Table Of Content

DOCUMENT RESUME ED 367 957 CS 011 635 TITLE Standards for the Assessment of Reading and Writing. International Reading Association, Newark, Del.; INSTITUTION National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, ISBN-0-8141-0213-1; ISBN-0-87207-674-1 REPORT NO PUB DATE 94 47p.; Prepared by the IRA/NCTE Joint Task Force on NOTE Assessment. Order Department, International Reading Association, AVAILABLE FROM 800 Barksdale Road, P.O. Box 8139, Newark, DE 19714-8139 (Book No. 674; $4.95 members, $6.95 nonmembers). Non-Classroom Use (055) PUB TYPE Guides EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. *Academic Standards; Elementary Secondary Education; DESCRIPTORS Instructional Improvement; Parent Participation; *Reading Achievement; *Reading Instruction; *Student Evaluation; *Writing Achievement; *Writing Instruction IDENTIFIERS *Educational Issues ABSTRACT Reflecting advances in the understanding of language, learning, and the complex literacy demands of a rapidly changing democratic and technological society, this booklet provides a set of standards to guide decisions about assessing the teaching and learning of reading and writing. After an introduction that presents an overview of what is meant by assessment, the booklet discusses the following 11 standards: (1) the interests of the student are paramount in assessment; (2) the primary purpose of assessment is to (3) assessment must reflect and allow improve teaching and learning; (4) assessment for critical inquiry into curriculum and instruction; must recognize and reflect the intellectually and socially complex nature of reading and writing and the important roles of school, (5) assessment must be home, and society in literacy development; (6) the consequences of an assessment procedure fair and equitable; are the first, and most important, consideration in establishing the (7) the teacher is the most important validity of the assessment; agent of assessment; (8) the assessment process should involve (9) assessment must be multiple perspectives and sources of data; based in the school community; (10) all members of the educational community--students, parents, teachers, administrators, policy makers, and the public--must have a voice in the development, interpretation, and reporting of assessment; and (11) parents must be involved as active, essential participants in the assessment process. The booklet offers rationales and implications for each standard, and some standards are accompanied with case studies. A glossary of assessment terminology is attached. (RS) =r_af, a "el I "PERMISSION TO UAL DEPARTMENT OP EDUCATION REPRODUCE THIS Office of Educator's' Ramrod, and Improvement MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER tERIO t has Wien reproduced as ThIS d°curn" from the person or organtzahon kmcetved oncenattno It. 0 Mmor changes have been made to Improve fettwoductoon Gualtty TO THE Points of vow or (muttons stated in tilts docu, EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES ment do not nocisaanty reCrellent °them' INFORMATION CENTER OERI posiflon ol poilcy (ERIC)." I II .0. 2 PI AVAilkutif. BE Standards for the Assessment of Reading and Writing International Reading Association and National Council of Teachers of English I Prepared by the IRA/NCTE Joint Task Force on Assessment Peter Johnston, Chair, SUNY at Albany Johnny Tolliver, Co-Chair, Delaware State University Carl Braun, University of Calgary James E. Davis, Ohio University Alan Farstrup, International Reading Association Shirley Haley-James, Georgia State University Jerome C. Ha,-ste, Indiana University Marjorie Y. Lipson, University of Vermont Marianne Marino, Central School, NJ Miles Myers, National Council of Teachers of English P. David Pearson, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign John J. Pikulski, University cf Delaware Susan Stires, Center for Teaching and Learning, ME Jackie E. Swensson, Metropclitan State College, CO Judith N. The len, Frostburg State Jniversity, MD Sheila D. Valencia, University of Washington 3 of the International Reading Association The work of the Joint Task Force on Assessment English (NCTE) and the publication of this (IRA) and the National Council of Teachers of and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. document were funded in part by the John D. formed in 1991 by the IRA Executive Board and the The IRA/NCTE Joint Task Force was is the Standards for the Assessment of Reading and Writing NCTE Executive Committee. IRA Board of Directors and the NCTE Executive report of this Joint Task Force. The in October Standards for the Assessment of Reading and Writing Committee approved below. 1993. Members of these boards are listed IRA Board of Directors Susan Heartland Area Education Agency, Johnston, IA; Doris D. Roettger (President), Dolores B. Malcolm (Vice President), Rider College, NJ; Mandel Glazer (President-elect), Linda B. St. Louis, MO, Public Schools; Mabel T. Edmonds, St. Louis, MO, Public Schools; Queens College, City Daniel R. Hittleman, University of Maryland-College Park; Gambrel!, Sandra McCormick, Northern Illinois University; York; Jerry L. Johns, University of New Pehr-Olof Ronnholm, National-Louis University; Donna M. Ogle, Ohio State University; California State University, Long MaryEllen Vogt, Cygnaeus School, Turku, Finland; Alan E. Farstrup, Executiue Norfolk State University; Carmelita Kimber Williams, Beach; Director, IRA. NCTE Executive Committee ret.; Janie Hydrick (President-elect), San Diego City Schools, Jesse Perry (President), James Rutgers University; Miriam T. Chaplin (Vice President), Mesa Public Schools, AZ; Marianne Marino (Representative at Large), Ohio University; E. Davis (Past President), Weatherford High Connie Sears (Representative at Large), Central School, Glen Rock, NJ; California State University; Chair), Barbara Flores (Elementary Section School, OK; CA; William G. Pinacate Middle School, Perris, Mildred Miller (Secondary Section Chair), Cynthia Selfe Colorado State University; McBride (Secondary Section Associate Chair), Anne Ruggles Gere (CCCC Michigan Technological University; (College Section Chair), Wake Forest University; Joseph Milner (CEE Chair), University of Michigan; Chair), Headquarters staff who are Sidney High School, OH. Donald Stephan (CEL Chair), Miles Myers (Executive Director), Charles members of the Executive Committee are Smith (Associate Executive Director), and Suhor (Deputy Executive Director), Karen Director for Business). Katherine Hope (Associate Executive Design: R. Maul IRA Stock Number: 674 NCTE Stock Number: 02131 Teachers Association and the National Council of 0 1994 by the International Reading of Reading Association and the National Council of English. Published by the International Printed in the United States of America. Teachers of English. All rights reserved. for and other publications to provide a forum It is the policy of NCTE in its journals the the conten't and the teaching of English and the open discussion of ideas concerning endorse- particular point of view does not imply language arts. Publicity accorded to any large, the Board of Directors, or the membership at ment by the Executive Committee, where such endorsement is clearly specified. except in announcements of policy, IRA ISBN: 0-87207-674-1 NCTE ISBN: 0-8141-0213-1 Contents Introduction 5 The Nature of Assessment 5 The Nature of Language 7 The Learning of Larlguage 9 The Assessment of Language 10 The Language of Assessment 11 The Standards 13 Goals 1. The interests of the student are paramount in assessment. 13 Rationale 13 Implications 14 2. The primary purpose of assessment is to improve teaching and learning. 15 Rationale 15 Implications 16 3. Assessment must reflect and allow for critical inquiry into curriculum and instruction. 17 Rationale 17 Implications 18 Case Study: Instruction Informs Assessment 18 4. Assessments must recognize and reflect the intellectually and socially complex nature of reading and writing and the important roles of school, home, and society in literacy development. 19 Rationale 19 Implications 20 Case Study: Assessment Must Be Contextualized 21 5. Assessment must be fair and equitable. 21 Rationale 21 Implications 24 6. The consequences of an assessment procedure are the first, and most important, consideration in establishing the validity of the assessment. 25 25 Rationale Implications 26 Implementation 7. The teacher is the most important agent of assessment. 27 27 Rationale 28 Implications Standards for the Assessmant of Reading and Writing involve multiple 8. The assessment process should 29 perspectives and sources of data. 29 Rationale 30 Implications Instead of Case Study: Special Education, People 31 Tests, and John 33 school community. 9. Assessment must be based in the 33 Rationale 33 Implications in Case Study: All Stakeholders Must Participate 34 Assessment communitystudents, 10. All members of the educational policy makers, and the parents, teachers, administrators, interpre- publicmust have a voice in the development, 35 tation, and reporting of assessment. 35 Rationale 36 Implications essential participants 11. Parents must be involved as active, 37 in the assessment process. 37 Rationale 38 Implications 39 Terminology Appendix: Glossary of Assessment Introduction This document provides a set of standards to guide decisions about assessing the teaching and learning of reading and writing. In the past thirty years, research has produced revolutionary changes in our understanding of language, learning, and the complex literacy demands of a rapidly changing democratic and technological society. The standards proposed in this document are intended to reflect these advances in our understanding. Most people reading this document share common school experiences with respect to literacy and assessment. For example, in school we read to get the correct meaning of a text so that we could answer questions put to us by someone who already knew the correct meaningor by a test (often multiple-choice) for which the correct answers were already determined. In order to develop assessment practices that serve students in an increasingly complex society, we must outgrow the limitations of our own schooiing histories and understand language, literacy, and assessment in more complex ways. Literacy, for example, involves not just reading and writing, but a wide range of related language activities. It is both more social and more personal than a mere set of skills. To improve language assessment we must understand not only assessment, but language and how it relates to assessment. The need to understand language is particularly important. Language is not only the thing being assessed, but also part of the process of assessment itself. Consequently, any discussion of literacy assessment must include a discussion of language: what it is, how it is learned, and how it relates to assessment. Before we state our assessment standards, then, we will give an overview of what we mean by assessment, and how we understand language and its relationship to assessment. The Nature of Assessment At one point in the history of schooling, a transmission view of knowledge, curriculum, and assessment dominated (or appeared to satisfy) our social, political, and economic needs. Knowledge was regarded as a static entity that was "out there" somewhere, so the key educational question was, "How do you get it from out there into the students' heads?" Then the corollary assessment question was, "What counts as evidence that the knowledge really is in their heads?" In a transmission view, it made sense 5 Writing Standards for the Assessment of Reading and of instruction standards that specified the content to develop educational procedures and engagements. before developing assessment work- with its ever-increasing need for In our postindustrial society, of the basic problem-solving dispositions and skills, one ers with strong the 1920s has that has gained in prominence since purposes of schooling of knowledge but the more complex become not simply the transmission indepen- A curriculum committed to nurturing of independent learning. that inquiry, rather than mere trans- dent learning is built upon the premise basis of teaching and learning. mission of knowledge, is the goal to inquiry as a primary This shift from knowledge transmission knowledge- implications for assessment. In a of schools has important static knowledge can suffice as assess- transmission framework, tests of (either they got the Students are primarily accountable ment instruments. Policy teachers held accountable next. knowledge or they didn't), with then the members, trustees, or regents are makers, such as school board data. primary recipients of assessment and the roles of the partici- Inquiry changes the role of assessment exploration of how framework, assessment is the pants. Within an inquiry the participants in the educational com- the educational environment and of learning to become indepen- munity support education as a process includes an solvers. This exploiaticn dent thinkers and problem for teaching and learning, the processes examination of the environment participants (stu- the degree to which all and products of learning, and their parents, and board members) meet dents, teachers, administrators, obligation to support inquiry. and types of knowledge than Inquiry emphasizes different processes to rec- For example, it values the ability does knowledge transmission. trying multiple and diverse perspectives in ognize problems and to generate knowledge and perspective asserts that while to solve them. An inquiry is the time, what will remain constant language are likely to change over administrators, (students, teachers, parents, need for learners at all levels knowledge, and problems, generate new and policy makers) to solve new An inquiry perspective would promote invent new language practices. in the solving as goals for all participants problem finding and problem the question example, inquiry would value educational community. For solve a particu- different sources can be used to of how information from of how teachers can promote It would value explorations lar problem. of why And it would raise the question critical thinking for all students. cultural heritage of some groups privileges the knowledge and our society within current school settings. over others essential multicultural society in which it is Inquiry fits the needs of a diversity. It also in cultural and epistemological to value and find strength multiple so- questions and generating honors the commitment to raising 6 Introduction lutions. Various stakeholders and cultural groups provide different answers and new perspectives on problems. In a sense, respecting difference among learners becomes a self-correcting and enriching strategy for all learners and, most important, for the curriculum. Just as the principle of inquiry values differences, so the principle of difference values conversation over recitation as the primary mode of discourse. In a recitation, it is assumed that one person, the teacher, possesses the answers and that the others, the students, interact with the teacher and one another in an attempt to uncover the teacher's knowledge. In