4/8/13

AERA 2013 Session

2013 Session: Poverty and Performance: International Perspectives on the Relationship of Socioeconomic Status and Assessment Outcomes
Sunday, 12:25pm – 1:55pm, Parc 55/Powell I
Refreshments will be provided

Participants: Javier Luque (Inter-American Development Bank), Val Klenowski (Queensland University of Technology), Eugene Wall (Mary Immaculate College), Anne Looney (National Council for Curriculum and Assessment), Helen F. Ladd (Duke University)

Discussant: Eric A. Hanushek

2/18/12

AERA 2012-- Session

Sponsor:
Presidential Session
Cosponsor:
Division L - Educational Policy and Politics
Cosponsor:
Division H - Research, Evaluation and Assessment in Schools
Cosponsor:
AERA Sessions
Schedule Information:
Scheduled Time: Mon, Apr 16 - 2:15pm - 3:45pm  

Building/Room: 
Vancouver Convention Center, Floor Second Level - West Room   215 & 216

Title Displayed in Event Calendar: International Perspectives on Implementation and Effectiveness of Teacher Evaluation Models


Reception following immediately after the Presidential Session
Time: Mon, Apr 16 - 4:05pm - 5:35pm
Place: Vancouver Convention Center, Floor Second Level - West Room  215 & 216



Abstract
This session will present teacher evaluation practices and approaches to measure teacher effectiveness around the world. Leading international scholars in teacher evaluation will offer perspectives on the definition, trends in theory, and applications of measuring teacher effectiveness.

Session Summary
One of the overarching challenges in developing a fair and balanced educational accountability system in any country is designing a teacher effectiveness program. The vital question asks how to recruit, identify and develop effective teachers. For example, possible criteria include: student performance, curriculum, instruction and assessment, compensation, classroom size, professional development resources, school autonomy, and school leadership.

It is well known that evaluative practices vary across the globe. Approaches to measuring teacher effectiveness should be well understood and discussed before implementing evaluative procedures since the chosen system can significantly impact student learning. Therefore, via this session researchers and policy makers worldwide can learn through an internationally comparative lens.

The purpose of this symposium is to provide attendees with the opportunity to learn about teacher evaluation practices and teacher effectiveness around the world. Leading international scholars in teacher evaluation will offer perspectives on the definition, trends in theory, and applications of measuring teacher effectiveness.

Understanding different approaches for evaluating teacher effectiveness is more important than ever before. On February 17, 2009, President Obama allocated $4.35 billion of the funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) for the Race to the Top Fund. This competitive grant program rewards states for improving student achievement. One of the most critical components of the Race to the Top Fund is measuring teacher effectiveness.



Presenters:
1)      Title: The Evaluation of Teachers and Schools Using Growth Models:  Hope Versus Reality (USA)
Author: Robert Lissitz, Ph. D.
               University of Maryland
              RLissitz@umd.edu
This paper begins with a short overview of the literature regarding Student Growth Modeling (SGM) and Value Added Modeling (VAM).  Included are comments regarding the motivation and goals for this interest, from NCLB, and RTTT, as well as a more general interest from those concerned with teaching performance effectiveness.  The paper progresses to a review of the literature as it addresses the assessment of teachers and schools using more formal statistical methods.   From there, the paper moves to a consideration of a comparison of SGM models that permit aggregating across teachers or schools to provide teacher and school performance information (VAM).  The focus is on relatively simple models.  From there the paper addresses the literature, as it currently exists, regarding issues of reliability and validity as applied to evaluating teachers and evaluating schools.   Finally the paper closes with some conjecture about the future and the likelihood of success.  The overall tone of the paper is one of skepticism and pessimism regarding the likelihood of success in this endeavor.

2)      Title: Un-Finished Business: Teacher Evaluation and Effectiveness in Finland
Author:  Pasi Sahlberg, Ph. D.
               Director General
               CIMO (Centre for International Mobility and Cooperation)
                  http://www.pasisahlberg.com/index.php?group=2
               pasi.sahlberg@helsinki.fi

Dr. Sahlberg will represent the Finland’s perspective. Unlike the models of measuring teacher effectiveness (such as VAM) used in USA which are based on hard data (such as test scores), Finland is using an approach that contains attributes like personal commitment, level of collegiality, engagement in pedagogical development and teacher leadership. His paper will explain in detail how Finland is coping with the issue of teacher performance and evaluation. Dr. Sahlberg will focus his paper around the theme of Finland’s experience in measuring teacher effectiveness.


3)      Title: A Singapore Perspective of Teacher Education: The Old Man, the Mountain and the Child
Author:  Tan Oon Seng, Ph. D.
                Dean of Teacher Education at the National Institute of Education
                  http://www.nie.edu.sg/profile/tan-oon-seng

Teacher development in Singapore is unique from the continuum approach from initial teacher education to life-long professional development where goal congruence and pragmatic policies and practices amongst university, schools and the Ministry of Education help steer the teaching profession towards high standards and commitment. Teaching is a calling and effective teachers have a unity of purpose in their personal aspirations, beliefs, interests and competencies with a view of impacting the next generation and a system of evaluation and accountability builds on (a) Learner-centred values, (b) Teacher identity values (c) The values of service to the profession and community. Professor Oon-Seng Tan, will address the key factors to a successful teacher education policy in Singapore, including teacher evaluation in light of empowering teachers and enhancing teacher professionalism. He will also address the challenges of diverse societal expectations, the impact of rapid educational transformations and balancing accountability measures and autonomous professional trust.

4)      Title: Washington Teacher/Principal Evaluation Project (USA)
Authors:   W. Christopher Brandt, cbrandt@air.org; American Institutes for Research 
                  Cynthia Ann DuBois, cdubois@air.org; American Institutes for Research 

Eight school districts and a consortium of eight districts in Washington State are participating in a pilot study to implement Senate Bill 6696, which establishes new criteria for evaluating educators. The nine pilot sites are working with the Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) to develop nine new and innovative teacher evaluation systems that comply with this new state legislation. Washington OSPI partnered with American Institutes for Research (AIR) on a project to understand the current state of evaluation in Washington, document pilot sites’ development processes, examine pilot sites’ experiences and perspectives during development, and provide formative feedback to help pilot sites implement high-quality evaluation systems.
5)  Title: Teacher Evaluation Systems and Multi-cultural Commonalities and Challenges: England, Mexico, Portugal, Finland, and Turkey

Authors:  Dr. Jacqueline Kelleher, Sacred Heart University & Bridgeport Board of Education  
                 Member (Student Achievement Committee, Chair); kelleherj@sacredheart.edu 
                 Dr. John Ramos, Superintendent of Bridgeport Public Schools, Connecticut
                Cynthia Fernandes, Director of Learning & Teaching, Bridgeport Public Schools;  
                 jramos@bridgeportedu.net
                 Bob Trefry, Bridgeport Board of Education Chair, Retired CEO of Bridgeport
                                      Hospital; rjtrefry@bridgeportedu.net

