Setting Consensus Goals For Academic Achievement

This special issue is based on a workshop which began with a description and examination of the current National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) standard-setting model, then looked to standard-setting applications outside of education. These applications included those that focus on human performance and the adequacy of human performance; in these contexts, raters were asked to focus on the knowledge and skills that underlie competent performance. Researchers also examined applications that focus on the impact of environmental agents on life and the ecology; in these cases, raters began with the knowledge that more (or less) of a substance is better and, as for NAEP, the judgment task was to determine "how good is good enough." They wished to examine parallels in the objectives, empirical grounding, judgmental requirements, and policy tensions for standard setting in NAEP and in other domains. These papers were commissioned to examine the current state of affairs and residual issues with respect to achievement-level setting in NAEP and to help determine whether the models and methods used in other disciplines have useful application to education. It is important to note that the papers represent the authors' views, not necessarily those of the committee or National Research Council. This issue and the workshop discussion point out a number of analogies between the objectives, requisite data, judgment requirements and policy issues for NAEP and other applications. The editors hope that this issue and wide distribution of these papers will prompt others to join in this interesting analysis and debate.

This special issue is based on a workshop which began with a description and examination of the current National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) standard-setting model, then looked to standard-setting applications outside of education. These applications included those that focus on human performance and the adequacy of human performance; in these contexts, raters were asked to focus on the knowledge and skills that underlie competent performance. Researchers also examined applications that focus on the impact of environmental agents on life and the ecology; in these cases, raters began with the knowledge that more (or less) of a substance is better and, as for NAEP, the judgment task was to determine "how good is good enough." They wished to examine parallels in the objectives, empirical grounding, judgmental requirements, and policy tensions for standard setting in NAEP and in other domains. These papers were commissioned to examine the current state of affairs and residual issues with respect to achievement-level setting in NAEP and to help determine whether the models and methods used in other disciplines have useful application to education. It is important to note that the papers represent the authors' views, not necessarily those of the committee or National Research Council. This issue and the workshop discussion point out a number of analogies between the objectives, requisite data, judgment requirements and policy issues for NAEP and other applications. The editors hope that this issue and wide distribution of these papers will prompt others to join in this interesting analysis and debate.

Since 1969, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has been providing policymakers, educators, and the public with reports on academic performance and progress of the nation's students. The assessment is given periodically in a variety of subjects: mathematics, reading, writing, science, the arts, civics, economics, geography, U.S. history, and technology and engineering literacy. NAEP is given to representative samples of students across the U.S. to assess the educational progress of the nation as a whole. Since 1992, NAEP results have been reported in relation to three achievement levels: basic, proficient, and advanced. However, the use of achievement levels has provoked controversy and disagreement, and evaluators have identified numerous concerns. This publication evaluates the NAEP student achievement levels in reading and mathematics in grades 4, 8, and 12 to determine whether the achievement levels are reasonable, reliable, valid, and informative to the public, and recommends ways that the setting and use of achievement levels can be improved.

Since the late 1960s, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)â€"the nation's report cardâ€"has been the only continuing measure of student achievement in key subject areas. Increasingly, educators and policymakers have expected NAEP to serve as a lever for education reform and many other purposes beyond its original role. Grading the Nation's Report Card examines ways NAEP can be strengthened to provide more informative portrayals of student achievement and the school and system factors that influence it. The committee offers specific recommendations and strategies for improving NAEP's effectiveness and utility, including: Linking achievement data to other education indicators. Streamlining data collection and other aspects of its design. Including students with disabilities and English-language learners. Revamping the process by which achievement levels are set. The book explores how to improve NAEP framework documentsâ€"which identify knowledge and skills to be assessedâ€"with a clearer eye toward the inferences that will be drawn from the results. What should the nation expect from NAEP? What should NAEP do to meet these expectations? This book provides a blueprint for a new paradigm, important to education policymakers, professors, and students, as well as school administrators and teachers, and education advocates.

Bringing together internationally recognised scholars this book focuses on the relationship between leadership and learning for the education community. It draws together a wealth of knowledge and research in the field across a variety of contexts, such as system leadership, professional learning communities and leading different cultures. Themes covered include: - exploring models for leadership and improvement - challenges in developing learning-focused leadership - broadening ideas of learning and knowledge work. This book will be of interest to educational leaders at all levels and in all sectors, as well as consultants, academics and those who wish to extend their knowledge in educational leadership whether engaging in further academic study or in reflective practice around the ideas presented. This book is essential for anyone taking advanced programmes in educational leadership and management.

Improve student outcomes with collective teacher efficacy. If educators’ realities are filtered through the belief that they can do very little to influence student achievement, then it is likely these beliefs will manifest in their practice. The solution? Collective efficacy (CE)—the belief that, through collective actions, educators can influence student outcomes and increase achievement. Educators with high efficacy show greater effort and persistence, willingness to try new teaching approaches, and attend more closely to struggling students’ needs. This book presents practical strategies and tools for increasing student achievement by sharing: Rationale and sources for establishing CE Conditions and leadership practices for CE to flourish Professional learning structures/protocols

There is a growing need for social, emotional, and academic development (SEAD) in classrooms, schools, districts, and state offices of public education, but educators struggle to find a resource that guides them on these specific challenges. Educators need valid resources as a means to better prepare themselves to use SEAD within their work and support student success. Tangible evidence-based practices on SEAD implementation and how it mitigates leading challenges in education is a current need in the research community. Challenges such as school safety, discipline and restorative practices, and workforce readiness are a few challenges that are currently in need of being addressed. SEAD in school systems may be a solution for some of these areas of concern as well as providing additional benefits for students, educators, and school systems. Leading Schools With Social, Emotional, and Academic Development (SEAD) provides theoretical and applied frameworks for evidence-based strategies to embed SEAD practices into sustainable and measurable high-impact systems. SEAD advancements and successful applications in increasing student academic achievement, campus safety and school climate, adult SEAD skills, and family/parent and community engagement are discussed. This book is ideal for in-service and preservice teachers, administrators, teacher educators, practitioners, researchers, academicians, and students interested in the applications and successful models of SEAD implementation in schools.