We experience a lot of parent confusion when it comes to making sense of school report cards and classroom performance as measured by teacher-made assessments in comparison with performance on grade-level standardized achievement tests or standardized admissions tests. It’s not uncommon for a parent to feel surprised, disappointed, and/or frustrated that their straight-A student – or their student consistently “exceeding expectations” on a report card rubric – has performed below average or within average ranges on grade-level standardized achievement testing. This same student might perform well below average to average on a diagnostic admissions test in one or more sections. It’s critical that parents understand we are not comparing apples to apples. Educational assessments serve different purposes and should be categorized for comparison.
There are three big bucket categories of educational assessments that students regularly encounter for school: 1) teacher-made assessments, 2) grade-level standardized achievement tests, and 3) standardized admissions tests. Let’s explore their differences.
Teacher-made Assessments
The first category of educational assessments that we’ll explore are teacher-made assessments. From diagnostic assessments to formative assessments (aka incremental benchmarking) to summative assessments (aka unit test), teacher-made assessments come in many shapes and sizes and serve different purposes.
In terms of the format types, they may include short answer responses, multiple-choice selection, true-false items, extended essay responses, project-based performance, or a combination thereof. These assessments can be shorter quizzes, papers, unit assessments, midterms, finals, projects or presentations.
Typically they directly align with classroom instruction and content standards specific to a unit, quarter, semester, or term. They impact course grades and internal placement decisions, inform daily instructional planning, and, hopefully, allow for timely feedback and a post-game experience, such as an error analysis, as a learning exercise. In many cases, these assessments follow intensive study of particular skills and concepts where considerable repetition has been in place. Moreover, there may be access to a clear teacher-made study guide that defines a narrower pool of potential content.
Grade-level Standardized Achievement Tests
The second category of educational assessments that we’ll explore are grade-level standardized achievement tests. These tests are designed to assess student achievement relative to grade-level content standards and expectations. Typically they’re given in the spring, but sometimes schools will give the previous grade level test in the fall term of the following school year. Examples of these grade-level tests include CTPs by ERB, MAP testing by NWEA, and state testing programs, like the New York State Testing Program. Internationally, the IGCSEs, for example, serve a similar purpose.
In the case of public schools adhering to state testing programs, the curriculum mapping across grade levels is backmapped from the state content standards. In the case of independent schools, each school’s curriculum is most typically NOT specifically backmapped from the publisher’s content standards. Rather these tests are considered “lower stakes benchmarking” in order to have some measures on student performance relative to national norms and independent school norms, but the day-to-day classroom experience is driven by internal curriculum mapping and faculty professional judgment.
Standardized Admissions Tests
The third category of educational assessments that we’ll explore are standardized admissions tests. Admissions testing includes a variety of tests, such as ISEE, SSAT, ACT, and SAT.
Because of the timelines associated with admissions processes, students often need to test and demonstrate mastery of content before it’s instructed in the classroom. Therefore, these tests often require considerable new instruction ahead of classroom exposure to certain content (aka frontloading). It may seem unfair, but it’s necessary work nonetheless. And before the more advanced content can be tackled, any prerequisite content needs to be mastered, which often includes some remedial work.
It’s important to keep in mind that “coverage” and “mastery” are not the same thing. Content can be “covered” in the classroom but not necessarily “mastered” by a student. True mastery requires that students can nimbly apply skills and concepts to novel situations. A teacher can “get through” the course or unit of instruction, which is “coverage”; truly “mastering” the content is a much higher standard. Moreover, these tests aren’t specifically aligned with a particular school’s curriculum, so earning straight A’s, for example, doesn’t necessarily translate to “acing” the admissions test. While teaching strategies is important, it’s not a substitute for mastering content. The two go hand in hand.
In the case of the ISEE or SSAT, these educational assessments are intentionally designed to be well above grade level. For example, a 5th grade student testing in the late fall or early winter will face content that includes all content standards for grades 1-7 or 8. An 8th grade student testing in the late fall or early winter will face content that includes all content standards for grades 1-10. To be successful, a student has to have mastery of all prerequisite content leading up to their current grade level in addition to frontloading content through their current grade level and well beyond their current grade level.
Each of these tests has three levels. The Lower Level ISEE is designed for students applying to grades 5 and 6. The Middle Level ISEE is designed for students applying to grade 7 and 8. The Upper Level ISEE is designed for students applying to grades 9-11 (though 11th grade applicants often submit PSATs).
Similarly, the Elementary SSAT is designed for students applying to grades 4 and 5. The Middle Level SSAT is designed for students applying to grades 6-8. And the Upper Level SSAT is designed for students applying to grade 9-11 (though 11th grade applicants often submit PSATs).
Our most successful students typically need 11-12 months of lead time and 60-75 instructional hours in order to properly pace it out. These are beastly tests that are meant to be approached as a marathon and not a sprint.
In the case of the ACT and SAT, these tests, in theory, assess academic achievement that is meant to be representative of classroom learning through grades 10 and 11. A “typical” high school experience should be sufficient for managing the content of these particular tests, but experientially we know that’s often not the case. For example, depending on when a student has completed algebra 2 and geometry (in the case of the SAT) and precalculus (in the case of the ACT), these tests usually require somewhere between “a little” to “a lot” of new instruction for a student taking them officially between the winter of grade 10 and the spring of grade 11. Any reading comprehension work, vocabulary development, grammar study, or math skills that are foundational and prerequisite to more advanced content on these tests must be solid before students can progress. For international students or students enrolled in IB programs, their curricula doesn’t align as neatly, and significant new instruction is typically needed.
Preparing For Educational Assessments
Between these three types of educational assessments, we’re truly considering very different measures and formats that require different skills, approaches, pacing, and stamina. With time, patience, consistency, and skillful instruction, we regularly experience success with our students. This success requires content-driven instruction in combination with practicing strategies to support efficiency and effectiveness.
Study skills and organizational skills should be a part of the preparation process for all three types of educational assessments, and many students need explicit and skillful instruction to develop these skills. What does it mean to study for a particular test? How do you backmap a studying plan leading up to the scheduled assessment date(s)? Which study skills are applicable to the task at hand? Which strategies should be emphasized and applied?
Private tutoring and test preparation for all three types of educational assessments is common. Setting the intention and explicitly delivering both content-driven instruction and executive function coaching simultaneously is uncommon and a seriously missed opportunity. We specialize in this integrated approach, and it seriously differentiates our work.
Scheduling An Appointment
Whatever your testing needs or wonders may be, please don’t hesitate to contact us. An initial planning meeting is usually the best way to get started. These meetings can be 30, 45, or 60 minutes by Zoom, by phone, or in person per a family’s preference. A single planning meeting allows us to talk more substantively about your family’s specific needs, priorities, and goals so that we can determine possible next steps. We’re committed to developing unique solutions for unique learners!
We look forward to hearing from you!
Warm regards,
Brad Hoffman and Faya Hoffman,
Co-Founders and Learning Concierges, My Learning Springboard
The Fast-Changing World of College Admissions
Short-term tutoring is intended to build specific skills and ultimately lead to improved effectiveness and independence. The effort scope — frequency, duration and total instructional time — is driven by a family’s specific goals and benchmarking data.
Over the last several school years, we’ve seen an increase in the number of colleges and independent schools adopting test-optional policies. Moreover, some schools adopted a test-blind policy, which is different from a test-optional policy. The intention is good, but the practical navigation is complicated and often more stressful because we’re living in a gray zone. And notably many independent schools and colleges have already started to reverse their test-optional policy.