Abstract
Merit-based pay or pay for performance. These terms are shaping national and state conversations on school reform, student achievement, and teacher competencies. Emerging policies aimed at rewarding teaching “effectiveness” and removing those less competent based on student achievement data are imposed on districts for implementation, often with little opportunity to examine “proven” systems for alignment with their vision and numerous mandated initiatives. Teacher unions, antiquated regulatory systems, and anxiety around testing impede a district’s ability to candidly discuss and compare. Bridgeport Public Schools recognizes these tensions. Teacher evaluation systems are clearly connected to improved student outcomes, and Bridgeport, currently in its eighth year of “Needs Improvement” under NCLB, is investigating national and international models to inform district-level policies. With a population of 21,000 children, speaking 123 languages, affected by significant poverty, dropout rates, and skill deficits, Bridgeport turned to merit-based models from multiple cultures to compare more critically with US performance-related pay structures. Using survey findings from 27 countries conducted by the Organization for Economic and Cooperative Development, Bridgeport identified incentive systems from six countries with tensions paralleling our own, including national labor agreements for teachers, basis for financial awards, professional staff making decisions, assessments performed by education administrators, and the measured student achievement. Superintendent Ramos and his Board of Education, a newly reconstituted board appointed by its State Commissioner, collaboratively reviewed literature, compared site-based documents, and conducted interviews with administrators from six international merit models: England, Mexico, Finland, Portugal, Turkey, and Canada. Our paper describes model components for each country reviewed, and highlights variations in scope, structure, and incentives. Finally, we evaluate the merit and worth of each model based on our findings in the context of guiding questions: Does merit-based pay improve education? Does incentivizing improve the quality of teaching? Does it help attract and retain quality teachers? Does it discourage teachers from going to low performing schools? Can teacher merit be successfully measured - or does varying student performance get in the way? Bridgeport has drawn conclusions from these global examples and is using findings to inform policy and strategic planning concerning student achievement.

Discussant:
Linda Darling-Hammond, Ph.D.
Stanford University
Charles Ducommon Professor of Education
Co-Director School Redesign Network (SRN)

Dr. Darling-Hammond’s research, teaching, and policy work focus on issues of school restructuring, teacher quality, and educational equity. Among Dr. Darling-Hammond’s more than 300 publications are Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and be Able to Do (with John Bransford, for the National Academy of Education, winner of the Pomeroy Award from AACTE), Teaching as the Learning Profession: A Handbook of Policy and Practice (Jossey-Bass: 1999) (co-edited with Gary Sykes), which received the National Staff Development Council’s Outstanding Book Award for 2000; and The Right to Learn: A Blueprint for Schools that Work, recipient of the American Educational Research Association’s Outstanding Book Award for 1998.



Chairs:
Whitney Wall, Ph. D. 
Queen's University - Belfast
Burcu Kaniskan, Ph.D. 
University of Connecticut

Session Organizer:
Antionette Stroter, Ph.D.
Liberty University
Burcu Kaniskan, Ph.D.
Neag School of Education
University of Connecticut
Whitney Wall, Ph. D. candidate
Queen's University - Belfast 

8/29/11

International Committee- session at AERA 2012 submission


Evaluation of the Teacher Effectiveness: Lessons From Around the World

Abstract
This session will present teacher evaluation practices and approaches to measure teacher effectiveness around the world. Leading international scholars in teacher evaluation will offer perspectives on the definition, trends in theory, and applications of measuring teacher effectiveness.

Session Summary
One of the overarching challenges in developing a fair and balanced educational accountability system in any country is designing a teacher effectiveness program. The vital question asks how to recruit, identify and develop effective teachers. For example, possible criteria include: student performance, curriculum, instruction and assessment, compensation, classroom size, professional development resources, school autonomy, and school leadership.

It is well known that evaluative practices vary across the globe. Approaches to measuring teacher effectiveness should be well understood and discussed before implementing evaluative procedures since the chosen system can significantly impact student learning. Therefore, via this session researchers and policy makers worldwide can learn through an internationally comparative lens.

The purpose of this symposium is to provide attendees with the opportunity to learn about teacher evaluation practices and teacher effectiveness around the world. Leading international scholars in teacher evaluation will offer perspectives on the definition, trends in theory, and applications of measuring teacher effectiveness.

Understanding different approaches for evaluating teacher effectiveness is more important than ever before. On February 17, 2009, President Obama allocated $4.35 billion of the funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) for the Race to the Top Fund. This competitive grant program rewards states for improving student achievement. One of the most critical components of the Race to the Top Fund is measuring teacher effectiveness.

