Thursday, May 26, 2011

Considerations for open-accommodations in standardized testing

Executive summary
Ethical considerations with assessment accommodations should be further researched with individual variations as a valid and reliable alternative to mainstream testing.




Metric variables can affect the validity of the assessment phase in evaluation. Intrinsic factors reflect the individual. The amount of sleep, health, emotional state, learning preference and cultural diversity can generate varied results in testing.

An open accommodation e-test would be valid and reliable if all persons shared the same opportunities to access accommodations. Students would be encouraged to access accommodations as a test taking strategy and e-tests would record accessed accommodations. Students that relied heavily on accessing accommodations would have the opportunity to receive remediation in study skills if necessary. Many disabled students would be able to take their tests alongside their peers without being pulled out to have the tests read to them by special education teachers.

The following assessment strategy outlines a proposal to open accommodations to all students. A sample assessment prototype was constructed to further illustrate this purpose. (Screen shots from the sample prototype are incorporated throughout the article.)

Background

School districts can lose government funding or worse, administrative control due to poor test scores. Federal law mandates that schools provide opportunities for testing accommodations to students with disabilities. With so much at stake, school districts are spending a bulk of the school year teaching multiple choice test strategies to students in order to increase test scores.

As educators, we have an ethical obligation to teach students how to access their individual learning style rather than funnel all student learning into linear, text based, multiple choice thinking. Studies of mainstreamed assessments with testing accommodations for all populations should be conducted with the highest of priorities.

Methodology

An example exam has been constructed to demonstrate what open-accommodation standardized e-testing should be modeled after. Online assessments should be purposefully planned using proven learning models to reduce metric variables among learners. Learner perception is influenced by an intuitive interface. A web interface is selected by the learner before the test to optimize the performance of the test. Web interface selection and all optional accommodations selected by the learner are recorded to give educators more information about the learner. National standardized tests should be repurposed for their original intent; as tools to get a clearer picture of the learner's profile.

Linear testing strategies are emphasized even though studies show that human brains are not linear in structure (U.S. Department of Education, 1997). Design considerations of the following e-test prototype provide the learner with an optional testing interface. The learner can select linear or non-linear test interface strategies. The linear test interface would be considered traditional in design; the test author selects the order of the sub-categories for the learner to test in.



Emotional well-being, test anxiety and stress can greatly factor metric variables. The e-test illustrates improvements for visual learners that prefer information organized and presented in a non-linear, central graphic format.





The tester can select subject subsections according to their individual preference. For the learner that prefers to tackle more familiar questions at start, this can help reduce stress.


A person who experiences test anxiety can have relaxing music played on a headset. A mental relaxation tutorial can be accessed before the test at the option of the user.





With authoring technology, a person who is losing concentration can choose to take breaks with stimulating computer brain games between test sections.



The following e-test offers a variety of accommodation options for learners with visual or auditory processing difficulties. Test takers can listen for auditory responses to hot spots through a headset.









A dyslexic learner can choose a cursive font to help prevent mistakes due to letter reversal during testing.

Inclusion of English language learners on large scale assessments is a critical issue nationwide (Butler, F. A. and Stevens, R 1997). Examples, prompts, questions and directions can be accessed through a computer generated voice in English or in the student's native language.








An accommodation that allows English language learners to select key test words in their native tongue can easily be constructed.

Such assessments can further be authored to track the amount of times that the English language learner relied on reverting to their language of origin in order to measure English confidence proficiency.




Test questions that specifically measure text reading ability should be offered in both traditional linear style and with context cues to measure the differences in reader comprehension.


In other words, how often does the reader rely on context cues in order to comprehend?

The e-test proposal incorporated content on three grade levels in three different subjects.









Reading content is illustrated in the elementary grade levels.











Math content was chosen to demonstrate e-testing in the middle school level.










Content from a psychology 101 course demonstrates e-testing at the adult education level.

Test questions in each subject and age group have been further broke down into a Bloom's Taxonomy grid to demonstrate testing on each level. An example from each of the Bloom's levels has been made into a question on the test in each subject. Each of the three categories incorporates hot spots on the first five levels of blooms.






The sixth level of blooms, the evaluation phase, addresses an opportunity for students to provide written responses to demonstrate higher cognitive skills.


Data collection and analysis

Instructional technologists will collaborate with educators and state employees to develop a more comprehensive prototype. Measurable objectives for standardized testing are to be identified from state educational departments. Potential eligible questions may be modified from previously authored tests. Quantitative data will be collected for analysis from the assessments at pilot schools across the nation. Qualitative responses will also be included in the pilot findings.

Program Costs
An analysis of program costs is requested. If a committee approves the test prototype for further research, a grant committee can be selected to analyze costs and request appropriate educational funding opportunities from the government and private institutions for the development of future studies on open-accommodation style, standardized e-testing.

Conclusions and recommendations
The open-accommodation e-test proposal should be studied in an appropriate assessment research environment for further evaluation. Currently, K-12 assessment accommodations are only available for students with Individualized Education Plans. Students that are eligible for Individual Education Plans must demonstrate a significant discrepancy between mainstream students in order to qualify for accommodations.

