Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages
Assessment Project Evaluation Overview Now you will complete this section of the white paper. You will justify your topic selection and its relevance to the school district’s goal of improving its assessment results.
Instructions Write a 3–5 page paper in which you:
● Revise the Assessment Project, printed below (The revision of the previous assignment is not included in the page count for this assignment).
● Evaluate your district’s assessment strategy for the area(s) that are relevant to your research and make any recommendations. Consider the following points:
○ Does your district’s current assessment strategy meet the needs of certain populations of students?
○ What can be done to improve assessment results, especially within specific populations?
○ Are there any concerns about your district’s assessment strategy that you have based on your research?
○ How do your research and recommendations fit into the border picture of improvement?
● Ascertain three new advances in computer and web technologies that would benefit K–12 assessment that are related to your topic. Highlight one of these new innovations that might be practical for the district to implement in the near future. Provide a rationale for your response.
● Propose the strategic manner in which you would conduct a training needs analysis for teachers related to your topic.
● Provide at least three additional reliable, relevant, peer-reviewed references published within the last two years.
2. This course requires the use of Strayer Writing Standards. For assistance and information, please refer to the Strayer Writing Standards link in the left-hand menu of your course. The specific course learning outcome associated with this assignment is:
● Create recommendations for an assessment strategy, new technologies, and a training needs analysis.
MUST FOLLOW RUBRIC:
Evaluate your district’s
assessment strategy for the area(s) that are relevant to your
research and make any
0 (0.00%) Did not submit or incompletely evaluated your district’s assessment strategy for the area(s) that are relevant to your research and/or did not make any recommendations, or made incomplete recommendations.
40.5 (15.00%) Partially evaluated your district’s assessment strategy for the area(s) that are relevant to your research and/or made partial recommendations .
45.9 (17.00%) Satisfactorily evaluated your district’s assessment strategy for the area(s) that are relevant to your research and made recommendations.
54 (20.00%) Thoroughly evaluated your district’s assessment strategy for the area(s) that are relevant to your research and made recommendations.
Ascertain three new advances in
computer and web technologies that would benefit K–12 assessment that are related to
your topic. Highlight one of
these new innovations that
might be practical for the district to implement in the
near future. Provide a
rationale for your response.
0 (0.00%) Did not submit or incompletely ascertained three new advances in computer and web technologies that would benefit K–12 assessment that are related to your topic. Did not submit or incompletely highlighted one of these new innovations that might be practical for the district to implement in the near future. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for your response.
Partially ascertained three new advances in computer and web technologies that would benefit K–12 assessment that are related to your topic. Partially highlighted one of these new innovations that might be practical for the district to implement in the near future. Partially provided a rationale for your response.
Satisfactorily ascertained three new advances in computer and web technologies that would benefit K–12 assessment that are related to your topic. Satisfactorily highlighted one of these new innovations that might be practical for the district to implement in the near future. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your response.
67.5 (25.00%) Thoroughly ascertained three new advances in computer and web technologies that would benefit K–12 assessment that are related to your topic. Thoroughly highlighted one of these new innovations that might be practical for the district to implement in the near future. Thoroughly provided a rationale for your response.
Propose the strategic manner
in which you would conduct a training needs
0 (0.00%) Did not submit or incompletely
67.5 (25.00%) Thoroughly proposed the
analysis for teachers related
to your topic.
proposed the strategic manner in which you would conduct a training needs analysis for teachers related to your topic.
Partially proposed the strategic manner in which you would conduct a training needs analysis for teachers related to your topic.
Satisfactorily proposed the strategic manner in which you would conduct a training needs analysis for teachers related to your topic.
strategic manner in which you would conduct a training needs analysis for teachers related to your topic.
Three references. Points:
0 (0.00%) No references provided.
20.25 (7.50%) Does not meet the required number of references; some or all references were poor-quality choices.
22.95 (8.50%) Meets number of required references; all references were high-quality choices.
27 (10.00%) Exceeds number of required references; all references were high-quality choices.
grammar, and formatting.
0 (0.00%) Serious and persistent errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting.
Partially free of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting.
11.475 (4.25%) Mostly free of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting.
13.5 (5.00%) Error free or almost error free grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting.
Clarity and coherence of
0 (0.00%) Information is confusing to the reader and fails to include reasons and evidence that logically support ideas.
20.25 (7.50%) Information is partially clear, with minimal reasons and evidence that logically support ideas.
