The Implementation of National Educational Standards in Austria

1. The Implementation of National Educational Standards in Austria Michael Bruneforth BIFIE - Austrian Federal Institute for Education Research, Innovation and Development of the Austrian School System EURASIAN EDUCATIONAL DIALOGUE 17.-19. April, Yaroslavl

2. BIFIE - Austrian Federal Institute for Education Research, Innovation and Development of the Austrian School System • Areas of work • International Studies (PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS, TALIS) • Implementation of national education standards • Formative and summative Evaluation of standards • Central examination for upper secondary education preparing for tertiary education • National Education Reports

3. Spotlight on Austrian education • Very rich country (4th highest GDP per Capita in EU) • High expenditure per student (140% of EU Average) in primary and secondary education • Low student teacher ratio and class size • But PISA shock in 2003 and 2009: • Very low PISA results in reading (470, similar to Russia 459), no EU country scores less • Strong relation between education outcomes and family background

4. Changing in paradigm in educational governance • Since more than a decade there is a change in governance of schools and education in German speaking countries from input oriented control to evidence based output oriented governance and extension of school autonomy • In Austria at the centre is shift towards competence oriented teaching based on the definition of nationwide compulsory education standards and a mechanism of formative and summative evaluation

5. Legal Basis and Conditions • From 2004: pilot phase with selected pilot schools • 2008: alteration of the law of teaching in schools to allow for introduction of educational standards • 2009: educational standards become compulsory for German, Math and English • 2009 (grade 8) and 2010 (grade 4): baseline-tests in samples of about 10.000 students each • From 2012 onwards yearly assessment of national standards (one subject per year)

6. Annex of the legal regulation • Competency Models and descriptors are formulated as Can-Do-Statements • Competency Models and descriptors are legally established • Educational Standards can be interpreted as mandatory and agreed upon social objectives of instruction • Educational Standards are derived from national curricula and clearly define learning outcome.

7. Areas covered • German (language of instruction) – grades 4 & 8 • Listening & Speaking • Reading • Writing texts • Spelling/Grammar Math – grades 4 & 8 4 content dimensions 4 process dimensions • English, grade 8 • Listening • Reading • Speaking • Writing English Assessment: Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEF)

8. Competencies are … • „fashionable term with a vague meaning“ (Weinert 2001) • „cognitive prerequisites to coping with a specific range of situations“ (Klieme, Hartig & Rauch, 2008) • „cognitive abilities and skills available to/acquired by individuals that enable them to solve specific problems, as well as the related motivational, volitional and social readiness and skills to utilize the solutions successfully and responsibly in variable situations“ (Weinert, 2002) •  BIFIE use: subject (domain) specific competency models, focusing on cognitive skills and proficiencies

9. Competency Models • Models ofcompetencestructures • Dimensionsofcompetence: E.g. TIMSS, grade 8: 4 contentdomains (number, algebra, geometry, dataandchance); 3 cognitivedomains (knowing, applying, reasoning) • Models ofcompetencelevels • Describespecificskillsandproficienciesusuallyshownbyindividualslocatedatspecificpointsoftheabilitycontinuum • Usedtoprovide a criterion-referencedinterpretationofmeasurementresults

10. Competency Models • Models ofcompetencestructures • Models ofcompetencelevels • Development models • Models describingtheacquisitionofskillsandproficiencies • May belinkedtoneurological/psychologicaltheoriesofdevelopment • Only a fewexist • Wouldbegreattohave a theoreticalfoundationfortests in different grades! (IKM – BIST)

11. Examplemathematics, grade 8

12. M8 – Competency Model

13. M8 – CompetencyModel Complexity Competency (H3, I2, K2) Content Process • The 4x4 grid leads to 16 nodes, using complexity as a 3rd dimension = 48 nodes • Not very handy and the theoretical concept of complexity does not lend itself to assessment

14. Example: Competency Model M8 • P: „demonstrating, modelling “ C: „numbersandmeasures“ • Formulatedascan-do-statements: The studentsareableto • transformgivenarithmeticaldatainto (another) mathematicalrepresentation. In doing so, directuseofbasicskillsisnecessary • transformgivenarithmeticaldatainto (another) mathematicalrepresentation. In doing so, connectionstoothermathematicalcontents (terms, definitions, representations) oractivitieshavetobeestablished • makeandevaluatestatementsabouttheappropriatenessas well asweaknessesandstrengthsof different mathematicalrepresentations (models) ofarithmeticaldata P1/C1/K1 P1/C1/K2 P1/C1/K3

