Assessing Students’ Opportunity to Learn: Teacher and Student Perspectives z n a Joan L. Herman, Davina C. D. Klein, and Jamal Abed? Rational Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) Graduate School of Education and Information Studies University zyxwvu VUTSRQ of California, Los Angeles How can we assess the opportunity that students have to learn the material they find on tests? How do stu- dents‘ perceptions of opportunity to learn differ from tb eir teachers zyxwvu QPONM ? roughout the nation, states, dis- zyxwvut GFEDCBA T” tricts, and schools are working to transform American education by set- ting rigorous academic standards for student performance and establishing assessment systems to help ensure that all students achieve these stan- dards, Targeted on the complex think- ing and problem-solving skills students will need for future success, the policy goals are ambitious and reflect a dra- matic change in the expectations for student performance and in the cur- riculum and instruction in which stu- dents are to be engaged. In many cases, the stakes are equally dramatic: Those who do not meet expecta- tions-those who do not pass the as- sessments-may be held back or not allowed to graduate; those who do pass will be granted important access. The potential consequences for these stu- dents’ futures are substantial indeed. Are these policies working? Are these policies fair for all students? What other actions are necessary to support the objectives of such policies? The answers to these questions require ac- curate information about the quality of curriculum and instruction that is available to students-the opportuni- ties which schools provide students to learn what is expected of them. In the current lexicon, this is termed stu- dents’ zyxwvutsrq GFEDCBA u ~ p u r t ~ n ~ t ~ to zyxwvutsr HGFEDCB learn (OTL). In this paper, we explore the what and why of assessing OTL and then use data collected as part of a pilot study of an 8th-grade statewide mathematics assessment to explore issues of valid- ity. We investigate the integrity of the various dimensions thought to consti- tute OTL, analyze the relationships among teachers’ and students’ self- reports on these dimensions, and draw implications for policy and practice. Background Building from prior work on education and quality indicators (Blank, 1993), the opportunity to learn (OTL) con- cept operationalizes what is taking place in schools and classrooms to support students’ learning and prog- ress, particularly relative to new ex- pectations for student performance. OTL addresses questions of whether and how the curriculum and pedagogy in which students are engaged are ap- propriate to the rigorous standards that have been established for student performance at the national, state, and local levels. Are students being provided opportunities to learn that which is expected of them-especially that for which students are held ac- countable in new assessment systems? In examining such opportunities, OTL researchers typically have distin- guished three overlapping categories of concern: curriculum content, in- structional strategies, and instruc- tional resources (Brewer & Stacz, 1996). The issue in curriculum content is the extent to which students have been exposed to the specific subjects and topics which are essential to at- taining particular standards or which are directly assessed. In instructional strategies, we ask whether students have been exposed to the kinds of z JI Joan L. Herman is Co-Director, Na- tional Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and S t u d e n t Testing (CRESST), Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, UCLA, 300 Charles E, Young Drive North, Box 951522, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1522. Her areas of specialization include design of assess- ments and in&ormation systems, effects of testing, and validitg ofassessment systems. Davina C. D. Klein is a Senior Re- searcher at the National Center for Re- search on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), Graduate School of Education & Information Stud- ies, UCLA, 300 Charles E. Young Drive North, Box 951522, Los Angeles, CA 90095- 1522. Her areas of specialization include evaluating technology-rich environments, designing and developing computer- based assessments, and exploring student attitudes towards alternative assessment, Jamal Abedi ?k a Senior Researcher at the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Test- ing (CRESST), Graduate School of Edu- cation & Ir@ownation Studies, UCLA, 300 Charles E. Young Drive North, Box 951522, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1522. His areas of specialization include psycho- metrics and assessment of English lan- guage learners. 16 Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice