Publication Date
| In 2025 | 0 |
| Since 2024 | 0 |
| Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
| Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 0 |
| Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 1 |
Descriptor
Source
| Thomas B. Fordham Institute | 1 |
Publication Type
| Numerical/Quantitative Data | 1 |
| Reports - Evaluative | 1 |
| Reports - Research | 1 |
| Speeches/Meeting Papers | 1 |
Education Level
| Elementary Secondary Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
| Maine | 2 |
| New Hampshire | 2 |
| Arizona | 1 |
| California | 1 |
| Colorado | 1 |
| Delaware | 1 |
| Idaho | 1 |
| Illinois | 1 |
| Indiana | 1 |
| Kansas | 1 |
| Maryland | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
| No Child Left Behind Act 2001 | 1 |
Assessments and Surveys
| National Assessment of… | 1 |
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Using Actual Student Work To Determine Cut Scores for Proficiency Levels: New Methods for New Tests.
Download full textKahl, Stuart R.; And Others – 1994
The accountability testing programs of many states have begun to make extensive use of constructed-response questions and to report test results in terms of percentages of students at various proficiency or performance levels. This paper describes the step-by-step procedures for two standard-setting methods recently used for the New Hampshire…
Descriptors: Accountability, Constructed Response, Cutting Scores, Educational Assessment
Cronin, John; Dahlin, Michael; Adkins, Deborah; Kingsbury, G. Gage – Thomas B. Fordham Institute, 2007
At the heart of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is the call for all students to be "proficient" in reading and mathematics by 2014. Yet the law expects each state to define proficiency as it sees fit and design its own tests. This study investigated three research questions related to this policy: (1) How consistent are various…
Descriptors: Federal Legislation, Mathematics Tests, Test Validity, Reading Tests
