Test Information Guide

Field 55: Adult Basic Education
Sample Open-Response Item

The following materials contain:

Sample Test Directions for Open-Response Items

This section of the test consists of two open-response item assignments. You will be asked to prepare a written response of approximately 150–300 words for each assignment. You should use your time to plan, write, review, and edit your response for each assignment. You must write responses to both of the assignments.

For each assignment, read the topic and directions carefully before you begin to work. Think about how you will organize your response.

As a whole, your response to each assignment must demonstrate an understanding of the knowledge of the field. In your response to each assignment, you are expected to demonstrate the depth of your understanding of the subject area by applying your knowledge rather than by merely reciting factual information.

Your response to each assignment will be evaluated based on the following criteria.

The open-response item assignments are intended to assess subject knowledge. Your responses must be communicated clearly enough to permit valid judgment of the evaluation criteria by scorers. Your responses should be written for an audience of educators in this field. The final version of each response should conform to the conventions of edited American English. Your responses should be your original work, written in your own words, and not copied or paraphrased from some other work.

Be sure to write about the assigned topics. You may not use any reference materials during the test. Remember to review your work and make any changes you think will improve your responses.

Sample Open-Response Item

Objective 0016
Analyze and evaluate the organization, focus, unity, and/or expression of ideas in a written text AND apply critical thinking skills (e.g., analysis, interpretation, synthesis, and evaluation) to a written passage that presents an argument related to an ABE content area.

Read the editorial below about the New Deal; then complete the exercise that follows.

Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal has had more than its share of critics over the years. On the right, conservatives have condemned Roosevelt for placing the United States on the road to socialism. These contentions are for the most part nonsense.

The New Deal has also received criticism from radical academics on the political left, who contend that it was largely a tool of corporate capitalism. This, too, is nonsense.

What then can we conclude about the New Deal? First of all, there were real constraints on how far the New Deal was both willing and able to go. These included the internal constraints imposed by generally accepted beliefs concerning the appropriate role of government and Roosevelt's traditionalist views of fiscal policy. Indeed, FDR's fear of large budget deficits blocked the adoption of the sort of programs needed to restore consumer and business demand to pre-Depression levels. It was not until the war years that massive increases in government spending finally put the United States back to work.

Roosevelt himself was an obstacle to real reform. Growing up amidst privilege, not touched personally by the devastation of the Great Depression, Roosevelt was responding politically to the temporary economic woes of the nation, not the structural deficiencies of capitalism or the plight of the unemployed.

There were also external constraints, such as the unstable nature of the New Deal coalition. New Deal policymakers could not keep everyone happy, and by the late 1930s large numbers of southern Democrats had joined Republicans to form a conservative coalition that possessed the legislative power to turn back any New Deal initiative that it did not like. Another constraint on New Deal policy was the nature of the state apparatus that Roosevelt and his team inherited. Throughout much of the period, government lacked the capacity to administer a thoroughgoing program of industrial planning. By the time government had finally developed this administrative capacity, whatever support there had been for a comprehensive program of industrial planning had largely disappeared.

Yet, for all its shortcomings, the New Deal marked a major break with the past. Never before in the nation's history had the federal government acted so aggressively to ameliorate the misery caused by a radical malfunctioning of the economic system. And while New Deal policies did not end the Great Depression, the regulatory agencies and social programs created by Roosevelt's administration provided a protective framework that has prevented a recurrence of that national disaster. In his first inaugural address, Roosevelt told Americans that "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself." In basic economic terms, at least, New Deal programs made the United States a much less fearful place in which to live.

Using your critical-reasoning skills to evaluate written material, prepare a response in which you:

Sample Strong Response to the Open-Response Item

The sample response below reflects a strong knowledge and understanding of the subject matter.

The author's main purpose in this essay is to evaluate major criticisms of the New Deal. It is the author's argument that New Deal policies and programs marked a major advance in U.S. government, even though various constraints prevented policymakers from undertaking the measures needed to end the Great Depression. A major assumption underlying the argument is that critics of the Roosevelt administration have not paid sufficient attention to these constraints.

The author's presentation of the argument displays both strengths and weaknesses. In terms of organization, the author does a poor job of introducing the essay's argument to readers. The author might also have provided readers with some background information by adding another paragraph after the introductory statement. This said, the remainder of the essay is reasonably well organized, with different forms of criticism and policy constraints subdivided in ways that are easy to follow.

For the most part, the author's reasoning proceeds logically. Given the generally positive assessment of the Roosevelt administration, the author's willingness to concede New Deal shortcomings adds to the general persuasiveness of the argument. The only major problem is the caricatured presentation of New Deal critics in the first two paragraphs. Not only are both of these portraits overdrawn, but the author fails to discuss how these critics developed their anti-New Deal arguments.

Turning to the author's use of evidence, virtually none is provided to support the assertions made in the first two paragraphs. This is similarly the case in paragraph four, where the offhand dismissal of Roosevelt's motives raises the possibility of potential bias. The author also makes several assertions in the final paragraph that would have been more credible had some supporting evidence been provided. By contrast, paragraphs three and five furnish a good example of what the author might have done throughout the essay.

Scoring Rubric

Performance Characteristics

The following characteristics guide the scoring of responses to the open-response item(s).

Table outlining performance characteristics.
Purpose The extent to which the response achieves the purpose of the assignment.
Subject Matter Knowledge Accuracy and appropriateness in the application of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
Support Quality and relevance of supporting details.
Rationale Soundness of argument and degree of understanding of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.

Scoring Scale

The scoring scale below, which is related to the performance characteristics for the tests, is used by scorers in assigning scores to responses to the open-response item(s).

Score Scale with description for each score point.
Score Point Score Point Description
4 The "4" response reflects a thorough knowledge and understanding of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
  • The purpose of the assignment is fully achieved.
  • There is substantial, accurate, and appropriate application of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
  • The supporting evidence is sound; there are high-quality, relevant examples.
  • The response reflects an ably reasoned, comprehensive understanding of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
3 The "3" response reflects an adequate knowledge and understanding of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
  • The purpose of the assignment is largely achieved.
  • There is a generally accurate and appropriate application of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
  • The supporting evidence is adequate; there are some acceptable, relevant examples.
  • The response reflects an adequately reasoned understanding of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
2 The "2" response reflects a limited knowledge and understanding of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
  • The purpose of the assignment is partially achieved.
  • There is a limited, possibly inaccurate or inappropriate, application of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
  • The supporting evidence is limited; there are few relevant examples.
  • The response reflects a limited, poorly reasoned understanding of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
1 The "1" response reflects a weak knowledge and understanding of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
  • The purpose of the assignment is not achieved.
  • There is little or no appropriate or accurate application of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
  • The supporting evidence, if present, is weak; there are few or no relevant examples.
  • The response reflects little or no reasoning about or understanding of effective writing or critical reasoning skills.
U The response is unrelated to the assigned topic, illegible, primarily in a language other than English, not of sufficient length to score, or merely a repetition of the assignment.
B There is no response to the assignment.