Efficacy of Frequent Formative Assessment for Improving Instructional Practice and Student Performance, Given Variations in Training to Use Assessment Results
Purpose: To evaluate the impact of a professional development program designed to improve teachers' efficiency using formative assessment. Research Questions: Do teachers who have access to frequent formative assessment results on individual students in addition to annual state assessment data and who have received training on the use and interpretation of the formative results to drive choices about instructional practice
exhibit more individualization of instructional practice?
have students who score higher on state assessments?
are those score differentials related to the instructional areas emphasized by the changed practice?
are score differentials greater for teachers who value the training in data.
Intervention:
The Northwest Evaluation Association designed and delivers formal training programs that target teachers to increase their efficiency in using the firm's periodic assessments (the Measures of Academic Progress or MAP). The intervention assumes that, given more frequent and consistent measurement, teachers will be better able to adjust instruction on-the-fly with the consequence that student performance, as observed by annual state assessments, will improve.
Design and Samples:
A cluster random assignment design with teachers being the key unit of treatment and thus the unit of random assignment. The targeted setting for this RCT will be classrooms in schools in districts that are first-year clients of NWEA and were not previously involved in formal training and implementation of frequent formative assessments. Since state assessments rarely reach below grade three and the MAP measures reach ceilings at about grade 9 or 10, we expect to sample elementary schools containing at least three grades at or above grade three as well as middle schools enrolling at least three grades, but none above grade nine.
Outcome Measures:
The study focuses on two primary outcomes: student performance on annual state assessments, and teachers' individualization of instructional practice. A variety of other data (assessment, survey, observational, and demographic data) will be collected to flesh out analysis and interpretation. Individual student assessment data will be obtained from state assessment programs, either from the SEA or the LEA. These data will be linked to the teachers in the study. Teacher individualization of instruction will be captured using teacher self-reports one week after each formative assessment and again at the 10th week. These reports will determine whether the instructional trajectory for a student was changed, what the topic area of the change was, and whether the original trajectory was restored.
Efficacy of Frequent Formative Assessment for Improving Instructional Practice and Student Performance, Given Variations in Training to Use Assessment Results