1. education
2. english as a second language

*
1
*Equates to teacher testing (Darling-Hammond,
2004; Horn, 2003; Wakefield, 2003*)
*BUT:
What about unintended consequences?
(Bennett, McWhorter & Kuykendall, 2006;
Jones, Jones & Hargrove, 2003; Kohn, 2000;
Popham, 2000; Perreault, 2000) address
potentially deleterious effects of standardized
testing
*
Check out Wakefield’s work on screening teacher candidates
with high stakes testing. See references.
2
*
* Common responses to accountability pressure include
raising test scores (Darling-Hammond, 2004; Horn,
2003; Wakefield, 2003; Wall, 2001; Wall, 2008)
* What does it mean for teacher candidates from diverse
backgrounds when standardized test scores increase?
* Wakefield (2003) chronicles serious ramifications for at-
risk teacher candidates, particularly those from low SES
and/or underrepresented minority populations when
teacher education programs comply with state and
federal accountability pressure by raising licensure exam
requirements
3
*
* “Race, Gender and Teacher Testing: How Informative a Tool is Teacher
Licensure Testing?” – AERA, 2010
* Dan Goldhaber and Michael Hansen, U- Washington
* “Student achievement is impacted by the race/ethnicity
match between teachers and their students, with black
students significantly benefitting from being matched with a
black teacher. As a consequence of these matching effects,
the uniform application of licensure standards is likely to
have differential impacts on the achievement of White and
minority students.” (p. 220).
4
*
*“There is a lack of information about teacher
licensure test performance for specific populations
of teachers” (p. 219).
*“Minority teachers (Black teachers in particular)
tend to perform substantially less well on licensure
tests than do White teachers; thus these tests have
a disparate impact on who is eligible to teach. This
means that licensure policies, to at least some
extent, conflict with the recruitment of minorities
in teaching, a long standing policy goal, particularly
in districts with large percentages of minority
students.” (p. 219).
5
*
*“… state education leaders need to take the
impact that these tests have on minority
candidates seriously and offer evidence
supporting a valid relationship between
teacher testing and student outcomes”. (p.
219).
6
*
*“Testing policies may also influence the
learning of minority students; the
argument for recruiting a diverse teacher
workforce rests, in part, on positive
gains in student achievement due to
matching students with teachers of a
similar racial and ethnic background.”
(Dee, 2004; 2005; as quoted in Goldhaber
& Hansen, 2010).
7
*
*“Enforcing strict cutoffs has the potential
to both adversely affect minority student
outcomes and decrease workforce
diversity.” (p. 220).
8
*
* MoPTA assessment not yet tested for reliability or predictive
validity with the job of teaching.
* Based on literature, data, research: Several concerns about
impact on teacher diversity in Missouri
* Will national accreditation body accept MoGEA?
* AACTE 2015 conversations with Jim Cibulka indicate it will not
meet CAEP evidence standard without:
* Technical manual
* CAEP endorsement as valid and reliable measurement of quality
assessment is uncertain
* Impact on protected classes? (Civil Rights concern)
9
*
* ACT by Income and/or Ethnicity, (Fairtest.org)
*< $18,000/year- 17.8
*$18k-$24k – 18.6
*$24k-$30k – 19.4
*$30k-$36k – 19.9
*$36k-$42k – 20.4
*$42k-$50k – 20.8
*$50k-$60k – 21.3
*$60k-$80k – 21.8
*$80k-$100k – 22.4
*> $100k/year – 23.3
* By ethnicity:
* African-American, 16.8
* Mexican-American, 18.2
* Puerto-Rican/Hispanic, 18.8
* Native American, 18.6
* Caucasian-American, 21.7
* Asian-American, 21.6
* Other, 19.2
* Multiracial, 20.9
The Relationships between
Socio-economic
Status and Ethnicity
11
12
13
High Correlations accounting for
much of the variance in test
scores
14
*
15
*
16
*What was the impact on teacher
candidate diversity of C-BASE cut scores
at one educator preparation institution in
Missouri?
*College Basic Academic Subject Examination
*
17
*Ho (Null):
There is no difference between White and
African Americans’ pass rates using their maximum
scores from the English C-BASE subtest at two SEM’s
below the cut score of 235
*Ha (Alternative):
There is a difference between White
and African Americans’ passage rates using their
maximum scores from the English C-BASE subtest at two
SEM’s below the cut score of 235
*
18
*The highest possible cut score that shows NO
statistically significant difference between
White and African American students
*Not statistically significant difference = Green
*Statistically significant difference = Red
*
19
*We will use an alpha (possibility that this
difference happened by chance) of 5% (1 in 20)
*Used a z score to compare proportions
*Ho: p1-p2=.05
*Ha: p1-p2>.05
*
20
*
21
*
C-BASE
2 SEM’s
below 235
1 SEM
below 235
235
1 SEM
above 235
2 SEM
above 235
Composite
223
229
235
241
247
English
229
232
235
238
241
Math
229
232
235
238
241
Science
229
232
235
238
241
Social
Studies
229
232
235
238
241
22
*
*Results:
*Some tests had an unbiased pass score
*Some needed small adjustments to be
unbiased
*Some would have been biased regardless of
cut score –as much as 7 SEM’s below…or more
*What about the MoGEA?
23