Evaluating the alignment among curriculum, instruction, and assessments: Implications and applications for research and practice

By Andrew T. Roach, Bradley C. Niebling, Alexander Kurz. 2008

118 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Opportunity to Learn (2016, background): “The SII logs (Rowan et al., 2004) are paper-and-pencil self-report measures on the time, content, and quality of instruction for a particular student and day rather than for a whole class. The logs are in two content areas at the elementary level only and have been used by thousands of teachers. Row”
Alignment of the Intended, Planned, and Enacted Curriculum in General and Special Education and Its Relation to Student Achievement (2010, methodology): “That is, the content experts determined the depth-of-knowledge level for each objective in the state content standards and all PAS items to employ Webb’s criteria for adequate alignment (see Roach et al., 2008).”
Using School Mission Statements for Reflection and Research (2011, background): “…wake of the NCLB Act, many educational research studies have focused on the alignment of assessment with instruction (e.g., Martone & Sireci, 2009; Roach et al., 2008); however, few studies have taken direct aim at systematically and empirically investigating the larger objectives of formal…”
Evaluating Alignment Between Curriculum, Assessment, and Instruction (2009, methodology): “, 2001) and is being used to address the many questions educators and policymakers have about patterns and differences in curriculum and instructional practices across classrooms, schools, districts, and states (Roach et al., 2008).”