[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-601672-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":80,"doc-detail-601672-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":73,"head_meta":75,"extra_data":77,"updated_unix":79},105,"en","toward-educational-testing-reform-inside-reading-achievement-tests","Toward Educational Testing Reform - Inside Reading Achievement Tests","","The commentary examines standardized reading achievement tests at the item level using the U.S. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) as a prototype, and proposes an alternative approach influenced by a UK initiative. It builds on critiques from earlier works that challenged prevailing achievement testing practices, noting those reforms remain relevant but lacked workable methodology. The discussion also explains why test content is rarely analyzed, citing secrecy, security concerns, limited adult interest, and the common reduction of results to a single score.",{"@graph":14,"@context":72},[15,34,55],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/","Exam",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/toward-educational-testing-reform-inside-reading-achievement-tests/601672/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/toward-educational-testing-reform-inside-reading-achievement-tests/601672.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"anakgang17","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-27","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":33},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",{"@type":56,"mainEntity":57},"FAQPage",[58,64,68],{"name":59,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"What is the commentary’s main focus regarding achievement testing?","Question",{"text":62,"@type":63},"It focuses on standardized reading achievement tests and examines them at the item level. It then offers alternative methodology aligned with an evaluation vision described earlier.","Answer",{"name":65,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":66},"How does the NAEP prototype shape the proposed approach?",{"text":67,"@type":63},"The U.S. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is used as a prototype to analyze standardized reading achievement tests at the level of individual items.",{"name":69,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":70},"Why are standardized test contents rarely examined in practice?",{"text":71,"@type":63},"The commentary cites secrecy and confidentiality, emphasis on security and cheating prevention, limited adult interest in the tests, and the tendency to treat small samples or single-number results as sufficient.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":74,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":76,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":78,"site_id":7},601672,1792469583,{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":82},"success",[83,87,91,94,99,104,109,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":84,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":88,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":92,"slug":93},70,"exam",{"id":95,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":96,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":98},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":100,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":101,"show_sort_weight":102,"slug":103},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":105,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":106,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":110,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":95,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":131},{"doc_id":78,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":33,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":33,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},962090883568,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_a8503ba1806abce46bf441b54a3ca4cd","| COMMENTARY |  |\n| --- | --- |\n| education policy analysis archives\u003Cbr>A peer-reviewed, independent, open access, multilingual journal | \u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>epaa\u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>aape |\n|  | Arizona State University |\n| Volume 21 Number 90 December 20th, 2013 ISSN 1068-2341 |  |\n\nToward Educational Testing Reform: Inside Reading Achievement Tests  \nDick Schutz  \n3RsPlus, Inc.  \nUnited States  \nCitation: Schutz, D. (2013). Toward educational testing reform: Inside reading achievement tests. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(90) . Retrieved [date], from  \n[http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1288](http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1288)  \nAbstract: The commentary (1) uses the U. S. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) as a prototype for examining standardized reading achievement tests atthe item level, and (2) sketches an alternative based on an initiative underway in the United Kingdom.  \nKeywords: achievement testing; NAEP  \nHacia una Reforma de los exámenes educativos: Un análisis de las pruebas deaprovechamiento de lectura  \nResumen: Este comentario (1) usa la Evaluación Nacional de Progreso Educativo (NAEP) como prototipo para examinar las pruebas de rendimiento estandarizadas delectura a nivel de los ítems individuales, y (2) esboza una alternativa basada en unainiciativa en marcha en el Reino Unido.  \nPalabras clave: Pruebas de rendimiento; NAEP  \nPara uma reforma de testes educacionais: uma análise da leitura de testes de  \ndesempenho.  \nJournal website: [http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/ ](http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/  Manuscript)[ Manuscript](http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/  Manuscript) received: 12/19/2012  \nFacebook: /EPAAA Revisions received: 11/12/2013  \nTwitter: @epaa_aape Accepted: 11/12/2013  \nEducation Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 21 No. 90 Commentary 2  \nResumo: Este comentário (1) usa a Avaliação Nacional do Progresso Educacional (NAEP) como um protótipo para analisar o desempenho de leitura padronizada evidênciaa nível de itens individuais, e (2) apresenta uma alternativa baseada em uma iniciativalançada no Reino Unido.  \nPalavras-chave: probas de desempenho; NAEP  \nIntroduction  \nThis commentary picks up where two books end. The books together present a critique of prevailing achievement testing practice that has not been refuted, but the practices prevail. The first book, Toward the Reform of Program Evaluation, was published in 1980, just a few years before A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983) triggered the long-term crusade for educational “reform.” The book summarizes the work of the Stanford Evaluation Consortium, a multi-disciplinary, multi-institution initiative that operated between 1973 to 1979, in which leading scholars under the leadership of Lee Cronbach exchanged views and arrived at consensus on educational policy issues?. Following the precedent of Martin Luther, the book outlines “95 Theses.”A sense of the Consortium’s goals can be gained from an extract of five theses:  \n• Accountability emphasizes looking back in order to provide praise and blame. Evaluation is better used to understand events and processes for the sake of guiding future activities.  \n• It is better for an evaluative inquiry to launch a small fleet of studies than to put all theresources into a single approach.  \n• Merit lies not in the form of inquiry but in relevance of information.  \n• External validity—that is, the validity of inferences that go beyond the data—is the crux. Increasing internal validity by elegant design often reduces relevance.  \n• The evaluator is an educator; success is to be judged by what others learn.  \nObviously, the Consortium’s theses did not have the same effect as Luther’s; the book has been long out of print and has had no identifiable impact on testing practices to date. Although the term“reform” in educational parlance has been reduced to an honorific label attached to whatever nostrum is being proposed, the reforms formulated by the Consor","cbCaitrorD3fA5CM","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaitrorD3fA5CM","pdf",1064378,32,"English","# Introduction\n# Critique of prevailing achievement testing\n## Accountability and evaluation goals\n## Limits of current testing practice\n# Focus on standardized reading tests\n## Reasons test content is rarely examined\n# Toward an alternative methodology","[{\"question\":\"What is the commentary’s main focus regarding achievement testing?\",\"answer\":\"It focuses on standardized reading achievement tests and examines them at the item level. It then offers alternative methodology aligned with an evaluation vision described earlier.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the NAEP prototype shape the proposed approach?\",\"answer\":\"The U.S. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is used as a prototype to analyze standardized reading achievement tests at the level of individual items.\"},{\"question\":\"Why are standardized test contents rarely examined in practice?\",\"answer\":\"The commentary cites secrecy and confidentiality, emphasis on security and cheating prevention, limited adult interest in the tests, and the tendency to treat small samples or single-number results as sufficient.\"}]","Toward Educational Testing Reform - Inside Reading Achievement Tests | PDF",1792093213,81]