The purpose of this study is to assess whether academic achievement in fact increases after the introduction of high-stakes tests. The first objective of this study is to assess whether academic achievement has improved since the introduction of high-stakes testing policies in the 27 states with the highest stakes written into their grade 1-8 testing policies.
Amrein-Beardsley, A., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). The Impact of High-Stakes Tests on Student Academic Performance.
This paper is a review of the literature on classroom formative assessment.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in education, 5(1), 7-74.
In recent years the number of states that have adopted or plan to implement end of course (EOC) tests as part of their high school assessment program has grown rapidly. While EOC tests certainly offer great promise, they are not without challenges. Many of the proposed uses of EOC tests open new and often complex issues related to design and implementation. The purpose of this brief is to support education leaders and policy makers in making appropriate technical and operational decisions to maximize the benefit of EOC tests and address the challenges.
Brief, A. P. (2011). State End-of-Course Testing Programs.
In this paper we take up the question of model choice and examine three competing approaches. The first approach, (SGPs) framework, eschews all controls for student covariates and schooling environments. The second approach, value-added models (VAMs), controls for student background characteristics and under some conditions can be used to identify the causal effects of schools and teachers. The third approach, also VAM-based, fully levels the playing field so that the correlation between school- and teacher-level growth measures and student demographics is essentially zero. We argue that the third approach is the most desirable for use in educational evaluation systems.
Ehlert, M., Koedel, C., Parsons, E., & Podgursky, M. (2013). Selecting growth measures for school and teacher evaluations: Should proportionality matter?. National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research, 21.
This meta-analysis examines the impact of formative assessment.
Kingston, N., & Nash, B. (2011). Formative assessment: A meta?analysis and a call for research. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(4), 28-37.
The report is an overview of the key components of inclusive assessment and accountability and highlights how they fit together to form a cohesive whole.
Lehr, C., & Thurlow, M. (2003). Putting it all together: Including students with disabilities in assessment and accountability systems. Policy Directions No, 16.
The study investigates the correlation and predictive value of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) against the Michigan Educational Assessment Program's (MEAP) fourth grade reading assessment.
McGlinchey, M. T., & Hixson, M. D. (2004). Using curriculum-based measurement to predict performance on state assessments in reading. School Psychology Review, 33, 193-203.
The goal of this guide is to provide useful information about standardized testing, or assessment, for practitioners and non-practitioners who care about public schools. It includes the nature of assessment, types of assessments and tests, and definitions.
Mitchell, R. (2006). A guide to standardized testing: The nature of assessment. Center for Public Education.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a national assessment of what America's students know in mathematics, reading, science, writing, the arts, civics, economics, geography, and U.S. history.
National Center for Education Statistics
This report provides information on states that require students enrolled in courses that have an end-of-course (EOC) exam to take the EOC
Zinth, J. D. (2012). End-of-Course Exams. Education Commission of the States (NJ3).