Quality Assurance

Key Considerations for Assessment Quality

Validity
Does the assessment accurately reflect the rigor and intent of the standard? Are students being asked to demonstrate the depth of understanding the standard requires?

Reliability
Is student performance interpreted and scored consistently across teachers and classrooms? Are testing conditions and administration protocols equitable and uniform?

Bias Review
Is the assessment fair for all students? Are questions written without unintended advantage or disadvantage based on personal characteristics or background?

A high-quality bias review considers:

• • Gender: Does the item reflect balanced and inclusive representation across gender roles and activities?

  • Race, Ethnicity, or Culture: Does the item avoid stereotypes and represent cultural diversity accurately and respectfully?

  • Socioeconomic Status: Are tasks or contexts accessible and relatable for students from all backgrounds?

  • Disability Access: Are items appropriate and fair for students with disabilities? Is language clear, respectful, and free of barriers?
    
    

Reviewers are encouraged to ask:

• • “Might this item offend or unfairly penalize any group of students?”

  • “Is the subject matter and language developmentally appropriate and culturally inclusive?”

Multiple Measures
Are assessment results triangulated from a variety of sources (formative, interim, summative) to build a complete picture of student learning?

Quality Assurance Protocols

To address these core quality questions, the following protocols and professional practices have been adopted:

Implementation and Instructional Integrity

Implementation is the vital link between curriculum, assessment, and instruction. Student success is defined by meaningful growth in standards—not just letter grades. Instruction should be engaging, challenging, and centered on authentic scientific thinking.

To support this, Campbell County science educators are:

• Shifting from content delivery to facilitation of learning

• Prioritizing constructive struggle and real-world application

• Emphasizing modeling, inquiry, and performance tasks over recall

• Embedding storylining strategies to connect instruction to coherent, phenomena-driven narratives
  
  

This work is amplified through district-wide collaboration with Jan Hoegh, where teachers are building and refining proficiency scales aligned to the Wyoming Science Content and Performance Standards. These scales define what proficiency looks like at various levels and anchor all assessment work—from daily formative checks to common district interim assessments and ultimately to state benchmarks like WYTOPP and ACT.

This creates a coherent and vertically-aligned system, where:

• Proficiency scales guide instructional focus and student learning targets

• Formative assessments provide timely feedback aligned to scale indicators

• District interim assessments measure progress on those same scales and standards

• WYTOPP (Grades 8 & 10) and ACT Science (Grade 11) serve as cumulative summative checkpoints
  
  

Collaborative Support and Professional Learning

The district ensures teachers are supported in this work through:

• Professional Learning Communities (PLCs): Driving standards-based collaboration and data analysis

• Staff Development Courses and Meetings: Offering training in assessment, proficiency-based learning, and instructional design

• Mentorship & Peer Coaching: Encouraging reflective practice through observation and support

• Cross-Building Teams: Allowing teachers to align resources, pacing, and assessments across schools and grade levels

• Data and Work Reviews: Engaging in regular cycles of examining student achievement and refining curriculum as needed
  
  

This collective work ensures that Campbell County’s science instruction is not only aligned and intentional—but responsive, inclusive, and forward-thinking.