Can today’s standardized achievement tests yield instructionally useful data?

Author:

James Popham W.,C. Berliner David,M. Kingston Neal,H. Fuhrman Susan,M. Ladd Steven,Charbonneau Jeffrey,Chatterji Madhabi

Abstract

Purpose – Against a backdrop of high-stakes assessment policies in the USA, this paper explores the challenges, promises and the “state of the art” with regard to designing standardized achievement tests and educational assessment systems that are instructionally useful. Authors deliberate on the consequences of using inappropriately designed tests, and in particular tests that are insensitive to instruction, for teacher and/or school evaluation purposes. Methodology/approach – The method used is a “moderated policy discussion”. The six invited commentaries represent voices of leading education scholars and measurement experts, juxtaposed against views of a prominent leader and nationally recognized teacher from two American education systems. The discussion is moderated with introductory and concluding remarks from the guest editor, and is excerpted from a recent blog published by Education Week. References and author biographies are presented at the end of the article. Findings – In the education assessment profession, there is a promising movement toward more research and development on standardized assessment systems that are instructionally sensitive and useful for classroom teaching. However, the distinctions among different types of tests vis-à-vis their purposes are often unclear to policymakers, educators and other test users, leading to test misuses. The authors underscore issues related to validity, ethics and consequences when inappropriately designed tests are used in high-stakes policy contexts, offering recommendations for the design of instructionally sensitive tests and more comprehensive assessment systems that can serve a broader set of educational evaluation needs. As instructionally informative tests are developed and formalized, their psychometric quality and utility in school and teacher evaluation models must also be evaluated. Originality/value – Featuring perspectives of scholars, measurement experts and educators “on the ground”, this article presents an open and balanced exchange of technical, applied and policy issues surrounding “instructionally sensitive” test design and use, along with other types of assessments needed to create comprehensive educational evaluation systems.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Education

Reference34 articles.

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education (1999), The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.

2. American Statistical Association (ASA) (2014), ASA Statement on Using Value-Added Models for Educational Assessment, American Statistical Association, Alexandria, VA.

3. Barone, T. (2001), Touching Eternity: The Enduring Outcomes of Teaching, Teachers College Press, New York, NY.

4. Borman, G.D. and Dowling, M. (2010), “Schools and inequality: a multilevel analysis of Coleman’s Equality of Educational Opportunity Data”, Teachers College Record, Vol. 112 No. 5, pp. 1201-1246.

5. Casanova, U. (2010), Si Se Puede! Learning From a School that Beats the Odds, Teachers College Press, New York, NY.

Cited by 6 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3