Module 1 Analysis
Teachers have the responsibility of ensuring that learners achieve academic milestones and objectives that pertain to various and specific educational levels. Assessments are a way of determining whether the teaching-learning process has been effective or not, depending on the results. Various forms of assessments could be used to evaluate the level at which learners have mastered content, including formative, summative, norm-referenced, and confirmative (Vlachou, 2018). Each of these types is dependent on the aspect that teachers are keen on evaluating, as well as the curriculum provisions and requirements. MAP assessments are most of the widely used approach as it enhances students ‘learning to learn’ skills, considering that they are viewed as partners in the academic process (NWEA, 2015). Apart from using MAP assessments, teachers may also use guided reading groups to ensure that they stay on track. Teachers who combine guided reading groups and MAP assessments are in a better position for improving learners’ outcomes. My district uses the NWEA Measure of Academic Progress (MAP) Assessment. According to the Northwest Evaluation Association MAP is the most innovative and trusted form of assessment that can be applied for evaluating reading, math, and science and language usage in K-12. In the same way, MAP provides teachers with actionable and accurate evidence that is in turn to design instruction that meets individual students’ learning needs no matter their deviation from their academic capabilities (NWEA, 2015). MAP is heralded for its ability to connect instructional content providers, thus allowing for more flexibility in curriculum choices for teachers.
Purpose
The purpose of the action research is to establish why teachers who combine MAP assessments and guided reading groups are in a better position for improving learner outcomes. I had an opportunity to compare Teacher A’s and Teacher B’s classes, in particular, the language arts portion. The learners in Teacher A’s class reported 121.6% of projected growth met on the Language Arts portion of the MAP, while those in Teacher B’s class reported 59.3 %. The fact that the learners in both classes study under a similar environment made me question what Teacher A is doing differently so that it could be applied across the board. I realized that she is using MAP assessments as well as a guided reading group, while Teacher B was not. I, therefore, decided to investigate the aspects that are envisioned in this form of assessment that enhance the achievement of curriculum objectives.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Problem Statement
Student assessment is a significant issue in the academic sphere, considering that it determines whether the teaching and learning process has been effective or not. Student performance becomes critical feedback for establishing how well learners are meeting specific learning objectives. While assessing learners is of uttermost importance, it continues to be a challenge for most teachers who are not aware of the best approach to evaluating their students (Burkhardt & Schoenfeld, 2018). The reason why this is a challenge is that various types of assessments are available and there is no way of knowing which will favor individual differences. The most common forms are formative and summative, but still, there are gaps in grading, as the assessments are viewed as lacking in transparency and flexibility. In this case, there is a need to establish best practices for ensuring that assessments factor in students’ learning needs as well as expectations outlined in the curriculum.
Research Questions
The action plan seeks to answer the following questions: What aspects of MAP Assessments contribute to the achievement of learner objectives? Are small guided reading groups effective in enhancing positive behaviors in the classroom?
Module 2 Analysis
Literature Review
Formative assessment is one of the practical strategies for supporting the teaching and the learning process. This form of assessment is heralded for its ability to guide the learning process as well as improve students’ outcomes. According to Schildkamp et al. (2020), this form of assessment has shown so much potential that it is one of the policy pillars that is capable of improving educational outcomes. However, if this form of assessment is to yield results, there is a need to understand its dynamics that are aligned with various theoretical perspectives. Schildkamp et al. (2020) indicate that there are two approaches to this form of assessment which are assessment for learning and data-based decision-making. Klingbeil et al. (2018) establishe that there is a need for educators to identify students who may need additional support in a bid to improve their overall performance. Klingbeil et al. (2018) advocate for MAP assessment since it enhances the capacities of teachers to predict the level of risk that tests that are aligned with Common Core State Standards present. This assertion is critical, considering that educators are interested in establishing the proficiency of achievement tests in a bid to determine the students who need remedial support. MAP assessment, a subset of norm-referenced assessment is a practical approach in identify students who need individualized attention since it aligns with Common Core Standards. Kilingbeil et al. (2018) note that MAP assessments which are computer-driven interim tests with 40 to 50 items are designed to be used as progress monitoring and universal screening tool. This aspect means that MAP assessments provide teachers with crucial feedback so that they are in a position to use instructional strategies that align with students learning needs. The two approaches are complementary with their elements being used by teachers to improve the classroom experience. Assessment for learning, which relies on either individual students or an entire classroom, focuses more on the quality of the learning process as opposed to outcomes. On the other hand, the data-based decision-making approach relies on the available information to improve student achievement and learning outcomes. Schildkamp et al. (2020) note that this approach could be used to address gaps between current and desired student achievement levels, after identifying the possible causes of discrepancies. In this case, 5 the formative assessment focuses on gathering evidence regarding student learning which is then used to guide all academic processes. MAP assessments are considered as one of the most reliable approaches to student evaluation, meaning that teachers are in a position to gauge student’s academic abilities. Klingbeil et al. (2018) indicate that NWEA affirms that the internal reliability for MAP assessments ranges from .94 to .99 in math and .93 to .94 for reading and across all grades. These ranges are indicative that MAP assessments are the most accurate measures of students’ academic competencies. Teachers who opt for this form of assessment are in a better position to identify their students’ weaknesses and strengths and from here adopt strategies to improve their outcomes (Klingbeil et al., 2018). The results of this study which was conducted in a large Wisconsin suburban district indicate that MAP assessment is an effective approach for correctly identifying students who require additional help.
