CodinGame for Work vs. Renaissance Star Assessments

If you are a tech recruiting, you might need to use an automation tool such as this. It will be more suitable for junior profile sourcing. Less appropriate for senior or architect-level openings. Great for technology-specific assessments, less appropriate for a full-stack technical assessment which will take 2 hours of the candidate's time.

Incentivized

Star Math is good for providing baseline and growth data to help create individual pathways for students to address gaps created the past couple of years. This data can also be compared to state assessment results and other local data to get a better picture of the whole students and any concerns which may be identified.

Incentivized

• Create ad-hoc technical assessments within minutes.
• Email bulk invites.
• Candidates get instant feedback.

Incentivized

• Star Assessment reports can provide valuable data as we monitor all of our students.
• Star Assessments are simple to administer and are quick to complete.
• Star Reports can predict how students will perform on our state assessment.
• Star Assessment reports can be modified in many ways so we can focus on different areas with our students.
• Star Assessments identify areas where students may need additional instruction and support and provide resources to meet those needs.

Incentivized

• Adding cutting-edge technologies in a faster way.
• adding a "register link" so you can use a public link instead of personalized invitations.
• Additional reporting and analyzing capabilities.

Incentivized

• The graphs for each subject are not consistently the same. (ie. some graphs are by 5s and some are by 50s.) It's very confusing to read them.
• The questions are not rigorous enough for state standards.
• Different reports will show data that does not align. If 'state' is chosen, then all reports should show the same data. The Parent Report will show the child in 'green', but every sub-skill is in 'red'. That is super confusing for parents and teachers.
• All reports should be based on the same score, but they are not. It is like comparing apples to oranges on the same child.

Incentivized

I give it this rating because it is an essential program in our school. We set up reading groups throug( the Star assessment. We set goals based on the assessment. Students comfort zones are based on the zpd data in Star. We track students progress through the data found in Star.

I love the idea that it takes only a short period of time for the students to be able to take the quizzes and obtain results. I appreciative how quickly the teacher has plans on implementation in her/his hands as soon as the class has completed the quiz.

It’s wonderful

I absolutely love this program

Incentivized

After using the product for multiple years, I am very pleased with the assessment administration and report options. I use STAR Assessment data regularly and review the different reports to guide instruction. There are many different report options to help meet the needs of the teacher and student. STAR Assessments are a valuable assessment tool for the classroom

Incentivized

I just feel this way.

When presenters show us how to use the program they need to have a full class size of data. During training, there were only 5 or 6 sample students. Classes are more like 25 and that makes the training more realistic to have similar data to what we will use.

We have used a few products like NWEA/Map, Lexia Rapid, Curriculum Associates/ i-Ready Diagnostics. Renaissance/Star360 stacks up to all of them, but doesn't exceed them. Star360 has less basic features (like school level grouping, exporting reports as a csv file, saving previous student data) but has some very good specific features compared to the others (like quick testing time, a variety of quick, good classroom level reports for teachers). They all have pluses and minuses, so it depends on the issue/feature is most important to you. NWEA/Map: the plus is complete previous data accessibility and export and compatibility in that most district in the county as well as our ISD use it., minus is the length of time it takes to test. Lexia Rapid: the plus is it gives very detailed breakdown of information in a relatively short test; the minus is it is VERY limited in scope (Reading at the k-2 level). Curriculum Associates/iReady Diagnostic: the plus is it has an integrated, ongoing online instruction piece that is tailored based on the diagnostic assessment results; the minus is that it does not give any good summary data (it gives individual scores and levels, but no class or grade average scores etc.) and it does not statistically adjust the normed scores (percentiles) for weeks of instruction or date test is taken in relation to the norm study. Renaissance/ Star360: the plus is that is it a quick assessment leaving more time for student instruction, it has a variety of good, detailed classroom level reports, and it interpolates the results to account for the exact testing date in relation to their norming study; the minus is that it does not keep records of previous students (even for the remainder of the current school year), it does not allow reports to be exported in any manipulable form (only pdf), and its lack of well functioning school wide grouping.

Great overall program with lots of advice in implementation

Incentivized

• Saved us team-wide 30+ working hours a week.
• Help us compare internal from external talent.
• Better candidate experience.

Incentivized

• Teachers throughout the school have a better idea about the reading strengths and challenges of individual students. They can make better instructional decisions to meet the needs of their students.
• Students are more aware of their own reading ability and the purpose of reading instruction at the secondary level.
• Parents have a better understanding of reading growth occurring each year.

Incentivized