I am curious as to how other special ed teachers feel about nationwide norming on standardized tests. I am strongly feeling a need for regional - or even state norms. There are such big differences in academic achievement between different areas of the country that it seems to me that nationwide norms are nearly useless. Any thoughts on this subject?
Re: Standardized test norming
remember that standardized testing is used to measure the district system not individual performance. You can get individualized performance level everyday in your classroom.
Re: Standardized test norming
In Massachusetts, the MCAS does indeed measure individual and district performaance; in fact there is a move to require teachers to take a math test themselves if 30% of their students fail the math MCAS and this has passed the Supreme Judicial Court in MA.
Re: Let me clarify
Let me clarify my comments.
I was referring to individualized standardized testing, such as the Woodcock Johnson, used for diagnostic purposes. When we compare the scores a student receives on the WJ-III for instance to his classroom performance, we usually find that the WJ says he should be doing average work but in the classroom he is not able to. Therefore, it seems as though the WJ is scoring the students too high.
Our staff feels this problem is due to norming the test nationwide. North Dakota, where I teach, ranks quite high on tests such as the CTBS. Our academic standards are high and students who move from here to many other states find themselves ahead of their new classmates. Different areas of the country have different standards and different hindrances to educational performance. A test that is normed nation-wide does not take any of these differences into account.
When determining eligibility we do place great emphasis on actual classroom performance. We are required to also do standardized testing, but thankfully are free to use the results as we feel are appropriate. Those scores would be much more useful and helpful to have norming that applied to our area.
Re: Let me clarify
I think the difference is not only state to state but also district to district. We were in ND for 5 1/2 years and when we moved to Illinois our kids were 2 years behind the district they are in. In other districts in the state from talking to other parents they would of been on target. All 3 took the CTBS while we were in ND. My daughter who was in the gifted program there did very well. The two boys with LD still scored well compared to other LD and even some non-LD students. Here they take the MAT7. My daughter did well although not as well as she did on the CTBS and did not qualify for the gifted program here. The boys did horribly on the MAT7. So maybe another part of the equation is which test is used and when during the school year it is given. I think using just 1 test is not the answer.
I think you mean criterion-referenced tests; Pres. Bush is pushing all states to dev. their own(curriculum based) high-stakes testing; my state, Massachusetts, has some of the toughest criterion ref. testing called the MCAS; 10th graders(ALL) have to pass to get a hs diploma. I don’t think school districts should be allowed to set lower standards for rural districts than for well-to-do suburban districts. If you mean a norm-referenced test like the WJ III, I assume it was normed on a sample that represented all abilities and a range geographically.