Center for Assessment team members write and present extensively on topics relating to assessment and accountability. As part of our mission and in order to increase and improve assessment and accountability practices nationally, we make our guides, presentations, papers, reports and other resources widely available.
This paper discusses how the NGSS differ from previous standards, some key structural challenges in designing assessments of the NGSS, and then provides examples of how claims in the form of achievement level descriptors (ALDs) might be formulated.
This policy brief summarizes our paper, presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, on the design considerations for balanced systems of assessment. We also focus on several factors that have served as barriers to the implementation of balanced assessment systems in school districts and states and offer an agenda for advancing practice.
The paper, presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, presents a discussion of design considerations for balanced systems of assessment as well as an in-depth analysis of several factors that have served as barriers to the implementation of balanced assessment systems in school districts and states.
In this paper, Chris Domaleski, Juan D’Brot, and Leslie Keng, outline recommended principles to guide the establishment of a standard-setting process for accountability systems and to describe a framework for implementing standard setting. The principles and framework are based on concepts, approaches, and considerations from establishing performance standards in assessment systems. The authors use two state examples, in partnership with Russel Keglovitz (Nevada) and Ann Michelle Neal (UT), to help make the principles more concrete and steps in the standard setting framework more practical for implementation.
In this paper, Senior Associates Leslie Keng and Juan D’Brot outline practical guidelines and considerations as states get their accountability systems up and running. The authors describe a framework that states can use to guide the development of their accountability implementation plan and put guardrails in place to help validate accountability system outcomes. They explore the operational workflow through the three main stages of operational implementation: input, processing, and output.