Q. Can the GED Practice Test be used to determine initial placement and/or completion of an educational functioning level?

A. At this time, the answer is no. At a minimum, it must be established that the GED Practice tests or any tests used for placement and to validate level completion have been designed to measure educational gain; that the content and skills being measured are consistent with the NRS and appropriate for state use; that the test has multiple forms that can generate valid pre and post-test comparisons; the test can be cross-walked with the NRS levels: and, in the case of the GED Practice Tests, the answer keys would have to be secure (not available to the general public). OVAE is currently working with the Indiana GED Testing Service to answer these questions for the Practice Tests.

Q. If a state correlates the educational functioning level descriptors to the test objectives of standardized community college entrance exams, such as Compass, Acuplacer, or Asset, can those tests be used to determine initial placement and/or level completion?

A. Generally speaking, the answer to this question is similar to the answer about the GED Practice Tests. At a minimum it would have to be established that these tests, or any such tests, have been designed to measure educational gain; that the content or skills being measured by the tests are consistent with the NRS and appropriate for state use; and the tests have multiple forms that can generate valid pre and post-test comparisons. In addition, the test publishers would have to crosswalk the tests to the NRS levels.

Q. In the absence of a post-test score, can the TOEFL be used to document completion of ESL functioning levels if the learner's score is high enough for acceptance into college?

A. No, educational gain is determined by post-testing on a different, but equivalent forms of the same test used for initial placement. Using one test for the pre-test and another test for the post-test does not produce a valid measure of educational gain. It is essential to follow standard assessment protocols to insure valid test results (e.g., appropriateness of test content (does the test measure the appropriate sets of skills); does the test have multiple versions or forms of the test to use as pre- and post-tests; are the pre-and post-tests conducted under like conditions -- such as time between test administrations is consistent across the state.

Q. Can the successful completion of the Official GED tests be used to validate level completion of an educational functioning level?

A. As a general policy, the answer is no. Successful completion of the GED test cannot be used to validate educational gain and subsequent level completion. However, a decision has been made by the Division of Adult Education and Literacy (based on a consensus of states) to allow one exception to this policy. That exception is to allow level completion of high secondary enrollees to be validated by successfully completing the GED (based on state score requirements for earning the GED credential). This exception was allowed because the high adult secondary education level is not part of the performance system-- states do not submit a performance target for high ASE and OVAE does not report state or national data on the completion rates of high ASE. This exception is for high ASE only and is based on successful completion of the GED test (all tests). The ultimate decision to use successful passage of the GED test to validate completion of high adult secondary is a state decision.

Q. Why is initial placement so important in reporting educational gain under the NRS?

A. The initial assessment is the basis for placing students in an entering educational functioning level. This is the baseline upon which programs measure student learning gains. Programs should administer the initial assessments to students at a uniform time shortly after enrollment. This time may be set by state policy or by the local program but is usually within a few weeks of enrollment. Regardless of the date for initial assessment it should be uniformly applied to all students to make assessment results comparable across students.

Using the results from the initial assessment, programs should place students into the appropriate NRS educational functioning level. Programs do not need to use all of the areas described in level descriptors to place students, but should use the area(s) most relevant to the student's needs and the program's curriculum. For example, if the student's goal is to improve reading skills, the scores from a reading test can serve as the basis for placement. However, if multiple skill areas are assessed and the student has differing abilities in each area assessed, NRS policy requires that the program place the student according to the lowest skill area. Educational gain and subsequent level completion is measured from this initial placement.

Q. What is the definition of "contact hours' or "attendance hours"?

A. Contact or attendance hours, for NRS reporting purposes, are defined as hours of instruction or instructional activity the learner receives from the program. Instructional activity includes any program-sponsored activity designed to promote student learning in the program curriculum such as classroom instruction, assessment, tutoring, or participation in a learning lab. (note: time spent on assessment can be counted only if the assessment is designed to inform placement decisions, assess progress or inform instruction. Time used to take the GED test, for example, cannot be counted as instructional activity).

Q. Do we have to follow the 12-30 hour framework for work-based project learners?

A. Yes, the 12-30 hour rule is a basic requirement for the work-based project learner program and cannot be altered.

Q. Are work-based project learners included in the performance reporting system?

A. No. Work-based project learners, as defined under NRS guidelines, are not included in the performance accountability system. Performance targets are not established for the work-based project learners and information related to these learners is reported through optional reporting tables included in the NRS report. The project learner designation is being allowed on a "pilot" basis to determine the size and scope of this program approach across the national system. At the conclusion of the pilot (four years) a decision will be made concerning the future status of the project learner category.

Q. We have a number of adults, especially those taking the GED, who do not complete the GED until after the annual report is submitted on December 31st of each year. Is there any way to report outcomes for students after the report has been submitted?

A. Yes. A state may submit a revision to its annual report at any time, however there are certain specific actions taken with the data that once concluded cannot be revisited or changed to reflect revised data submissions. These actions include: 1) confirmation of incentive awards (which normally is concluded by the end of March; 2) the report to Congress; and 3) submission of the annual GPRA performance report to Congress. Table 13 of the annual performance report was adopted specifically to report core outcomes achieved but not reported in the previous year's report. Table 13 also allows states to report on core outcomes
achieved by students who had not previously established the outcome as a goal.

Q. If a student enrolls for computer literacy only or any course in which the student is not co-enrolled in an academic-based program, should the student:

1. be assigned an educational functioning level base on the functional and workplace skill descriptors related to computers (using a standardized performance assessment); or
2. be designated a work-based project learner (if the computer instruction does not exceed 30 hours); or
3. be given an academic standardized test to determine the educational functioning level?

A. It is possible that each of the scenarios described could be appropriate policy or procedure. For example, if state policy requires computer literacy to be offered as part of a comprehensive basic skills curriculum and students must be enrolled in the general ABE program to be allowed to take computer literacy training (which OVAE endorses, although no formal policy has been developed supporting this approach)-- then scenario (c) would be appropriate. If a state offers basic computer literacy as a separate basic skills offering and does not require enrollment in the general basic skills program -- then scenario (a) would be appropriate (provided there are standardized assessments available and these assessments have been cross-walked by the publisher to the NRS). If a state supports project learner programs and the computer literacy skills were job related - then scenario (b) would be appropriate and allowable under NRS guidelines.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, Division of Adult Education and Literacy
11/02