-
Recent Posts
- Equitable Grading 04/09/2025
- Comparing states by only looking at overall NAEP average scores can provide incomplete analysis of performance 07/08/2025
- What does NAEP say about the Teachers College Reading and Writing Project? 07/08/2025
- Reading performance in the US is a serious problem 07/08/2025
- Grade 4 Reading – Is NAEP’s standard for proficiency set too high? 07/08/2025
- Math Anxiety 13/01/2025
- New article: Fact-checking Research Claims about Math Education in Manitoba 14/12/2024
Comments
- David D. Baskerville on Breaking the Spell of Math Reformists
- Albert B. Franklin on About Us / Comments
- Bryan on Comments on Zearn’s “Myth of the Math Kid”
- Betty Peters on Reading Before Writing
Authors
Tag Archives: protocols
Fordham Institute’s pretend research
The Thomas B. Fordham Institute has released a report, Evaluating the Content and Quality of Next Generation Assessments,[i] ostensibly an evaluative comparison of four testing programs, the Common Core-derived SBAC and PARCC, ACT’s Aspire, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ MCAS.[ii] … Continue reading
Posted in College prep, Common Core, Education policy, Education Reform, Ethics, K-12, Mathematics, Reading & Writing, research ethics, Richard P. Phelps, Testing/Assessment, Uncategorized
Tagged CCSSO, CRESST, evaluation, Fordham Institute, Gates Foundation, guidelines, HumRRO, protocols, review, rigor, SCOPE, standards, Student Achievement Partners, testing
3 Comments
