A Pragmatic Future for NAEP Containing Costs and Updating Technologies (2022) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 88-95
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 88... ...
4 NCES response to Q33: The "program support management" contract covers the follow ing activities: "Manages the NAEP program in alignment with Project Management (PM) best practices to ensure proper scheduling, quality control, risk management and communication across contractors and handoffs." The "support contract" category actually includes several different contracts over the years that have been combined for the historical analysis under
|
From page 89... ...
and cover the following activities: "Ensures coordination among Alliance contractors; maintains data for tracking program progress; and provides logistical support for complaints and substantive comments." 5 The planning portion of the item development contract is in this range (NCES, personal communication, March 15, 2022)
|
From page 90... ...
Although this panel is not constituted to conduct a thorough evaluation of the organizational structures that give rise to such costs for program management, planning, support, and oversight, it is clear that the challenge of NAEP's costs cannot be addressed by looking only at the activities that directly relate to developing, administering, and reporting on the assessments. RECOMMENDATION 10-1: The National Assessment Governing Board and the National Center for Education Statistics should commis sion an independent audit of the program management and decision making processes and costs in the NAEP program, with a charge and sufficient access to review the program's costs in detail.
|
From page 91... ...
This absence is particularly noteworthy given the role NAEP seeks to play as an exemplar for other assessment programs: those other assessment programs could benefit substantially from understanding the kinds of innovations NAEP has identified to explore and the lessons the program has learned from those explorations. And the absence is particularly striking in considering the task that faced this panel to provide advice on valuable innovations for NAEP to consider for the years ahead.
|
From page 93... ...
The work of this panel is to contribute to that exploration by providing analysis and recommendations for the next phase of NAEP. This chapter summarizes our recommendations: taken together, they chart an ambitious yet practical way for the National Center for Education Statistics and the National Assessment Governing Board to plan for NAEP's future.
|
From page 94... ...
Congress, the National Assessment Governing Board, and the National Center for Education Statistics should then consider the value of a modernized and continued long-term trend NAEP in comparison with other program priorities. If continued, long-term trend NAEP should be renamed to better distinguish it from the trend data provided by main NAEP.
|
From page 95... ...
The downside of not actively considering assessments for combined subjects is illustrated by the cost pressures that force some subjects to be assessed infrequently, such as writing, or to have been effectively eliminated, such as economics and geography. RECOMMENDATION 3-3: The National Assessment Governing Board should give high priority to consideration of integrating non mandated subjects that are currently assessed separately (such as sci ence and technology and engineering literacy)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.