NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Showing all 3 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Popham, W. James; Keller, Tom; Moulding, Brett; Pellegrino, James; Sandifer, Paul – Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 2005
This article presents a rejoinder to the commentaries on the authors' article titled, "Instructionally Supportive Accountability Tests in Science: A Viable Assessment Option?" The commentaries offer a series of well warranted cautions regarding the adoption of any form of large-scale accountability testing. However, the authors contend…
Descriptors: Accountability, Science Instruction, Student Evaluation, High Stakes Tests
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Popham, W. James – Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 1993
Current successes and failures in U.S. educational measurement are reviewed, focusing on criterion-referenced testing. Pluses and minuses are listed for the following: (1) the move toward authentic assessment; (2) the dominance of criterion-referenced assessment; and (3) item response theory applications. Each area is a double-edged sword. (SLD)
Descriptors: Academic Achievement, Accountability, Criterion Referenced Tests, Educational Change
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Popham, W. James; Keller, Tom; Moulding, Brett; Pellegrino, James; Sandifer, Paul – Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 2005
Instructionally supportive accountability tests (a) measure students' mastery of only a modest number of extraordinarily important curricular aims; (b) describe what is to be assessed in clear, teacher-palatable language; and (c) report each student's results for every curricular aim assessed. To determine the suitability of such assessments to…
Descriptors: Science Tests, Physical Sciences, Accountability, Educational Legislation