Features of Improved Practice in MAP Assessment
The second article under review is “Toward a framework for classifying teachers’ use of assessment data” by Elizabeth Farley-Ripple and others. The article establishes that MAP is associated with improved student achievement in various subjects including Mathematics. However, if students are to enjoy the potential that this assessment offers, teachers must change their practice so that it aligns with learning objectives. Farley-Ripple et al. (2019) used both qualitative and quantitative data from educators across 20 schools and 5 districts to evaluate the utility of MAP assessments. The authors concluded that MAP assessment is a useful framework that helps teachers to capture their actions and practices as they relate to the teaching-learning process. In this case, classroom practice ought to be informative, in that it allows teachers to elicit, interpret, and use evidence on student achievement to improve instructional methods. In this case, teachers are required to use tests to gather evidence of learning and from here adjust instructions as well as provide feedback to students to improve outcomes. MAP assessments are crucial in evaluating the extent to which learners have mastered the content that is associated with their academic level. The fact that students have no say regarding the areas that the test will focus on means that they have to collaborate with their peers and teachers to ensure that they are adequately prepared. According to Farley-Ripple et al. (2017), MAP assessment is a practical way of evaluating students since it is a self-regulated approach that aligns with students’ learning abilities. Students who have mastered the content may be subjected to questions that are hard and technical while those with learning disabilities will have easier ones. This aspect of the MAP assessment means that students are more likely to post higher scores since it factors in their learning needs and abilities. Teachers have a responsibility of recommending difficulty levels in MAP tests, considering that they understand their academic threshold.
Guided Reading Groups as Predictors for Success
The third article in the review is “Increased frequency and planning: A more effective approach to guided reading in Grade 2” by Chase Young. Guided reading groups are an effective approach for ensuring that learners become successful readers who are capable of synthesizing written information. However for students to achieve success, there is a need for instructions that focus on decoding skills, word recognition, and phonemic awareness (Young, 2019). Moreover, the instructions that guide the process must advocate the need for students to focus on the spelling, meaning, writing, and vocabularies in the text they are reading. Teachers who align with these components that are related to effective reading are more likely to produce students who have a lessened probability of failing. According to Young (2017), teachers have a responsibility of knowing the learners who are more likely to fail in reading and from here, determine a practical approach to help them. The author insists on an approach that is comprehensive, explicit, supportive, intensive, and that aligns with small-group formats. Guided reading groups have the capacity of improving students’ performance in a variety of tests especially if they are aligned with learning objectives. If these reading groups are to improve students learning abilities, teachers must adopt a balanced literacy approach. Young (2017) notes that this approach emphasizes the need to read-aloud, use authentic literature, lead a discussion as well as work in small groups. However, teachers need to understand that learners’ who are struggling would require more comprehensive and explicit instruction that goes beyond the regular classroom. Small-group instruction is heralded as being an effective and practical strategy for dealing with slow and struggling students (Young, 2017). The incorporation of various strategies makes guided reading groups a framework for meeting students' literacy needs and, in turn, their learning goals.
Relating the Action Research with the Literature Review
The literature review focuses on MAP assessment which is an evaluation tool that was developed by the Northwest Evaluation Association. This form of assessment which is computer adaptive is very practical since they allow for tests that match with varied students learning abilities. In the case of the study, it is evident that teachers who use MAP assessments have a greater likelihood of enhancing students’ performance as compared to those that do not. The reason for this claim is the fact that these forms of norm-referenced assessments measure students’ academic growth for a long time. Moreover, they have a provision that allows teachers to use other data appoints to enhance actionable and detailed information on students' unique learning paths. In this case, a teacher who combines MAP assessment with guided reading groups brings out the best in students.
