Determining Informative Student Growth on the Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading

Yaacov Petscher, Ph.D.Director of ResearchFlorida Center for Reading Research

Common QuestionsHow much growth should occur?What score type should be used

for growth?Why are students’ PRS scores in

Grade 1 decreasing?What do the Reading

Comprehension and Word Analysis Ability scores really tell us?

Things to DiscussReview Goals and FAIR

Psychometrics Review of FAIR & Score Types

◦How they were derived◦2010-2011 changes to FAIR

Growth in FAIR subtestsComparison of Growth

Goals in Assessment – K2What do we want to maximize in

a screen?◦Correct classification or base rates

Focus on correct classification◦Cost = higher false positives/false

negativesFocus on predictive power

◦Cost = Lower sensitivity

Reliability of Broad ScreenIRT Precision Estimates for Kindergarten and Grade 1 Broad Screen Tasks by Time of AssessmentGrade Task AP 1 AP 2 AP 3

Kindergarten Letter Names 0.51* - -

Letter Sounds 0.87 0.86 -

Phonological Awareness - 0.86 0.87

Word Reading - - 0.86

Grade 1 Word Reading 0.86 0.86 0.86

*The Letter Sounds task was more reliable than Letter Names at AP 1; however, due to the restricted range for high risk, a policy decision was made to use the Letter Name task in order to better capture the floor of the distribution. Because the Broad Screen in G2 is a timed task, precision estimates are not reported; however, test-retest reliability was strong (.79-.84).

Predictive Validity of Broad Screen

K 1st 2nd K 1st 2nd K 1st 2ndAP1 AP2 AP3

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

NPPPPP

Goals of Assessment – 3-12What do we want to maximize?

◦Reliable estimate of student abilityComputer adaptive test (CAT)

◦Allows for individual test creation◦Limits form effects◦Difficult to teach to the test

Starting students in the CAT

FAIR-FCAT RelationshipFall Winter Spring

Grade RC Screen FSP RC Screen FSP RC Screen FSP3 0.72 0.71 0.74 0.72 0.75 0.734 0.69 0.74 0.73 0.74 0.74 0.745 0.70 0.75 0.73 0.76 0.73 0.766 0.73 0.74 0.72 0.74 0.72 0.747 0.71 0.72 0.69 0.72 0.69 0.728 0.71 0.76 0.71 0.76 0.71 0.769 0.69 0.73 0.67 0.73 0.67 0.73

10 0.69 0.75 0.67 0.74 0.66 0.74

FAIR K-2 Broad ScreenEach grade has different tasks

◦Kindergarten◦Grade 1◦Grade 2

Probability of Reading Success (PRS)◦What does this mean?◦How can it be used?

“The Probability of Reading Success (PRS) score predicts the student’s percent chance of being at or above grade level by the end of the year based on the performance for that assessment period (AP) and time of year. The 40th percentile on the SESAT (K) or SAT-10 (grade 1 and 2) is the cut point for grade level performance. The PRS can be used descriptively to compare class, school, or district level performance from one AP to the next. “

State Median PRS K-2

Grade AP 1 AP 2 AP3K 76 87 911 80 85 882 53 60 71

Analyzing Student ProgressMake descriptive comparisons

◦<85% PRS Was there a change in PRS?

Yes – YAY! Did they shift zones?

No – Look at TDI information and examine progress

◦>=85% PRS Did the student remain the “green zone”? Grade 1 question…

Previous Grade 1 PRSAP1 PRS AP2 PRS AP3 PRS0 .11 0 0.02 0 .011 .15 1 0.04 1 .022 .21 2 0.06 2 .033 .29 3 0.10 3 .064 .37 4 0.16 4 .125 .46 5 0.25 5 .206 .56 6 0.37 6 .337 .65 7 0.50 7 .498 .74 8 0.64 8 .659 .80 9 0.75 9 .7910 .86 10 0.85 10 .8811 .9012 .93

New Grade 1 PRSAP1 PRS AP2 PRS AP3 PRS0 0.11 0 0.01 0 .011 0.14 1 0.02 1 .022 0.20 2 0.03 2 .033 0.27 3 0.05 3 .064 0.36 4 0.09 4 .125 0.46 5 0.17 5 .206 0.56 6 0.28 6 .337 0.66 7 0.44 7 .498 0.75 8 0.61 8 .659 0.82 9 0.76 9 .7910 0.86 10 0.86 10 .88

RC Screen◦ Helps us identify students who may not be able

to meet the grade level literacy standards at the end of the year as assessed by the FCAT without additional targeted literacy instruction. 

Mazes◦ Helps us determine whether a student has more

fundamental problems in the area of text reading efficiency and low level reading comprehension. 

Word Analysis ◦ Helps us learn more about a student's

fundamental literacy skills--particularly those required to decode unfamiliar words and read accurately. 

Purpose of Each 3-12 Assessment

FAIR 3-12 Score TypesReading Comprehension - BS/PMT

FCAT Success Probability (FSP) Percentile Standard Score Lexile Ability Score and Ability Range FCAT Cluster Area Scores Ability Score (RCAS)

Maze - TDI Percentile Standard Score Adjusted Maze Score

Word Analysis - TDI Percentile Standard Score Ability Score (WAAS)

PercentilesRaw score transformation that

indicates the rank of the student compared to others of the same grade◦Does not denote mastery (criteron-

referencing) but relative performance

Standard ScoresStandardized scores are derived

from raw scores to compare one student’s performance on a test to the mean of all other students at that grade

Mean = 100, SD = 15, Range = 55-145

Ability ScoresSimilar to standard scores!

......but different!Mean = 500, SD = 100, Range =

200-800

Why we use Ability Scores

Tom Brady Raw Standard Percentile AbilityAP1 12 100 50th 500AP2 17 100 50th 550AP3 20 100 50th 600

Reading Comprehension Mazes Word Analysis

AP Score PM score AP Score PM score AP Score PM score

student lexile score

student lexile score

%ile & SS

RCAS

Percentilerank

Percentilerank

FSP

Adj. Maze

SS SS

WAAS

Why not FSP?FSP includes previous FCATDifferential calculation of FSPStudent may gain in FAIR

Reading but not change FSP

Gain Score AnalysesSimple difference scoresOnly students who were in all APsOnly within the testing windowOnly for consistent grade

students

Analyzing Student ProgressUnlike K-2 we have Ability Scores

◦Determine if score type is AP or PM scoreAP score

◦<85% FSP Was there a change in FSP?

◦>=85% FSP Did the student remain the “green zone”?

PM score◦Examine AS in light of state results◦Did ability score increase for the student?

◦

Changes to RCASNew passages and linking

◦Range of scores for RCAS & Lexile changingRCAS 2009-2010

◦200-800RCAS 2010-2011

◦150-1000Uncapped Lexile 2009-2010

◦220L – 1735LUncapped Lexile 2010-2011

◦225L – 2105L

Next StepsAnalyzing specific growth targetsIs there merit in knowing the gain

scores?Working with JRF to provide

guidelines to districts/schools