Transcript KIN 386 Ch 4 2012

CHAPTER
4
Measurement,
Assessment, and
Program Evaluation
Manny Felix and Garth Tymeson
Chapter 4 Measurement, Assessment, and Program Evaluation
Measurement, Assessment,
and Program Evaluation
Common assessment strategies
• Standardized approaches
• Alternative approaches
Standardized Approaches
• Usually published tests
• Limited selection of test items
• Specific directions for administration
• Usually known validity and reliability
• Generally strong psychometrically but weak
authentically
• Standards provided to make judgments
about student test performance
Standards
• Norm referenced
• Criterion referenced
Norm-Referenced Standards
• Comparisons are made with others from a
specifically defined group (e.g., age, sex,
disability).
• Norms are usually developed by testing
large numbers, and results are tabulated.
• Percentiles, T-scores, and z-scores are
used.
(continued)
Norm-Referenced Standards (continued)
• Above average and below average are the
types of judgments made.
• IQ tests and older physical education tests
are examples.
Criterion-Referenced Standards
• Comparisons are made with predetermined
mastery scores (minimally acceptable
scores for a particular purpose).
• Criteria are determined by expert opinion,
research data, logic, experience, and so on.
(continued)
Criterion-Referenced Standards
(continued)
• Competent (meets standard) and
noncompetent (does not meet standards)
are the types of judgments made.
• Fitnessgram is an example.
Alternative Approaches
• Link assessment to instruction.
• Have day-to-day applicability.
• Often teacher constructed for specific
situations or physical education content.
• Strong authentically but weak
psychometrically (premium on subjective
evaluation).
• Checklists, rubrics, task analyses, and
portfolios are examples.
Checklist
• Identifies presence or absence of behavior
or skill.
• Does not indicate the quality of behavior.
• Helpful when using task-analytic or
ecological approaches.
• Use with a specific skill or series of skills.
Rubric
• In this type of rating scale, a student’s
performance is matched to one of multiple
levels of a skill via a set of criteria.
• Students know where they stand and what
needs to be done for improvement.
• Works well with IEPs: If PLP = 2, then
short-term objectives = 3 or 4 (or certain
aspects of 3 or 4).
Task Analysis
• Many types exist, but all involve breaking
skills down into smaller, perhaps
sequentially ordered, steps or focal points.
• When used as an assessment instrument,
missing components are identified, and a
strategy for teaching is revealed.
• It can be expanded for use in ecological
assessment (including functional and topdown approaches).
Portfolio
• A collection of representative student work
• Entries: videos, test results (standardized
and alternative), peer evaluations, journals,
logs, and so on
• Strength: multiple assessments on multiple
occasions
Standardized Versus Alternative
• Generally use both.
• Give preference to standardized for unique
need questions.
– IDEA requires valid, reliable, objective,
and nondiscriminatory testing.
• Give preference to alternative when
devising instructional strategies.
– Assessment is curriculum embedded.
Determination of Unique Need
• Low motor development
• Low motor skill performance
• Low health-related physical fitness
(continued)
Determination of Unique Need (continued)
• Possible criteria:
• <15th percentile
• >1 standard deviation below the mean (T < 40)
• 2-year developmental delay or more
• Fails to meet criterion-referenced standards
• Fails to meet 70% of the competencies in the
curriculum
• Trial placement recommended for
corroboration
Other Factors to Consider
in Determining Unique Need
• Behavior
• Communication
• Need for adapted physical education
• Need for safe participation
• Medical condition or disability
• Potential for intramural and interscholastic
athletic experiences
Meeting State- or District-Wide
Testing Requirements
• All students, including those with disabilities,
should be incorporated in any state- or district-wide
assessment programs.
• Many physical education testing programs (e.g.,
health-related physical fitness) are required by
districts.
(continued)
Meeting State- or District-Wide
Testing Requirements (continued)
• Participation levels include the following:
– Use same standardized test.
– Provide appropriate accommodations.
– Provide an alternative test.
What to Assess in
Adapted Physical Education?
• Remember IDEA definition of physical education.
– Physical and motor fitness
– Fundamental motor skills and patterns
– Skills in aquatics, dance, and individual and
group games and sports (including intramural
and lifetime sports)
(continued)
What to Assess in
Adapted Physical Education? (continued)
• Minimally test physical fitness (or physical activity)
and motor skills (including reflexes and
rudimentary, fundamental, and specialized skills, as
appropriate).
• Affective skills may also be assessed in authentic
settings.
Milani-Comparetti
• Purpose: to assess motor development, including
reflexes and reactions, in young children (birth-2
years) and children with developmental disabilities
• Description: 27 total test items; 9 test head control,
body control, and active movements; 5 test
primitive reflexes; 13 test postural reactions
• Scoring: age norms for each test are provided
• Comment: often administered by therapists
Peabody Developmental Motor Scales
• Purpose: to assess the fine and gross
motor development of children (birth-5
years)
• Description: 249 test items (mostly
developmental milestones) arranged across
six categories and age levels
• Scoring: gross motor quotient, fine motor
quotient, and total motor quotient
• Comment: normative data available
Test of Gross Motor Development
• Purpose: to test fundamental movement
patterns in preschool and early elementary
children with emphasis on process rather
than product of performance
• Description: 12 patterns tested within
locomotor and object-control subtests
• Scoring: based on focal points listed for
each pattern
• Comment: criterion-based scores compared
with norm-referenced standards
Sport Skills Program Guides
• Purpose: to assist in the assessment and
instruction of sport skills for people with
disabilities (aged 8 and beyond)
• Description: task-analyzed assessments
available for 29 sports
• Scoring: focal points checked off as
athletes demonstrate correct techniques
• Comment: used by Special Olympics;
strong authentically but no validity or
reliability reported
Brockport Physical Fitness Test
• Purpose: to assess the health-related fitness of
young people (aged 10-17) with certain disabilities
• Description: typically 4 to 6 test items selected
from 27 possibilities based on a personalized
approach
• Scoring: test scores compared with criterionreferenced standards based on gender, age, and in
some cases disability
• Comment: closely related to Fitnessgram and
supported by computer software (Fitness
Challenge)
Activitygram
• Purpose: to record, analyze, and save student
physical activity data and produce reports based
on the data
• Description: computer program prompts students
to recall previous day’s physical activity in 30minute time blocks
• Scoring: total number of minutes of at least
moderate level of activity for previous 3 days
• Comment: good utility for students with disabilities
(but they may need help recalling or entering data)
Program Evaluation
• Increasingly important to demonstrate that an
instructional program is good, not merely claim
it is good.
• Requires that program goals be clearly articulated.
• Program goal should include a criterion (e.g., 90%
of all students will engage in at least 30 minutes of
moderate-level physical activity at least 4 days per
week).
• Student data are aggregated to evaluate the
program goal.