Instructional Alignment as a Measure of Teaching Quality

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 36, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 399-416

  Polikoff, Morgan S ^a   Porter, Andrew C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

assessment; measurement; psychometrics; school choice; survey research

Indexed keywords

EID: 84911861567     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: 19351062     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0162373714531851     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Organization; 1999:
2. Learning about teaching: Initial findings from the Measures of Effective Teaching Project. Seattle, WA: Author; 2010:
3. Gathering feedback for teaching: Combining high-quality observations with student surveys and achievement gains. Seattle, WA: Author; 2012:
4. Cueto S.,Ramirez C.,Leon J.Opportunities to learn and achievement in mathematics in a sample of sixth grade students in Lima, Peru.Educational Studies in Mathematics. 2006;62:25-55
5. D’Agostino J. V.,Welsh M. E.,Corson N. M.Instructional sensitivity of a state standards-based assessment.Educational Measurement. 2007;12:1-22
6. Danielson C.Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; 2007:
7. Ferguson R. F.The Tripod Project framework. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2008:
8. Freeman D. J.,Belli G. M.,Porter A. C.,Floden R. E.,Schmidt W. H.,Schwille J. R.The influence of different styles of textbook use on instructional validity of standardized tests.Journal of Educational Measurement. 1983;20:259-270
9. Gamoran A.,Porter A. C.,Smithson J.,White P. A.Upgrading high school mathematics instruction: Improving learning opportunities for low-achieving, low-income youth.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 1997;19:325-338
10. Greer E. A.Examining the validity of a new large-scale reading assessment instrument from two perspectives. Urbana, IL: Center for the Study of Reading; 1995:
11. Grossman P.,Loeb S.,Cohen J.,Hammerness K.,Wyckoff J.,Boyd D.,Lankford H.Measure for measure: The relationship between measures of instructional practice in middle school English language arts and teachers’ value-added scores. Washington, DC: National Center for the Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research; 2010:
12. Hill H. C.,Blunk M.,Charalambous C.,Lewis J.,Phelps G. C.,Sleep L.,Ball D. L.Mathematical knowledge for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: An exploratory study.Cognition and Instruction. 2008;26:430-511
13. Kurz A.Handbook of accessible achievement tests for all students: Bridging the gaps between research, practice, and policy. Elliott S. N.Kettler R. J.Beddow P. A.Kurz A., ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2011:99-129.
14. McCaffrey D. F.,Sass T. R.,Lockwood J. R.,Mihaly K.The intertemporal variability of teacher effect estimates.Education Finance and Policy. 2009;4:572-606
15. McDonnell L. M.Opportunity to learn as a research concept and a policy instrument.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 1995;17:305-322
16. Mihaly K.,McCaffrey D. F.,Staiger D. O.,Lockwood J. R.A composite estimator of effective teaching. Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; 2013:
17. Papay J. P.Different tests, different answers: The stability of teacher value-added estimates across outcome measures.American Educational Research Journal. 2012;48:163-193
18. Pianta R. C.,Hamre B. K.Conceptualization, measurement, and improvement of classroom processes: Standardized observation can leverage capacity.Educational Researcher. 2009;38:109-119
19. Polikoff M. S.Instructional sensitivity as a psychometric property of assessments.Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. 2010;29 (4): 3-14
20. Polikoff M. S.The association of state policy attributes with teachers’ instructional alignment.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2012a;34:278-294
21. Polikoff M. S..Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Conference of the National Council of Measurement in Education; 2012bVancouver, British Columbia, Canada; 2012b.
22. Polikoff M. S.Instructional alignment under No Child Left Behind.American Journal of Education. 2012c;118:341-368
23. Polikoff M. S.,Fulmer G. W.Refining methods for estimating critical values for an alignment index.Journal for Research on Educational Effectiveness. 2013;6:380-395
24. Polikoff M. S.,Porter A. C.,Smithson J.How well aligned are state assessments of student achievement with state content standards?.American Educational Research Journal. 2011;48:965-995
25. Popham J. W.Instructional insensitivity of tests: Accountability’s dire drawback.Phi Delta Kappan. 2007;89:146-155
26. Popham J. W.,Husek T. R.Implications of criterion-referenced measurement.Journal of Educational Measurement. 1969;6:1-9
27. Porter A. C.The uses and misuses of opportunity-to-learn standards.Educational Researcher. 1995;24 (1): 21-27
28. Porter A. C.Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice.Educational Researcher. 2002;31 (7): 3-14
29. Porter A. C.,Kirst M. W.,Osthoff E. J.,Smithson J.,Schneider S. A.Reform up close: An analysis of high school mathematics and science classrooms. Madison: Wisconsin Center for Education Research; 1993:
30. Porter A. C.,McMaken J.,Hwang J.,Yang R.Common core standards: The new U.S. intended curriculum.Educational Researcher. 2011;40:103-116
31. Porter A. C.,Polikoff M. S.,Smithson J.Is there a de facto national intended curriculum? Evidence from state content standards.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2009;31:238-268
32. Porter A. C.,Smithson J. L.,Blank R.,Zeidner T.Alignment as a teacher variable.Applied Measurement in Education. 2007;20:27-51
33. Rothstein J.Teacher quality in educational production: Tracking, decay, and student achievement.Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2010;125:175-214
34. Rowan B.,Camburn E.,Correnti R.Using teacher logs to measure the enacted curriculum: A study of literacy teaching in third-grade classrooms.Elementary School Journal. 2004;105:75-101
35. Ruiz-Primo M. A.,Shavelson R. J.,Hamilton L.,Klein S. P.On the evaluation of systemic science education reform: Searching for instructional sensitivity.Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2002;39:369-393
36. Schmidt W. H.,Cogan L. S.,Houang R. T.,McKnight C. C.Content coverage differences across districts/states: A persisting challenge for U.S. education policy.American Journal of Education. 2011;117:399-427
37. Schmidt W. H.,McKnight C.,Houang R.,Wang H.,Wiley D.,Cogan L.,Wolfe R.Why schools matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2001:
38. Sebring P. A.Consequences of differential amounts of high school coursework: Will the new graduation requirements help?.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 1987;9:257-273
39. Smith M. S.,O’Day J. A.The politics of curriculum and testing: Politics of Education Association yearbook. Fuhrman S. H.Malen B., ed. Bristol, PA: Falmer Press; 1991:233-267.
40. Winters M. A.,Cowen J. M.Who would stay, who would be dismissed? An empirical consideration of value-added teacher retention policies.Educational Researcher. 2013;42:330-337
41. Yoon B.,Resnick L. B.Instructional validity, opportunity to learn, and equity: New standards examinations for the California mathematics renaissance. Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of Evaluation; 1998: