Assessment of Student Performance April 1997 Exhibit 5-1

A r c h i v e d I n f o r m a t i o n

Assessment of Students Performance April 1997

EXHIBIT 5-1

Factors Facilitating or Obstructing Assessment Reform:

State-Initiated Reforms

Factor	Serves as a Facilitator	Serves as a Barrier	Neutral effect (or not applicable)
Outside sources of information	Arizona Kentucky Maryland Oregon Vermont		New York
Technical soundness of assessment (actual or perceived)	Maryland New York^*	Arizona Oregon⁺	Kentucky Vermont (in both cases there are perceived problems but outweighed by perceptions of utility)
Perceptions of fairness (to students and schools) of assessment and consequences	New York Vermont	Arizona Kentucky Maryland Oregon
Coordination with associated reforms or assessments	Kentucky Maryland Vermont	Arizona^# Oregon	New York
Timeline of reform	New York	Arizona Oregon	Kentucky Maryland Vermont
Professional development	Kentucky Oregon Vermont		Arizona Maryland New York

^* New York's assessment is a pilot without much standardization; therefore it in many ways resembles a local reform effort.
⁺ Perceptions of poor technical quality have served as a barrier at the high school level, but not necessarily at the other sites within the district included in the study sample.
^#Arizona's performance assessment system is aligned with the state's Essential Skills. However, the inconsistency across years in the skills tapped by the assessments led to the accusation that the assessments were invalid and the subsequent derailing of the system.