Aligning Mathematics Assessment Standards: Oklahoma and the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). REL Technical Brief. REL 2008-No. 010

This technical brief examines the current alignment between Oklahoma Core Curriculum Tests (OCT) and the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAPE) mathematics framework. It looks at the extent to which current state assessment standards cover the content on which 2009 NAPE assessments...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest 2008
Hauptverfasser: Shapley, Kathy L, Brite, Jessica
Format: Report
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This technical brief examines the current alignment between Oklahoma Core Curriculum Tests (OCT) and the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAPE) mathematics framework. It looks at the extent to which current state assessment standards cover the content on which 2009 NAPE assessments will be based. Applying the methodology used by Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest in 2001 in a similar study that examined the alignment of Oklahoma science assessment standards with the 2009 NAPE, this study presents results for areas of full alignment, partial alignment, nonalignment, and areas where the OCT assessment standards go beyond the NAPE standards. The study finds that 85 percent of NAPE grade 4, 89 percent of NAPE grade 8, and 74 percent of NAPE grade 12 assessment standards are either fully or partially addressed by the OCT mathematics assessment standards. The study analyzes the alignment of the OCT and 2009 NAPE mathematics assessment standards. It does not analyze individual items or the alignment of state standards with the OCT assessment items. The study does not make specific recommendations about whether a state should close gaps in alignment to NAPE--a decision for state policymakers. Revising assessments requires substantial time and resources, so policymakers considering such revisions need to weigh the costs of such changes and the benefits they believe such changes will bring to students. (Contains 1 box, 7 tables, 3 figures, and 2 notes.) [This REL Technical Brief was prepared for the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences (IES) by Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest administered by Edvance Research.]