Presenters:

1) USA
Robert Lissitz, Ph. D. 
Universityof Maryland
Dr. Lissitz will represent the USA perspective by presenting a paper on a wide range of topics related to value added models (VAM) such as the definition of VAMs, Race to the Top versus NCLB, Growth modeling and VAM, teacher effectiveness and challenges. He will discuss a comparative study he is currently conducting using different growth models. Dr. Lissitz will summarize a review of the literature on measuring teacher effectiveness; and will synthesize his talks around the theme of what can the world learn from USA’s experience in measuring teacher effectiveness.


2) FINLAND
Pasi Sahlberg, Ph. D. 
Director General
CIMO (Centre for InternationalMobility and Cooperation)
Dr. Sahlberg will represent the Finland’s perspective. Unlike the models of measuring teacher effectiveness (such as VAM) used in USA which are based on hard data (such as test scores), Finland is using an approach that contains attributes like personal commitment, level of collegiality, engagement in pedagogical development and teacher leadership. His paper will explain in detail how Finland is coping with the issue of teacher performance and evaluation. Dr Sahlberg will focus his paper around the theme of Finland’s experience in measuring teacher effectiveness.




3) SINGAPORE
Tan Oon Seng, Ph. D. 
Dean of TeacherEducation at the National Institute of Education

Teacher development in Singapore is unique from the continuum approach from initial teacher education to life-long professional development where goal congruence and pragmatic policies and practices amongst university, schools and the Ministry of Education help steer the teaching profession towards high standards and commitment. Teaching is a calling and effective teachers have a unity of purpose in their personal aspirations, beliefs, interests and competencies with a view of impacting the next generation and a system of evaluation and accountability builds on (a) Learner-centred values, (b) Teacher identity values (c) The values of service to the profession and community. Professor Oon-Seng Tan, will address the key factors to a successful teacher education policy in Singapore, including teacher evaluation in light of empowering teachers and enhancing teacher professionalism. He will also address the challenges of diverse societal expectations, the impact of rapid educational transformations and balancing accountability measures and autonomous professional trust.

Discussant:

Linda Darling-Hammond, Ph. D. 
Stanford University
Charles Ducommon Professor of Education
Co-Director School Redesign Network (SRN)

Dr. Darling-Hammond’s research, teaching, and policy work focus on issues of school restructuring, teacher quality, and educational equity. Among Dr. Darling-Hammond’s more than 300 publications are Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and be Able to Do (with John Bransford, for the National Academy of Education, winner of the Pomeroy Award from AACTE), Teaching as the Learning Profession: A Handbook of Policy and Practice (Jossey-Bass: 1999) (co-edited with Gary Sykes), which received the National Staff Development Council’s Outstanding Book Award for 2000; and The Right to Learn: A Blueprint for Schools that Work, recipient of the American Educational Research Association’s Outstanding Book Award for 1998.

4/25/11

Early Career Mentorship

Division H offers an EarlyCareer Mentorship program to those finishing a graduate program in June 2011 or who are in the first three years following their graduate programs.

The unique mentorship program pairs the young professional with an experienced person in an applied field related to Division H’s purpose– Research, Evaluation and Assessment in Schools.

As the intent of the mentorships is to support the transition from academia to an applied setting, applications should emphasize the applied nature of the mentor’s experience.

Support in finding a mentor is available if needed.

 Details:
  - The mentorship pays up to $750 toward the expense of your visit.
  - All mentorship visits must be completed by the end of October 2011.
  - Mentors will be expected to summarize their experience in an article for the Division H newsletter.
  - There are a maximum of four mentorships available.
  - Mentees must be members of Division H.

The application form is available

Applications must be submitted by *May 6, 2011.*
Please visit the link 
for more information about the program and the  application process as well as the testimonials of the previously awarded mentees regarding their experience.

3/26/11

AERA 2011--Division H International session.







Division H Vice Presidential Session:

Formative Assessment: International Perspectives and Applications


Sponsor:
Division H - Research, Evaluation and Assessment in Schools
Division H
Schedule Information:
Scheduled Time: Sun, Apr 10 - 10:35am - 12:05pm
Building/Room: Doubletree / Madewood B

Title Displayed in Event Calendar: Division H Vice Presidential Session: Formative Assessment: International Perspectives and Applications
Session Participants:
Trends in Formative Assessment Theory and Practice in the United States
*Dylan R. Wiliam (Institute of Education - London), *Walter D. Way (Pearson)
Dylan Wiliam is Emeritus Professor of Educational Assessment at the Institute of Education, University of London. In a varied career, he has taught in urban high schools, trained teachers, run a large-scale testing programme, and served in a number of roles in university administration, most recently as Dean of a School of Education, and Provost. Between 2003 and 2006, he was Senior Research Director at Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.


Trends in Formative Assessment Theory and Practice in the United States
*Walter D. Way (Pearson)

Dr. Denny Way is Senior Vice President of Psychometric and Research Services at Pearson.  Dr. Way has over 25 years of assessment experience in a variety of settings. He is a nationally known expert on computer-based testing and has worked on testing programs in higher education, licensure and certification, and K-12 assessment.  Dr. Way received his Ph.D. in Educational Measurement and Statistics from the University of Iowa.  Prior to working at Pearson, he spent 16 years with Educational Testing Service in Princeton, New Jersey.



Assessing Teachers' Assessment Literacy: The Problem of Formative Assessment
*Chris Davison (University of New South Wales)


Professor Chris Davison, a specialist in language education and school-based assessment, was appointed Professor of Education and Head of the School of Education in September 2008. She was previously Associate Dean (Research) in the Faculty of Education at Hong Kong University, where she remains an Honorary Professor. Before going to Hong Kong in 1999, she worked in teacher education at the University of Melbourne and La Trobe University for fifteen years. Chris has researched and published extensively on the interface between English as a mother tongue and ESL development, integrating language and content curriculum, and English language assessment. Her latest books include a two volume handbook of teaching English internationally (Springer, with Jim Cummins) and a co-authored book on English language teaching innovation in China (HKU Press, with Xinmin Zheng). With colleagues at the University of Hong Kong, she has just completed the research and development of a range of oral school-based assessment initiatives for the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority, and has also been working with the Ministries of Education in Singapore and in Brunei on integrating assessment for learning into their new curricula.


The Role of an Instructionally Supportive State Assessment in Improving Teacher Judgments About Student Proficiency
*Michael J. Flicek (Natrona County School District - Wyoming)

Michael Flicek is both a practitioner and a researcher.  He has worked in the Natrona County Schools in Wyoming for the past 26 years during which time he has presented multiple research papers nearly every year at annual meetings of national professional organizations.  He initially worked as a school psychologist but for the past 12 years he's been directing assessment and research for his district.  He has received a Certificate of Recognition for Outstanding Contributions to Educational Measurement from the National Association of Test Directors, an Outstanding Discussant Award from Division H of AERA, and the George Ingebo Educational Measurement Research Award from NWEA. He serves on the Technical Advisory Committee for the Wyoming State Assessment and the AERA Task Force for Reauthorization of the Institute of Education Sciences.  He was on the Northwest Evaluation Association Board of Directors for seven years and was Board Chairman for his final two years on the Board.




Discussant:  Lorrie A. Shepard (University of Colorado - Boulder)


Dr. Lorrie Shepard is University Distinguished Professor and Dean of the School of Education. Her research focuses on psychometrics and the use and misuse of tests in educational settings. Dr. Shepard is a past president of the American Educational Research Association and past president of the National Council on Measurement in Education. She was elected to the National Academy of Education in 1992 and served as its President from 2005 - 2009. Currently, she is a member of Colorado’s State Council for Educator Effectiveness, Colorado’s Assessment Stakeholder Committee, and the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education’s Blue Ribbon Panel for Clinical Preparation, Partnerships, and Improved Student Learning.




