The Impact of Vertical Scaling Decisions on Growth Interpretations

Most growth models implicitly assume that test scores have been vertically scaled. What may not be widely appreciated are the different choices that must be made when creating a vertical score scale. In this paper empirical patterns of growth in student achievement are compared as a function of different approaches to creating a vertical scale. Longitudinal item‐level data from a standardized reading test are analyzed for two cohorts of students between Grades 3 and 6 and Grades 4 and 7 for the entire state of Colorado from 2003 to 2006. Eight different vertical scales were established on the basis of choices made for three key variables: Item Response Theory modeling approach, linking approach, and ability estimation approach. It is shown that interpretations of empirical growth patterns appear to depend upon the extent to which a vertical scale has been effectively “stretched” or “compressed” by the psychometric decisions made to establish it. While all of the vertical scales considered show patterns of decelerating growth across grade levels, there is little evidence of scale shrinkage.     

Reading Recovery and Evidence‐based Practice: A response to Reynolds and Wheldall (2007)

Reynolds and Wheldall reviewed research relating to Reading Recovery (RR) and concluded that “RR has provided an excellent model in demonstrating how to plan, promote, and implement an intervention across an educational system and how to design a professional development programme” (2007 Reynolds, M. and Wheldall, K. 2007. Reading Recovery 20 years down the track: Looking forward, looking back. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 54: 199–223. [Taylor & Francis Online] [Google Scholar], p. 218). They balanced this praise with concerns about the research base for RR, its effectiveness for the lowest‐performing first‐grade students, long‐term change in literacy achievement for RR students and RR’s cost‐effectiveness. This response aims to address these concerns by discussing four central issues of evidence‐based practice from their review: evidence of effectiveness; sustained gains; programme evaluation data from a response to intervention perspective; and cost‐effectiveness versus cost‐benefit.     

Learning outcomes in professional contexts in higher education

With the policy of developing a, transparent and competitive European higher education sector, learning outcomes (LOs) are attributed a foundation stone role in policy and curriculum development. A premise for their implementation is that they bear fundamental similarities across national, institutional or professional/disciplinary contexts. In contrast, detractors suggest that LOs cannot communicate precisely across programmes or national boundaries. With this as a backdrop, this article analyses how LOs are used to communicate what students are to learn and the extent to which their use drives standardisation. The analysis is based on a case study of how LOs are formulated in study programme documents in two professional education programmes in Norway and the UK. The findings indicate that LOs can be considered to drive standardisation through the same presentation using bullet points. The study also finds that LOs are framed in different ways in the two countries and within the different study programmes and in a web of interconnected documents. This ‘local’ structural use of LOs disrupts their ‘foundation stone’ role as a vehicle for standardisation and weakens the establishment of sameness across institutions and nations.     

Curriculum Leadership Roles of Chairpersons in Continuously Planning Departments

Forty-four chairpersons of departments judged by academic vice presidents at randomly selected institutions to be engaged in especially effective curriculum planning were interviewed about their roles. The interviews suggest 7 leadership roles used in the curriculum development process. The roles varied by institutional type, department size, and personal choice. This article reviews the conceptual framework that guided the study, describes the interview population and sample, illustrates the leadership roles with quotations, relates the roles to curriculum planning and organizational contexts, and develops implications for researchers.