Evaluation of Resources to Support Diagnostic Score Report Interpretation

• In Event: 31.045 - Supporting Teacher Action Based on Diagnostic Assessment Results

Abstract

While design and evaluation of score report structure and contents are critical to supporting their intended interpretation and use (Zenisky & Hambleton, 2012), additional consideration should be given to the resources made available to teachers to support their understanding and use of diagnostic score reports. However, relatively little research has been conducted into resources to support teacher use of reports following their delivery. To address this gap in the literature, individual teacher and focus group interviews were conducted during spring 2018 with 17 teachers from a sample of the 18 states in the Dynamic Learning Maps Consortium. Focus groups were semi-structured, in which questions prompted participants to share information about resources they have found useful or desired resources to support their use of diagnostic score reports for instructional practice. Interviews and focus groups were recorded and subsequently transcribed and coded for themes. Additional evidence was collected on teachers’ understanding of score reporting concepts following their use of an online score report interpretation tutorial.
Teachers identified resource needs for three audiences: (a) parents, (b) individual teachers, and (c) group-level district training. The presentation will expand on the brief summary of results provided here and provide recommendations for other programs considering implementation of a diagnostic assessment system to support educator use of fine-grained assessment results.
Parents. Teachers noted that parent-teacher conferences and IEP meetings often inundate parents with information about their student from a variety of sources. Because these meetings may leave parents feeling overwhelmed, teachers suggested making resources available that could be introduced at the meeting but available on the website for parents after the meeting as well. Resources might include a brief assessment overview summarizing how results are calculated, the assessment Parent Interpretive Guide, and cheat sheets for tying academic content in score reports to day-to-day interactions with their children.
Teachers. Participants described wanting additional training opportunities around how to interpret results and use for planning subsequent instruction. This might include separate meetings to (a) receive results and discuss interpretation, and (b) begin planning subsequent instruction and for cross-collaboration across sending and receiving teachers of a particular student. Teachers also expressed a desire for more information in aggregate form to support identifying instructional groupings and quickly identify students working on similar areas.
Districts. Teachers highlighted the value of district-provided professional development activities that incorporated interpretation of the previous year’s reports. Teachers suggested district trainings for interpreting results and for planning instruction, and also suggested providing district agencies with summary reports they could use to support teachers. They suggested these reports could be used to evaluate from a programmatic level if certain standards were perhaps being covered less or that may be more challenging to teach. By identifying these areas collectively, the participants suggested districts may be better equipped to point teachers toward already available resources or host trainings to address potential areas of challenge.

Authors

• Chelsea Nehler, University of Kansas

• Amy Clark, The University of Kansas