providers feel it is not reasonable to expect learners who score that low to achieve the equivalent of two grade levels per year in order to meet NRS standards. For too many, progress is much slower. I believe the current system creates a disincentive to serve the lowest level learners because the accountability pressures are related to funding. In short, unless something changes, many feel that serving "too many" very low level learners could jeopardize an entire program. Response: In identifying these levels, we were conscious of the fact that one of the chief audiences for NAAL results is adult education programs, which are guided legislatively by the Workforce Investment Act of 1998. Title II of this act mandates an accountability system for adult education programs, known as the [NRS] that specifies a set of education functioning levels used in tracking the progress of enrollees. Feedback from stakeholders emphasized the usefulness of creating levels for NAAL aligned with the NRS levels. Although it was not possible to establish a clear one-to-one correspondence between NAAL performance levels and the NRS levels, there appears to be a rough parallel between Non-literate in English and the NRS beginning literacy level; between below basic and the NRS beginning basic and low intermediate levels; and between basic and the NRS high intermediate level. We tried to develop performance levels that would be useful to a variety of audiences, but particularly to adult educators who most address the requirements of NRS. Given the scope of what is assessed by NALS/NAAL (e.g., the test frameworks, specifications), it wasn't possible to completely align NALS/NAAL levels with NRS levels, but we did the best that we could. And, we provided the mapping from one to the other on page ES-6 to assist with this. Q&A #2: Has there been any correlations of the "standard" assessments (TABE, CASAS,) and the GED Tests, including the English Proficiency test (Test 6) to the 2003 NAALS, or for that matter to the NRS? Response: Our report discusses the performance levels we recommend be used for reporting the 2003 NAAL results, and for purposes of exemplification, we applied the levels and cut scores to the 1992 NALS results. Our report doesn't include any actual date from the 2003 NAAL because the Department of Education has not yet publicly released them. The Department was awaiting our recommendations for performance levels and cut scores before reporting the 2003 results, and they are now in the process of preparing their reports. Once the 2003 NAAL results are released, I would expect that analyses that had been conducted with the 1992 NALS (such as the GED study) would be replicated with the new results. Q&A #3: Do we have any evidence that the NALS data have been used by any of these audiences to improve adult literacy education services? My impression is that practitioners do not (perhaps cannot) use the NALS data to improve instruction. And my experience with policy makers is that the NALS findings -- the large numbers of Americans in need of literacy skills -- has been dismissed as an exaggeration, or has resulted in a throwing up of hands of hopelessness. What exactly, do you think, is the added value of these studies? For example, do you think the NAAL will be more useful to practitioners and policy makers than the NALS? If so, why? Response: I can only address this from the aspect of the performance levels, since this is what the committee's report is about. The committee intentionally designed the performance levels to address specific policy and programmatic questions, and the report is pretty explicit about this (see bullets on ES-4 and supporting discussion on pgs. 4-11 and 4-12). I think that the committee hopes (and anticipates) that reporting NAAL results using these performance levels will enhance their usefulness to those making policy and programmatic decisions. I'm not sure that the levels could be used by adult educators to improve instruction per se, but would be interested in hearing your (and other listserv participants') ideas about this.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:48:51 EST