Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Classroom Assessment in Mathematics pp 139–155Cite as

Validating and Vertically Equating Problem-Solving Measures

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: ICME-13 Monographs ((ICME13Mo))

Abstract

This paper examines the validation of a measure for eighth-grade students related to problem-solving. Prior work discussed validity evidence for the Problem-Solving Measure series, but it is uncertain whether linking items appropriately vertically equates the seventh- and eighth-grade measures. This research connects prior work to the development of linked measures with anchor items that assess problem solving within the frame of the Common Core in the United States. Results from Rasch modeling indicated that the items and overall measure functioned well, and all anchor items between assessments worked satisfactorily. Our conclusion is that performance on the eighth-grade measure can be linked with performance on the seventh-grade measure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 9–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boaler, J., & Staples, M. (2008). Creating mathematical future through an equitable teaching approach: The case of railside school. Teachers College Record, 110, 608–645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, T., & Fox, C. (2007). Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostic, J., & Matney, G. (2016). Leveraging modeling with mathematics-focused instruction to promote other standards for mathematical practice. Journal of Mathematics Education Leadership, 17(2), 21–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostic, J., Pape, S., & Jacobbe, T. (2016). Encouraging sixth-grade students’ problem-solving performance by teaching through problem solving. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 8(3), 30–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bostic, J., & Sondergeld, T. (2015a). Development of vertically equated problem-solving measures. In T. Bartell, K. Bieda, R. Putnam, K. Bradfield, & H. Dominguez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 395–398). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University. Retrieved from http://www.pmena.org/pmenaproceedings/PMENA%2037%202015%20Proceedings.pdf.

  • Bostic, J., & Sondergeld, T. (2015b). Measuring sixth-grade students’ problem-solving: Validating an instrument addressing the mathematics common core. School Science and Mathematics Journal, 115(6), 281–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bostic, J., Sondergeld, T., Folger, T., & Kruse, L. (2017). PSM7 and PSM8: Validating two problem-solving measures. Journal of Applied Measurement, 18(2), 151–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core standards for mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_Math%20Standards.pdf.

  • Commonwealth of Australia. (2009). Shape of the Australian curriculum: Mathematics. Retrieved from http://docs.acara.edu.au/resources/Australian_Curriculum_-_Maths.pdf.

  • De Ayala, R. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Embretson, S., & Reise, S. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, T., & Bostic, J. (2015). Using the PSM6 to adjust math instruction. School Science and Mathematics Journal, 115(6). Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ssm.12130/abstract.

  • Gleason, J., Livers, S., & Zelkowski, J. (2017). Mathematics Classroom Observation Protocol for Practices (MCOP2): A validation study. Investigations in Mathematics Learning. Advance online publication: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19477503.2017.1308697.

  • Kenyon, D. M., MacGregor, D., Ryu, J. R., Cho, B., & Louguit, M. (2006). Annual technical report for ACCESS for ELLs English language proficiency test, Series 100, 2004–2005 Administration. WIDA Consortium. Retrieved from https://www.wida.us/get.aspx?id=142.

  • Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesh, R., & Zawojewski, J. (2007). Problem-solving and modeling. In F. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 763–804). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linacre, M. J. (2002). What do infit and outfit, mean-square, and standardized mean? Rasch Measurement Transactions, 16(2), 878.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linacre, M. J. (2012). WINSTEPS Rasch measurement computer program. Chicago, IL: MESA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lissitz, R. W., & Huynh, H. (2003). Vertical equating for state assessments: Issues and solutions in determination of adequate yearly progress and school accountability. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8(10). Retrieved from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=10.

  • Matney, G., Jackson, J., & Bostic, J. (2013). Connecting instruction, minute contextual experiences, and a realistic assessment of proportional reasoning. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 6, 41–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Goh, S., & Cotter, K. (Eds.). (2016). TIMSS 2015 encyclopedia: Education policy and curriculum in mathematics and science. Retrieved from: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/encyclopedia/.

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to action: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palm, T. (2006). Word problems as simulations of real-world situation: A proposed framework. For the Learning of Mathematics, 26, 42–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pibal, F., & Cesnik, H. S. (2011). Evaluating the quality-quantity trade-off in the selection of anchor items: A vertical scaling approach. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 16(6). Retrieved from pareonline.net/pdf/v16n6.pdf.

  • Rasch, G. (1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen, Denmark: Denmarks Paedagoiske Institut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schacter, D. (1999). The seven sins of memory: Insights from psychology and cognitive neuroscience. American Psychologist, 54(3), 182–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. (2011). How we think: A theory of goal-oriented decision making and its educational applications. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. (1996). A comparison of methods for determining dimensionality in Rasch measurement. Structural Equation Modeling, 3, 25–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. (2014, September). Curricular alignment to support student success in algebra 1. (Research Report). Retrieved from United States Department of Education website: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/dropout/instructionalpractices092414.pdf.

  • Takahashi, A., Watanabe, T., & Yoshida, M. (2009). English translation of the Japanese mathematics curricula in the course of study. Madison, NJ: Global Education Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verschaffel, L., De Corte, E., Lasure, S., Van Vaerenbergh, G., Bogaerts, H., & Ratinckx, E. (1999). Learning to solve mathematical application problems: A design experiment with fifth graders. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1, 195–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37, 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, B. D., & Stone, M. H. (1979). Best test design. Chicago, IL: Mesa Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bowling Green State University, 529 Education Building, Bowling Green, OH, 43403, USA

    Jonathan D. Bostic

  2. School of Education, Drexel University, 3401 Market St., Office #332, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Toni A. Sondergeld

Authors
  1. Jonathan D. Bostic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Toni A. Sondergeld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan D. Bostic .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Teaching and Learning, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA

    Denisse R. Thompson

  2. Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, USA

    Megan Burton

  3. University of Turin, Turin, Italy

    Annalisa Cusi

  4. Research Center for Learning and Teaching, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom

    David Wright

Appendix

Appendix

  • Is the task a problem? (YES or NO).

  • Is the task open? (YES or NO).

  • Is the task realistic? (YES or NO).

  • What seventh- or eighth-grade Common Core Standard(s) for Mathematics Content are addressed by this task? Please list the primary standard and/or secondary standard, if applicable.

  • (NOTE: The primary standard is one that is best addressed by this task. The task may also address a secondary standard. Finally, the task may address a tertiary standard that is somewhat connected but not necessarily the clearest standard. For example, a student could solve the problem in a certain manner that employs knowledge from the tertiary standard but is not the most likely problem-solving approach that will be used.)

  • What Standard(s) for Mathematical Practice primarily are addressed by this task?

  • What bias, if any, do you perceive within this task that might inappropriately influence a respondent’s ability to answer this question?

  • FOR MATHEMATICIAN ONLY

  • Please show at least two viable approaches to solve this task.

  • Is the mathematics correct?

  • Is there a well-defined solution?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bostic, J.D., Sondergeld, T.A. (2018). Validating and Vertically Equating Problem-Solving Measures. In: Thompson, D., Burton, M., Cusi, A., Wright, D. (eds) Classroom Assessment in Mathematics. ICME-13 Monographs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73748-5_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73748-5_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73747-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73748-5

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation