In this paper, we have outlined a formative evaluation model for classroom instruction. In addition, we provided an example of how the model was used recently to evaluate the performance of students in a ninth grade science program. This Comprehensive Achievement Monitoring approach to evaluation uses criterion-referenced tests.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
GorthW. P.SchriberP. and O'ReillyR. P., A training manual for Comprehensive Achievement Monitoring, Bureau of School and Cultural Research, New York State Education Department, Albany, N.Y., 1970.
2.
PinskyP., Mathematical models concerning the measurement of educational achievement levels, Technical Memorandum No. TM-29, School of Education, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1971.
3.
GorthW. P. and HambletonR. K., Measurement considerations for criterion-referenced testing and special education, Journal of Special Education, 6, 303–314, 1972.
4.
HambletonR. K. and GorthW. P., Criterion-referenced testing: Issues and applications, Center for Educational Research Technical Report #13, School of Education, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1971.
5.
GorthW. P.GraysonA.PopejoyL. and StroudT., A tape-based data bank from educational research or instructional testing using longitudinal item sampling, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 29: 175–177, 1969.
6.
GorthW. P.GraysonA. and StroudA., A computer program to tabulate and plot achievement profiles of longitudinal achievement testing using item sampling, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 29: 179–180, 1969.
7.
GlaserR. and NitkoT., Measurement in learning and instruction. In ThorndikeR. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement, pp. 625–670, American Council on Education, Washington, 1971.
8.
HambletonR. K. and NovickM. R., Toward an integration of theory and method for criterion-referenced tests, ACT Research Report No. 53, The American College Testing Program, Iowa City, Iowa, 1972.
9.
LordF. M., Estimating norms by item-sampling, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 22: 259–267, 1962.
10.
LordF. M. and NovickM. R., Statistical theories of mental test scores. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1968.
11.
O'ReillyR. P. and HambletonR. K., A CMI model for an individualized learning program in ninth grade science, Center for Educational Research Technical Report #14, School of Education, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1971.
12.
HambletonR. K., A Fortran IV program to generate CAM test schedules, Center for Educational Research, School of Education, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1971.
13.
BrachtG. H., Experimental factors related to aptitude-treatment interactions. Review of Educational Research, 40: 627–646, 1970.
14.
SheehanD. and HambletonR. K., An evaluative study of the Jamesville-DeWitt individualized science program (1971–1972), final report, Bureau of School and Cultural Research, New York State Education Department, Albany, N.Y., 1972.
