Can Interim Assessments be Used for Instructional Change

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. Supporters argue that these tests will provide data on student understanding; teachers’ analysis of this data will in turn lead to greater differentiation of instruction and better teaching of content, leading to improved student learning. Much of the belief in the potential of interim assessments comes from the body of research on formative assessment, particularly those studies showing that “short-cycle” formative assessments—largely those that are based on information collected by teachers in their classrooms and that provide feedback to teachers within a single class period—are a powerful means to improve the quality of teaching and raise student performance (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Crooks, 1988; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Natriello, 1987).

Authors: Margaret Goertz, Leslie Nabors Olah, Matthew Riggan

894_role-policy-brief-final.pdf