22.95 (8.50%) Information is mostly clear and generally supported with reasons and evidence that logically support ideas.
27 (10.00%) Information is provided in a clear, coherent, and consistent manner with reasons and evidence that logically support ideas.
Standardized and aptitude tests intend to measure the general knowledge and intelligence of
students. Standardized assessments and aptitude tests have played a primary role in providing
opportunities for students. The opportunities result in success in vital economic sectors and
competitive job markets. Despite that, culture and gender could result in assessment inaccuracy.
The tests are formed based on the majority group’s values and knowledge, forming bias against
minority groups. Also, for female students, the tests have often barred their access to progress.
This paper will assess cultural and gender bias in standardized and aptitude tests in 12th grade
students of North Carolina school of science and mathematics, and present recommendations.
Aptitude and standardized tests are presumed impartial and fair academic performance measures.
BAZEMORE-JAMES, Shinaprayoon & Martin (2016) postulate that the tests have become the
most substantial educational program quality measures. However, performance gaps are evident
between non-minority groups and ethnic minority groups when standardized tests are performed,
despite efforts to minimize. Most grade 12 aptitude and standardized tests are normed from
majority group scores and male gender in a general perspective (BAZEMORE-JAMES,
Shinaprayoon & Martin, 2016). Therefore, it is inappropriate for individuals from other minority
cultures to be given the same assessments since they do not reflect those groups. When the
gender or cultural background of students being tested is inadequately represented, the
assessment’s reliability and validity are questionable, mostly when used on the said persons.
Such groups are being denied access to career and advanced education opportunities because the
test does not reflect their ability and knowledge (Morgan, 2016). This necessitates the expansion
of current test practices to be inclusive and more uniform. For instance, creativity assessments
are normed for specific groups and produce uniform scores.
Kruse (2016) established a bias in the interpretation and meaning of words included in
assessments and tests. Gender and culture affect how students interpret and understand the
wording of test questions. The comprehension of questions can be impacted by communication
patterns, values, epistemologies, beliefs, learning and teaching styles, and students’ societies and
cultures’ experiences (Morgan, 2016). More so, the test question can influence the item’s
interpretation, primarily when written in a language different from the test-takers (Kruse, 2016).
Therefore, it is integral to regard non-native English speakers’ language proficiency before
assessing them in the native language or English.
Men and women have unequal grounds concerning higher education. Such includes the scores
received by male and female students in the North Carolina school of science and mathematics
on standardized tests for admission into universities and colleges. As noted by Saygin (2020),
male students are associated with significantly higher test scores than females in SATs. In
retrospect, this could develop a pool of unequal opportunities for both genders when seeking
scholarships and admission to higher learning institutions. Female students have consistently
scored below males in math and science tests (Saygin, 2020). The tests underpredict female
performance because while female students score lower on the standardized and aptitude tests,
they obtain higher grades than boys in all subjects for the same course in their first year in
university or college.
Key Related Political, Legal, and Current Issues
Proper standardized and aptitude tests are among the current concerns under debate to advance
education policies. Studies by Eble & Hu (2018) agree that policymakers and most elected
officials use standardized tests to influence local schools’ operations. The tests have been used to
promote policy goals, impose sanctions, and bestow rewards, broadening educational
opportunity gaps for students from different cultural backgrounds and female and male students,
narrowing the curriculum, deprofessionalize education instructors, and centralized education
decision making. In this sense, policymakers use standardized test prodigy as policy strategies
(Eble & Hu, 2018). For instance, policymakers and elected officials face pressure to improve
schools using existing tests for neither adequately validated nor intended objectives (Saygin,
2020). As a result, the tests designed to provide valid performance measures are used to make
decisions about students only at the aggregate level, leading to unfair consequences to individual
Policymakers often depend on available tests as it is an action opportunity. Reilly, Neumann &
Andrews (2019) agree that though it is an impacted test, it yields better than harm results.
Therefore, due to the correlation of policy and testing, it is critical to provide standards for
proper tests. For reliability of the tests, all assessments must consistently measure student
performance across tasks. The test scores meaning should not differ across settings, individuals,
or groups as a fairness measure (Morgan, 2016). The scores must reflect and draw meaning in
the measured domains for validity measure (Reilly, Neumann & Andrews, 2019). With testing
being utilized as a political strategy, individuals running political seats call for more substantial
test-based accountability, support testing for given aims, and take stands on different students’
type of tests. The politicians’ focus on SAT has provided a strong support vein among citizens.
