DOCeMENT RESUME

ED 088 900 TM 003 448

Racine Feedback and Diagnostic System.INSTITUTION Racine Unified School District 1, Wis.SPONS AGENCY' Bureau of Elementary and Secondary Education

(DHEW/OE), Washington, D.C.PUB DATE an 73NOTE 39p.

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS,

ABSTRACT

MF-$0.75 HC-$1.85*Computer Programs; *Educational Diagnosis; Feedback;Information Processing; *Input Output; MultipleChoice Tests; *Scoring; Systems Analysis; *Tests;Test Scoring Machines

The system is a comprehensive set of computerprograms and procedures for assisting in the preparation, scoring andanalysis of multiple choice test batteries. The system may be usedwith either standardized or locally developed tests. For the uppergrades the system accepts pupil responses on mark-sense answersheets. For lower grades pupil responses may be keypunched. Whenmark-sense forms are used, the system can also interrogate the schooldistricts pupil files and preprint answer sheets for the pupils whoare to be tested. A number of tests for each pupil may be analyzed atthe same time. A score is computed for each test and a pupil'sperformance on each test relative to all pupils taking the test inthe district is reported. Various types of norms can be used with thesystem. Mean scores and .other summary statistics are reported forgroups of pupils. All computer programs are written in AmericanNational Standard COBOL to facilitate implementation on mostcomputers. The entire system is designed and written in a modularfashion to permit modifications to existing reports or additionalreports to be added. This design permits the system to be understoodby the computer analyst. For related document see TM003447. [Ibisdocument has been reproduced from the best copy available.) (EE)

YS ell *arta Wait 0* N$ 'MtnII DIKIten I WU Paltifeat IONA OnlitillaTe Of

II DOC/ TOONet lie Op neranstr Nonce

tuft 00Cuantaf nAS DEEM 10,0 Iles SIM FatsIns, ass waged

OuCED laCtiv AS ICfovED tCan Om doeseen Ise pessoune

C)THE PERSON on 04eGaaufat ton Oa 'Gin leTen0 lt Must, 01 burst On OmoosisSTATED 00 NOT nIECESSali

COSENT Or tiCfLnatiOna/ U strtutit Of

la ow imeghtet. Mit Ilbasensoft

EDUCA7,01 0.007,0* DI Kurt,DIM of wenn so Ins dearinp

0%h........ ess rent Ines.re hold ream lbw aplaial

COpoints ell wink

RACINE FEEDBACK AND DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEM

Published ByUnified School District #1

of Racine CountyRacine, Wisconsin

The system described herein was developedwith the aid of a Title III grant from theU.S. Office of Education, Department of

Health, Education and Welfare.

January, 1973

Overview

-The-Racine Feedback and Diagnostic System -:is- comprehensive set -of

computer programs and procedures for assisting in the preparation, scor.;ng

and analysis of multiple choice test batteries. The system may be used with

either standardized tests (such as Cie Stanford Achievement Tests) or with

diagnostic tests prepared by teachers or curriculum consultants within the

district. For the upper grades the system accepts pupil responses on mark

sense answer sheets. For lower grades pupil responses may be keypunched.

When mark-sense forms are used, the system can also interrogate the school

district's pupil files and preprint answer sheets for the pupils who are to be

tested.

All other input to the system is provided through common format input

coding sheets that are easy to use and require a minimum amount of coding to

be done for each test.

A number of tests for each pupil may be analyzed at the same time. All of

the tests together comprise a test battery. A score is computed for each test

and a pupil's performance on each test relative to all pupils taking the test

in the district is reported. If national norms (or other norm data) are

available for the test, this data may be provided as input and the performance

(grade equivalent, percentile and stanine) of each pupil relative to the norm

data is reported. Norms that are dependent on the age of the pupil (commonly

used with IQ tests) may be used also.

A number of statistics are reported for tests (or scoring sets) and the

items within them. The system also permits items to be grouped into other

categories called item sets.

-1-

Item sets are a means of grouping items into skill areas that are not

----necessarily-the- same-groupings-used- for-traditional-scoring-purposes- Among

other uses of item sets, the system lists the pupils in each room who do not

answer correctly at least a specified percent of items in each item set.

Mean scores and other summary statistics are reported for groups of

pupils. lypically these groups are rooms (and rooms are used in the

description below). Other groupings are possible however. Examples are_

groups such as "girls in room 103" or "pupils with special needs in

Westview school".

All computer programs are written in American National Standard COBOL

(ANS COBOL) to facilitate implementation on most computers. The system will

operate on a 32K byte machine. Expandable tables in the programs and other

features, however, permit taking advantage of larger machines and reducing

_the required running time. A non-technical Users Guide and a more technical

System Documentation Manual are available for the system. The Users Guide

.permits a non-technical user to prepare all required input for the system and

to-coordinate the test preparation, administration and analysis functions.

The System Documentation Manual is designed for the systems analyst or

computer programmer who is to maintain the computer programs and possibly

modify them.

The entire system is designed and written in a modular fashion to permit

modifications to existing reports or additional reports to be added. This

design also permits the system to be understood by the computer analyst with

a minimum amount of analysis and effort.

