Benefit-cost analysis of the Kansas Computerized Assessment (KCA): Implications for equity and cost-effectiveness in the allocation and use of educational resources

While research on computerized testing shows favorable results for student motivation and student-learning results, there has been no hard data or research to indicate that computer-based or online testing is the most efficient use of finite educational budgets. To provide today's educational leader with a balanced picture to proactively solve administrative dilemmas, this study is a benefit-cost analysis that guides the district's chief resource officer, the superintendent, and the building leadership, the principals, in analyzing the benefits and costs to evaluate the formats available for Kansas assessments.;Utilizing a 9-district case study, this paper develops a definable benefit-cost model to provide a rational tool in leveraging resources being used to conduct the Kansas assessment program as a strategy to work smarter in measuring student proficiency and learning. The objective of the benefit-cost analysis is to identify resource ingredients and measure the benefit-costs of administering the Kansas Computerized Assessment compared to the traditional paper-and-pencil version of the same assessment. It starts with the premise of a school district having limited financial resources and a choice between the two testing options of online Kansas Computerized Assessments (KCA) or the traditional paper-and-pencil format. The primary audience is the school leader and educators while the secondary audience involves legislators, school boards, parents, students and taxpayers. The selected analysis format is the benefit-cost model.;Through the data collected from nine different school districts varying in size and selected test formats, resources were identified and monetary values determined. In the grand scheme, the costs of the computer and Internet in terms of an hourly unit proved to be relatively negligible. Costs for personnel from a labor standpoint in administering the tests were spent on one format or another, therefore, that particular human component was not included in the incremental benefit costing formula. However, monetary values for technology support were computed. The opportunity cost, which measured the lost instructional time for the use of computer facilities, became a sizable factor ranging from 78.91% to 97.01% of the incremental testing component percentages by district. However, the monetary value of benefits in terms of quicker student test results and reduced testing time far outweigh the figures representing opportunity costs. Net benefits ranged from a low of ;While this limited sample is not designed to yield results that can be generalized for all districts, the small nine-district sample lends itself to a manageable benefit-cost analysis study that is the first priority of the research. Policymakers should interpret the results of this study carefully and objectively and keep in mind that the benefit-cost analysis is yet another tool in the decision process. Motivation to conduct Kansas assessments using the online format will be unique to each district given the resource mix of technology and personnel available. The heightened stakes of meeting the mandates of the No Child Left Behind legislation in terms of increased testing at additional grade levels for both math and reading will be challenging as budget-conscious policymakers re-evaluate capacity to use the KCA format despite a bleak financial picture.