the implementation of national educational standards in austria, 18/05/2013 © bifie salzburg the...

The Implementation of National Educational Standards in Austria, 18/05/2013 © BIFIE Salzburg

The Implementation of National Educational Standards in Austria

Michael BruneforthBIFIE - Austrian Federal Institute for Education Research, Innovation and Development of the Austrian School System

EURASIAN EDUCATIONAL DIALOGUE17.-19. April, Yaroslavl


BIFIE - Austrian Federal Institute for Education Research, Innovation and Development of the Austrian School System

Areas of work International Studies (PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS, TALIS)

Implementation of national education standards

Formative and summative Evaluation of standards

Central examination for upper secondary education preparing for tertiary education

National Education Reports


Spotlight on Austrian education

Very rich country (4th highest GDP per Capita in EU)

High expenditure per student (140% of EU Average) in primary and secondary education

Low student teacher ratio and class size

But PISA shock in 2003 and 2009: Very low PISA results in reading (470, similar to Russia

459), no EU country scores less

Strong relation between education outcomes and family background


Changing in paradigm in educational governance

Since more than a decade there is a change in governance of schools and education in German speaking countries from input oriented control to evidence based output oriented governance and extension of school autonomy

In Austria at the centre is shift towards competence oriented teaching based on the definition of nationwide compulsory education standards and a mechanism of formative and summative evaluation


Legal Basis and Conditions

From 2004: pilot phase with selected pilot schools

2008: alteration of the law of teaching in schools to allow for introduction of educational standards

2009: educational standards become compulsory for German, Math and English

2009 (grade 8) and 2010 (grade 4): baseline-tests in samples of about 10.000 students each

From 2012 onwards yearly assessment of national standards (one subject per year)


Annex of the legal regulation

Competency Models and descriptors are formulated as Can-Do-Statements

Competency Models and descriptors are legally established

Educational Standards can be interpreted as mandatory and agreed upon social objectives of instruction

Educational Standards are derived from national curricula and clearly define learning outcome.


Areas coveredGerman (language of instruction) – grades 4 & 8- Listening & Speaking- Reading - Writing texts- Spelling/Grammar

Math – grades 4 & 84 content dimensions4 process dimensions

English, grade 8- Listening- Reading- Speaking- Writing

English Assessment:Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEF)


Competencies are …

„fashionable term with a vague meaning“ (Weinert 2001)

„cognitive prerequisites to coping with a specific range of situations“ (Klieme, Hartig & Rauch, 2008)

„cognitive abilities and skills available to/acquired by individuals that enable them to solve specific problems, as well as the related motivational, volitional and social readiness and skills to utilize the solutions successfully and responsibly in variable situations“ (Weinert, 2002)

BIFIE use: subject (domain) specific competency models, focusing on cognitive skills and proficiencies


Competency Models

Models of competence structures

Dimensions of competence: E.g. TIMSS, grade 8: 4 content domains (number, algebra, geometry, data and chance); 3 cognitive domains (knowing, applying, reasoning)

Models of competence levels

Describe specific skills and proficiencies usually shown by individuals located at specific points of the ability continuum

Used to provide a criterion-referenced interpretation of measurement results


Competency Models

Models of competence structures

Models of competence levels

Development models

Models describing the acquisition of skills and proficiencies

May be linked to neurological/psychological theories of development

Only a few exist

Would be great to have a theoretical foundation for tests in different grades! (IKM – BIST)


EXAMPLEMATHEMATICS, GRADE 8


M8 – Competency Model

Process domains(Handlungsbereiche)

Content domains (Inhaltsbereiche)

Level of complexity(Komplexitätsbereiche)

demonstrating, modelling

numbers and units use of basic skills and knowledge

calculating, operating variable, functional dependency

build connections/connect

interpreting geometric figures and shapes

reflect, use knowledge of reflection

explaining, reasoning statistical representations, measures of central tendency and variance


M8 – Competency Model

The 4x4 grid leads to 16 nodes, using complexity as a 3rd dimension = 48 nodes

Not very handy and the theoretical concept of complexity does not lend itself to assessment

Content

Process

Complexity

Competency (H3, I2, K2)


