You are here:

Assessment Without Testing: Using Performance Measures Embedded in a Technology-Based Instructional Program as Indicators of Reading Ability
PROCEEDING

, Lexia Learning, United States ; , MGH Institute of Health Professions, United States ; , Community College of Rhode Island, United States

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Washington, DC ISBN 978-1-939797-29-2 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Abstract

Screening and monitoring student reading progress can be costly and time consuming. Assessment embedded within the context of online instructional programs can capture ongoing student performance data while limiting testing time outside of instruction. This paper presents two studies that examined the validity of using performance measures from a computer-based reading program gathered through embedded “Assessment Without Testing®” technology as indicators of reading ability. These performance measures were strongly correlated with an established progress monitoring tool and a national outcome assessment. Assessment Without Testing® performance measures at beginning- and middle-of-year were also used to predict which students were likely to demonstrate proficiency on outside assessments at the end of the year. Considerations of using data gathered through technology-based instructional programs as a way to measure students’ reading ability are discussed.

Citation

Mitchell, A., Baron, L. & Macaruso, P. (2017). Assessment Without Testing: Using Performance Measures Embedded in a Technology-Based Instructional Program as Indicators of Reading Ability. In J. Johnston (Ed.), Proceedings of EdMedia 2017 (pp. 520-527). Washington, DC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 22, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Brooke, L. (2015). Assessment Competency: How to obtain the right information to drive instruction [White Paper]. Retrieved from: http://www.lexialearning.com/resources/white-papers/assessment-competency California Department of Education. (2016). Test Results for English Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics [Report]. Retrieved from: http://caaspp.cde.ca.gov/sb2016/ViewReport
  2. Council of Great City Schools (2015). Student Testing in America’s Great City Schools: An Inventory and Preliminary Analysis [Report]. Retrieved from: http://www.cgcs.org/cms/lib/dc00001581/centricity/domain/87/testing%20report.pdf Hemphill, J.F. (2003). Interpreting the magnitudes of correlation coefficients. American Psychologist, 58, 78-80.
  3. January, S.A.A., Ardoin, S.P., Christ, T.J., Eckert, T.L., & White, M.J. (2016). Evaluating the Interpretations and Use of Curriculum-Based Measurement in Reading and Word Lists for Universal Screening in First and Second Grade. School Psychology Review, 45, 310-326.
  4. Johnson, E.S., Jenkins, J.R., & Petscher, Y. (2010). Improving the accuracy of a direct route screening process. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 35, 131–140.
  5. Lexia Learning. (2014). Lexia Reading Core5 [Product Description]. Retrieved from: http://lexialearning.com/product/core5 Nelson, P.M., Van Norman, E.R., & Lackner, S.K. (2016). A Comparison of Methods to Screen Middle School Students for Reading and Math Difficulties. School Psychology Review, 45(3), 327-342.
  6. Northwest Evaluation Association (2015). Measures of academic progress: Interim assessments for grades k-12. Retrieved from: https://www.nwea.org/content/uploads/2015/09/Introduction-to-MAP-Brochure-JUL16.pdf The Regents of the University of California– Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (2016). Smarter assessments: Reporting Scores. Retrieved from: http://www.smarterbalanced.org/assessments/scores/
  7. United States Department of Education (2015). Testing Action Plan. [Fact Sheet] Retrieved on December 4th: http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-testing-action-plan Petscher, Y., Kim, Y.S., & Foorman, B.R. (2011). The importance of predictive power in early screening assessments: Implications for placement in the response to intervention framework. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 36, 158186.
  8. Snowling, M.J., & Hulme, C. (2011). Evidence‐based interventions for reading and language difficulties: Creating a virtuous circle. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 1-23.
  9. Torgesen, J.K. (2006). A comprehensive K-3 reading assessment plan: Guidance for school leaders. Portsmouth, NH. RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.