Standardized tests in schools have been used to enact legal proceedings. As part of public
schooling, standardized achievements have shaped several federal and state laws, regulations,
and policies to enhance school performance. In particular, (Scheiber, 2016) standardized test
scores are used as a practical measure, and educators and schools are held accountable for
student performance and educational results (Saygin, 2020)s. The scores are also used to
establish achievement gaps among several student groups such as students with learning or
physical disabilities, from low economic status households, not proficient in English, and color
(Eble & Hu, 2018). The achievement gaps highlight and exposure could be crucial for greater
public awareness in education programs and policies.
Teachers and schools append the curriculum to reflect the tests. In this context, teachers prepare
students for the test types and format with constructed responses (Scheiber, 2016). Taking a test
having an unfamiliar structure is difficult for students. Thus, teachers are inclined to help
students prepare for what will be in the test rather than the required comprehensive skill set
(BAZEMORE-JAMES, Shinaprayoon & Martin, 2016). Like in the North Carolina school of
science and mathematics, teachers spend more time on mathematics and less on other subjects.
As a result, instead of students being educated, they are prepared to do tests.
Specific Needs of Students in The School
Special needs and other students need instructional support and assistance to progress in their
assessments and classes (Scheiber, 2016). Education teachers help students understand presented
information and assignments, and modify work to support their needs. This could be provided in
a separate or general education classroom. Such students often join regular classes for select
subject areas (Reilly, Neumann & Andrews, 2019). Teachers collect information on students
requiring special needs and device strategies and initiatives to succeed in their education and
formal assessments (Eble & Hu, 2018). On the other hand, students need consultation services
from general education and special education teachers (Ok, Rao, Bryant & McDougall, 2017).
The instructors provide behavioral intervention and assessment adaptation, which facilitates
students with specific needs to benefit.
Students with a disability require appropriate modifications, adaptations, and accommodations to
the classroom activities for their success. According to Kruse (2016), such must be
individualized based on personal interests, needs, and learning styles (BAZEMORE-JAMES,
Shinaprayoon & Martin, 2016). This includes ensuring the student accesses the general
curriculum to meet education standards applying to all students. Hence, it requires adapting the
assessment to the content.
Applications to K-12 Assessment
Creativity assessment is a preferred creative accomplishment predictor for students. It leverages
intelligence and benefits minority groups and gender than standardized tests (Morgan, 2016).
This can facilitate student assessment based on their cognitive potential rather than the ability to
adopt the majority’s culture, especially when the assessments reduce verbal aspects. It may
increase fairness in other learning institutions such as colleges and universities (Reilly, Neumann
& Andrews, 2019). Besides, alternative assessment models place the minority groups on the
same ground as the majority in ways standardized tests are incapable of doing. As a result, it will
minimize the gender and cultural disparity and distortions emerging from the given
Reforms on standardized tests must ensure skills and content learned is aligned in the assessment
(Saygin, 2020). Therefore, local policymakers should formulate assessments that present useful
questions and information that triggers students’ critical thinking capacity. This will enable
students to gain valuable experience (Eble & Hu, 2018). In this way, leaders can be decisive in
providing appropriate support and resources to local schools.
The local district can balance the need for high-quality assessment and instructional time. It will
ensure that student students exhaust the required time to undertake standardized assessments.
Worth noting, assessment of the tests would ensure each test serves a critical and distinct role in
facilitating students’ progressive learning (Reilly, Neumann & Andrews, 2019). Fairness should
be exercised when using assessment to measure student learning, mainly for minority groups and
students with disabilities. Uniform and equal assessments can help leaders and educational
instructors identify additional interventions and support for student success.
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!
Tired of getting an average grade in all your school assignments, projects, essays, and homework? Try us today for all your academic schoolwork needs. We are among the most trusted and recognized professional writing services in the market.
We provide unique, original and plagiarism-free high quality academic, homework, assignments and essay submissions for all our clients. At our company, we capitalize on producing A+ Grades for all our clients and also ensure that you have smooth academic progress in all your school term and semesters.
High-quality academic submissions, A 100% plagiarism-free submission, Meet even the most urgent deadlines, Provide our services to you at the most competitive rates in the market, Give you free revisions until you meet your desired grades and Provide you with 24/7 customer support service via calls or live chats.