Test accommodation strategies should be taught instead of funneling and re-wiring brains to be linear and standardized. Individuals should be directed towards personal learning style accommodations to tackle tests. The viewpoint that testing must be as identical as possible to be reliable and fair should be challenged, all individuals should have access to test accommodations. Currently, educators teach our children multiple choice strategies throughout the school year. Rather, our focus should teach students how to study based on their individual learning preferences and provide testing in their individualized style. If everyone has the same access to these accommodations, then it is still valid and reliable.

Further test developments could provide testers with individualized levels and alternate accommodation views on a "per question" basis. For example, if a tester finds difficulty comprehending a particular question, the tester can select an alternate view such as a non-linear mind-map visual or auditory reading of the question. By tracking the tester's accommodation choices and frequency during testing, educators have an opportunity to pin-point specific learning strategies that may need to be addressed for remediation. Entire school districts that rely heavily on certain accommodations when testing can receive funding for retraining staff to provide more appropriate teaching strategies.

In conclusion, keep in mind that assessments in general should always be treated as a tool to provide a snapshot into how a learner's mind assimilates and retains information. The future of test reliability should be considered for research at the evaluation phase as test analysts need more clearly defined metric interpretation methods.

HUST 8/11/10 by Angela Rupert, Graduate Student, LTMS 520 Assessment, Dr. Gerry Post, Instructor, Andy Petroski, Department Chair


References

Shaw, S. (2008). Essay Marking On-Screen: Implications for Assessment Validity. E-Learning, 5(3), 256-274. Retrieved July 10, 2010, from http://www.wwwords.co.uk/rss/abstract.asp?j=elea&aid=3382
Butler, F. A. and Stevens, R (1997). Accommodation Strategies for English Language Learners on Large-Scale Assessments: Student Characteristics and Other Considerations. CSE Technical Report 448. Retrieved July 10, 2010, from http://research.cse.ucla.edu/Reports/TECH448.pdf
Benson, P. J. (2001). The More Things Change. . .Paper Is Still With Us The Journal of Electronic Publishing vol. 7, no. 2, Dec., 2001. Retrieved July 10, 2010, from http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text- idx?c=jep;view=text;rgn=main;idno=3336451.0007.205
Kordel, R. (2008). Information Presentation for Effective E-Learning EDUCAUSE Quarterly, vol. 31, no. 4 (October–December 2008) Retrieved July 10, 2010, from http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolu m/InformationPresentationforEffe/163438
Gregg Corr and Ruth Ryder (RIM 2007) Presentation: Monitoring, TA and Enforcement U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs 3.29.07 Retrieved July 10, 2010, from http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cdynamic%2CPresentation%2C24%2C
Building the Legacy: IDEA (2004) Idea Partnership. Web. Retrieved July 10, 2010, from http://www.ideapartnership.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1344 &oseppage=1
Making Connections: How Children Learn. Read With Me - A Guide for Student Volunteers Starting Early Childhood Literacy Programs (1997) U.S. Department of Education. Web. Retrieved July 10, 2010, from http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/ReadWithMe/makconn.html

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Implementation Plan Case Study for an e-learning module

Implementation plan for launching an e-learning module at an institute of higher learning. (Based on the ADDIE model)

Marketing Plan
The campus librarian will provide the plagiarism training course as a guest speaker during freshman level English composition courses.  All incoming students that are not required to take the English class will take the course at a separate time in the library or over the internet. 

A minimum number of students will be four and a maximum number of students will be 36 for any plagiarism training class so that the instructor will be able to individually assess students for subject matter comprehension difficulty.

Material Maintenance Procedures
Library personnel will keep plagiarism records, test results and signed pledge forms on file should a plagiarism incidence occur.  Administrators will pull student pledge forms as a documentation to support any disciplinary decisions. The librarian will keep a plagiarism journal of requests from professors to check on suspected plagiarism. 

Plagiarism test results will be maintained in a confidential folder by the campus librarian on the school administrative website.  Test results must be requested in writing by professors and administrators with a form stating the reason for requesting the results.  Results should never be tampered with in any way and all retests should be documented. 

Test results and plagiarism files should never be released outside of the university institution unless requested by the student in writing or court ordered.

All updates to the plagiarism pledge are allowed with proper citation.  Personal photos from the plagiarism pledge or other content and materials must first receive permission from the artist before being used for any marketing or monetary gains.    The University reserves the right to display and replace the pictures, voices, content, subject matter of the e-learning module or any educational supplements or testing associated with “The Plagiarism Pledge” to their liking (with proper citation) for educational purposes. 

Updates and original and previous versions will be documented and maintained on file by the university campus library personnel.  The plagiarism pledge, facilitator and learner guides will be presented to the library staff at the end of the fall semester.

Beta Testing
Participants: Two university staff and eight graduate students     
       
Purpose           
The purpose of beta testing is to test the elearning with a control group and fine tune its effectiveness so that components of the module flow together and are easily understood.

