Educational Achievement Standards: NAGB's Approach Yields Misleading Interpretations. Report to Congressional Requesters.

Alert:

Limited Availability of Full-Text Documents. Click here for more information, or here to request the return of a PDF online.

Help

Tutorial

Help |

Tutorial

Help |

Tutorial

Help With This Page

Back to Search Results Help Permalink Share this record

More Info:
Help 0 items in My Clipboard | Add record to My Clipboard

Record Details - ED359268

Title: Educational Achievement Standards: NAGB's Approach Yields Misleading Interpretations. Report to Congressional Requesters.

Full-Text Availability Options:

ERIC Full Text (2964K)

Related Items: Show Related Items

Click on any of the links below to perform a new search
Title:	Educational Achievement Standards: NAGB's Approach Yields Misleading Interpretations. Report to Congressional Requesters.
Authors:	N/A
Descriptors:	Academic Achievement; Academic Standards; Educational Policy; Elementary Secondary Education; Evaluation Methods; Evaluators; Mathematics Achievement; Measurement Techniques; National Surveys; Research Problems; Scores; Standard Setting (Scoring); Student Evaluation; Test Interpretation; Test Results; Test Validity
Source:	N/A
More Info: Help Peer Reviewed:
Publisher:	U.S. General Accounting Office, P.O. Box 6015, Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015 (first copy free; $2 for additional copies; orders for 100 or more to one address are discounted 25 percent).
Publication Date:	1993-06-00
Pages:	120
Pub Types:	Reports - Evaluative
Abstract:	In September 1991, the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) announced standards for basic, proficient, and advanced achievement in mathematics and reported that few American students had reached these standards. Expert reviewers noted technical problems with the NAGB approach and questioned its results. In this report, the NAGB standard-setting approach and ability to provide policy guidance to the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) are examined. The NAEP test-score standards set in 1990 were evaluated by examining the adequacy of item-judgment procedures and by studying whether the evidence supported NAGB's interpretation of the NAEP scores selected for each level. The investigation found that the standard-setting approach was procedurally flawed, and that the interpretations of the resulting NAEP scores were of doubtful validity. The NAGB improved its procedures substantially in 1992, but the issue of the validity of interpretation remains. The report concludes that the NAGB approach is unsuited for the NAEP. Alternative approaches are reviewed, but it is apparent that their use will be difficult as the NAEP is currently designed. Specific recommendations are given to help implement these alternative approaches. Six tables and three figures illustrate the discussion. Appendixes include comments from the U.S. Department of Education and from the NAGB, a summary description of the NAEP and other supplementary materials. A four-part bibliography is provided. Contains 44 references. (SLD)
Abstractor:	N/A
Reference Count:	N/A

Note:	N/A
Identifiers:	General Accounting Office; National Assessment Governing Board; National Assessment of Educational Progress
Record Type:	Non-Journal
Level:	1 - Available on microfiche
Institutions:	General Accounting Office, Washington, DC. Program Evaluation and Methodology Div.
Sponsors:	N/A
ISBN:	N/A
ISSN:	N/A
Audiences:	Policymakers
Languages:	English
Education Level:	Elementary Secondary Education

Back to Search Results