Commentary: Evaluating the validity of formative and interim assessment

Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 32-37

  Shepard, Lorrie A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

Formative assessment; Interim assessment; Validity

Indexed keywords

EID: 69949136016     PISSN: 07311745     EISSN: 17453992     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.2009.00152.x     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA : Addison-Wesley.
2. Assessment Reform Group (1999). Assessment for learning: Beyond the black box. Cambridge : University of Cambridge School of Education.
3. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. T. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213 238.
4. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice, 5 (1 7 74.
5. Foster, D., & Noyce, P. (2004). The mathematics assessment collaborative: Performance testing to improve instruction. The SiliconValley Mathematics Initiative. Available at http://www.noycefdn.org/publications.html Retrieved April 2, 2009.
6. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., & Stecker, P. M. (1991). Effects of curriculum-based measurement and consultation on teacher planning and student achievement in mathematics operations. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 617 641.
7. Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond testing: Towards a theory of educational assessment. London : Falmer Press.
8. Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. In R. L. Brennan (Ed. Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 17 64). Washington, DC : The National Council on Measurement in Education and the American Council on Education.
9. Kulik, C. L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1990). Effectiveness of mastery-learning programs: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 60, 265 299.
10. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press.
11. Masters, G., & Forster, M. (1996). Progress maps: Assessment resource kit. Melbourne, Victoria, Australia : The Australian Council for Educational Research.
12. McManus, S. (Ed. 2008). Attributes of effective formative assessment. Washington, DC : Council of Chief State School Officers.
13. Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed. Educational measurement (pp. 13 103). Washington, DC : American Council on Education and National Council on Measurement in Education.
14. Nichols, P. D. (1994). A framework for developing cognitively diagnostic assessments. Review of Educational Research, 64 (4 575 603.
15. Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (Eds. 2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC : National Academy Press.
16. Perrenoud, P. (1991). Towards a pragmatic approach to formative evaluation. In P. Weston (Ed. Assessment of pupil achievement: Motivation and school success (pp. 79 101). Amsterdam : Swets & Zeitlinger.
17. Sadler, R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119 144.
18. Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29 (7 4 14.
19. Shepard, L. A. (2008). Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. In C. A. Dwyer (Ed. The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning. New York : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Skinner, B. F. (1954). The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 24, 86 97.
21. Slavin, R. E. (1987). Mastery learning reconsidered. Review of Educational Research, 57, 175 214.
22. Sleeman, D., Kelly, A. E., Martinak, R., Ward, R. D., & Moore, J. L. (1989). Studies of diagnosis and remediation with high school algebra students. Cognitive science, 13, 551 568.
23. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.
24. Wiliam, D., & Black, P. (1996). Meaning and consequences: A basis for distinguishing formative and summative functions of assessment British Educational Research Journal, 22 (5 537 548.