15. Educational Standards –The Austrian Version • Three areas of activities • Implementation of standards at school and capacity building for teacher: Support of teachers and school heads in implementation • Formative evaluation to support teachers diagnostic: On-line evaluation system to be used by teachers • Census to monitor and summative evaluation at system, sub-system, school and classroom level

16. Educational Standards –The Austrian Version • School-specific development of instruction • Mandatory educational standards • Census-survey of all students and schools • Feedback to all students, teachers, schools • Feedback moderation („Rückmeldemoderation“) • Stimulation of quality development and support by MoE • Strong linkage of monitoring and practical school and instructional development • Strengthening of schools, school management and regional quality development

17. Main functions of standards according to the legal regulation • Output orientation: Sustainable output orientation in planning and implementation of instruction • Promotion („Förderfunktion“): Diagnosis and specific individual remediation and challenge • Evaluation: reliable information about the output of instruction, schools and education system

18. Implementation of Standards • Supporting materials for instruction • Praxishandbücher • Themenhefte • Aufgabenbeispiele, Interaktive Beispiele • Best-Practice-Beispiele • Integration with teacher training institutions • In-service teacher training (partially mandatory) • Pre-Service teacher trainin • Research and development work by members of teacher training institutions

19. Diagnosis tool for Informal Monitoring of Competencies • Teacher administered on-line system • Grade 3 and 7, one year before Assessment • All Areas of standards • Only teachers themselves have access to results

20. Assessment of Educational Standards • Legal assessment cycle: three (school) years • In each cycle, the whole target population has to be assessed in all prescribed competency subdomains • Grade 4: German, Mathematics • Grade 8: German, Mathematics, English • Students, teachers, schools and regional education authorities must get feedback about the results (to be used for quality improvement)

21. Domain-orientated Test Design

22. Pilot testing: about 10% of population, up to 9000 Students • Main test: Census up to 83000 students • Speaking domain only with sample for system monitoring • 10% of census with external administration and items for next census to ensure linking over time • Example: Test session Mathematics Grade 4

23. This pictureshows about 1/10 of the test materials

24. Item Development • Items are developed to measure sub-competencies or domains, eg. Content = numbers and units and process = demonstrating • Dimension „complexity“ is not used as such, since it can‘t be measured empirically • We have 16 nodes, upon which an item should fall. We strive for unidimensional items, i.e. items that can be classified as belonging to one specific node only

25. Item Development • Items are developed to measure sub-competencies or domains, eg. Content = numbers and units and process = demonstrating • Dimension „complexity“ is not used as such, since it can‘t be measured empirically • We have 16 nodes, upon which an item should fall. We strive for unidimensional items, i.e. items that can be classified as belonging to one specific node only

26. Item Development

27. Item Development • Test blueprint specified the items to be developed: • Mathematical node • Item format: Multiple Choice, Constructed response, … • Estimated difficulty of item • Further requirements: • adequat for age group, • no biased towards gender, race, religion, also taking into account rural/urban differences. • does not require other knowledge than maths contents. • Items should be uni-dimensional

28. Validation • In order to secure validity of the test items, they were … • written by school and university teachers • reviewed by teachers (peer review and outsider review) • trialled on a sample of grade 8 students – each item was answered by at least 200 students • item properties were reviewed by a team of psychometricians and school teachers • items with less than desirable or surprising properties were retired and not used in the main test

29. Test Design • Multiple matrix sampling • Two-step approach for the test design • Allocation of „empty“ blocks to forms that satify several global prerequisites for the design: • positional and contextual balance, item security (S90 vs. S10), longitudinal link (BL and BIST-UE 2015) • Allocation of items to blocks that satisfy several local prerequisites: • Balanced difficulty, format, representative for the competence construct, dependency (enemy items), test motivation • Test information, especially along cutoff-scores

30. Scaling • UsingRasch model • Allowsto express difficultiesofitemsandstudentsability on onecommonscale • Allowstomatchtestcyclesover time • Allowsforcomplextest design

31. Standard Setting • Standard settinggoal: meaningfullydescribedlevels • criterion-referenced • Phases: 4 levels in Austria in most domains 0: standards not reached 1: partially reached standards 2: reached standards 3: exceeded standards Easy to understand for „laymen“

32. Proficiency Level Descriptions M8 3 – standardsexceeded Studentspossess fundamental knowledgeandskills in all partsofthemathematicscurriculumandadvancedknowledgestructures, whichexceedtherequirementsoflevel 2, specificallymorepronouncedabilitiesofabstractionandhigherproficiency in combiningpartsofknowledge, methodsorrules. Theyareabletoapplytheseindependently in novelsituations in a flexible way. 2 – standards reached Students posessfundamental knowledge and skills in all parts of the mathematics curriculum and can use these in a flexible way. They are able to find and apply problem solving strategies, to describe and reason an approach. They are able to handle verbal, graphical and formal representations of mathematical facts in a flexible way and can apply these appropriately. Theay are able to extract relevant information from a differently represented facts (e.g. texts, data material, graphics) and can interpret them in the respective context. They are able to relate their mathematical knowledge and can check, evaluate and/or reason mathematical statements. 1 – standardspartiallyreached Studentspossess fundamental knowledgeandskills in all partsofthemathematicscurriculumandcanmasterreproductivetasksandcarry out routineprocedures.

33. Standard Setting • „ A standard setting method is a mechanism for helping panelists translate their intentions to the score scale.“ (Reckase, 2006) • Goal: Match predetermined descriptors of competency levels to an empiric scale defined by test items • Determinecutscoresbetweenlevelsofcompetence • Bifie invited a groupofstakeholderstosetthecutscores: teachers(loweranduppersecondary), teachersofdidacticsofmath; representativesofparentsassociations; representativesoftheMoE; representativesofchamberofcommerce; bifie staff • Methodused: Item descriptormatchingmethod

34. (Modified) Item descriptormatchingmethod Item-descriptor matches Difficult Item Level 3 Level 3 Level 2 Level 2 Level 1 Level 1 Difficulty-ordered items Easy Item Ordered Item Booklet Cut Score 2 Cut Score 1 Freunberger & Yanagida, in press.

35. Standard Setting • Standard setting is more about finding a societal consensus than finding a constant • The goal should be clear before test development etc starts

36. Feedback and ReportsInformation aboutresultsof Educational Standards SCHOOL LEVEL School report (for school management) per school, online 4600 schools about 3200 primary and 1400 secondary I School and instruction development 10.000 classesabout 6000 primary and 4000 secondary I Feedback to teachers per teacher, per class/group; online Feedback to students per participant, online 170.000 students about 85.000 in grade 4 and 8 each

37. Feedback and ReportsInformation aboutresultsof Educational Standards SYSTEM LEVEL National report (Minister for Education) aggregated MoE System development 9 provinces Province reports (pres & vice-) for each procince and grade Supervisory reports (federal superv. authorities for PS & LS/AS) aggregated on fed. state and supervised-school type 9 provincesPrimary/4 Lower sec/8, academic sec/8 School development 99 school districts 15 Cities – 84 districts Supervisory reports (district superv. authorities for PS and LS) per district and grade

38. School report: overview of content • Information aboutschoolresults: • compared toAUT • compared tothedefinedgoals(in theregulation) • compared tootherschoolswithsimilarbasicconditions („fair comparison“) • Areas ofconflict: • Educational Standards applyto all students – andthereforeto all schools • Conditionsofschoolsvarywidely

39. The school takes centre stage Feedback

40. Feedback – example (school report)„Competency levels“

41. Feedback – example (teacher feedback)

42. Feedback – example (school report)

43. Support system for schools

44. Outlook • Bringing IKM (grade(s) before BIST) and BIST assessments closer together. Using items in both assessments could lead towards a better understanding of learning • Backwash from doing the assessments towards research in the areas of item development, standard setting, feedback … through evaluation of results • Outcomes of the assessments should not only allow us to give feedback to schools, teachers and students but also to improve the competence models we use for the assessment • Prepare for computer based testing • Open databases for external researchers and improve system level monitoring

45. Thank you for your attention! MichaeI Bruneforth m.bruneforth@bifie.at Bundesinstitut BIFIE Salzburg | Zentrum für Bildungsmonitoring & Bildungsstandards www.bifie.at