Estimating critical values for strength of alignment among curriculum, assessments, and instruction

Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 381-402

  Fulmer, Gavin W ^a  

^a Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings   (United States)

Author keywords

assessment; educational policy; high stakes testing; standard setting

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958215605     PISSN: 10769986     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/1076998610381397     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Anderson L. W.,Krathwohl D. R.A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY: Longman; 2001:.
2. Bhola D. S.,Impara J. C.,Buckendahl C. W.Aligning tests with states' content standards: Methods and issues.Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. 2003;22:21-29.
3. Blank R. K. Models for alignment analysis and assistance to states. Council of Chief State School Officers Summary Document. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers; 2002:.
4. Calderhead J.,Robson M.Images of teaching: Student teachers' early conceptions of classroom practice.Teaching and Teacher Education. 1991;7:1-8.
5. Florida Department of Education. (2005). Next Generation Sunshine State Standards. Retrieved June 1, 2009, from www.floridastandards.org.
6. GlodM. (2009). 46 States, D.C. plan to draft common education standards. Washington Post. Retrieved June 1, 2009, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/31/AR2009053102339.html.
7. Ihaka R.,Gentleman R.R. : A language for data analysis and graphics.Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics. 1996;5:299-314.
8. Making valid and reliable decisions in determining adequate yearly progress. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers; 2002:.
9. Lemke R. J.,Hoerandner C. M.,McMahon R. E.Student assessments, non-test-takers, and school accountability.Education Economics. 2006;6:235-250.
10. Liang L. L.,Yuan H.Examining the alignment of Chinese national physics curriculum guidelines and 12th-grade exit examinations: A case study.International Journal of Science Education. 2008;30:1823-1825.
11. Linn R. L.The future of test-based educational accountability. Ryan K. E.Shepard L. A., ed. New York, NY: Routledge; 2008:3-24.
12. Linn R. L.,Baker E. L.,Betebenner D. W.Accountability systems: Implications of requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.Educational Researcher. 2002;31:3-16.
13. Liu X.,Fulmer G. W.Alignment between science curriculum and assessments in selected New York State Regents exams.Journal of Science Education and Technology. 2008;17:373-383.
14. Liu X.,Zhang B. H.,Liang L. L.,Fulmer G. W.,Kim B.,Yuan H. Q.Alignment between the physics content standards and standardized tests: A comparison among US-NY, Singapore, and China-Jiangsu.Science Education. 2009;93:777-797.
15. McCullough B. D.Microsoft Excel's "not the Wichmann-Hill" random number generators.Computational Statistics and Data Analysis. 2008;52:4587-4593.
16. Mathematics framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: US Department of Education; 2009:.
17. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Public Law Number 107-110 (2001).
18. Porter A. C.Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice.Educational Researcher. 2002;31:3-14.
19. Porter A. C.,Smithson J.,Blank R. K.,Zeidner T.Alignment as a teacher variable.Applied Measurement in Education. 2007;20:27-51.
20. R Development Core Team. (2005). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org.
21. Ross S. M.Introduction to probability and statistics for engineers and scientists. 3rd ed.Burlington, MA: Elsevier Academic Press; 2004:.
22. Rothman R.Imperfect matches: The alignment of standards and tests. Washington, DC: National Research Council; 2003:.
23. Rothman R.,Slattery J. B.,Vranek J. L.,Resnick L. B.Benchmarking and alignment of standards and testing. Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of Evaluation; 2002:.
24. Shavelson R. J.Statistical reasoning for the behavioral sciences. 3rd ed.Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon; 1996:.
25. Tomsho R. (2009). U.S. ties new funds to schools data. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved April 2, 2009, from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123860983393679075.html.
26. Learning standards for mathematics, science, and technology. Albany, NY: The State Education Department; 1996:.
27. Webb N. L.Issues related to judging the alignment of curriculum standards and assessments.Applied Measurement in Education. 2007;20:7-25.