From testing to teaching: The use of interim assessments in classroom instruction

Abstract

The past ten years have witnessed an explosion in the use of interim assessments by school districts across the country. A primary reason for this rapid growth is the assumption that interim assessments can inform and improve instructional practice and thereby contribute to increased student achievement. Testing companies, states, and districts have become invested in selling or creating interim assessments and data management systems designed to help teachers, principals, and district leaders make sense of student data, identify areas of strengths and weaknesses, identify instructional strategies for targeted students, and much more. Districts are keeping their interim tests even under pressure to cut budgets (Sawchuk, 2009). The U.S. Department of Education is using its Race to the Top program to encourage school districts to develop formative or interim assessments as part of comprehensive state assessment systems.Much of the rhetoric around interim assessments paints a rosy picture, often with the ultimate claim that such measures will lead to increased student achievement. Much of the belief in the potential of interim assessments to improve student learning comes from the growing body of research on formative assessment. However, the majority of this research has not focused on interim assessments themselves, but rather practices that are embedded within classroom instruction. Very few studies exist on how interim assessments are actually used, by individual teachers in classrooms, by principals, and by districts. Furthermore, we know little about how teachers and other educators use the results from such assessments, the conditions that support their ability to use these data to improve instruction, or the interaction of interim assessments with other classroom assessment practices. Our study begins to fill that vacuum. Disciplines Curriculum and Instruction | Educational Administration and

Locating Interim Assessments Within Teachers' Assessment Practice

“…In themselves, interim assessments appear limited in their capacity to inform teachers about students' thinking or problem solving (Goertz, Oláh, & Riggan, 2010), but among these teachers they gave direction to short-cycle assessments that may be better suited to that purpose. Other research suggests that short-cycle assessment practices may be better suited to conceptual diagnoses, as it provided teachers with more information about students' reasoning and problemsolving processes (Black & Wiliam, 1998).…”

Research on Data Use: A Framework and Analysis

“…In so doing, they have designed data use routines that serve as a form of surveillance (Goertz et al, 2010;Hallett, 2010;Honig et al, 2010;McDougall et al, 2007;Spillane et al, 2011). For example, Hallett (2010) shows how one principal in Chicago developed a routine by which she inspected teachers' grades and evidence from student work as a mechanism to see what was going on in teachers' classrooms and ensure that teachers were teaching to the standards.…”

“…But existing research suggests that some technological tools fall short when they create access to data that teachers do not find useful or relevant to their instructional decisions (Goertz et al, 2010;Means et al, 2009;Wayman et al, 2008;Young & Kim, 2009), limiting the degree to which they influence teachers' data use processes (Goertz et al, 2010). In addition, technological tools may be more effective in shaping interpretive processes when they are accompanied by training on how to use the system, something that is often lacking (Means et al, 2009 …”

“…These initiatives often incorporate multiple tools along with professional development and new technology. They include such diverse strategies as district initiatives that couple interim assessments linked to pacing guides and curriculum standards that teachers are required to administer and discuss in teacher teams (Christman et al, 2009;Clune & White, 2008;Goertz, Nabors Oláh, & Riggan, 2010); schoollevel inquiry projects that tend to focus on a broad range of data, use protocols to guide data discussions, and frequently involve trained facilitators and/or professional development (Copland, 2003;Gallimore, Ermeling, Saunders, & Goldenberg, 2009;McDougall et al, 2007;Porter and Snipes, 2006;); and district data use initiatives that engage individuals at multiple levels of the system in data routines, use technological tools and protocols, and involve professional development (Ikemoto & Honig, 2010;Kerr et al, 2006;Marsh et al, 2006;Supovitz, 2006) among others.…”

A classroom data literacy intervention for pre-service teachers

“…In Kerr et al's (2006) study of data use in three in-reform districts, less data use was associated with these factors: negative perceptions around the validity and availability of data; an inflexible curriculum; and, a lack of preparation. Finally, Goertz, Ol ah, and Riggan (2009) studied 45 elementary teachers' use of interim assessment data in mathematics within two districts. In their study, teachers collected and analyzed student data and used these data to identify which content to teach to which students, but less often varied specific methods for re-teaching in ways that reflected specific patterns in the data (e.g., errors).…”