Published Works

TeachThought

Paper-based or computer-based testing? Whichever meets students needs

Chad Barrett and Stuart Kahl (2016)

As the shift to digital continues in schools and classrooms, it’s easy to assume that computer-delivered assessments are the future of testing. While many education leaders extol the efficiency of this new model, paper testing shouldn’t be forgotten quite yet. [PDF]

Cognia (and Measured Progress)

Instructionally-sensitive assessments

Chad Barrett (2019)

Across the country educators are evaluating current instructional practices and implementing strategies designed to improve student learning. To evaluate students’ progress, educators administer multiple tests each year, including district-level interim and benchmark assessments and state-level annual summative assessments. Educators are using test results, along with other information gathered during instruction, to gauge whether changes made to instructional design and practice are working. [PDF]

Supporting new paradigms for educational accountability

Chad Barrett (2016)

When I learned that Linda Darling-Hammond, an educational researcher and policy advocate at Stanford University, was taking on the role of President and CEO of Learning Policy Institute, I was curious about the new organization and what its goals might be. So I did some research and found several articles that reveal her views on state educational accountability systems. One of the new institute’s goals is to work with states to put these views into practice. [PDF]

Online and paper testing: Are we looking at the differences closely enough?

Chad Barrett (2016)

Recently Parcc, Inc. reported student performance differences in the Spring 2015 PARCC assessments based on the mode of testing: online or paper. Benjamin Herold summarized the findings in two recent Education Week articles. He reported that the pattern of lower student performance for those taking the computer-based tests was most pronounced in English Language arts and middle school and high school mathematics (Herold, 2016a). Parcc, Inc. has not yet released research evidence or announced a plan to conduct research that may explain the mode differences. Herold reported that Parcc, Inc. is asking participating states to examine the differences and draw conclusions appropriate for their context. [PDF]

New peer review guidance from USDOE: Important information for state assessment teams

On September 25, 2015 the United States Department of Education (USDOE) released revised guidance for the peer review of state assessment systems. The guidance will be used during a new round of federal peer review that will start next year. The purpose of the guidance, says USDOE, is to “support States in meeting statutory and regulatory requirements under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA)” (USDOE, 2015). The new guidance comes 15 years after the start of the federal peer review process and more than six years after the last revision to the USDOE’s guidance. [PDF]