Previous systems of assessment in the USA
Assessment in the United States is primarily undertaken at state and local levels. Most states set standards for what students should learn and how well they should learn it. This appendix outlines some of the previous assessment programmes which have been in use in the United States.
Voluntary National Tests (VNTs) in Grades 4 and 8
School principals were encouraged, during the period of office of the Clinton Government (1993-2001), to support Voluntary National Tests (VNTs) in Grades 4 and 8 (students aged 9-10 and 13-14) respectively.20 The tests, in reading in Grade 4 and mathematics in Grade 8, were originally developed with a view to introduction in 2002, and were intended to measure student performance against a uniform standard to determine where improvements could be made. Voluntary National Tests faced extensive opposition from those who wanted less, rather than more, central government involvement in education; those who did not wish test results to be used to compare state with state, district with district and school with school; and those who were opposed to testing being used to prevent students from advancing to the next Grade/Year group.58 The National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) developed the Voluntary National Tests, based on the same content and achievement standards as NAEP. Further details can be found on archived pages of the Department of Education website: http://www.ed.gov/nationaltests/index.html.
Maryland
The Maryland School Performance Assessment Programme (MSPAP) was replaced by the Maryland School Assessment (MSA) in the 2002/03 academic year. Under MSPAP local school systems were required to administer MSPAP tests to students in Grades 3, 5 and 8 (ages 8/9, 10/11 and 13/14 respectively).107
MSPAP was a testing programme with the primary purpose of providing information that could be used to improve instruction in schools. The MSPAP aimed to measure the performance of Maryland schools by illustrating:
In May 1990, the State Board of Education approved student learning goals for the year 2000. An accountability system was needed to assess progress toward achievement of these learning outcomes. MSPAP was that accountability system61
The tests were generally adminstered in to all students in Grades 3, 5 and 8, ages 8/9, 10/11 and 13/14 in late spring, usually May. 61
Some students could, however, be excused from MSPAP testing for a variety of reasons, such as demonstrating inordinate frustration, distress, or disruption of others and/or requiring accommodations that the school was unable to provide. Students who were exempted did not take the test and were not included in the calculation of MSPAP scores for a school. Students who were excused did not take the test, but were included in the calculation of MSPAP scores. That is, schools were not held responsible for students who were exempted from the test, but were held responsible for students who were excused from the test.62
In order to keep MSPAP administration time to a minimum, each student was given only a portion of the assessment. Consequently, a complete MSPAP score did not exist for an individual student. This sampling technique did, however, provide the needed performance assessment information at the school, system and state levels. School systems made student test results available to parents, but student MSPAP data were useful only in context with all the measures and observations available for an individual child61.
MSPAP consisted of criterion-referenced performance tests in reading, mathematics, writing, language usage, science and social studies for students in Grades 3, 5, and 8 (aged 8/9, 10/11 and 13/14 respectively), and the tests lasted for a period of nine hours over a five-day period. The tests were based on learning outcomes developed by Maryland educators, and approved by the State Board of Education in 1990, specifying what students should know and be able to do as a result of their educational experiences. 62
In MSPAP testing, which was intended to measure school improvement rather than individual student performance, tasks included a series of related steps that drew on knowledge across content/curriculum areas. MSPAP tasks were related to real-life situations and typically required students to write extensively; they were not multiple choice questions that could be answered by simple rote learning and memorisation of facts. For example, one Grade 5 task (students aged 10/11) asked students to work out if a school could raise $200 for a school banner in a six-week time frame. Using a chart on aluminium can recycling and responding to a number of specific questions, students worked out the conditions necessary to reach the fund-raising goal, then wrote a brief feasibility statement to present to the student council.61
Basic skills and knowledge - such as reading for general understanding, writing to communicate clearly, making accurate arithmetic calculations, understanding key scientific concepts, and identifying historical and geographic information - were assessed in MSPAP tasks. However, the tests also aimed to emphasise higher order skills such as supporting an answer with information; predicting an outcome and comparing results to the prediction; and comparing and contrasting information. 62
Development of MSPAP was a collaborative effort involving teachers and administrators throughout Maryland, curriculum and testing experts at the State Department of Education, and consultants whose speciality was test development. The process of designing and field testing MSPAP performance tasks and methods of scoring student answers was a multi-year process 61.
As student responses to the MSPAP performance tasks were open-ended, a wide range of responses to each was acceptable. Some responses received full credit, some partial credit, and some no credit, depending on the quality of the response. Responses to the MSPAP tasks were returned to the appointed test contractor/agency and scored by teams of Maryland educators who were specially trained to use scoring guidelines (called rules and rubrics) 61. Full details of how consistency of assessment in marking for MSPAP testing was ensured are provided here.
In each content area, MSPAP results were reported through five proficiency levels, with level 1 being the most proficient.61Full details of these proficiency levels, with descriptions of, for example, what constituted a level 1 in the Grade 3 reading test can be found here.
Performance standards were also set as follows for schools and local systems to meet:
Wisconsin
Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations (WKCE)
In autumn 2005, the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examination Criterion-Referenced Tests (WKCE-CRT) replaced the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations (WKCE) reading and mathematics tests. The WKCE were taken by students in Grades 4, 8 and 10 (ages 10, 14 and 16 respectively), under the Wisconsin Student Assessment System (WSAS), and were designed to measure a student's achievement in five subject areas - mathematics, science, social studies, reading, and language applications. 121
WKCE scores were used as one of several criteria for advancing students from Grade 4 to Grade 5 or from Grade 8 to Grade 9. The other criteria used included general academic performance, teacher recommendations based on academic performance and any other academic criteria specified by the local school board.
The annual WKCE tests were standardised and included commercially developed questions used in schools across the country and questions developed specifically for Wisconsin in order to improve coverage of Wisconsin academic standards. The WKCE measured achievement in reading, language applications, mathematics, science, and social studies using multiple-choice and short-answer open-ended questions. Students also provided a rough draft writing sample. Total WKCE test time varied by Grade and ranged from five to seven-and-a-half hours.
Schools reported WKCE test results to parents in the following ways:
- Advanced: this indicated distinguished achievement, that is, students showed an in-depth understanding of the academic knowledge and skills tested.
- Proficient: this indicated that the student was competent in the important academic knowledge and skills tested.
- Basic: the student was somewhat competent in the academic knowledge and skills tested.
- Minimal performance: the student showed limited achievement in the academic knowledge and skills tested. 121
Wisconsin Reading Comprehension Test (WRCT)
The Wisconsin Reading Comprehension Test (WRCT) was used from 1989 to 2005 to to identify a child's reading level, compared with state-wide proficiency standards for Grade 3 children (aged 8/9), 121 and to identify those students who required additional assistance to improve their reading comprehension skills. The test consisted of three discrete reading passages and associated questions from 1989 to 2003. In 2004 and 2005 the test consisted of two related passages, questions on each of the passages, and a third set of questions related to both passages. This "paired passage" concept required students to connect information from both sources and has been carried over into the reading portion of the WKCE-CRT. The Wisconsin Reading Comprehension Test (WRCT) was taken by Grade 3 students (aged 8/9) during a three-week period each spring. The test was given in three sessions and was not timed (that is, there was no specified time limit), although most children finished each session in about one hour.121 Students were given passages to read that were typical of what Grade 3 students read in school.
Scores in the WRCT were reported at one of four proficiency levels: