Model-based assessments to support learning and accountability: The evolution of CRESST's research on multiple-purpose measures

Educational Assessment

Volumn 12, Issue 3-4, 2007, Pages 179-194

  Baker, Eva L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 35948956747     PISSN: 10627197     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Baker, E. L. (2003). Multiple measures: Toward tiered systems. Educational Measurement: Issues & Practice, 22(2), 13-17.
2. Baker, E. L., Freeman, M., & Clayton, S. (1991). Cognitive assessment of history for large-scale testing. In M. C. Wittrock & E. L. Baker (Eds.), Testing and cognition (pp. 131-153). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Baker, E. L., O'Neil, H. F., Jr., & Linn, R. L. (1990). Performance assessment framework. In S. J. Andriole (Ed.), Advanced technology for command and control systems engineering (pp. 192-214). Fairfax, VA: AFCEA International.
4. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5, 7-74.
5. Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Self-explaining: The dual processes of generating inference and repairing mental models. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instruction psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 161-238). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Chung, G. K. W. K., Delacruz, G. C., & Bewley, W. L. (2004). Performance assessment models and tools for complex tasks. International Test and Evaluation Association (ITEA) Journal, 25, 47-52.
7. Chung, G. K. W. K., Delacruz, G. C., Dionne, G. B., & Bewley, W. L. (2003). Linking assessment and instruction using ontologies. Proceedings of the I/ITSEC, 25, 1811-1822.
8. Clare, L., & Aschbacher, P. (2001). Exploring the technical quality of using assignments and student work as indicators of classroom practice. Educational Assessment, 7, 39-59.
9. Clare Matsumura, L., & Valdés, R. (2000). Learning to write in urban elementary and middle schools: An investigation of teachers' written feedback on student compositions (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 526). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
10. James, M. (1998). Using assessment for school improvement. Oxford, UK: Heinemann.
11. Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., & Dunbar, S. B. (1991). Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria. Educational Researcher, 20(8), 15-21. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ 436 999)
12. Matsumura, L. C., Slater, S. C, Wolf, M., Crosson, A., Levison, A., Peterson, M., et al. (2005). Using the Instructional Quality Assessment Toolkit to investigate the quality of reading comprehension assignments and student work (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 669). Los Angeles: University of California, Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
13. Mayer, R. E. (2003). Learning and instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
14. Morris, W. (Ed.). (1981). The American heritage dictionary of the English language. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
15. Niemi, D. (1996). Assessing conceptual understanding in mathematics: Representations, problem solutions, justifications, and explanations. Journal of Educational Research, 89, 351-363.
16. Niemi, D., Baker, E., & Wang, J. (2005, April). Moving technology up: Computer-aided formative assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.
17. Niemi, D., & Sylvester, R. S. (2000). Scoring handbook: STEPS and performance assignments. Los Angeles: University of California, Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
18. Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Australia: ACER Press.