Multiple measures: Toward tiered systems

Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 13-17

  Baker, Eva L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Assessment; Model; Testing; Validity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84991041419     PISSN: 07311745     EISSN: 17453992     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.2003.tb00123.x     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999) Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
2. Baker, E. L. (1997, Autumn) Model-based performance assessment. Theory Into Practice, 36, 247–254.
3. Baker, E. L. (2002) Design of automated authoring systems for tests. In National Research Council, Board on Testing and Assessment, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (Ed.), Technology and assessment: Thinking ahead: Proceedings from a workshop (pp. 79–89). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
4. Baker, E. L., Abedi, J., Linn, R. L., &Niemi, D. (1996) Dimensionality and generalizability of domain-independent performance assessments. Journal of Educational Research, 89, 197–205.
5. Baker, E. L., Linn, R. L., Herman, J. L., &Koretz, D. (2002, Winter) From the directors: Standards for educational accountability systems. The CRESST Line, 1–4.
6. Black, P., &Wiliam, D. (1998) Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5, 7–74.
7. Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of education goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans, Green & Company.
8. Commission on Instructionally Supportive Assessment. (2001) Building tests to support instruction and accountability: A guide for policymarkers (James Popham, Commission Chair). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved June 29, 2002, from http://www.aasa.org.
9. Gong, B., &Hill, R. (2001, March) Some considerations of multiple measures in assessment and school accountability. Presentation at the Seminar on Using Multiple Measures and Indicators to Judge Schools' Adequate Yearly Progress Under Title I (sponsored by CCSSO & US DOE), Washington, DC.
10. Improving America's Schools Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-382, 108 Stat. 3518 (1994).
11. Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., &Dunbar, S. B. (1991) Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria. Educational Researcher, 20(8), 15–21. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ436999).
12. Millman, J., (Ed.) (1997) Grading teachers, grading schools: Is student achievement a valid evaluation measure? Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
13. National Council on Education Standards and Testing. (1992) Raising standards for American education. A report to Congress, the Secretary of Education, the National Education Goals Panel, and the American people. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
14. Niemi, D. (1996) Assessing conceptual understanding in mathematics: Representation, problem solutions, justifications, and explanations. Journal of Educational Research, 89, 351–363.
15. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, £115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
16. Pellegrino, J., Chudowsky, N., &Glaser, R. (Eds.). (2001) Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessments (Committee on the Foundations of Assessment, Board on Testing and Assessment, Center for Education, Division on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
17. Wildavsky, A. (1993) Speaking truth to power: The art and craft of policy analysis. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.