# data[].attributes.body
For me, I think the most interesting point David Slomp made was in regard to fairness in assessments. he stated, "The first step in examining fairness is to analyze student performance disaggregated by populations of interest." This is followed by "Does one group of test takers unexpectedly underperform another group?"

Although I do not work with elementary aged students, I can clearly see when my students under perform during state testing due to external reasons. Many of these reasons are out of our control (poor sleep, disruptions to home life, etc.) and some are created in the building itself. Some students are not comfortable in their assigned testing environment. This fact makes me reflect on the IRI which is given several times a year and is less vulnerable to variability such as having a bad day or not agreeing with their proctor.

Overall, I think my students suffer disproportionally from test anxiety which assesses them lower than their peers. If we were to be fair, students should be tested in a fair and meaningful way that is not affected by externalities.

# data[].attributes.body
I admit that the title of this article was a bit of a shock. I mean after all, what exactly do the topics of sex, and finance have to do with literacy assessments? Maybe I can associate the latest controversy in the media on book banning that is plaguing our districts with the topics of sex and finance since politicians mostly only deal in finance, and whatever is in their best interest. Whereas educators are in the field having to deal with the whole child, the trauma they may be experiencing at home, or the lack of financial resources to perform at optimum levels. Environmental factors also come to mind, not to mention the fact that most assessments may not truly be appropriate for the issues students are facing today. The article addresses fairness as a factor to be considered when creating and administering an assessment. “When advocating for fairness, our goal is to ensure that an assessment does not systematically disadvantage one group of students as compared with others” (Nisbet & Shaw, 2019). These days, fairness and equality are of equal importance when considering the cultural and ethnic needs of others. The needs of the LGBTQ+ community are also a major consideration when creating assessments. The context, word choice, phrasing, family scenarios (same-sex parents)should all be taken into consideration. Having those types of realistic conversations is imperative if we as educators are going to be able to create relevant assessments. Although all of the factors mentioned within all three tables were relative to the successes or failures of student performance, scoring inference, the opportunity to learn, disparate impact, and equity of opportunity were the key leading factors that seem to affect my students the most. I hope that in the very near future, a more diverse cohort of professionals are available contribute to the construction of literacy curriculums and assessments to provide more opportunities for the success of all of our students.

# data[].attributes.body
For the past three weeks, I have been pulling students to complete various reading assessments. Those assessments include the Acadience, Core Phonics, and PASA. These are beneficial as they are fair, reliable, and valid for our students in grades 1-5. After reading the article, however, these assessments are biased against kindergarten-aged students. The article mentions, "When advocating for fairness, our goal is to ensure that an assessment does not systematically disadvantage one group of students as compared with others.”(Slomp. 2020) For many of our kindergarteners, this is their first time being in a school environment and exposed to concepts such as letters and sounds. Without learning basic reading skills in a school environment,  these students scored well below their peers who had early intervention in a preschool setting. In some of the assessments, students are being asked to identify letters and sounds.  A few of the children just looked at me and smiled because they did not know what I was asking them to do. I feel that it’s not fair that these students are being compared to their peers so early in the year. That being said, the other interventionists and I brought this concern to our principal. After our conversation and evaluating the data, we decided that instead of pulling the students into small groups right away, we would push in to the class. We will continue to monitor progress weekly and see how those students progress after being exposed to instruction. If there continues to be a delay or struggle after a month or two, we would then consider creating kindergarten reading intervention groups.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading the article it reminded me of those dreadful parent-teacher conferences. Sometimes during these meetings, there are going to be tough conversations that are had regarding test scores and the student's reading abilities. The article expresses validity and why it is important. The other party should know that we are testing to serve a purpose. It is good to let the parents know what information we got from the assessments as well as what decisions will come forward when helping the students succeed. Another topic to bring up is fairness. These literacy assessments are not meant to put the student at a disadvantage. All assessments must ensure that the student is demonstrating their skills for the content being measured. And last but not least is reliability. Not all students are going to measure the same so it is important to look at things like systematic errors. I think that this article was very helpful especially when talking to parents and other educators. We must be all on the same page when it comes to helping the student succeed. Bringing up validity, fairness, and reliability may put the caretakers and educators at ease because there is going to be a purpose for the assessment. There is going to be an end goal and the only way to start the goal is to find out the root of the problem. Do you think that we should also explain to the students what the tests are for? and explain to them why they are taking them? Do you think there would be a better testing outcome?

# data[].attributes.body
KT-
Assessment carries a lot of baggage and can cause a lot of anxiety for teachers and students.
Educators create assessments to manage, monitor students' behavior, and their learning. Literacy assessment plays an important role in promoting and inhibiting effective models in literacy education. The role of assessments in literacy within education is difficult to have when discussing about while learning. When discussing about a literacy assessment can often be compacting for teachers, school administers, and many others in the field. The three tips that we as educators should do when having a difficult conversation for understanding any assessment is preparing for the conversation, choosing what kind of assessment you're going to use, and taking data on the student or your class progress. Being in the field of literacy should also provide questions, and research that enables readers to become advocates for themselves. Educators will then develop, determine, and create their own assessment from the classes' response.
How are assessment and conversations related, and used in the classroom?

# data[].attributes.body
Double click anywhere on the board to open your text box. Please put your name in the subject and then write your response below.

# data[].attributes.body
Why are literacy assessments such a taboo topic? I never thought of literacy assessments as taboo. I always think of state-mandated and other external assessments as a taboo topic, but I have never thought of literacy assessments as taboo. Maybe it’s because I teach Kindergarten and these assessments are necessary to inform instruction and I give these assessments regularly to assess classroom learning.

After reading further, I understand that what makes a QUALITY literacy assessment may be a taboo topic. For it to be a quality assessment, it must be valid, fair, and reliable. In regards to validity, my school is in the process of doing benchmark assessments via Aimsweb. In Kindergarten, our ELA Benchmark measures letter naming fluency and letter sound fluency. A previous student of mine who is now in first grade, REFUSES to participate in this assessment. Occasionally a teacher can get her to participate, but often this benchmark is invalid for this student as she exhibits opposition and defiance to complete the task. The argument exists about whether we should be using this benchmark to categorize her as Tier 1, Tier 2 or Tier 3 since her lack of participation is not a valid measure of success with letter names and letter sounds. When I had this student in my class, I used other classroom formative assessments and observations in addition to the benchmark data to inform instruction.

Our benchmark assessments take place 1-on-1 with a literacy aide and the student in the hallway of our school. There is usually a table and chairs set up while the hallway environment is rarely consistent. While this testing occurs in the hallway, classes may walk by, loud and distracting behaviors may occur, announcements may happen over the loudspeaker, doors may open/close, etc. This does not seem like a reliable environment for an assessment that holds such great weight on measuring student achievement. Our school is so overcrowded, so I understand why students are assessing in the hallway, but something must be changed. Where do your schools conduct benchmark testing? Do you have a separate testing room?