G2TT
来源类型Report
规范类型报告
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.7249/RRA1037-1
来源IDRR-A1037-1
Adapting Course Placement Processes in Response to COVID-19 Disruptions: Guidance for Schools and Districts
Jonathan Schweig; Andrew McEachin; Megan Kuhfeld; Louis T. Mariano; Melissa Kay Diliberti
发表日期2021-02-16
出版年2021
页码102
语种英语
结论

Consistent course placement decisions can be made using all three of the replacement strategies, although much depends on the district context

  • Regression-based replacement methods improve as the number of tested students increases; the districts with the least-consistent placement recommendations had fewer than 250 tested students.
  • Simple replacement strategies might result in high rates of misclassification for students who have significant changes in achievement or content mastery between testing periods.
  • Students whose actual scores are just above or just below the criterion for course recommendations are likely to end up with different recommendations if their replacement scores differ even slightly from their actual scores.

Assuming average school quality can be problematic for course placement decisions that are based on regression-based methods

  • Because school quality varies considerably, such an assumption can have the effect of systematically overestimating some students' future achievement and underestimating other students' future achievement.

There is evidence of differential method performance based on student race and ethnicity and school poverty

  • The simple replacement and multiple replacement methods do not seem to induce bias based on student demographics or school poverty, but the regression-based methods do.
  • The regression models that do not include school prior achievement systematically underestimate scores for white and Asian students and systematically overestimate scores for black and Hispanic students.
  • Regression-based methods tend to overestimate scores for students in high-poverty contexts and underestimate scores for their more advantaged peers.
摘要

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created an unprecedented set of obstacles for schools and exacerbated existing structural inequalities in public education. In spring 2020, as schools went to remote learning formats or closed completely, end-of-year assessment programs ground to a halt. As a result, schools began the 2020–2021 school year without student assessment data, which typically play a role in selecting students for specialized programming or placing students into courses. Although conceptual research has emerged to support school and district decisionmaking regarding assessment during the pandemic, there has been relatively little empirical research to help guide schools and school districts on handling the impacts of the pandemic on the availability and interpretability of assessment data.

,

To address this gap, the authors of this report provide empirical evidence to inform schools' and districts' approaches to course placement in the absence of end-of-year assessment data. The authors compare and contrast three potential strategies that use older assessment data to estimate missing test scores: simple replacement, regression-based replacement, and multiple replacement. The authors examine the ways in which the pandemic may have influenced the consistency of decisionmaking under these strategies and the extent to which these strategies work equally well for all students, regardless of student race and ethnicity or school poverty. They also discuss these strategies' implications for schools and districts.

目录
  • Chapter One

    Introduction

  • Chapter Two

    Study Background and Context

  • Chapter Three

    Study Approach

  • Chapter Four

    Results

  • Chapter Five

    Implications for Decisionmaking in the Absence of Large-Scale Test Scores

  • Appendix A

    Data Sources for This Report

  • Appendix B

    Analytic Methods

  • Appendix C

    Complete Results

主题Academic Achievement Gap ; Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) ; Educational Equity ; Educational Program Evaluation ; Test-Based Promotion
URLhttps://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1037-1.html
来源智库RAND Corporation (United States)
引用统计
资源类型智库出版物
条目标识符http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/524369
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
Jonathan Schweig,Andrew McEachin,Megan Kuhfeld,et al. Adapting Course Placement Processes in Response to COVID-19 Disruptions: Guidance for Schools and Districts. 2021.
条目包含的文件
文件名称/大小 资源类型 版本类型 开放类型 使用许可
RAND_RRA1037-1.pdf(535KB)智库出版物 限制开放CC BY-NC-SA浏览
x1641993047200.jpg.p(1KB)智库出版物 限制开放CC BY-NC-SA浏览
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[Jonathan Schweig]的文章
[Andrew McEachin]的文章
[Megan Kuhfeld]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[Jonathan Schweig]的文章
[Andrew McEachin]的文章
[Megan Kuhfeld]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[Jonathan Schweig]的文章
[Andrew McEachin]的文章
[Megan Kuhfeld]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享
文件名: RAND_RRA1037-1.pdf
格式: Adobe PDF
文件名: x1641993047200.jpg.pagespeed.ic.5SfS5s1rbp.jpg
格式: JPEG

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。