Local assessment systems are being marketed as formative, benchmark, predictive, and a host of other terms. Many so-called formative assessments are not at all similar to the types of assessments and strategies studied by Black and Wiliam (1998) but instead are interim assessments. In this article, we clarify the definition and uses of interim assessments and argue that they can be an important piece of a comprehensive assessment system that includes formative, interim, and summative assessments. Interim assessments are given on a larger scale than formative assessments, have less flexibility, and are aggregated to the school or district level to help inform policy. Interim assessments are driven by their purpose, which fall into the categories of instructional, evaluative, or predictive. Our intent is to provide a specific definition for these “interim assessments” and to develop a framework that district and state leaders can use to evaluate these systems for purchase or development. The discussion lays out some concerns with the current state of these assessments as well as hopes for future directions and suggestions for further research.
[1]
Dylan Wiliam,et al.
Assessment for Learning: Why, What and How?
,
2009
.
[2]
A. Kluger,et al.
The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory.
,
1996
.
[3]
P. Black,et al.
Assessment and Classroom Learning
,
1998
.
[4]
D. Sadler.
Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems
,
1989
.
[5]
Etienne Wenger,et al.
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation
,
1991
.
[6]
R. Glaser,et al.
Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment
,
2001
.
[7]
Scott Marion,et al.
A Framework for Considering Interim Assessments
,
2007
.
[8]
P. Black,et al.
Working inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom
,
2004
.
[9]
P. Black,et al.
Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment
,
2010
.