Commentary: Evaluating the Validity of Formative and Interim Assessment

106 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.

An argument for formative assessment with science learning progressions (2018, background): “Although used synonymously, “learning progressions” in more subject-general literature (e.g., Heritage, 2007) have a slightly different meaning.”
Understanding Formative Assessment Insights from Learning Theory and Measurement Theory (2013, background): “Formative assessment does not take the form of a particular instrument or task (Moss, 2008), but is defined by its purpose (Shepard, 2009), which is to help form, or shape, a student’s learning during the learning process.”
The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment (2011, background): “A community of researchers and educators interested in articulating learning progressions is engaged in a related conversation, as the community struggles to construct and conceptualize learning progressions, beyond canonical conceptual attainments (e.g., Alonzo & Gotwals, in press; Sikorski & Hamme”
Teachers’ Use of Assessment Data to Inform Instruction: Lessons from the past and Prospects for the Future (2015, background): “Drawing on Perie and colleagues’ (2009) study, Shepard (2009) suggested that the usefulness of interim assessments seems to “erode in practice” (p. 35).”