ACT Newsroom & Blog

ICYMI: Here are some of our social media highlights from March to easily share with your networks. Together, we can help people achieve education and workplace success.

Strong economic growth continues to foster a competitive labor market, with low unemployment and robust hiring. At ACT, we are working with economic development and workforce groups to promote employer awareness about the best solutions to drive efficiencies in finding the right person for the right job.

Hiring a new employee is an exciting event. It may mean the business is growing and new staff is needed, or a vacant position due to a promotion or turnover is being filled with a newcomer to the organization.

Hiring, of course, also comes with unknowns. Does the candidate possess foundational workplace skills? Will the prospective employee be able to perform at the required level? Does the individual possess the hard and soft skills needed to succeed in the organization?

Employers are increasingly addressing these concerns by relying on industry-recognized credentials—degrees, certificates, industry certifications, licenses, apprenticeships and badges. The goal is to validate the knowledge and skills of prospective employees and save valuable time in the recruitment process.

Credentials allow for employers to not only better identify qualified candidates but to also provide more effective matches between candidates and jobs. This instills confidence that new hires can succeed in their work immediately and employers can realize benefits like cost savings on training, improved productivity and reduced turnover. (Check out these case studies for more info).

Equally important, job candidates can distinguish themselves with industry-recognized credentials. They may gain a leg up in the competitive applicant pool or leverage quality credentials as a tool for career advancement.

Recently, the Lumina Foundation developed the Connecting Credential Framework. Among its goals was the need to address the growing confusion in the credential world. It cited an 800 percent surge over the past three decades in the number of certificates issued by higher education institutions and other providers of education and training.

To help “connect the dots” among diverse credentials, it led the way to instill a common language to describe what recipients of each credential should know and be able to do.

ACT contributed to field testing the Connecting Credential Framework by conducting a crosswalk comparison of the ACT® WorkKeys® National Career Readiness Certificate® (NCRC®) to the Framework. This enables the competencies that NCRC validates as an entry-level credential to be compared with programs and credentials that are also aligned with the Framework.

The appeal of a widely recognized certificate like the NCRC was further bolstered after it was identified as one of six key criteria that matter most to global corporate location decision-makers looking for places to grow operations in the U.S. Additional factors that influence business climate rankings include taxes, higher ed R&D spending, fiscal health, college attainment and electricity costs, according to an analysis by the Industrial Asset Management Council

As the value of credentials continues to be better understood and appreciated, they are increasingly embraced as a means to ensure our economy remains competitive.

Business and industries can leverage credentials to communicate exactly what skills are needed for a productive workforce. At the same time, credentials help align schools and post-secondary institutions with employer needs to close the skills gaps – wherever the economy may be in the business cycle.

---

Follow Suzana Delanghe

   

Follow ACT

          

Free Online Personalized Learning Community for Students Worldwide Supports College Readiness

Two 7th-grade students, Emma and Jackson, began their latest math homework. They dreaded it: a set of word problems.

“A train leaves the northernmost station of a train line at 9 a.m., heading south. On the same line, another train leaves the southernmost station at 10 a.m., heading north. If both trains are traveling at the same speed…”

You know, that kind of question.

In the past, Emma and Jackson would have seen the same questions and received the same nominal feedback - correct/incorrect, maybe an explanation of how to solve the problem.

But lucky for them, the system they’re now using employs adaptive learning technology.

Over time, the adaptive learning system has come to know Emma’s and Jackson’s strengths and gaps, and it is now able to provide real-time personalized recommendations. For example, the system knows Emma understands the math, but struggles with reading. The system also knows Jackson’s challenges are different, and provides feedback tailored to him.

A nice story, yes? Can it really work? Yes!

There’s a lot of interest today in utilizing technology in the service of education. While many resources are related to infrastructure—internet connectivity, learning and student management systems—significant focus is being placed on “adaptive” or “personalized” learning.

Adaptive learning is a way of using technology to leverage what we know about the student—across multiple dimensions—and what we know about that student’s objectives, and then using that information to identify what the student or teacher can do to help the student reach those objectives.

It recognizes that the learning skills and goals of students are different. Other variables include the pace at which they process new information, the degree to which the student is prepared to learn new material, the instructional approaches that are most likely to help each student, and the motivational factors that are important to the student.

Identifying and acting upon all of these differences, for even a handful of students simultaneously, is challenging for any teacher. Success depends on knowing each student well, especially since all of these factors vary from student to student, context to context, and moment to moment.

What is needed as the foundation are reliable and appropriate measurement models to make appropriate and informative inferences about each student. At ACT, we see adaptive learning as a way to seamlessly integrate measurement into learning so results can be immediately actionable, targeted to each student’s needs and goals.

That’s a remarkable path forward. And we are already on that path as we pursue new opportunities to fulfill our mission—helping people achieve education and workplace success—through personalized and adaptive learning.