a conversation, all of the stakeholders in the educational environment (students, parents, teachers, specialists, administrators, and policy makers) have a voice at the table as curriculum, standards, and assessments are negotiated. Neither inquiry nor learning is viewed as the ex- clusive domain of students and teachers. Both are primary concerns for all members of the school community. For example, administrators ask themselves hard questions about whether the structures they have estab- lished support staff development, teacher reflection, and student learning. School board members ask themselves whether they have lived up to the standards they have set for themselves and their schools to provide teachers and students with the resources they need to guarantee learning opportunities. Quality assessment, then, hinges on the process of setting up condi- tions so that the classroom, the school, and the community become cen- ters of inquiry where students, teachers, and other members of the schoo! community investigate their own learning, both individually and collaboratively. The onus of assessment does not fall disproportionately upon students and teachers (which is often the case in schools in our society today); instead, all those involved in curriculum inquiry are held respon- sible for investigating the roles they have played. Different members of the school community have different but interacting interests, roles, and responsibilities. And assessment is the medium that allows all to explore what they have learned and whether they have met their responsibilities to the school community. The Nature of Language Language is very much like a living organism. It cannot be put together from parts like a machine, and it is constantly changing. Like a living organism it exists only in interaction with others, in a social inter- dependence. Language is a system of signs through and within which we represent and make sense of the world and of ourselves. Language does not contain meaning; rather, meaning lies in the social relationships within which language occurs. Individuals in communities make sense of Ian- Standards for the Assessment of Reading and Writing and their social reationships, their personal histories, guage within their of even a single word, people collective memory. In order to make sense their relationship with the speaker or take into account the situation and word, the situation, and their re- writer, as they understand all threethe lationship with speaker or writer. word used many times as if Take, for example, the word "family," a agreed on its meaning. The word may all members of the society were situ- different contexts, however, whether cultural, mean different things in forty-year-old whose parents moved with ational, or personal. To a white in the fifties, "family" may mean their two children from Illinois to Maine she grew up. To someone from a different the nuclear family with which American or Asian American, the word culture, for example an African constellation of grandparents, aunts, "family" may conjure images of the each other and constitute uncles, and cousins who live together or near for example a television commercial his family. In yet another context, appeals to the word "family" take for a long-distance telephone company, hearer's own that may or may not coincide with the on a persuasive edge between one person and needs or wants. And meaning may vary even the word "family" are likely to another, since the meanings attached to experience in the family or fami- be quite different depending on one's own of different people make different sense lies one has lived with. Thus the same words will mean different apparently similar language. Even situations and to different people in things to the same person in different what seems to be the same situation. of language depending on Because individuals make different sense there are complexities that we do not their cultural and personal histories, when we attempt to standardize a test often take seriously. For example, make the tenuous assumption that (make it the same for everyone), we from the language of our instruc- students will all make the same meaning tions. of representing the world, Different cultures also have different ways language. For example, in any given themselves, and their intentions with de- different ways of greeting one another, cultural group, people have and business meeting, a funeral, a date) pending on the situation (e.g., a another. Our own language practices come on their relationship to one language, but our individual language from our cultural experience with Indeed, others collectively make the culture. practices along with those of and language to make sense of the world the different ways people use cultural distinguishing features of different of their lives are the major groups. Words always changing as we use it. At the same time, language is language structures and uses appear acquire different meanings, anc new 11,,;ii;,',? i'.: meanings. Conse- and pull the language to make new as people stretch 8 1 0