ALIGNMENT OF 6TH GRADE LARGE-SCALE ASSESSMENT CONSTRUCTS WITH THE REVISED CURRICULUM FRAMEWORK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2019vol2.3811Keywords:
alignment between curriculum and assessment, large scale assessment, assessment evaluation, student performanceAbstract
One of the goals of the National Development Plan 2014-2020 is to reduce the proportion of students with low cognitive skills, and at the same time increase the proportion of students with higher level cognitive skills. In line with those goals, the National Centre for Education is implementing the project “Competency-based approach to curriculum”, funded by the European Social Fund. The purpose of the research described in this article is to find out to what extent the current large-scale national assessments for 6th Grade are coherent with the new curriculum and what improvements are needed for aligning the national assessments with the national curriculum. The theoretical framework of the research is developed by analysing the frameworks of the programme for international student assessment (PISA), trends in international mathematics and science study (TIMSS), progress in international reading literacy study (PIRLS), as well as the framework of the revised national curriculum in Latvia. National 6th Grade assessments of the year 2018 are analysed by using Classical test theory and Rasch model. The indicators of the test items are mapped according to the developed theoretical framework. Authors conclude that the national 6th Grade tests assess the elements of literacy, numeracy and scientific literacy. Students have a high level of performance in test items with low cognitive depths, but there is an insufficient number of test items with high cognitive depths, allowing pupils to demonstrate skills in new contexts, which is an essential goal of the new national curriculum. Further research is required on the use of data from the large-scale assessment in supporting and guiding student instruction and learning.
Downloads
References
Alberta Education (2017). About Literacy and Numeracy - Literacy & Numeracy. Retrieved from https://education.alberta.ca/literacy-and-numeracy/about-literacy-and-numeracy/
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Red.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Complete ed). New York: Longman.
Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: the SOLO taxonomy (structure of the observed learning outcome). New York: Academic Press.
Biggs, J. B., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching For Quality Learning At University. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education. Iegūts no http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=798265
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2015). Applying the Rasch model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences (Third edition). New York ; London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
France, I., Namsone, D., Čakāne, L., Vilciņš, J., Dzērve, U., & Nikolajenko, A. (2017). Student Graphical Information Literacy in Mathematics and Science. SOCIETY. INTEGRATION. EDUCATION. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference, 2, 81.DOI: https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2017vol2.2394
Harvard Graduate School of Education (1995). Assessing Mathematical Understanding and Skills Effectively (Balanced Assessment in Mathematics Project).
IAE (2017). Timss 2019 frameworks. 140 Commonwealth Avenue, Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS.
Martone, A., & Sireci, S. G. (2009). Evaluating Alignment Between Curriculum, Assessment, and Instruction. Review of Educational Research, 79(4), 1332–1361. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309341375
Messick, S. (1989). Validity In. R. Linn (Ed.) Educational measurement (13-103). New York: Macmillan Publishing.
Ministru kabinets. Noteikumi par valsts pamatizglītības standartu, pamatizglītības mācību priekšmetu standartiem un pamatizglītības programmu paraugiem, Nr.468 (2014). Retrieved from https://likumi.lv/ta/id/268342-noteikumi-par-valsts-pamatizglitibas-standartu-pamatizglitibas-macibu-prieksmetu-standartiem-un-pamatizglitibas-programmu-parau.
Ministru kabinets. Noteikumi par valsts pamatizglītības standartu un pamatizglītības programmu paraugiem, Nr. 747 (2018). Retrieved from https://likumi.lv/ta/id/303768-noteikumi-par-valsts-pamatizglitibas-standartu-un-pamatizglitibas-programmu-paraugiem
Namsone, D., Oliņa, Z., France, I., Dudareva, I., Čakāne, L., Pestovs, P., Bērtule, D., Volkinšteine, J., Lāce, G., Logins, J., & Butkēviča, A. (2018). Mācīšanās lietpratībai. (Latvijas Universitāte & D. Namsone, Red.). LU Akadēmiskais apgāds. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22364/ml.2018
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I): Excellence and Equity in Education. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD (Red.). (2018). PISA for development assessment and analytical framework: reading, mathematics and science. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Pestovs, P., & Namsone, D. (2017). National level test in science in Latvia for assessing how students explain phenomena scientifically. 2nd International Baltic Symposium on Science and Technology Education.
Pestovs, P., & Namsone, D. (2018). Performance Assessment in Science National Level Diagnostic Tests. Society. Integration. Education. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference, 2, 376.DOI: https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2018vol1.3215
Volante, L. (2006). An Alternative Vision for Large-scale Assessment in Canada. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 4(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.22329/jtl.v4i1.89
Wilson, M. (2005). Constructing measures: an item response modeling approach. Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
