Conceptualizing, measuring, and implementing higher (high or hire) standards

Educational Researcher

Volumn 25, Issue 8, 1996, Pages 19-21

  Sabers, Darrell L ^a   Sabers, Donna S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347307824     PISSN: 0013189X     EISSN: 1935102X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0013189X025008019     Document Type: Note

References (10)

1. Berk, RA (1995). Something old, something new, something borrowed, a lot to do!. Applied Measurement in Education, 8(1), 99-109.
2. Bond, L (1995). Unintended consequences of performance assessment: Issues of bias and fairness. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 14(4), 21-24.
3. Buros, OK (1977). Fifty years in testing. Educational Researcher, 6(7), 9-15.
4. Green, BF (1995). Comparability of scores from performance assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 14(4), 13 24-15.
5. Impara, JC, and BS Plake (1995). Standard setting for complex performance tasks (Special issue). Applied Measurement in Education, 8(1).
6. Levine, D (1996). Race over reason in the jury box. Reader's Digest, 148(890), 123-128.
7. Mager, RF (1962). Preparing instructional objectives. Palo Alto, CA: Fearon Press.
8. Miller, SE, G Leinhardt, and N Zigmond (1988). Influencing engagement through accommodation: An ethnographic study of at-risk students. American Educational Research Journal, 25(4), 465-487.
9. Phillips, SE (1996). Legal defensibility of standards: Issues and policy perspectives. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 15(2), 5 19-13.
10. Powell, B, and LC Steelman (1996). Bewitched, bothered, and bewildering: The use and misuse of state SAT and ACT scores. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 27-59.