As per course,
EQAO has been the standard by which Schools measure their achievement progress in Ontario since 1996. It is used to construct both School Improvement Goals and Board Improvement plans and often drives the focus of professional development in Boards and Schools.
In 2020, and again in 2021 there were no EQAO scores to guide, specifically Elementary schools. EQAO has now shifted all of its assessments to digital, online environments. Other large scale data assessments may or have been cancelled as well. Given the absence of large scale standardized assessment data, schools and Boards must now find new ways to measure student achievement.
Sandra Herbst, a Manitoba educator and author, explains that for assessment and evaluation to be reliable and valid, three types of assessment must be used:
-Products
-Observations
-Conversations
And these must be collected over time. She terms this 'triangulated evidence' (Herbst & Davies,2016).
Reflect on the changing realities of EQAO. In what ways might this affect the reliability and narrative the data tells? Consider the reading by Caillou and Wesley-Esquimaux and Street Data chapters and discuss what types of evidence may be collected in your school and how it will be aggregated in order to gain a clear picture of school achievement and needs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As per discussion, Reflecting on my practicum for principal qualifications parts 1 and 2, it is very much a point of discussion. After reading Caillou and Wesley-Esquimax, Chapter 2 of "A Wise Practices Approach"(2010), it seems that the measurements need to account for the ways of learning that recognize first nations perspectives and ways of knwoing. This strongly reinforces what I am trying to accomplish with my practicum, on a very loosely worded level, I am trying to ensure that the students who enter our program (with their varying degrees of exposure to English language), are not only heard when they have concerns with regards to their learning, but presented with learning opportunities conducive to an engaging language learning environment of which is not solely localized in their English Literature Studies or English U. Prep classes while still holding culturaal relevance. Although the OSSLT may not impact a student's grade directly, it becomes a question of the data's relevance and reliability of students who participate.
Having much time spent reading "Street-Data: " (2021), in particular the focus in this discussion is of Chapter 3-4, "Flip the Dashboard" and "Digging into the Levels of Data". From "Flip the Dasboard" chapter, the representation of student work should not be quantatative as it reinforces product based assessment, This is problematic for the simple reason that it reinforces the ideas of knowledge based criteria catering to the assessor and not the student assessed. For accurate representation of student success, qualitative data is collected within the OSSLT but many not feel complete or honest due to the context in which it is collected and the context missing from the data if observed from outside of the population of collected data this sentiment is echoed with the term use, systemic oppresion with Chapter 4 "Digging into the Levels of Data".
Finally, considering my experiences, the readings I believe that after seeing the EQAO's OSSLT process up close many times and participating in it as much as I have, the data that is being accessed through its use is important, however with regards to reliability though it is a question begs one to discuss the use of the information. The OSSLT closely resembles a number of other assessments across Canada, one I have had personal experience with is the literacy test that BC still utilizes (which does account for a small percecntage of a student's grade, 12% if I recall correctly) and its predecessor(s); another would be the testing in New Brunswick that the EQAO remesbles more closely now, it takes place online as well and contains sections of testing very comparable to the OSSLT. Two areas of noticable difference with regards to New Brunswick to Ontario is that the ELPA (English Language Proficiency Test) is administered at Grade Levels 9, 11, and 12. Furthermore there is department of early childhood education that collects, oversees and distributes the data/results. I digress, the reason the question is varying in its application is because on one hand if it is used to measure students' individual and actual capabilities it will always be unreliable unless interperted by the classroom teacher which is generally how BC's testing was (maybe still is). Without the EQAO having a distinct impact on a student's marks directly, it is something that some may not try as hard to demonstrate their best work on which makes it very much a test that is made to identify pass/fails rather than actually access students particular abilities in varying degrees of application which is a core difference between classroom work and this test. I understand this difference as something that can be characterized through the understanding of the Culminating Task that counts towards the 10% of the student's grade and the exam (in most university prepatory courses) that accounts for 20% in order to finally determine impromptu abilities with potential scenarios. With that being said, the data defines a student has pass or fail after the literacy test is taken, numerated and broken down for closer examination on a larger scale but yet localized to the school itself which in many cases could be further examined by the school's departmental faculty/staff. On the otherhand, with the amount of testing done in New Brunswick, it could be interesting to compare the language testing data for reliability there compared to that of the data collected from the OSSLT, and ultimately it becomes a question of "would more assessment lead to more reliability as believed with the triangulation of data?" Even with that being said there is still the question of the type of data collected conversation, observation and product. I would conclude then that the data produced by the completion of the EQAO is important and reliable in regards to being understood as a voicing tool for the whole population, and a measurement tool for educators to align focus with regards to at-risk or underserviced populations if utilized correctly, but to say it is a direct reflection of each specific student's abilities, no, it is not reliable enough to predict the perceivable grade of a student as the tasks are limiting to student standarization.
No comments:
Post a Comment