Example: Competency Model M8

P: „demonstrating, modelling “ C: „numbers and measures“

Formulated as can-do-statements: The students are able to

transform given arithmetical data into (another) mathematical representation. In doing so, direct use of basic skills is necessary

transform given arithmetical data into (another) mathematical representation. In doing so, connections to other mathematical contents (terms, definitions, representations) or activities have to be established

make and evaluate statements about the appropriateness as well as weaknesses and strengths of different mathematical representations (models) of arithmetical data

P1/C1/K1

P1/C1/K2

P1/C1/K3


Educational Standards –The Austrian Version

Three areas of activities Implementation of standards at school and capacity

building for teacher: Support of teachers and school heads in implementation

Formative evaluation to support teachers diagnostic: On-line evaluation system to be used by teachers

Census to monitor and summative evaluation at system, sub-system, school and classroom level


Educational Standards –The Austrian Version

School-specific development of instruction Mandatory educational standards

Census-survey of all students and schools

Feedback to all students, teachers, schools

Feedback moderation („Rückmeldemoderation“)

Stimulation of quality development and support by MoE

Strong linkage of monitoring and practical school and instructional development

Strengthening of schools, school management and regional quality development


Main functions of standards according to the legal regulation

Output orientation: Sustainable output orientation in planning and implementation of instruction

Promotion („Förderfunktion“): Diagnosis and specific individual remediation and challenge

Evaluation: reliable information about the output of instruction, schools and education system


Implementation of Standards

Supporting materials for instruction Praxishandbücher

Themenhefte

Aufgabenbeispiele, Interaktive Beispiele

Best-Practice-Beispiele

Integration with teacher training institutions In-service teacher training (partially mandatory)

Pre-Service teacher trainin

Research and development work by members of teacher training institutions


Diagnosis tool for Informal Monitoring of Competencies

Teacher administered on-line system

Grade 3 and 7, one year before Assessment

All Areas of standards

Only teachers themselves have access to results


Assessment of Educational Standards

Legal assessment cycle: three (school) years

In each cycle, the whole target population has to be assessed in all prescribed competency subdomains Grade 4: German, Mathematics

Grade 8: German, Mathematics, English

Students, teachers, schools and regional education authorities must get feedback about the results (to be used for quality improvement)


Domain-orientated Test Design


Pilot testing: about 10% of population, up to 9000 Students

Main test: Census up to 83000 students Speaking domain only with sample for system

monitoring

10% of census with external administration and items for next census to ensure linking over time

Example: Test session Mathematics Grade 4


This pictureshows about 1/10 of the test materials


Item Development

Items are developed to measure sub-competencies or domains, eg. Content = numbers and units and process = demonstrating

Dimension „complexity“ is not used as such, since it can‘t be measured empirically

We have 16 nodes, upon which an item should fall. We strive for unidimensional items, i.e. items that can be classified as belonging to one specific node only


Item Development


Item Development

Test blueprint specified the items to be developed: Mathematical node

Item format: Multiple Choice, Constructed response, …

Estimated difficulty of item

Further requirements: adequat for age group,

no biased towards gender, race, religion, also taking into account rural/urban differences.

does not require other knowledge than maths contents.

Items should be uni-dimensional


Validation

In order to secure validity of the test items, they were … written by school and university teachers

reviewed by teachers (peer review and outsider review)

trialled on a sample of grade 8 students – each item was answered by at least 200 students

item properties were reviewed by a team of psychometricians and school teachers

items with less than desirable or surprising properties were retired and not used in the main test


Test Design

Multiple matrix sampling

Two-step approach for the test design Allocation of „empty“ blocks to forms that satify several

global prerequisites for the design:• positional and contextual balance, item security (S90

vs. S10), longitudinal link (BL and BIST-UE 2015)

Allocation of items to blocks that satisfy several local prerequisites:• Balanced difficulty, format, representative for the

competence construct, dependency (enemy items), test motivation

• Test information, especially along cutoff-scores


Scaling

Using Rasch model

Allows to express difficulties of items and students ability on one common scale

Allows to match test cycles over time

Allows for complex test design


Standard Setting

Standard setting goal: meaningfully described levels

criterion-referenced

Phases: Determination of number of levels

Labelling of levels (PLLs)

Description of levels (PLDs)

Establishing the cut scores between levels

4 levels in Austria in most domains0: standards not reached1: partially reached standards2: reached standards3: exceeded standards Easy to understand for „laymen“