Module 3 Analysis
Research Methodology/Design
The study aims at establishing why teachers who combine MAP assessments and guided reading groups have a higher likelihood of producing students who excel in tests. In this case, the study focused on teachers and students in a bid to understand their views regarding MAP assessments and guided reading groups. In particular, I focused more on two teachers, one of who combines MAP assessment with guided reading while the other only uses MAP assessment. This result indicates that, although their students are evaluated the same, guided reading groups enhance learners’ outcomes when combined with MAP assessment. The study was more of a descriptive undertaking focused on previous surveys and records to affirm or refute the research question. More so, the study aligned with a correlational comparison of teachers A and B’s student performance in the MAP assessment. However, it is important to note that I used results from 2019, considering that COVID-19 interfered with the academic calendar. The correlational design helped me to examine if MAP test scores improve students’ performance when combined with guided reading groups.
Data Collection
This study used quantitative data from the school database to establish the students’ performance history on MAP tests. In particular, the researcher focused on how teachers A and B students have been performing to determine if MAP tests and guided study groups influence performance or not. In this case, the MAP test scores and guided study groups were independent variables while students’ performance levels were the dependent variables. Apart from analyzing the database, the researcher examined past surveys on 10 teachers who used MAP assessments. 5 teachers combined MAP with guided reading groups while 5 used MAP assessments in isolation. This survey was very important as provided crucial insights that will contribute to establishing the extent to which a combination of MAP assessments guided reading groups to improve performance levels in K-12. More so, it helped in understanding the reasons for combining MAP with guided reading groups as well the reservations on the part of the teachers who do not combine. This feedback helped me to establish the gap in the integration of guided reading groups and MAP assessments well as strategies to enhance the integration, in a bid to improve students’ outcomes. The other data source that I used were past survey involving 20 students that was conducted by another teacher in a bid to identify learners’ views on guided reading groups. The students were required to fill a form by stating their goals in every subject and how they intend to achieve those goals. They were required required to fill the form before taking the assessment and submit it along with first test.The satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the use or failure to use MAP tests and guided study groups helped me to establish if there are gaps that future research needs to address.
Data Analysis
Data analysis is an important aspect of the study as it shows trends and themes that relate to MAP assessment which is a tool for eliciting better performance in students. The researchers used three different data collection methods which include the school’s database, past surveys and interviews. The review of the school database was important as it provided quantitative data regarding students’ performance in different classes in the institution. In the same way, it allowed for the comparison of students whose teachers integrated MAP assessment and guided reading groups. From the assessment, I conclude that the learners in Teacher A’s class reported 121.6% of projected growth met on the Language Arts portion of the MAP, while those in Teacher B’s class reported 59.3 %. The reason for this disparity despite the students learning under similar conditions has to do with the form of assessment their teachers use. Teacher A incorporates the MAP assessment driving instruction for guided reading practice to increase student reading abilities and scores on test.. According to January et al. (2015), MAP assessment which is computer adaptive allows for the adjustment of difficulty level to ensure that every student takes a test that matches their academic ability. A failure to use this form of assessment means that students will take a similar test that only favors top performers, that aspect that lowers the average score. The review led to the conclusion that there is a need to review the current policy on assessment to ensure that it is flexible enough to allow for individual students’ learning abilities. The other data collection that I used in the study to inform the action plan are past surveys that involved 10 teachers drawn from different classes in the school. Initially, the study was focused on two classes headed by teachers A and B which had shown significant differences, despite having similar learning conditions. However, the researcher felt that there was a need to come up with an objective conclusion that allows for the generalization of results. The teachers were required to answer several questions revolving around their preferred form of assessments as well as their attitude towards them. There was a specific question where they were supposed to indicate whether they combined MAP assessment with guided reading groups or not and why. The data that was collected using a survey has helped in answering the question ‘What aspects of MAP assessments contribute to the achievement of learner objectives?’ 