-2-

Reports Available from the System

A primary goal in the development of the system was to make the testing

process a valuable learning experience for the student and the teacher. The

reports prepared by the system reflect this goal in the amount of information

they provide to the student and the teacher in addition to the test analyst

or coordinator. Rather than simply giving the student a scores the system

has the capability of telling the student why his incorrect choices were wrong

and providing assistance in strengthening the students skills in his weak ones.

Other reports enable the teacher to identify areas in which the entire class

needs additional work and provide assistance in prescribing additional

instructional material.

A variety of reports are available with different information and varying

amounts of detail for the several users for whom the reports are prepared.

All reports are optional and are prepared only if requested.

0 Figure 1 shows the Individual Pupil Prescriptions for incorrect responses.

This report provides valuable feedback to the pupil by including a prescription

for each incorrect response. These prescriptions may indicate why the response

was incorrect or may direct the pupil to additional instructional material.

0 A summary of pupil scores for all pupils in each room is given on the

report shown in Figure 2. Each pupils performance relative to all test takers

in the district and relative to national norms is reported for each test taken.

() The Percentile report shown in Figure 3 provides the frequency of

_occurrance,_the_percentile_score_and the_stanine_for_each_raw score. This

report is produced for each room, for each school in the district and for the

entire district. The report may also be prepared for any other grouping of

rooms e.g., rooms using teacher aids, rooms using team teaching, inner city

3

kTSS23-1,5

RACINE

n1 AGNrIST I C

FEEOBACK

SYSTEM

THIS IS THE RIJN TITLF ENTEDEO BY Ti,F Usvg

PAGE

2

DATE. ob/15/7?

NAmF-SILL JOINSON

Num4FK-100002

PRIMiRY PUPIL

C0q17.:NTs ON

pirEsc;IpTrmis FUR INCOpUiECT RESPONSES

SET-GREEN ROOM

NCCR-?EcT RFsRWISEG

IT cu

ANSwERs

TFST PART

NU'llER

YOURS

RICHT

PRESC,4IPTIONS

TTST PART,

11

F4

Epf.;T 1 /TEST 1

10

e04<T 2 /TEST 1

,F

AALL CHOICES THAT ARE SAP GET THIS MESSAGE.

glIFT ;?./TEST

11

8E

olir,T 2 /TEST

14

9C

TFST 'e-Patfl* 2

1C

AALL CHIOCES WITHOUT THEIR OWN MESSAGES.

TTST ?frPART ?

4K

C

r

RTSS26 -04

PUPIL SET

UNKNOWN

RACINE

DIAGNOSTIC

FEEDBAG.%

SYSTEM

OTIS- LENNON MENTAL ABILITY TEST INTERMEDIATE LEVEL

STUDENT SCORES

NUMBER

NAME

TEST

AN

IMO

NIM

INLI

MI

AM

ION

WIM

MM

O11

4111

0111

M IN

.WM

IOM

MM

=M

O,M

MO

08757

AUDE DAWN

7TH

09244

CARROLL VICTOR

7TH

09174

CARTER DENNICE

7TH

09206

CARTER EDDIE

7TH

04727

DURHAM DONALD

7TH

08800

GARDNER LURRETTA

7TH

08769

GARDNER RODERICK

7TH

10109

GEk8t< DAVID

7TH

09214

GOLDEN CHRISTINE

7TH

09188

MILLER JOHN

7TH

09221

MOAT MARYANN

7TH

08813

PIRKL CORY

7TH

04667

ST AMANO MARY JO

7TH

04758

URICK JOHN P.

7TH

08168

WAINWRIGHT MICHAEL

7TH

UTIS- LENNON I.Q.

OTIS...LENNON I.Q.

OTISLENNON I.Q.

OTIS- LENNON I.Q.

OTIS- LENNON I.Q.

OTIS-LENNON I.Q.

OTIS- LENNON I.Q.

UTIS - LENNON I.Q.

UTISLENNON

OTISLENNON I.Q.

OTISLENNON I.Q.

OTIS- LENNON I.Q.

OTIS- LENNON I.Q.

OTIS- LENNON I.Q.

OTIS- LENNON I.Q.

I.Q.

DISTRICT

PUPIL SET

RAW

PCILE

STA9

MEAN

HIGH

LOW

PUPIL/MEAN

26

22.0

3

13

4.0

2

16

7.0

2

22

13.0

3

30

26.0

4

21

12.0

3

14

7.0

2

34

9.0

2

15

6.0

2

26

22.0

3

22

18.0

3

12

2.0

1

26

26.0

4

29

Z3.0

4

81.0

1

=01

01M

AIM

E./

=11

11.

DATE 1006/72

NATIONAL

IQ

PCILE

STA9.

91

30.0

4

78

9.0

2

82

13.0

86

20.0

3

93

34.0

85

18.0

3

82

13.0

3

83

15.0

3

81

12.0

3

91

30.0

89

25.0

4

74

5.0

2

93

34.0

92

32.0

4

71

4.0

2

RTSS2604

R A C I N E

DIAGNOSTIC

FEEDBACK

SYSTEM

DIAGNOSTIC LANGUAGE ARTS GRADES

STUDENT SCORES

PUPIL SET

MISS FRANZKE

NUMBER

NAME

70

TEST

DISTRICT

=11

11RAW

PCILE

STA9

MIN

IM a

smIM

MIN

omm

nel

OM

NIM

MI=

MN

SM

SIM

IMM

OD

.11.

4.10

MO

OM

MM

=11

m

1504

3

12973

13003

13004

15042

29792

ANCHONDO ALMA

ANDERSON PAM

BAY KATHY

BELL SENA

BINGHAM LEE

BROWN JOSEPHINE

13006 .CARPENTER RUSSELL

29788

CONTRERAS DOLORIS

12975

CRAMER JO ANN

12976

29746

EDWARDS C;IARMAN

13010

FLOCK JEFFREY

29790

GARZA EDDIE

13011

GILBRIDE THOMAS

13013

JANES HENRY

13014

JENSEN JUNE

12483

JOHNSON BRIAN

29791

KEPPIN RANDY

29747

KITT SANDRA

29793

LACHET DICK

12719

LUDEMAN SARAH

29787

MILLER RANDY

12991

WELL ROSIE

DIEM KELLY

LANG. ARTS 5

LANG. ARTS 5

LANG. ARTS 5

LANG. ARTS 5

LANG. ARTS 5

LANG. ARTS 5

LANG. ARTS 5

LANG. ARTS 5

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

LANG.

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

ARTS 5

PUPIL 'SE T.

MEAN

HIGH

LOW

PUPIL/MEAN

111

24

35.0

428

39

15

32

69.0

62b

39

15

27

46.0

528

39

15

36

84.0

728

39

15

33

72.0

628

39

15

16

12.0

328

39

15

31

65.0

628

39

15

3.,

76.0

628

39

15

26

42.0

528

39

15

31

65.0

628

39

15

31

65.0

628

39

15

15

10.0

228

39

15

29

56.0

S28

39

15

38

89.0

828

39

15

25

39.0

528

39

15

25

39.0

528

39

15

16

12.0

32R

39

15

22

29.0

428

39

15

31

65.0

628

39

15

30

60.0

628,

39

15

39

92.0

828-

39

15

28

51.0

528

39

15

30

60.0

628

39

15

84.2

112.2

94.7

124.3

115.7

56.1

101.7

119.2

91.2

108.7

108.7

52.6

101.7

133.3

87.7

87.7

56.1

77.1

108.7

105.2

136.8

98.2

105.2

PAGE 136

DATE

N A T 1 OIN A L

SCALE

PCiLE

STA9

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES.

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

RAW SCORES

ONLY

IJNLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

ONLY

RTSS2604

R A

'PUPIL tit

FORTUNA

NUMBER. NAME

CINE

DIAGNOSTIC

FEEDBACK

SYSTEM

STANFORD ADVANCED ARITHMETIC - GRADE 8

STUDENT SCORS

4el

02901

HILKER JULIA A

O 2152

DRAPER LEE JEROME

O 11164

WITHERIL RICKARD L

01032

SORENSEN ANITA m

01804

KNuOTSOM CRAIG ALAN

02466

PETERSON RICKY

03039

LOwREY BENNIE L

PAGE -43i

DATE 1112702

1

vi

DISTRICT

PUPIL SET

STAN D AR)).

..8.

TEST

RAW

PCILE

STASO

............

MEAN

HIGH

LOW

4111

11IL

IIIM

IM

OIN

E-

-AMIN. APPLICATIONS

12

31

463

121

0ARITH. COMPUTATION

20

52

566

104

0ARITH. CONCEPTS

54

270

127

40

ARITH. APPLICATIONS

10

20

363

121

0

ARITH. COMPUTATION

11

14

366

104

0ARITH. CONCEPTS

00

170

127

40

ARITH. APPLICATIONS

14

44

563

121

0

ARITH. COMPUTATION

00

166

104

0ARITH. CoNCEPts

00

170

127

40

ARITH. APPLICATIONS

25

98

963

121

0

ARITH. COMPUTATION

22

62

666

104

0ARITtI. CONCEPTS

31

95

970

127

40

ARITH. APPLICATIONS

68

263

121

0

ARITH. COMPUTATION

13

20

366

104

0ARITH. CONCEPTS

13

16

370

127

40

AM IN. APPLICATIONS

11

26

463

121

0ARITH. COMPUTATION

10

11

346

104

0ARITH. CONCEPTS

,11

la

370

127

40

ARITH. APPLICATIONS

00

163

121

0

ARUN. COMPUTATION

00

166

104

0

ARITH. CONCEPTS

22

60

670

127

40

PUPIL/MEAN

GRADE

PCILE

Apif

....6....

72

14

4IS -

42

5Iii...