Proficiency Level Descriptions M8

3 – standards exceededStudents possess fundamental knowledge and skills in all parts of the mathematics curriculum and advanced knowledge structures, which exceed the requirements of level 2, specifically more pronounced abilities of abstraction and higher proficiency in combining parts of knowledge, methods or rules. They are able to apply these independently in novel situations in a flexible way.2 – standards reachedStudents posess fundamental knowledge and skills in all parts of the mathematics curriculum and can use these in a flexible way. They are able to find and apply problem solving strategies, to describe and reason an approach. They are able to handle verbal, graphical and formal representations of mathematical facts in a flexible way and can apply these appropriately. Theay are able to extract relevant information from a differently represented facts (e.g. texts, data material, graphics) and can interpret them in the respective context. They are able to relate their mathematical knowledge and can check, evaluate and/or reason mathematical statements.

1 – standards partially reachedStudents possess fundamental knowledge and skills in all parts of the mathematics curriculum and can master reproductive tasks and carry out routine procedures.


Standard Setting

„ A standard setting method is a mechanism for helping panelists translate their intentions to the score scale.“ (Reckase, 2006)

Goal: Match predetermined descriptors of competency levels to an empiric scale defined by test items

Determine cut scores between levels of competence

Bifie invited a group of stakeholders to set the cut scores: teachers (lower and upper secondary), teachers of didactics of math; representatives of parents associations; representatives of the MoE; representatives of chamber of commerce; bifie staff

Method used: Item descriptor matching method


Ordered Item Booklet

Easy Item

Difficult Item

Level 2

Level 3

Level 1

Item-descriptor matches

Level 2

Level 3

Level 1

(Modified) Item descriptor matching method

Freunberger & Yanagida, in press.

Difficulty-ordered items

Cut Score 1

Cut Score 2


Standard Setting

Standard setting is more about finding a societal consensus than finding a constant

The goal should be clear before test development etc starts


Feedback and ReportsInformation about results of Educational Standards

SCHOOL LEVEL

School report (for school management) per school, online

Feedback to teachers per teacher, per class/group; online

170.000 studentsabout 85.000 in grade 4 and 8 each

10.000 classesabout 6000 primary and

4000 secondary I

School and instruction development

4600 schoolsabout 3200 primary and

1400 secondary I

Feedback to students per participant, online


Province reports (pres & vice-) for each procince and grade

SYSTEM LEVEL

99 school districts15 Cities – 84 districts

National report (Minister for Education) aggregated

9 provincesPrimary/4

Lower sec/8, academic sec/8

9 provinces

MoE

School development

System development

Supervisory reports (federal superv. authorities for PS & LS/AS) aggregated on fed. state and supervised-school type

Feedback and ReportsInformation about results of Educational Standards

Supervisory reports (district superv. authorities for PS and LS) per district and grade


School report: overview of content

Information about school results:

compared to AUT

compared to the defined goals (in the regulation)

compared to other schools with similar basic conditions („fair comparison“)

Areas of conflict:- Educational Standards apply to all students –

and therefore to all schools

- Conditions of schools vary widely


FEEDBACK

The school takes centre stage


Feedback – example (school report)„Competency levels“


Feedback – example (teacher feedback)


Feedback – example (school report)


Support system for schools

A SCHOOL

School feedback

Teacher feedback

School authorities

Feedback Moderation

Quality developmen

t- process supervision

IKM (informal

self evaluation)


OutlookBringing IKM (grade(s) before BIST) and BIST assessments closer together. Using items in both assessments could lead towards a better understanding of learning

Backwash from doing the assessments towards research in the areas of item development, standard setting, feedback … through evaluation of results

Outcomes of the assessments should not only allow us to give feedback to schools, teachers and students but also to improve the competence models we use for the assessment

Prepare for computer based testing

Open databases for external researchers and improve system level monitoring


Thank you for your attention!

MichaeI Bruneforth

[email protected]

Bundesinstitut BIFIESalzburg | Zentrum für Bildungsmonitoring & Bildungsstandardswww.bifie.at

mailto:[email protected]

the implementation of national educational standards in austria, 18/05/2013 © bifie salzburg the...

Documents

educational governance

bifie salzburg areas

bifie salzburg spotlight

bifie salzburg annex

bifie salzburg competencies

national curricula

bifie use

austrian education