4 out of the 10 teachers indicated that they had combined MAP assessment with guided reading groups to achieve a balance of performance between high and low performing students. They also said that MAP tests were their preferred form of assessment, considering that they were flexible enough to factor in individual students’ learning capacities. On the other hand, 6 teachers indicated that they did not combine MAP assessments with guided reading groups, considering that the school did not have a standardized approach. However, when asked if they would consider guided reading groups assessment, they answered that if it had the potential to improve students’ performance they would be willing to use it. The feedback from the survey provides crucial insights regarding the need for a standardized approach to assessment. According to Dos & Savas (2015), school administrators have the responsibility of clarifying to educators the approaches that they need to adopt in the learning and teaching process and ensure their implementation. The administrators ought to recommend evidence-based approaches that have been shown to improve learner outcomes in other schools. The students whose teachers combined MAP with reading groups had high scores considering that the tests were aligned with their learning abilities. The other data source that contributes to this analysis is resppooonses obtained from 20 students drawn from different classes. The reason for including the students was to understand their satisfaction levels with guided reading groups aimed at improving their MAP test scores. The researcher requested them to indicate the name of their class and their grade so that I would cross-reference with the results from the school’s database. They were also required to indicate their views with the assessment tool that they use in terms of its difficulty levels. 12 students belonged to classes that combined MAP assessment with guided reading groups while teachers for the 8 did not use the reading groups. The students whose teachers combined MAP with reading groups had high scores considering that the tests were aligned with their learning abilities. On the other hand, 6 out of the 8 students whose teachers did not combine MAP with reading groups had an average of 40.7% met score. When asked why their score was low, they indicated that the tests use technical language that is hard to understand. The students further indicated that in as much they knew most of the concepts it was hard to understand what exactly was required of them. This feedback is crucial as it establishes that guided reading groups are crucial in promoting individual learners’ abilities.
Module 4 Analysis
Future Action Plan
The data collection was an opportunity to test out the thesis that a combination of MAP assessment and guided reading groups improves students’ performance. The study was based on prior findings that compared teachers A and B in terms of their usage of the reading groups to enhance performance in MAP assessment. I established that Teacher A’s class had a 121.6% of projected growth met in the Language Arts portion of the MAP, while Teacher B’s students had 59.3 % in the same test. This difference was too high, considering that the students from both classes learn in a similar environment. The difference forced me to question what is it that is causing this variation despite there being clear guidelines that are to be followed in the teaching-learning process. I concluded that Teacher A combines MAP tests with guided reading groups while Teacher B does not. The first source of data was the school database where I retrieved results from 2019, considering that COVID-19 restrictions interfered with the school calendar. This source was crucial since it helped in ascertaining the differences in performance in the two classes under investigation. From the database, I concluded that combining MAP assessment with guided reading groups improves students’ performance significantly. According to Kuhfeld et al. (2019), this approach aligns with students learning capabilities, meaning that it is a practical tool for designing tests. Apart from reviewing the database, I reviewed data from past school-wide surveys of teachers who combined MAP tests with guided reading groups and those who used MAP tests only. The reason why I included information for teachers who only used MAP was to have an objective conclusion regarding the effectiveness of combining MAP tests with guided reading groups. An analysis of the survey findings would help to compare different approaches to guided reading groups and from here determine the aspects that would contribute to better performance. Lastly, I reviewed past interviews with students drawn from different grades to understand their views regarding the interventions that their teachers adapt. In particular, I wanted to know if they are in favor of guided reading groups to establish existing gaps in this aspect of the teaching-learning process. Vlachou (2018) notes that students are at the center of the academic discourse not only as consumers of instruction but also as decision-makers regarding the teaching-learning process. Their feedback allowed me to conclude that they prefer an approach that aligns with their learning needs as well as capacities.
Potential Actions for Resolving Underperformance
Teachers have a responsibility of using practical and effective approaches to enhance students’ performance. In particular, they are supposed to analyze their students and from here design instructional approaches that match students learning needs and abilities. Assessment is a critical tool in the teaching-learning process as it is a form of feedback that helps educators to establish if they have achieved their goals. In this case, there is a need to use evidence-based assessment frameworks such as MAP tests which is a subset of norm-referenced evaluation. According to Klingbeil et al. (2018), MAP assessment is effective since it is based on a continuum of skills from low to high, meaning that it considers the needs of all students. The data has indicated that despite the approach to assessment is practical, it is not enough to guarantee higher performance. A failure to combine MAP assessment with guided reading groups use it means that the school does not have a standard approach to learning since teachers have autonomy in this aspect. Going forward, the school needs to review its policy on assessment and interventions to ensure that there is a uniformity in the process. If need be, the stakeholders should use a hybridized assessment method that includes the best aspects from MAP tests and guided reading groups to pave the way for improved performance.
Force Field Analysis
The table captures crucial elements of the study revolving around the effectiveness of MAP assessment and guided reading groups in the classroom. This goal is advised by the finding that teachers who use this approach in the teaching-learning process have a higher likelihood of achieving students’ outcomes. More so, action's main focus is to determine the specific aspects of MAP assessment that make it a practical and effective approach. From the study, it is evident that the reason why educators prefer MAP assessments is the fact that it is flexible enough to cater for individual students’ learning needs. Moreover, it is easy to use, considering that it is computer-driven, meaning that the teacher can spend the extra time to handle other aspects of the teaching-learning process. However, the action plan is prone to various barriers associated with the usage of MAP assessment. The main barrier is that most schools have not adopted best practices that would enhance the effectiveness of MAP tests, meaning that teachers determine the course that learning should take. The other barrier to the action plan is limited research studies regarding guided reading groups, meaning that stakeholders lack authoritative and credible reference points for decision-making.
Potential Evaluation Data Sources for Future Action Plan
There is a need to evaluate the action plan to determine whether it will be an effective framework for achieving the desired change. This plan will not only be used to provide recommendations to the issue of assessment but also evaluate the outcomes. In this case, it is imperative to ensure that it has the potential for evaluating the summative outcomes, once it is implemented. In particular, the action plan will endeavor to establish if the implementation of the recommendations improves student outcomes. In this way, the action plan will be the basis of determining if the teacher who combines MAP assessments with guided reading groups will have improved outcomes in a specified period. Test results will be used to analyze the impact of including this approach of assessment in the teaching-learning process.
Conclusion
The academic discourse requires the adoption of practical approaches that enhance students’ performance while aligning with students’ learning abilities. Assessment is one of the critical areas in education as it provides feedback against which to measure the successes or failures of the entire process. MAP assessment, a subset of norm-referenced assessment is one of the approaches that teachers could use to evaluate students. This action plan was focused on establishing the aspects of this approach which is heralded for factoring in individual students learning needs. The assessment that is computer-driven allows for the adjustment of difficulty in questions to enhance understanding. The study relied on data from a survey with 10 teachers, interviews and a review of the school database. The analysis of this data indicates that the classes that use MAP assessment in combination with guided reading groups are more likely to report higher performance. However, in as much as MAP tests are flexible and effective, teachers are yet to include practical interventions to improve their effectiveness. In this case, there is a need for school administrators to review evidence-based literature regarding the practicality of combining MAP tests with guided reading groups to improve learners’ outcomes.
References
Burkhardt, H., Schoenfeld, A. (2018). Assessment in the service of learning: challenges and opportunities. ZDM Mathematics Education, 50(6), 571–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0937-1 Dos, I., & Savas, A. C. (2015). Elementary school administrators and their roles in the context of effective schools. SAGE Open, 5(1), 19-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014567400 Farley-Ripple, E. N., Jennings, A. S., & Buttram, J. (2019). Toward a framework for classifying teachers’ use of assessment data. AERA Open, 5(4), 30-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419883571 January, S.-A. A., & Ardoin, S. P. (2015). Technical adequacy and acceptability of curriculum-based measurement and the Measures of Academic Progress. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 41(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508415579095 Klingbeil, D. A., Van Norman, E. R., Nelson, P. M., & Birr, C. (2018). Evaluating screening procedures across changes to the statewide achievement test. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 44(1), 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508417747390 Kuhfeld, M., Domina, T., & Hanselman, P. (2019). Validating the SEDA measures of district educational opportunities via a common assessment. AERA Open, 5(2), 37-56. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419858324 MAP Growth: Precisely measure student growth and performance. NWEA. https://www.nwea.org/map-growth/. NWEA. (2015). Measures of Academic Progress Interim Assessments for Grades K – 12. Northwest Evaluation Association. https://www.dekalbschoolsga.org/documents/test-scores/introduction-to-map-brochure.pdf Schildkamp, K., Kleij, F. M., Heitink, M. C., Kippers, W. B., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2020). Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice. International Journal of Educational Research, 103(5), 23-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101602 Vlachou, M. A. (2018) Classroom assessment practices in middle school science lessons: A study among Greek science teachers. Cogent Education, 5(1), 19-37. DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2018.1455633 Young, C. (2019). Increased frequency and planning: A more effective approach to guided reading in Grade 2. The Journal of Educational Research, 112(1), 121-130. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2018.1451814
