A Framework to Evaluate Cognitive Complexity in Reading Assessments

Institution	Achieve, Inc.
Titel	A Framework to Evaluate Cognitive Complexity in Reading Assessments
Quelle	(2019), (25 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Reading Skills; Student Evaluation; Evaluation Methods; Reading Tests; Literacy Education; Language Arts; Test Items; Difficulty Level; Summative Evaluation; Thinking Skills; Logical Thinking; Evidence; Scores + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Reading skill; Lesefertigkeit; Schulnote; Studentische Bewertung; Lesetest; Sprachkultur; Test content; Testaufgabe; Schwierigkeitsgrad; Denkfähigkeit; Evidenz
Abstract	In 2013, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), working collaboratively with state education agencies, released a set of criteria for states to use to evaluate and procure high-quality assessments. The English Language Arts (ELA)/Literacy section of the document included nine content-specific criteria to evaluate the alignment of assessments to college- and career-ready ELA/Literacy standards. In 2016, both the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and the Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO) used the criteria to evaluate a set of statewide summative assessments: ACT Aspire, the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS), PARCC, and Smarter Balanced. This brief describes efforts to address the evaluation of one of the ELA/Literacy Criteria (B.4): Requiring a range of cognitive demand, which has traditionally used Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) as its lens to consider individual assessment items. "Achieve" proposes a new English Language Arts-specific approach for reading items to measure cognitive complexity, which draws on the language of Criterion B.4. The tool in this document provides a new way to analyze reading assessment items in summative assessments. This analysis is in two steps: (1) determining the complexity of the text using previously developed text complexity analyses; and (2) analyzing what the item requires a student to do with the text. Ideally, a summative assessment will include texts of varying complexity for the grade and tasks that reflect varying degrees of complexity. Interim assessments should reflect the range of complexity appropriate to the purpose of the assessment, time of administration, etc. The authors believe this new approach to evaluating item-level complexity has advantages over traditional approaches like DOK. This model provides specific feedback on item complexity and does this through the evaluation of text, range of evidence, and level of reasoning required. Additionally, this approach creates a more seamless system for assessment review by directly connecting to the expectations outlined in Criterion B.4. (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	Achieve, Inc. 1775 Eye Street NW Suite 410, Washington, DC 20006. Tel: 202-419-1540; Fax: 202-828-0911; Web site: http://www.achieve.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01