Or, as Emma and Jackson might say, if you’re not sure what you’re doing, you’re probably heading for a train wreck.

---

Follow ACT

          

Last week marked International Women’s Day. Recognizing such an important day allowed me to reflect on what it means to be a woman in the 21st century. I’ll be even more specific and think aloud about what it means to be a woman in STEM.

Within this universe, my professional experience is quite diverse and spans three countries. I did my undergraduate and graduate work in mathematics in Bucharest, Romania, my Ph. D. in mathematics in Magdeburg and Trier in Germany, and my professional life in psychometrics in the U.S., in New Jersey and Iowa.

In Romania, I was lucky to have access to an amazing education where many of my best professors were women. I fondly remember my first course on the mathematical underpinnings of computer science, which was taught by a very young female prodigy. She was intelligent, just had a baby, and one of the best professors. I, alongside my peers, were in awe.

Women made up about 20 percent of the professors in the mathematics faculty during my studies. To my shock, there were none in the mathematics or in the psychology departments in Trier. In the U.S., I have been fortunate enough to work for two organizations where about half of the employees are women, and where the leadership teams have a significant number of strong women.

However, once we narrow to the most technical areas, the distribution is skewed again, including in my own group, ACTNext where two of my teams that work on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning have no women. 

So, what helped me along my career path in STEM, and how can I share this knowledge to support others?

I believe it all starts with the need for role models. This is true for every one of us, regardless of gender, or race, or socioeconomic status. We look around and ask, "Is there anyone out there who shares my experience and is successful in an area to which I dream of belonging?" If the answer is yes, then one can see a possible path. If the answer is no, one will always doubt whether they truly belong, even if successful.

I was fortunate enough to learn early on that I belong. A (male) teacher told me that I was one of the few people who “could create something out of nothing.” I was 14. When I was anxious about my test scores for admission to university, my other (male) teacher said, “If you don’t get in, then who would?” In other words, I was told that I belong. This is what I remind myself even nowadays, if I ever get anxious about anything. It’s that powerful!

As the senior leader of a technical group and an adjunct professor of psychometrics, it’s important to be the kind of role model I had. “Paying it forward” is my job. 

I look to build a path forward for my team, my students, and for colleagues from our community.

For someone who veered off a traditional path, obtaining a Ph. D. is a personal success. For someone who struggled to write, producing a new paper is a success. For my colleague, earning a scholarship is a success. In all of these instances, I not only tell the individual they belong, I really try to ensure that they believe it. 

There are many ways of belonging. When we lack variance in role models, we don’t see the realm of possibility. Can I belong in STEM and love girly-girls dresses? Can I get a Ph. D. and have three children? Can I study math and find a husband? Can I be the boss and enjoy shopping, or do I need to talk about golf, football, and baseball? Believe it or not, I hear these questions from my students. These are not superficial questions. They reflect the very real struggle that women face to build an authentic identity. 

We often hear that women are perceived as being less confident. We, as a society, especially in America, need to learn to disentangle confidence from real knowledge and ability. Confidence is nothing more than the coherence of a personal story (Kahneman, 2011). The story can be ridiculous and the confidence high. However, the story is more coherent when you weave it from a place of belonging, from a place of safety. We need to teach our girls the power of a coherent story by providing the assurance of belonging, and we need to look closer into their story to understand what’s behind their apparent lack of confidence.

Our society needs women’s perspectives everywhere, in order to be whole, especially in STEM. First, it’s a matter of numbers: we hold up half the sky.

Second, it’s a matter of insight. Some women have very sophisticated insights into complex situations. A talented woman can change the knowledge map around a given problem, even if she doesn’t always have the evidence to support it. This can add tremendous value for innovation.

Third, it’s a matter of collaboration. On average, women try hard to be attuned to other people’s contributions. There is strong research evidence that teams who have many women are more successful (see Woolley’s research). 

Fourth, women tend to have a different way of assessing risks. They take into consideration the social consequences of risk management, which is valuable for a team. A team is better off having both the daredevil and its mother when making decisions. See Huston’s book for an interesting overview on how women make decisions.

Fifth, women tend to care more about improving the lives of others. We need more psychometricians who are willing to take their knowledge and build solutions for education.

Last but not least, all humans have the right to variance; the right to be who they are, and the right to choose. Some women are successful in STEM jobs. Some are successful doing something else. This is true for men, too. Our job is to help all those around us be the best they can be at whatever they choose to be, and to ensure that they belong.

---

Follow Alina von Davier

   

Yogi Berra, an American baseball player legendary for his skill in his sport and his lack of skill with his language, reportedly said: “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.”

Yogi knew a lot about baseball, but probably less about assessment. When it comes to our profession, I prefer William Gibson, who said: “The future is already here. It’s just not very evenly distributed.”

