I like how you pointed out the positives of interim tests at the end as I do see them having some value but totally get your point on "they don't really tell a teacher anything". I think the way I think about it is that those tests are merely one data point that overlayed with the right granular data, could be supportive. That's actually something I am trying to work on right now and would love your feedback. I am also curious if you think there's a good resource out there (besides achieve the core website) that helps teachers figure out those ten "foundational skills" they should assess at the beginning of the year.
I agree interim assessments can be used well. For instance, they are probably the best tool for measuring progress over multiple years and that data can be really helpful for special education determinations, etc. But in my experience, most teachers struggle to look data holistically and mostly pay attention to the most recent data point. There are other issues -- they take a lot of instructional time, they contribute to testing fatigue, and teachers try to teach to those tests. I don't know the best way to use them, I see them used badly way more often than they are used well.
In terms of resources for mapping out foundational skills, I haven't seen anything good. There is an obsession with grade-level rigor in the current generation of curriculum materials. There are clear benefits to that but it also means that lots of people seem scared of including this type of assessment/scaffolding in their official curricula. I do it by going through the curriculum and asking myself, "what does the curriculum assume students already know?" but a lot of it is just experience teaching the content and knowing where students get tripped up. This is a good example of a task that would be good for a department/district to work on together to allow more experienced teachers to support folks who are newer.
I love that idea re: where the district can actually pour some resources. That said, I imagine experienced teachers are just as burned out right now as the newer ones and am always leery about putting more on this plate. Perhaps something for an instructional coach. If you are down, would love to chat at some point re: "...most teachers struggle to look data holistically and mostly pay attention to the most recent data point." This is exactly what we are researching right now and trying to assess what "to do" would actually be helpful for teachers in the moment versus just another dashboard of charts and graphs. Glad I found your blog - Super interesting stuff!
“Lots of schools use this information to do ability grouping but the reality is that student could be anywhere in a pretty broad range.” This is a good reason that schools should move away from ability grouping and tracking. Even when triangulated with other assessments, the result is usually a bunch of “low” kids not receiving grade-level content.
Yup. I have lots of complicated thoughts about tracking but one big one is there are all these practical challenges that mean it doesn't look in practice like lots of people imagine it.
I like how you pointed out the positives of interim tests at the end as I do see them having some value but totally get your point on "they don't really tell a teacher anything". I think the way I think about it is that those tests are merely one data point that overlayed with the right granular data, could be supportive. That's actually something I am trying to work on right now and would love your feedback. I am also curious if you think there's a good resource out there (besides achieve the core website) that helps teachers figure out those ten "foundational skills" they should assess at the beginning of the year.
I agree interim assessments can be used well. For instance, they are probably the best tool for measuring progress over multiple years and that data can be really helpful for special education determinations, etc. But in my experience, most teachers struggle to look data holistically and mostly pay attention to the most recent data point. There are other issues -- they take a lot of instructional time, they contribute to testing fatigue, and teachers try to teach to those tests. I don't know the best way to use them, I see them used badly way more often than they are used well.
In terms of resources for mapping out foundational skills, I haven't seen anything good. There is an obsession with grade-level rigor in the current generation of curriculum materials. There are clear benefits to that but it also means that lots of people seem scared of including this type of assessment/scaffolding in their official curricula. I do it by going through the curriculum and asking myself, "what does the curriculum assume students already know?" but a lot of it is just experience teaching the content and knowing where students get tripped up. This is a good example of a task that would be good for a department/district to work on together to allow more experienced teachers to support folks who are newer.
I love that idea re: where the district can actually pour some resources. That said, I imagine experienced teachers are just as burned out right now as the newer ones and am always leery about putting more on this plate. Perhaps something for an instructional coach. If you are down, would love to chat at some point re: "...most teachers struggle to look data holistically and mostly pay attention to the most recent data point." This is exactly what we are researching right now and trying to assess what "to do" would actually be helpful for teachers in the moment versus just another dashboard of charts and graphs. Glad I found your blog - Super interesting stuff!
Makes sense, would be a good task for an instructional coach.
Happy to talk - my email is dkane47 at gmail.
“Lots of schools use this information to do ability grouping but the reality is that student could be anywhere in a pretty broad range.” This is a good reason that schools should move away from ability grouping and tracking. Even when triangulated with other assessments, the result is usually a bunch of “low” kids not receiving grade-level content.
Yup. I have lots of complicated thoughts about tracking but one big one is there are all these practical challenges that mean it doesn't look in practice like lots of people imagine it.