Chair: Zsuzsanna R. Szabo (Marist College)


Zsuzsanna Szabo, is Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Education Programs, in the Department of Teacher Education at Marist College, Poughkeepsie, NY. Her research interests include human cognition and learning, classroom assessment, integrating technology in instruction, and gender issues in education.  Dr. Szabo received her B. S. in Civil Engineering from Technical University Cluj, and B. S. in  Psychology from University Babes-Bolyai, both in Romania. M. Ed. from SUNY at Buffalo, NY, and Ph. D. in Educational Psychology from University of Arizona, in Tucson, AZ. She also worked for 9 years as a civil engineer.


Abstract:
Formative assessment is a topic of great interest in the last decade as related to the teaching and learning process, and especially as being related to student performance and assessment. However, there is still controversy in the definition of formative assessment as well as its use in measuring student performance. This symposium has as main objective to offer an international perspective on the definition and applications of formative assessment in measuring student progress in academic performance. Clarifications in what concerns definition, trends in theory and practice will be presented in two papers. Two applications of use of formative assessment will be presented: Asia and The United States.
Session Summary
Objectives

This symposium has as main objective to offer an international perspective on the definition, trends in theory, and applications of formative assessment in measuring student progress in academic performance.

Overview of the presentation
The first paper will be a presentation on the definition of formative assessment and the relationship between formative assessment and other related fields of education, such as instructional design. Along with definition the paper will clarify details concerning to the roles of teachers, learners, and their peers, specifically in regard to establishing where learners are in their learning, where they are going, and what instructional steps are needed to get them there.
The second paper will summarize trends in theory and practice regarding formative assessment in the United States. This paper will discuss the distinctions between formative assessment as practice and the tools that are typically used in formative assessment settings in the U.S. It will also address the use for formative assessment information in identifying gaps between a student’s current state of achievement and a targeted state of achievement. Finally, the implications of emerging assessment trends in the U.S. on formative assessment practice.
The third paper will be a project presentation from Asia. The Education Department in Hong Kong has been strongly encouraging a shift from assessment of learning to assessment for learning. The paper will present results from a large scale study of assessment reform in Hong Kong schools, and report on progress towards meeting these reform goals through an analysis of the changes in English teachers’ assessment attitudes, processes and practices.
The last paper will present an application in US in the state of Wyoming and describe an approach that is designed to support teachers in making valid and reliable judgments about student proficiency on standards. High school teachers were asked to use a rubric under testing conditions and to score student responses. Teachers had training in using collaboratively a rubric; then performed collaborative scoring on submitted student work. This collaboration allows teachers to agree about what proficient and advanced performance looks like and to refine their professional practice.

Scholarly or scientific significance
When formative assessment becomes an important topic that takes prevalence in the assessment world at international level, there is a need for clarifications of definitions and evaluation of lessons learned from the applications at diverse levels of education. This symposium will create a good opportunity to share our knowledge at international level.


Structure of the session
Presenters:
Dylan Wiliam, Ph.D. -- Institute of Education, University of London;
Chris Davison, Ph.D. -- University of New South Wales, Australia;
Denny Way, Ph.D. -- Pearson, U.S.A; denny.way@pearson.com
Michael Flicek - Natrona County School District, Wyoming, U.S.A.;

Chair:
Zsuzsanna Szabo – Marist College, NY;

Discussant:
Lorrie Shepard -- University of Colorado at Boulder, CO;





11/3/10

Fall 2010 Info

1. At the AERA 2011 conference we will have an International Committee organized session:

Formative Assessment: International Perspectives and Applications

Presenters:
Dylan Wiliam, Ph.D. -- Institute of Education, University of London
Chris Davison, Ph.D. -- University of New South Wales, Australia
Denny Way, Ph.D. -- Pearson, U.S.A.
Michael Flicek - Natrona County School District, Wyoming, U.S.A.
Discussant:
Lorrie Shepard -- University of Colorado at Boulder, CO

2. The international Committee offered help in language barriers and provided a "representative presentation" upon presenters’ request

