Getting at student understanding - the key to teachers' use of test data

Teachers College Record

Volumn 114, Issue 11, 2012, Pages

  Supovitz, Jonathan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875082977     PISSN: 01614681     EISSN: 14679620     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Amir, R., & Tamir, P. (1992, April). Assessing students' alternative frameworks through triangulation: An in-depth study of conceptions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
2. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. C., (1991). Effects of frequent classroom testing. Journal of Educational Research, 85, 89-99.
3. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. 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. Bergan, J. R., Sladeczek, I. E., Schwarz, R. D., & Smith, A. N. (1991). Effects of a measurement and planning system on kindergartners' cognitive development and educational programming. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 683-714.
5. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-75.
6. Boudett, K. P., City, E. A., & Murnane, R. J. (2005). Data wise. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
7. Brennan, R. (Ed.). (2006). Educational measurement (4th ed.). Washington, DC: National Council on Measurement in Education and Greenwood Publishing Group.
8. Bunker, J. (2007). The case for ongoing assessment based on cognitive research. Unpublished research report.
9. Clerk, D., & Rutherford, M. (2000). Language as a confounding variable in the diagnosis of misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 703-717.
10. Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test validation. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 443-507). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
11. Daro, P., Mosher, F. A., & Corcoran, T. (2011). Learning trajectories in mathematics: A foundation for standards, curriculum, assessment, and instruction (Research Report No. 68). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
12. Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
13. Doran, R. L. (1972). Misconceptions of selected science concepts held by elementary school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 9(2), 127-137.
14. Downing, S. M., & Haladyna, T. M. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of test development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2002). Leading schools in a data-rich world. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 1003-1022). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
16. Engel-Clough, E., & Driver, R. (1986). A study of consistency in the use of students' conceptual frameworks across different task contexts. Science Education, 70, 473-496.
17. Fuchs, L. S., Deno, S. L., & Mirkin, P. K. (1984). Effects of frequent curriculum-based measurement and evaluation on pedagogy, student achievement, and student awareness of learning. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 449-460.
18. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Karns, K., Hamlett, C. L., & Katzaroff, M. (1999). Mathematics performance assessment in the classroom: Effects on teacher planning and student problem solving. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 609-646.
19. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Stecker, P. M. (1989). The effects of curriculum based measurement on teachers' instructional planning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 51-59.
20. Gilman, D., Hernandez, I., & Cripe R. (1970). The correction of general science misconceptions as a result of feedback mode in computer-assisted instruction. Proceedings of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Minneapolis, MN.
21. Goertz, M. E., Nabors Oláh, L., & Riggan, M. (2009). From testing to teaching: The use of interim assessments in classroom instruction (CPRE Research Report No. RR-65). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
22. Guttman, L., & Schlesinger, E. M. (1967). Systematic construction of distractors for ability and achievement test items. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 27, 569-580.
23. Haladyna, T. M., & Downing, S. M. (1993). How many options is enough for a multiple choice item?. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 999-1010.
24. Hamilton, L. (2003). Assessment as a policy tool. Review of Research in Education, 27, 25-68.
25. Heritage, M. (2010). Formative assessment and next generation assessment systems: Are we losing an opportunity? Washington, DC: Council of Chief School Officers.
26. Heritage, M., Kim, J., Vendlinski, T., & Herman, J. L. (2009). From evidence to action: A seamless process in formative assessment?. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 28(3), 24-31.
27. Herman, J. L. (1992). What research tells us about good assessment. Educational Leadership, 49(8), 74-78.
28. Ingram, D., Louis, K. S., & Schroeder, R. (2004). Accountability policies and teacher decision making. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1253-1282.
29. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996) The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-284.
30. Leithwood, K,, Steinbach, R., & Jantzi, D. (2002). School leadership and teachers' motivation to implement accountability policies. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(1), 94-119.
31. Nakiboglu, C., & Tekin, B. B. (2006). Identifying students' misconceptions about nuclear chemistry. A study of Turkish high school students. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(11), 1712-1718.
32. Nabors Oláh, L., Lawrence, N. R., & Riggan, M. (2010). Learning to learn from benchmark assessment data: How teachers analyze results. Peabody Journal of Education, 85(2), 226-245.
33. Perie, M., Marion, S., & Gong, B. (2009). Moving toward a comprehensive assessment system: A framework for considering interim assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 28, 5-13.
34. Petit-Cunningham, E. (2008). A preliminary analysis of the impact of OGAP professional development and use on teacher knowledge: Strategies and errors. Unpublished research report.
35. Petit, M., Laird, R., & Marsden, E. (2010). A focus on fractions: Bringing research to the classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge Press.
36. Ramaprasad, A. (1983) On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28, 4-13.
37. Riggan, M., & Nabors Oláh, L. (2011). Locating interim assessments within teachers' assessment practice. Educational Assessment, 16(1), 1-14.
38. Rodriguez, M. C. (2005). Three options are optimal for multiple-choice items: A metaanalysis of 80 years of research. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(2), 3-13.
39. Sadler, R. (1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119-144.
40. Sadler P. (1998). Psychometric models of student conceptions in science: Reconciling qualitative studies and distractor-driven assessment instruments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(3), 265-296.
41. Shepard, L. A. (2001). The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 1066-1101). Washington, DC: AERA.
42. Shepard, L. (2005, October). Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. Paper presented at the ETS Invitational Conference, The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning, New York, NY.
43. Stiggins, R. (2006). Balanced assessment systems: Redefining excellence in assessment. Portland, OR: Educational Testing Service.
44. Supovitz, J. A. (2009). Can high stakes testing leverage educational improvement? Prospects from the last decade of testing and accountability reform. Journal of Educational Change, 10(2), 211-227.
45. Supovitz, J. A., & Brennan, R. T. (1997). Mirror, mirror on the wall, which is the fairest test of all? An examination of the equitability of portfolio assessment relative to standardized tests. Harvard Educational Review, 67(3), 472-506.
46. Supovitz, J. A., & Klein, V. (2003). Mapping a course for improved student learning: How innovative schools systematically use student performance data to guide improvement. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
47. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Fitzpatrick, A. R. (1989). Multiple-choice models: The distractors are also part of the item. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 161-176.
48. Wiliam, D., & Leahy, S. (2006, April). A theoretical foundation for formative assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
49. Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M. (2007). Integrating assessment with instruction: What will it take to make it work? In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 53-82). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.