The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Moving Toward a Comprehensive Assessment System: A Framework for Considering Interim Assessments
Abstract
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.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815355 · Cited by 35,324
Assessment and Classroom Learning
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050102 · Cited by 8,152 · cited 7×
“is clear that the Black and Wiliam (1998) meta-analysis evaluated studies with formative”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialKluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 · Cited by 5,882
Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems
Sadler, D. R. (1989) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00117714 · Cited by 4,285
Working inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004) · Phi Delta Kappan · doi:10.1177/003172170408600105 · Cited by 1,323
Cited by
Measuring progressions: Assessment structures underlying a learning progression
Wilson, M. (2009) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20318 · Cited by 329
(2009) · ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania) · Cited by 300
Carlson, D., Borman, G. D., & Robinson, M. (2011) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/0162373711412765 · Cited by 249
Datnow, A., & Hubbard, L. (2015) · Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education · doi:10.1177/016146811511700408 · Cited by 176
Synergy and Tension between Large‐Scale and Classroom Assessment: International Trends
Volante, L., DeLuca, C., Adie, L., Baker, E., Harju‐Luukkainen, H., Heritage, M., Schneider, C., Stobart, G., Tan, K., & Wyatt‐Smith, C. (2020) · Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice · doi:10.1111/emip.12382 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Perie, M., Marion, S., & Gong, B.
- Venue
- Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-09
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 5-13
- ISSN
- 0731-1745 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-3992
- OpenAlex
- W2139126000
- Cited by
- 204
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 63.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Moving Toward a Comprehensive Assessment System: A Framework for Considering Interim Assessments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2009.00149.x
- The paper
- Perie, M., Marion, S., & Gong, B. (2009). Moving Toward a Comprehensive Assessment System: A Framework for Considering Interim Assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2009.00149.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.