পদ্ধতির তুলনা করুন

	Opportunity-to-Learn Index	Opportunity to Learn Analysis
ক্ষেত্র	Education	Education
পরিবার	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
উদ্ভবের বছর	1995	1963
প্রবর্তক	Carroll (concept); Husén/IEA (measurement); McDonnell; Schmidt (TIMSS)	John B. Carroll (1963); Lorraine McDonnell (1995); IEA surveys
ধরন	Quantitative index of students' exposure to instructional content and resources	Measurement and analysis of students' exposure to instructional content
মৌলিক উৎস	McDonnell, L. M. (1995). Opportunity to learn as a research concept and a policy instrument. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(3), 305–322.	McDonnell, L. M. (1995). Opportunity to learn as a research concept and a policy instrument. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(3), 305–322.
অপর নাম	OTL Index, Content Coverage Index, Curriculum Exposure Measure, Opportunity-to-Learn Measurement	OTL Analysis, Opportunity-to-Learn Indicators, Content Coverage Analysis, Curriculum Coverage Measurement
সম্পর্কিত	4	4
সারসংক্ষেপ	An opportunity-to-learn (OTL) index quantifies how much exposure students have had to the content and instructional resources they need to succeed on an assessment. Rooted in Carroll's model of school learning and developed through the IEA international studies, OTL measurement asks whether students were actually taught the material before being tested on it. Constructed from teacher reports, curriculum analysis, or instructional logs, OTL indices are used both as a fairness criterion for interpreting test scores and as a policy instrument for monitoring equitable access to the intended curriculum.	Opportunity to learn (OTL) analysis measures the degree to which students are actually taught the content on which they are assessed, and relates that exposure to their achievement. Rooted in Carroll's 1963 model of school learning and developed as both a research concept and a policy instrument by McDonnell (1995) and the international IEA assessments, it treats content coverage, instructional time, and the alignment between the enacted curriculum and the tested curriculum as measurable conditions of learning rather than properties of the learner.