Agenda
·         Preview elearning module as a group.
·         Play portions of the e-learning on the projector.
·         Request verbal feedback from the audiences.
·         Request written feedback from the instructor.
·         Private consultation with SME.
·         SME does a separate extensive evaluation of content.

Assumptions Evaluated
·         Determine if content is easily understood.
·         Determine if examples are relevant.
·         Identify preface and introduction objectives.
·         Determine if topics transition smoothly.
·         Identify distracting visual aids.
·         Identify level of audience interest.
·         Determine that content is correct.
·         Determine appropriateness of formative evaluations.

Pilot
·         Undergraduate English Classes Spring Semester
·         Set up interactive e-learning on the university website
·         Facilitator runs e-learning in classroom setting.
·         Facilitator tries one class with small group activities and another with a selected whole group activity.
·         Students will sign plagiarism pledge and administer an online quiz.

Job Task Analysis Example for Instructional e-learning design

Angela Rupert
The Plagiarism Pledge
Instructional eLearning Design Case Study on Attitude Change

Executive Summary: An academic institution of higher education offering academics in mathematics, science, and technology. The university requires copy write and plagiarism awareness training for entry level students at both the undergraduate and graduate level. With internet and technology rapidly changing, the university seeks to familiarize students with the proper way to reference writing and media in essays, blogs, podcasts, wikis and other mediums.

Business Need: An institute of higher education seeks a learning solution for student understanding of the ethical implications of plagiarism in order to reduce academic instances of plagiarism.

Learning Opportunity: A learning module outlining the consequences of plagiarism as a career and reputation killer will teach students to take responsibility for their own work.

Expected Benefits: Students will take more care to cite sources when borrowing ideas inspired from other authors. Campus professors will reduce the number of confrontations when verifying student sources for authenticity.

Audience Analysis: A typical student at the university is an undergraduate in their early twenties. A secondary audience is the graduate student, average age in their forties. Males and Females are nearly evenly split in both categories. 


Older students may not be familiar with referencing media in blogs, podcasts, wikis and other technology based mediums. The upcoming generation is more technology savvy, having quickly caught on to the copy and paste features of word processing. On occasion, incoming freshman may have slipped through high school with teachers too busy to verify student sources.

Project Design: An asynchronous e-learning module will illustrate to incoming students what plagiarism is and why they need to be more conscientious writers.  An e-learning module will incorporate open-source media and digital imaging on a power point presentation.

Project Success Measures: The campus librarian will track the number of student plagiarism responses before and after the training.

Out of Scope: The e-learning module will be short in length and will not get into the specifics as to how to avoid copyright infringement and any rules about what constitutes fair use laws.

Estimated Project Costs: Project costs should not exceed the price of any e-learning module or software that will be needed to be purchased for the final portfolio. 


Course Goals:  While broadening student awareness of the ethical implications and consequences of plagiarism, at the end of the course, students will be motivated to properly cite research writing and media sources.

The pilot will be delivered during the spring semester of incoming students during orientation.

Course Objectives:  After plagiarism training, the students will be able to:

  Identify the consequences of plagiarism.
·         Identify what constitutes plagiarism.
·         Omit plagiarism discipline at the university.
·         Demonstrate how to catch plagiarism using search engines.
·         Take ownership of research writing assignments.

Performance levels are determined during the subsequent courses.  University officials shall outline the rules and consequences of plagiarism discipline.  


Job Task Analysis

Task
After plagiarism training, the students will be able to:
Frequency
4  3  2  1
Importance
4  3  2  1
Learning
4  3  2  1
Risk
4  3  2  1
Identify what constitutes Plagiarism
Identify the definition of plagiarism.
Relate common examples of campus plagiarism.
Distinguish between blatant plagiarism and negligence
3
4
4
4
Identify Consequences of Plagiarism
Prevent plagiarism discipline at the university.
Recall examples of high profile plagiarism as career killers.
Identify the consequences of negligence and carelessness
Demonstrate how professors catch plagiarizers using search engines.
3
4
4
4
Use Original Ideas
Create an original idea
Check the internet to make sure that the idea is unique.
Use sources to support unique ideas.
Submit original ideas for peer review.
4
4
4
3
Paraphrase
Write using their own words.
Rephrase from memory.
Cite source within the text and on the bibliography page.
Cite other people’s ideas.
3
4
4
4
Avoid Quilting
Avoid patching together other people’s ideas.
Avoid piecing together sentences from different sources.
Use sources to support their own ideas.
3
4
4
4
Cite Resources
Correctly format sources on a bibliography page.
Use parenthetical citations to acknowledge sources of originating ideas.
Cite during the writing process.
4
4
2





3
Identify what is not plagiarism
Paraphrase using own words while citing other’s ideas.
Document common knowledge.
Use multimedia in compliance with fair use laws.
3
3
3
2
Direct Quotations
Use Quotations in under 15 percent of paper.
Incorporate identifying tags.
Cite sources within text and on the bibliography page.
2
4
2
2
Use Open Source Citation Websites for Ease of Use
HU Library
3
2
1
2