40

1 1

1

:::7

63

Ali

33

56

IO

200.0

0; 0

0

119.1

76

49

5O

00

00.0

00.0

0i 0

0

139.6

121

B.,'

9123.4

42

12

51614

120

15

41

76.8

49

90.5

1 6

290.3

60

A6

364

It

3

105.0

67-

24

481.3

34

II

284.8

60

414

3,

00.0

010

000.0

01 0

012L6

86

40

4

R7SSL9 10

R AGIME

DIAGNOST4C

FEEDBACK

SYSTEM

PAGE

89

DIAGNOSTIC LANGUAGE ARTS GRADES

DATE

PERCENTILES -RAW SCORES- PRIMARY PUPIL SETS

PRIMARY PUPIL SET-

MISS FRANZKE

70

RESULTS FOR TEST

LANG. ARTS 5

HIGH- 39 LOW- 15 MEAN..

NUMBER OF PUPILS...

28

SCORE

FREQ

PCILE

28.5

STA9

SCORE

FREQ

PC -!LE

STA9

MO

OM

IIM=

IMM

O/W

MM

OM

IMI=

O11

1.M

AM

MO

N

15

13.6

216

210.7

322

114.3

324

117.9

325

225.0

424

128.6

427

339.3

528

142.9

529

146.4

5

30

357.1

5

31

575.0

632

178.6

733

285.7

734

189.3

836

192.9

838

196.4

939

1100.0

9

ACINE

DIAGNOSTIC. FEEDBACK

SYSTEM

DIAGNOSTIC LANGUAGE ARTS GRADE5

PERCENTILESRAW SCOREGROUP PUPIL SETS

GROUP. PUPIL SET

ALL PUPILS

RESULTS FOR TEST

LANG. ARTS 5

HIGH 48 LOW 0 MEAN 25.3

NUMBER OF PUPILS2217

SCORE

FREQ

PCILE

STA9

SCORE

FREQ

PCILE

STA9

05

0.2

143

19

98.5

9

42

0.3

144

998.9

9

51

0.4

145

15

99.5

9

62

0.5

146

899.9

9

76

0.7

147

1100.0

9

812

1.3

148

1100.0

9

913

1.8

1

10

16

2.6

1

11

25

3.7

2

12

31

5.1

-

213

39

6.9

2

14

37

8.5

2

15

29

9.8

2

16

55

12.3

3

17

51

14.6

3

18

60

17.3

3

19

20

52

54

19.7

22.1

3 321

62

24.9

422

84

28.7

4

23

83

32.4

4

24

63

35.3

425

T7

38.7

5

26

73

42,0

5

27

91

45.1

5

28

105

50.9

5

29

104

55.6

5

30

92

59.7

631

117

65.0

6

32

89

69.0

6

33

77

72.5

6

34

86

76.4

635

99

80.8

7

36

65

83.8

737

58

86.4

738

63

89

89.2.

8

39

58

91.8

8

40

50

94.1

8

41

. 41

95.9

9.

42

37

97.6

9

PAGE

DATE

schools, etc. The report shown describes raw scores. When standardized norm

data is provided for the test, this report may be requested for standardized

scores also.

0 The percent of pupils selecting each response for each item is given in the

report illustrated in Figure 4. This report-can be an aid in determining the

areas in which pupils needs additional work. As with the Percentile report,

this report is prepared for each room, for each school in the district, for

the entire district and for any other specified room groupings. The report

shown in the Figure shows items grouped by scoring set. The report is also

available with items grouped by item set.

()The Item Set Response Analysis RepotI, illustrated in Figure 5 is another

aid in identifying instructional areas where pupils in a room need additional

work. This report is prepared for each room with items grouped by item set.

An accompanying sheet (shown at the bottom of the Figure) identifies the names

of the item sets and test parts.

0 The Item Set Fail/Marginal report shown in Figure .6 is particularly

useful in larger districts where curriculum consultants are utilized-to

develop instructional materials and assist in overall curriculum planning.

This report, which is prepared for each room, identifies for each item set

the pupils who either failed or performed marginally on the, item set.

("Failing" an item set is not answering correctly at least a speicifed

percent of items comprising the item set. A "marginal" performance is not

answering correctly a higher specified percent of the items in the set.)

Remedial prescriptions are provided for use by the teacher to help improve

the skills of the pupils who failed or performed marginally.

10

.RTSS141009

RACINE- OIAGNO.ST

FEEDBACK

S Y S T

DIAGNOSTIC LANGUAGE ARTS GRADES

RESPONSES FOR SCORING SETS BY GROUP PUPIL SETS

1.4

-GROUPPUPIL tET

"TEST PARt4SENTENCE SENSE

'PUPILS ANSWERING ...2091

PAGE

1

DATE 01/22/73."'

ITEM

1

PERCENT

2

SELECTING

3 aa

RESPONSE;

aOMIT

a 20

78*

00'

12

32

19

279*

00

03

10

82*.

80

00

483*

39

00

05

'70*

18

30

00

610

387*

00

07.