I cited Gibson, a pioneer in the literary subgenre of “cyberpunk,” during a recent presentation at the Association of Test Publishers conference in San Antonio. While Berra was amusing, Gibson was correct: With assessment, the future is here; it’s just a matter of time before we all start to live it.

Going back in time (not very long ago), a few words characterized most testing: fixed, cognitive, wait, artificial, and intrusive. What’s coming next? Better words, such as adaptive, holistic, real-time, authentic, and stealth.

There are plenty of other words we could use, but those will do for now.

Consider “fixed”: Most current testing is standardized, delivered on fixed forms. Even though all of us are different, tests are one-size-fits-all. That paradox alone should suggest a problem. Future testing, in contrast, will be personalized, with each test as unique as the person taking it. Computer-adaptive testing is getting us there, but right now CAT and related technologies are “just not very evenly distributed.” Hang on – it won’t be long.

Consider “cognitive”: Most assessments focus on language, mathematics, science, and other academic skills legitimized in the academic canon. Those skills are important, but they aren’t the only ones. Other holistic, social and emotional learning skills such as critical thinking, dependability, and self-awareness – each described in the ACT Holistic Framework (which we readily make available to all) – help paint a more textured picture.

Consider “wait”: A test given on a Monday whose results are provided a month later is less valuable than a test in the morning whose results are available at noon. Real-time results inform teachers, energize students, and add immediate value to the instructional process.

Consider “artificial”: Most testing is artificial. Students put aside all distractors (i.e., “real life”), take out Number 2 HB pencils, and provide responses to tightly defined items whose solutions can be presented in simple phrases that begin with A, B, or C (or D – “None of the above.”). The world demands authentic, and sometimes amorphous, solutions, and so should tests.

And last (for now), consider “intrusive”: Right now, tests intrude on teaching time. There’s the time to take the tests, the time to grade them, and the time to interpret and share the results with students and other stakeholders – not to mention the time students take to prepare for the tests (and to worry about them before and after).

If testing were done stealthily, integrated into the instructional process, “intrusive” could become “invisible,” “interactive,” and even “engaging.” Assessment could finally enhance learning in ways that have long been dreamed of, but never achieved – until now.

There are other word pairs that will soon define our psychometric past and future: alone vs. collaborative, accountable vs. actionable, unidirectional vs. multidimensional, closed book vs. open standard, flat files vs. data cubes, and exasperating vs. entertaining. The blogs almost write themselves!

With all due respect to Yogi, none of the predictions in this blog were particularly tough to make; I’ve been making them for years.

Only now, though, in deference to Mr. Gibson, is the reality of my predictions becoming more evenly distributed.

---

This blog is reprinted with permission from Comms Multilingual. The original post can be found here.

Follow Marten Roorda

   

          

An All-Too-Common Problem

At Jacksonville State University (JSU), we were experiencing a common, pervasive problem. Our students were entering our walls underprepared for college-level mathematics. Like many other schools, to address this problem we instituted a series of developmental courses that cost actual tuition dollars, but did not result in actual college credit.

Our failure rate was high, which resulted in repeated enrollment and an increased student cost. But it gets worse. The 50 percent who finally made it through still had a 50 percent failure rate in their subsequent college-level math class. After all that time and money, they were still underprepared.

No college wants to charge tuition and use resources for courses that do not count toward a degree but, also, no one wants to turn away underprepared students who could be successful with a little help. Some states will not allow developmental courses at all because of the unfortunate possibility of accumulating student loan debt with nothing to show for it.

That’s why finding EdReady, the platform that now powers ACT CollegeReady—the student success tool that employs a low-stakes diagnostic and provides students with a personalized study path to fill gaps in knowledge and skills—was serendipitous. We sought a better way to do developmental mathematics and, after hearing a presentation about EdReady, we knew we had found our solution. Replacing high-stakes placement testing with a student readiness system fit our needs perfectly, and continues to be an inexpensive way to address the dilemma of developmental education.

Our Method to the Madness

We began our bold experiment by asking incoming students to take an initial diagnostic test and letting them independently embark on their own study path to review necessary concepts. They would complete the study path on their own time, at their own pace, in pursuit of a goal.

Our message to students was simple: We are trying to help you pass college math. We told them:

1.) These are the topics you need to know;

2.) These are the ones you have yet to master; and

3.) Here are some materials to help you. Take your time. We’ll be here if you need us.

To our delight, the students responded beautifully. In fact, 31 percent of incoming students who took the initial math test who did not meet our set target score were able to achieve the score needed for credit-level coursework after utilizing EdReady. (More on our setup, methods and preliminary findings from the pilot, in this case study).

But the most promising finding is that it didn’t stop with preparation. The success continued into their credit-bearing math course. The pass rate for math after EdReady preparation has never been under 70 percent for our students, and they are passing with As and Bs, not just ducking under the wire.