3. We have a Division H - International Committee blog and a Google groups account that will be made known to all international members by advertising it more at the AERA 2011 conference:

http://aera-divh-international.blogspot.com


Future plans:

• Organize an international paper session from regular submissions for the 2011 program
• Organize an international themed poster series from accepted proposals
• Organize a meeting for international members early during the AERA convention
• Submit short articles to Reality Test on items of interest to international members
• Develop an award for "Best International paper" presented at the Div H Breakfast
• Construct a longer list of descriptors for research type appropriate for submission to Division H
• Place a handout with International Committee news at the Division H booth at each AERA conference that presents the International Committee news and gives more information of type of activities and also proposal submission topics appropriate for Division H
• Make a small video with VP talking and pictures across years at sessions, meetings, breakfast, etc., and burn on DVD and post at booth (free give away)
• Find a way to contact with international students – possibly through international faculty at their universities and encourage more submissions

5/6/10

AERA 2010 -- April 30- May 4, 2010



International Perspectives on Assessment for Educational Accountability


Sponsor:

Division H - Research, Evaluation and Assessment in Schools
International Committee

Schedule Information:

Scheduled Time:
Tue, May 4 - 10:35am - 12:05pm

Building/Room:
Sheraton / Plaza Ballroom D



Session Participants:

Holding Accountability Assessment Systems Educationally Accountable

*Michael Michell (University of New South Wales)


The Role of Accountability Systems in Driving School Improvement: A Case Study

*Michael J. Flicek (Natrona County School District - Wyoming)

Educational Accountability in Ireland

*Eugene Wall (Mary Immaculate College)


Diagnostic Assessment and Education Accountability

*Diane Hui (University of Hong Kong )


Chair: Zsuzsanna R. Szabo (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute)
Discussant:
Joseph M. O'Reilly (Mesa Public Schools)
Stephan Henry (REASolutions)


Abstract:

Worldwide assessment is used to measure academic achievement, and currently more often for education accountability purposes. The present symposium presents four international perspectives concerning education accountability: Europe (Ireland), Australia, Asia, and the United States. The Asian presentation revolves around an educational framework for development of a diagnostic assessment tool used for educational accountability purposes. A case study from U.S.A. will describe the benefit of using a judgment panel, versus a mathematical algorithm, concerning school accountability. The European perspective will present the effect of nationally high stakes assessment on educational accountability. The session concludes with the Australian paper which examines the problematic amalgam of three different forms of ‘external’ accountability and highlights the flawed assumptions and internal contradictions of accountability policy.

Session Summary


This session has as main objective to offer an international perspective on how assessment in education is used for educational accountability. The blend of case study and theoretical presentations about large national assessment measures and their use for educational accountability will provide a world-wide perspective on accountability.

Four international perspectives concerning education accountability will be presented in this session: Asia, the United States, Europe (Ireland), and Australia. The Asian presentation revolves around an educational framework for development of a diagnostic assessment tool used for educational accountability purposes. A case study from U.S.A. will describe the benefit of using a judgment panel, versus a mathematical algorithm, concerning school accountability. The European perspective will present the effect of nationally high stakes assessment on educational accountability. The session concludes with the Australian paper which examines the problematic amalgam of three different forms of ‘external’ accountability and highlights the flawed assumptions and internal contradictions of accountability policy.

The international perspective offered by this session will allow the audience to compare, contrast, and better understand the implications of assessment for educational accountability from the different perspectives across the world. Each paper presents implications for student learning and instruction, as well as use of assessment.


Structure of the session

Presenters:
1. Michael Michell - University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia



2. Michael Flicek - Natrona County School District, Wyoming, U.S.A.



3. Eugene Wall - Mary Immaculate College, University of Limerick, UK




4. Diane Hui - The University of Hong Kong, China



Chair:
Zsuzsanna Szabo, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY



Discussants:
Joe O’Reilly - Mesa Public Schools, Mesa, AZ
Stephan Henry -- REASolutions