78*

615

00

0

TEST PART-.PUNC.,CAP.,AND USAGE

PUPILS-ANSWERING ...2091

ITEM

PERCENT

a2

SELECTING

3M

INIM

4

RESPONSE

OMIT

114

a 11

a 04=

1011

1111

11 18

480*

96

75*

13

01

10

68*

10

14

03

Li

,60*

57

27

02

12

45

'63*

20

02

13

55

'78*

10

01

14

.

53

-7

80*

0:

315

'

75

64*

23

0:

1

16

671*

5'

15

0:

217

'

65

978*

0'

218

50*

621

'21

02

19

64

.52*

37

01

20

21*

413

58

04

21

865*

: 9

-

15

02

22

54

779*

:0

423

7.

736*

48

02

24

561*

822

03

. 25

56

43*

41

04

'26

.6

65*

816

04

27

-

65

29

58*

02

28

76

43*

39

04

29

37*

523

33

02

30

42*

841

03

,

RACINE

01-41GNOSTIC

.FEEDBACK

SYS'T EM

PAGE

88

DIAGNOSTIC LANGUAGE ARTS TEST GRAOE4

RESPONSES FOR ITEN SETSBY GROUP PUPIL SETS

GROUP PUPIL SET ....WINSLOW

ITEM SET ..PUNCTUATION

GATE 02/19/73

PUPILS ANSWERING

SS

PERCENT

SELECTING

RESPONSE

TEST PART

ITEM

12

34

. -,

OMIT

.....la

......

4....m.

PUNC.CAP,ANO.USAGE

233*

916

36

05

69

09

78*

o4

822*

22

13

31.

013

10

25*

11

13

45

05

11

36*

13

14

31,

04

16

25*

236

31

05

22

29*

715

45

04

24

36*

22

929.

04

25

53*

7.

925

05

26

31*

922

35

04

28

16

913

55*

07

30

36*

LS

18

27

'

04

34

18*

15

11

51

0s

ITEM SET ..CAPITALIZATION

PUPILS ANSWERING

55

PERCENT

SELECTING

RESPONSE

TEST PART

ITEM

12

34

MO

M=

OMIT

0/..P

1M11

1101

1111

1.11

PUNC.CAPIAND,USAGE

0011

111=

1111 3

255

024*

IS"

45

738*

.22

29

04

911

99

62*

09

14

15

49*

18

13

'

0S

20

4i

67*

720

012

27

15

-35*

11

31

0.

: 5

32

.7

18.

18

49*

07

ITEM SET ..VERB USAGE

PUPILS ANSWERING

55

PERCENT

SELECTING

RESPONSE

TEST PART

ITEM

23

4OMIT

PUNCIIICAP,AND,USAGE

12

584*

70

27

525

44*

22

4

-RAC INE

0 1AGNOI$TiC

FEEDBACK

S Y S T-E M

'DIAGNOSTIC LANGUAGE ARTS GRADES

ITEM SET RESPONSE ANALYSES

PAGE Xifv

DATE

MISS FRANZKE

70

TEST PART

ITEM NUMBER

SET

1111

0:61

3SIZ

IMM

I-00

111/

1111111111

0011112233

1604782401

SET

2,

SET

3SET

4SET

SET

6SET

7SET

8SET

9M

1490

14W

.0

111111

002223'

470362

.1.M

O.

111111

111222

356157

.MIM

MS

OM

MM

.11.

0

111111111

000011122

235912989

OO

OO

22

2222

22

33

4334

34

48

0391

62

22

3357

12719

LUDEMAN SARAH

...At 3.4.4

44

4...

33

22

12973

ANDERSON PAM

4.24.

31

....4..

..43.444

.3

....

5.

31

12975

CRAMER JO ANN

4. .44..4

0.3:

4.4.44

.0. 1.144

..

..55

52

3.

12976

DIEM KELLY

....4 *****

.440.1

104.*

04 .130444

5.

1...

33

le

12983

JOHNSON BRIAN

4242.42.42

.1

1.4441

11.13.441

.2

.25

11

23

12991

ODELL ROSIE

4...3...4.

4.11.44

....3.4.4

..

1...

33

31

12997.

VINE THERESA

..4.44..4.

.4

4...44.

....3..44

0.

1...

.3

.2

12999

YNOCENCIO ALMA

0000

3 *

00 *

*.4..44.

..44.

0.43.14.

2.

5..

.2

10

13003

BAY KATHY

2...4... -..

.4.1.1

...44

3.3.4.

4.

5.2

-.23

44

13004

BELL SENA

...

1.0.4

0.4..

0.3. .0444

22

14

0.

13006

CARPENTER RUSSELL

.4..4...4.4.4

441.4

.2

1we2

33

14

13010

FLOCK JEFFREY

444.423322

.4...3

44.14.

24.2..441

55

3.12

..

13

13011

GILBRIDE THOMAS

.44..4

..444

we.

..

.13013

JANES HENRY

..2.4.1. 1

.414.

'...4.

..*3.1:

34

3..

15

33

13014

JENSEN JUNE

4...4....3

.4.343

...4..

.0.03. 4

.2

415.

35

14

13028

WAHLEN PAMELA

..4.44'.4.

4..4

4...41.44.

22

5....

.5

21

15042

BINGHAM LEE

444.3...4.

.444.4

..4...

44..

0.

e.0.

25

..

1.5043

ANCHONDO ALMA

.44.44..4.

.3...3

..444.

44.4.4.44

.1

..a

11

33

29146

EDWARDS CHARMAN

4..44....

.4....

4..444

...4

444

..

1..4

33

3.

29747

KITT SANDRA

....3 OOOOO

.44..4.

...4.4

..444444

.2

5...

33

.2

29785

SWIFT GAIL

.4.3

.41..4

.4.13.44.

..

...

3.

.2

29786

VINE REGINA

4.4.4...4.

.444.3

...4344.4

45

1to.

53

.2

29787

MILLER RANDY

.. .3...41

.3...3

p.313414.

.3

40..

3..

14

29788

CONTRERAS DOLORIS

....3.2...

14..43

..IA.

..*43..4.

'04

4...

.0

.2

29790

GARZA EDDIE

..4.4...4.

43.03

.0.4.4

....3.4..

54

.5.

15

24

29791

KEPPIN RANDY

..3.4.1.32

.4...1

41

.43..2.24

24

3.2.

le

.40

29792

BROWN JOSEPHINE

424.44..42

43.413

40.4.1

2.321.42.

32

3...

.2

22

29793

LACHET DICK

.4....1

0..4)44

....3..4.

25

.2

342

RTSS17-07

RAc__INE

DIAGNOSTIC

FE'EDBACK

SYSTEM

V*** GRACE 4 RATHEMATICS DIAGNOSTIC TEST * * **

FAILIMARGINAL_REPqRT

PKIMARY PUPIL SET -

MR. HYLLSERG

ITEM SET

1- ADDITION

PAGE

.4

DATE 10/16/72

FAIL LIMIT

C PC. MARGINAL LIMIT 65 PC.

BOCHER SUSAN

MARGINAL

53

LAY DEANETTE

MARGINAL

46

____

FP

T.T

$OMR__

FAIL

_0

MARGINAL PRESCRIPTION

4,5-TO 40 40 NO R P20,26295

6-20 COL NO R P213.295

7,15,17,32 -TO 3D COL W/R-443,55,296/217.299

8-40R0 PROS- P44-45

14-30 30 W/R-P43.296

16-20 4D CARRY TO 99-P111.297

111.33..-MONEV-4'46,49.294

9-NO.

AP

El PRESCRIPTION

ITEM SET

2-SUOT' A TION

FAIL

LIMIT

46

5060

EQUATION.REOUIRES ADDITION P47,293.

0 PC. MARGINAL LIMIT 70 PC.

RUGG JESSE

MARGINAL

BAILEY KEVIN

BERG RENEE

MARGINAL

MARGINAL

BOCHEK SUSAN

MARGINAL

30

COOK JOHN

MARGINAL

70

FOREMAN LORI

MARGINAL

70

MAO HENRY_

MARGINAL

30

KOKE JOANNE

MARGINAL-

60

LAY, pEANEITE

MARGINAL

50.

L__

LINEN

DAVID

LUTLI LAURIE

MARGINAL

20

MEISNER JOHN

60

POTTS DONNA

_MARGINAL.

FAIL

RINEHART MATTHEW

MARGINAL

It'

RUGG JESSE

MARGINAL

20

SCHRAUFNAGECJAMEt

MARGINAL

to

MARGINAL PRESCRIPTION

1O- SUBTRACTION EQUATIONAEOUGRES ADDITION TO SOLVE P47i293

_

11,12-TO 40-3D NO R112102,95 AL3-WORD PROBLEM P44-45

19,20,21 -TO 30t.30 NfR P.414444294,291

22.34.35-TO 40--4D RENAMING ACROSS ZEROS 'P297.

0 The Fail/Marginal summary report which is shown in Figure 7 assists the

curriculum consultants or other personnel at the school or district level.

This rIport indicates the number of pupils taking each item set in each room

and the number and percent of pupils in each room who failed or performed

marginally on the item set.

A number of additional reports are also prepared that assist the test

analyst to insure that the input to the system has been prepared and

processed correctly. Examples of these are included in the "Input" section

below.

Labels

Adhesive labels for inclusion in the pupils permanent records are also

produced by the system. These labels show both district and nationally

standardized test performance. Sample labels are shown in Figure 8.

Input to the System

As mentioned above, pupil responses are entered in the system either

through mark sense answer sheets or on keypunched "IBM" cards. Other required

input is the description of the test battery needed to produce the reports

requested. This information is first entered on input coding sheets as

illustrated in Figures 9 and 10. These sheets are then keypunched and used as

input to, the system. Substantial editing is performed on this. input to

insure its accuracy. Various reports are also produced to assist the test

analyst in determining that the input data has been prepared correctly. Two

of these "input validation" reports are shown in Figures 11 and 12.

-15-

_R15510=14

RACINE

DIAGNOSTIC

FEEDBACK

SYSTEM

*********GRADE 7 DIAGNOSTIC SPELLING TEST*********

FAIL MARGINAL SUMMARY (BY ITEM SET)

PAGE

1

DAff09/i072

1ITEM SET - SOUNDS

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

HOUSEMAN

PER.17-18

HOUSEMAN

PER. 19 -20

LINOHARD

PER.15-16

LINDHARD

PER.19 -20

LINOHARD

PER.23-24

PAYSON

PER.13 -14

PAYSON

PER-17-18

ROPE

PER.13-14

RUPE

.PER.15-16

RUPE

PER.I7-18

RUPE

PER.21-22

RUPE

PER.23-24

GEDEMER

PER.1

GEDEMER

PER.2

GEDEMER

PER.4

GEDEMER

PER.5

GEDEMER

PER.6

KRONBERG

PER.1

KRONBERG

PER.2

KRONBERG

PER.4

KRONBERG

PER.5

KRONBERG

PER.6

STEINKE

PER.I

STEINKE

PER.2

STEINKE

PER.4

STEINKE

PFR.5

STEINKE

PER.6

CHRISTENSENPER.4

MAYER

PER.2

SAWISKEY

PER.1

TOTERO

PER.I

TOTERO

PER.2

TUTERO

PER.3

TOTERC

PER.5

TOTERC

PER.6

BARRETT

PER.1

BARRETT

PER.3

BARRETT

PFR.5

BELA4

PER.)

FAIL

NPC

27.7

150.0

28.3

312.0

310.0

14.0

14. 8

310.3

.2

7.7

26.3

25.9

13.8

27.7

00.0

00.0

00.0

27.1

12.9

13.4

412.5

5Pf 1

00.0

00.0

38.8

13.3

00.0

514.7

13.0

26.1

;0

0.0

13.2

411.1

26.9

13.2

00.0

00.0

00.0

00.0

I3.6

00 .0

13.6

MARGINAL

NPC

311.5

00.0

P___9.9___

14.0

13.3

14.0

14.8

13.4

27.7

TOTAL

26 224

25

3025

2129

26

3234

2626

2131

26.3

38.8

13.8

134.114

29.5

13.2

1-s;i----

517.9.

25.7

1314

13.1

00.0_

00.0

12.9

12.9

00.0

26.3

12.9

13.0

00.0

13.3

412.9

38.3

00.0

_..

0g0.(71)

26.3

26.5

312.5

310.7

516.1

00.0

3128

_35 29

3237

c

26

35

3.4

303234

-.11.

33

3330

31

36

29

31 34

32

31 24

7831

28

Figure 8

SAMPLE LABELS

HAAKENSON MICHAEL 14930

FALL 1972 TESTINGLOCAL

R.S PC STm.....MATL

G.E PC STLANG. ARTS 01 27 / 4 LOCAL ONLYMATH SKILL 10 83 / 7 508 01 / 1

READING 01 14 / 3 LOCAL ONLYSTEP SOCIA 21 90 / 8 427 13 / 3

KAPLAN DANIEL OTTO 37632

FALL 1972 TESTINGLOCAL

R.S PC ST......NATLG.E PC ST

LANG ARTS 02 67 / 6 LOCAL ONLYMATH SKILL 08 66 / 6 505 01 /READING 03 69 / 6 LOCAL ONLYSTEP SOCIA 25 98 / 9 433 25 / 4

LUDWIG RAYMOND JUDE 45816

FALL 1972 TESTINGLOCAL

R.S PC ST G.E PC STLANG ARTS 00 00 / 1 LOCAL ONLYMATH SKILL 05 25 / 4 504 01 / tREADING 01 14 / 3 LOCAL ONLYSTEP SOCIA 08 05 / 2\ 405 01 / 1

ECO:

RECORD

IDENTIFIER

SET

AI

LEALD IA IT IA

II

r4T

-0-1

02 q3 04 05 C5 07 OS 09 10

11 12

TEST PART

AUREVIATION

CT

14 15

ITEM NUMGER

(WITHIN TEST PART)

17 18 19

20

FEED RACK

DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEM

DEFINIT:04 OF TEST ITEM

ANSWER

22 23

WEIGHT

25 26

LOCATION AND NAMES OF POSSIBLE RESPONSES ON

TEST FORM

RESPONSE:

12

3

1

170

MARK LOCATION

rfI

I,

.,-;(

)15 40 41 42..

44 45 15 47

49 50 51 52

IDENTIFICATION

rgn

14;1

71

MEMBER OF ITEM SETS

Isis

4r1=7

54 55 56 57

0-1

%4

II

I

I---

PAGE

i0F______

DATE H 1

Di

28 29

30 31

32 33

34 35

36 37

117i011-73

1-1

_221_1

59 60 61 62

76 7

7

itECORD

IDENTIFIER

RECORD

SET

FPIA R

eFr;;]

ut 02 03 04 05 05 07 08 09 10

11 12

Im TEST PART

ABBREVIATION

QY

FT 1

LL

1

TEST PART NAME

FEEDBACK Ann OIAMOSTIC SYSTEM

DEFINITION OF TEST PART.

PM

EE

R s

in=

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27.2829 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

/10I

N L

i I1

1

11,

1-1T

17-1

FIL

I

ABBREVIATION OF TEST.

THIS PART IS IN

538 39

Iv1I

S

PAGE

OF

DATE

RTSSO4 -

R A C I N E

DIAGNOSTIC

F..:138ACK

SYSTEM

PAGE

141.***

GRADE 3 LANGUAGE ARTS DIAGNOSTIC TEST

*At*

DATE 09/18/72

TEST DEFINITION RrPORT

TEST

CONSISTS OF TEST PARTS

ITEMS AND NORMS

aaaa

a..

GRADE 3 LANG OF 9 -72

SENTENCE SENSE

PUNCCAPITALUSAGE

12

14

56

78

910

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

FOR AGES 10 YFARS

4 10 MONTHS...

RAW SCORE

GRADE SCORE

PERCENTILE

STANINE

MP

1114

= M

IMA

INO

019

50

J

122

90

224

13

03

76

17

0 !

428

22

05

32

25

06

36

28

07

42

31

0

846

35

09

51

42

010

53

46

011

57

53

012

59

62

-1

13

61

71

1

14

65

82

-

1

15

68

93

1

FOR AGES 10 YEARS

5

RAW SCORE

GRADE SCORE7 MONTHS...

PERCENTILE

STANINE

015

50

122

90

224

13

03

26

17

0

/4

28

2?

05

32

25

06

36

28

07

42

'32

08

46

35

09

51

42

010

53

46

011

57

53

012

59

62

1

13

61

71

1

14

65

82

1

15

68

93

1

RTSS04..t.

TEST PART

RACINE

DIAGNOSTIC

FL.OBACK

***

GRADE 3 LANGUAGE ARTS DIAGNOSTIC

ITEM DEFINITION REPORT

ITEM ANS., WEI..

RESP..

NO

WER

GHT

IN ITEM SETS

ONSE

.11

1..1

441.

1.

SYSTEM

PAGE

TEST

***

CATE 09/18/72

.

MARK

LOC PRESCRIPTION

.....

mw

smm

amm

w. .

......

SENTENCE SENSE

12

1.0

ASKING SENTENCES

11 -10

SENTENCE SENSE

21-10 THIS IS CORRECT RESPONSE FOR THIS

ITEM

31 -10

SENTENCE SENSE

2I

1.0

TELLING SENTENCES

11-11 THIS IS CORRECT RESPONSE FOR THIS ITEM

SENTENCE SENSE

21-11

31-11

SENTENCE SENSE

33

1.0

NOT A SENTENCE

11-12

.SENTENCE SENSE

21 -12

31 -12 THIS IS CORRECT RESPONSE FOR THIS

ITEM

SENTENCE SENSE

43

1.0

NOT A SENTENCE

11 -13

SENTENCE SENSE

21 -13

31-13 THIS IS CORRECT RESPONSE FOR THIS

ITEM

SENTENCE SENSE

52

1.0

ASKING SENTENCES

11..14

SENTENCE. SENSE

21-14 THIS IS CORRECT RESPONSE FOR THIS

ITEM

N, F

31-14

SENTENCE SENSE

.6

31.0

NOT A SENTENCE,

11-15

SENTENCE SENSE

21-15

1-15 THIS IS CORRECT RESPONSE FOR THIS

ITEM

SENTENCE SENSE

71

1.0

TELLING SENTENCES

11-.16 THIS IS CORRECT RESPONSE FOR THIS

ITEM

SENTENCE SENSE

21 -16

31-16

PUNC-.CAPITAL-USAGE

83

1.0

OTHER USAGE

,PUNC - CAPITAL- USAGE.

1 21-1T

1.17

31-17 THIS IS CORRECT RESPONSE FOR THIS

ITEM

41-17

PUNC - CAPITAL -USAGE

94

1.0

VERB USAGE

11-18

PUNC- CAPITAL - USAGE

21 -18

31 -18

41-.18 THIS IS CORRECT RESPONSE FOR THIS

ITEM ,

PUNC.CAPITALUSAGE

10

31.0

VERB USAGE

11-.19

PUNCCAPITAL.rUSAGE

21..-I9

31 -19 THIS IS CORRECT RESPONSE FOR THIS

ITEM

41-49

Much of the input data needed to be coded and keypunched only once for a

district (and then just updated when personnel changes, etc. are made). The

same input cards may then be used for a number of different tests.

Implementation of the System

As mentioned above, the entire system .is written in ANS COBOL to expedite

implementation. Interfaces with existing district files and systems are

required only for preprinting mark sense answer sheets and for looking up

pupil identification data (i.e., name and birthdate) when the completed

answer sheet (or keypunched cards) are being scored. If the school district

is not currently me staining these files in a computerized form they can

easily be developed for use by this system.

Because of the "self-contained" nature of the system it may be

implemented on a "computer utility" or some other computer not managed by

the school district.

Implementation of the system may be accomplished through use-of its-own-

instructional development and data processing personnel. Implementation

assistance for both the computer system and for the development of meaningful

instructional feedback is available, however. For further information

concerning any aspect of the system please contact

-22-