A Model for ALL

Students arrive at JSU with a wide variety of preparatory experiences. We draw students from rural areas and almost one-third of our students are first generation. Despite these implications, our model allows us to provide underprepared students a place to start and a guided path to embark upon.

I know our model has been replicated by several other institutions, and I look forward to hearing about their experiences. I also know that anyone who cares about the education gap will be interested in this system. It can be an aid to those who are returning to school after a break and need a refresher. The materials appeal to young and adult learners alike. It is a place to start for anyone who wants to pursue further education.

Onward and Upward

We are continuing to track every student involved in the placement model, and I am optimistic that the success will continue on through a higher retention and graduation rate. A path for success in college math is almost equivalent to a path for success in college. We feel that we have removed one of the largest obstacles that our students faced, and there is a great satisfaction in that.

---

About ACT CollegeReady

In October 2017, ACT announced the introduction of ACT® CollegeReady™, a web-based system that measures students’ readiness for college math and English and provides a personalized study path for knowledge and skill building. The system is designed for colleges and universities as part of a collaboration between ACT and The NROC Project, an organization dedicated to improving students’ college and career readiness. Learn more.

Follow ACT

          

ACT’s Annual STEM Report—Now in its Fifth Year—Indicates Female Students Continue to Lag Behind Males in STEM Readiness

IOWA CITY, Iowa—STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) careers are equally appealing to female and male students, but the achievement gap between the two groups continues, with females again trailing males in terms of readiness for college STEM coursework, according to ACT’s newly released report, STEM Education in the U.S.: Where We Are and What We Can Do.

“Women make up nearly half of the US workforce, but they are woefully underrepresented in STEM careers,” said Suzana Delanghe, ACT chief commercial officer. “Our report references promising practices designed to encourage all students to pursue STEM education and careers, but those practices are not enough. We must accelerate efforts to engage and prepare girls and young women to pursue careers in STEM when they graduate from high school.”

ACT’s fifth and latest edition of its annual STEM report focuses on the more than 2 million students in the 2017 US high school graduating class—60 percent of all the nation’s graduates—who took the ACT® test. The ACT is the only college readiness exam in the US with a full science test and also the only one that reports a STEM score and a STEM College Readiness Benchmark score indicating students’ readiness to succeed in college courses such as calculus, biology, chemistry and physics, which are typically required for a college STEM-related major.

The findings indicate nearly equal interest in STEM exists among females and males overall (47 percent of females versus 50 percent of males).

A strong disparity remains between the two groups, however, in overall readiness for STEM courses: Just 18 percent of females—compared to 24 percent of males—met the STEM Benchmark. And among students who have an interest in STEM, the gap is even larger: 22 percent of female students met the STEM Benchmark, compared to 31 percent of males. In fact, females interested in STEM were less likely than males overall to meet or surpass the benchmark (22 percent vs. 24 percent).

“Clearly we have a lot of work to do” said Delanghe. “Encouraging young women to consider pursuing technically challenging careers must be on the top of educators’ ‘to do’ lists.”

The ACT STEM score is based on combined results from the ACT math and science tests. Students who meet or surpass an ACT STEM score of 26—the STEM benchmark score—have a strong (75 percent) probability of earning a grade of C or higher in first-year college STEM courses. They also are more likely than those who don’t to 1) earn good grades, 2) persist in a college STEM major and 3) earn a STEM-related bachelor’s degree.

As noted in the report, opportunities for future careers in STEM fields are plentiful: The number of jobs in US STEM occupations grew by 10.5 percent from May 2009 to 2015—more than twice the growth rate of non-STEM occupations. And this trend is expected to continue, with the US projecting that computer occupations alone will create nearly 500,000 new jobs between 2014 and 2024.

“STEM occupations represent an excellent career path for our young people,” said Delanghe. “Policymakers have the ability to do more to keep more students on the STEM career path and keep America’s workforce competitive.”

Recommendations

ACT makes several policy recommendations in the report to help improve STEM readiness:

Ensure that state graduation requirements emphasize the importance of rigorous science and math courses for all students. ACT has long advocated that all US students take a rigorous core curriculum: four years of English and three years each in mathematics (including Algebra I & II and geometry), science (including biology, chemistry, and physics) and social studies.

Pay teachers more. The US ranks 22nd out of 27 countries in average earnings for teachers. Federal and state funding must be increased to enable districts to pay higher teacher salaries, especially in critically important areas such as advanced math (Algebra II, calculus, etc.) and science (advanced biology, chemistry, and physics). “It’s long past time to put our money where our mouth is,” the ACT report observes.

Establish a loan forgiveness program for STEM teachers. ACT’s challenge to the federal government: Create and financially support a federally-matched loan forgiveness program to improve the pipeline of STEM teachers by the end of 2022.

---

Follow ACT