The Impact of Indiana's System of Interim Assessments on Mathematics and Reading Achievement

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 35, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 481-499

  Konstantopoulos, Spyros ^a   Miller, Shazia Rafiullah ^b   van der Ploeg, Arie ^b  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

interim assessments; randomized control experiment; student achievement

Indexed keywords

EID: 84886009116     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: 19351062     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0162373713498930     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Black P.,Wiliam D.Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment.Phi Delta Kappan. 1998;80:139-144.
2. Blanc S.,Christman J. B.,Liu R.,Mitchell C.,Travers E.,Bulkley K. E.,Lawrence N. R.Learning to learn from data: Benchmarks and instructional communities.Peabody Journal of Education. 2010;85:205-225.
3. Blank R.,Porter A.,Smithson J.New tools for analyzing teaching, curriculum, and standards in mathematics and science. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers; 2001:.
4. Boruch R.,Weisburd D.,Berk R.Handbook of quantitative criminology. Piquero A.Weisburd D., ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2010:481-502.
5. Bracey G. W.No Child Left Behind: Where does the money go?. Tempe: Education Policy Studies Laboratory, Arizona State University; 2005:.
6. Bulkley K. E.,Christman J. B.,Goertz M. E.,Lawrence N. R.Building with benchmarks: The role of the district in Philadelphia's Benchmark Assessment System.Peabody Journal of Education. 2010;85:186-204.
7. Carlson D.,Borman G. D.,Robinson M.A multi-state district-level cluster randomized trial of the impact of data-driven reform on reading and mathematics achievement.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2011;33:378-398.
8. Clune W. H.,White P. A.Policy effectiveness of interim assessments in providence public schools. Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research; 2008:.
9. Coe R.School improvement through performance feedback. Vischer A.Coe R., ed. Lisse, Netherlands: Swetz & Zeitlinger; 2002:3-26.
10. Cordray D.,Pion G.,Brandt C.,Molefe A.,Toby M.Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education; 2012:.
11. Datnow A.,Park V.,Wohlstetter P.Achieving with data: How high-performing school systems use data to improve instruction for elementary students. San Diego: University of Southern California, Rossier School of Education, Center on Educational Governance; 2007:.
12. Davidson K.,Frohbieter G.District adoption and implementation of interim and benchmark assessments. Los Angeles, CA: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing; 2011:.
13. Dunn K. E.,Mulvenon S. W.A critical review of research on formative assessment: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessment in education.Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation. 2009;14 (7): 1-11.
14. Faria A.,Heppen J.,Li Y.,Stachel S.,Jones W.,Sawyer K.,Palacios M.The use of interim assessment data in urban schools: Links among data use practices and student achievement. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research; 2012:.
15. Glick J. E.,White M. J.The academic trajectories of immigrant youths: Analysis within and across cohorts.Demography. 2003;40:759-783.
16. Goertz M. E.,Nabors-Olah L.,Riggan M.From testing to teaching: The use of interim assessments in classroom instruction. Philadelphia, PA: The Consortium for Policy Research in Education; 2010:.
17. Goren P.Data, data, and more data-What's an educator to do?.American Journal of Education. 2012;118:233-237.
18. Hattie J.,Timperley H.The power of feedback.Review of Educational Research. 2007;77:88-112.
19. Henderson S.,Petrosino A.,Guckenburg S.,Hamilton S.Measuring how benchmark assessments affect student achievement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast and Islands; 2007:.
20. Heritage M.Formative assessment: Making it happen in the classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press; 2010:.
21. Hill C. J.,Bloom H. S.,Black A. R.,Lipsey M. W.Empirical benchmarks for interpreting effect sizes in research.Child Development Perspectives. 2008;2:172-177.
22. Holland P. W.,Rubin D. B.Test equating. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1982:.
23. Indiana statewide testing for educational progress, plus: ISTEP+ 2010 technical report. Indianapolis, IN: Author; 2010:.
24. A long-term assessment plan for Indiana: Driving student learning. Indianapolis, IN: Author; 2006:.
25. Kingston N.,Nash B.Formative assessment: A meta-analysis and a call for research.Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. 2011;30 (4): 28-37.
26. Kluger A.,DeNisi A.The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory.Psychological Bulletin. 1996;119:254-284.
27. Kolen M. J.,Brennan R. L.Test equating: Methods and practices. New York, NY: Springer; 1995:.
28. Konstantopoulos S.Trends of school effects on student achievement: Evidence from NLS:72, HSB:82, and NELS:92.Teachers College Record. 2006;108:2550-2581.
29. Li Y.,Marion S.,Perie M.,Gong B.An approach for evaluating the technical quality of interim assessments.Peabody Journal of Education. 2010;85:163-185.
30. Luce T.,Thompson L.Do what works: How proven practices can improve America's public schools. Dallas, TX: Ascent Education Press; 2005:.
31. May H.,Robinson M. A.A randomized evaluation of Ohio's Personalized Assessment Reporting System (PARS). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Consortium for Policy Research in Education; 2007:.
32. Performance management report. Austin, TX: Author; 2009:.
33. Nabors-Olah L.,Lawrence N. R.,Riggan M.Learning to learn from benchmark data: How to analyze results.Peabody Journal of Education. 2010;85:226-245.
34. NyquistJ. (2003). Reconceptualizing feedback as formative assessment: A meta-analysis (Unpublished master's thesis). Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
35. Perie M.,Marion S.,Gong B.,Wurtzel J.The role of interim assessments in a comprehensive assessment system: A policy brief. Dover, NH: National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment; 2007:.
36. Porter A.Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice.Educational Researcher. 2002;31:3-14.
37. Quint J.,Sepanik S.,Smith J.Using student data to improve teaching and learning: Findings from an evaluation of the Formative Assessments of Student Thinking in Reading (FAST-R) program in Boston elementary schools. New York, NY: MDRC; 2008:.
38. Sadler D. R.Formative assessment and the design of instructional strategies.Instructional Science. 1989;18:119-144.
39. Sawchuk S.Testing faces ups and downs amid recession.Education Week. 2009;28 1 (31): 16-17.
40. Shadish W. R.,Cook T. D.,Campbell D. T.Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin; 2002:.
41. Slavin R. E.,Cheung A.,Holmes G. C.,Madden N. A.,Chamberlain A.Effects of a data-driven district reform model. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University's Center for Research and Reform in Education; 2011:.
42. Stiggins R.Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment for learning.Phi Delta Kappan. 2002;83:758-767.
43. Tobias S.Instructional design: Foundations. Gagne R., ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1987:207-231.