The Potential of Curriculum-Aligned Through-Year Models

To be fair, we engaged in some light test prep at other times during the school year by asking students to answer a randomly selected released item as a “Bell Ringer” or “Ticket Out the Door” activity, but ultimately as soon as flowers started blooming, it was “go time” for testing.  As a middle school teacher, this meant 4-6 weeks of frantically covering topics I had not yet addressed, building students’ test-taking skills and endurance with practice assessments, and endlessly searching for released assessment items.

I can still remember my anxiousness at that time—and I likely passed those feelings on to my students. Unfortunately, those students received the basic message from teachers and school leaders like me that performance on this one assessment would determine their overall probability of “success” for the rest of their life.

— Why was the end-of-year state summative assessment test prep such a stand-alone process?

— Why did the other assessments that my students completed throughout the year not adequately prepare them for this end-of-year state summative assessment?

The simple answer: The tests did not speak to each other.

There was a lack of integration in the assessment system. There was no clear through-line between the diagnostic, teacher-created formative assessments, curriculum-provided unit assessments, commercially created interim assessments, and the end-of-year summative assessments that were put in front of my students.

When the tests don’t speak to each other, then each assessment:

• Requires students to learn and practice different assessment techniques
• Cannot scaffold to or fully assess the content and standards from which students received direct instruction and practice
• Provides only isolated data points that require a deeper level of analysis—analysis that teachers may not have received training on, or simply do not have the time to complete

Instead, what if we created an assessment system that ensures consistency while also providing teachers with the information they need to support students and students with a fair, clear, and comprehensible learning experience?

At Cognia, we believe that curriculum-aligned, through-year assessment is a way for educators to consistently measure learning, understand students’ needs, target and address learning gaps, and celebrate achievements in a manner that is relevant and practical within the classroom.

When these assessments are integrated into a larger assessment system, they can support a more coherent and balanced experience with consistent expectations for students and teachers.  This approach may be a change from the disjointed or inconsistent assessment systems that many teachers have experienced.

Cognia’s classroom assessments are intentionally aligned to the standards and skills emphasized in a district’s curriculum – AND rather than just one end of year administration, they are administered throughout the academic year.

Cognia’s classroom assessments are intentionally aligned to the standards and skills emphasized in a district’s curriculum – AND rather than just one end of year administration, they are administered throughout the academic year.  Our curriculum-aligned interim assessments include tasks aligned to high-quality, Ed Reports “green-rated” curricula such as Illustrative Mathematics (IM), EL Education (EL), OpenSciEd, and Core Knowledge. These assessments are available for grades kindergarten through high school in ELA, math, and science and can be customized to meet a specific scope and sequence and targeted assessment measures.

— What would it look like if this assessment system undergirded the education system?

— Would this approach to assessment be an initial step toward building a more coherent system of curriculum, instruction, and assessment?

Imagine assessments that are:

• Administered throughout the school year
• More proximate to student learning
• Actionable and have readily available data that is useful for teachers
• Seamlessly incorporated into the rituals and routines of daily classroom instruction

As we developed these assessments, we wanted to ensure that they could be integrated effectively into a larger assessment system and would not be a huge disrupter to the daily rituals and routines of the classroom. To this end, we worked to align them to end-of-year state summative assessments so that they shared a common structure, format, and set of expectations and could be administered within a class period.

To really understand the effectiveness of our curriculum-aligned interim assessments, we decided to participate in an initiative with Education First to explore a “new generation of through-year assessment solutions.” Coordinated by Education First, this effort was a collaboration between three assessment organizations (CenterPoint-now Cognia, NWEA, and New Meridian) and eight states, testing different versions of through-year assessments.

Our central question was this: If curriculum-aligned interim assessments can demonstrate predictive capabilities, producing similarities in both results and alignment with summative, could they supplement or supplant traditional end of year assessments?  

We collaborated with a district in Maryland and another in Wisconsin, that are teaching the Illustrative Mathematics (IM) middle grades curriculum and using our aligned interim assessments. In collaboration with Professor Dr. Hong Jiao from the University of Maryland, College Park, we compared the outcomes of our interim assessments with the results of Maryland’s and Wisconsin’s end of year assessments. Simultaneously, we examined the alignment between the standards assessed by our interim assessments and the states’ summative assessments.

The results of our study were promising!

The comparative analysis revealed that Cognia’s Illustrative Mathematics interim assessments effectively determined students’ performance on their respective state summative assessments. Dr. Jiao indicated that the scores from our “interim assessments predicted the state summative test scores with predictive power.” Moreover, she stated, “Adding the demographic variables including LEP (Limited English Proficiency) status, gender, and race increased the predictive power slightly.” From this finding, we learned that the additional variables enhanced the understanding of the predictive capability.

The content and skills tested in our interim assessments closely match those in the state summative tests, further reinforcing the reliability of our interim assessments as predictors of state test performance.

Additionally, our analyses uncovered a strong alignment between the standards and domains covered in both the interim and state summative assessments.  Meaning, the content and skills tested in our interim assessments closely match those in the state summative tests, further reinforcing the reliability of our interim assessments as predictors of state test performance.

These findings were beneficial for our partners. The Wisconsin school network indicated that the study allowed them to “critically examine the standards we were prioritizing against the standards assessed on our state assessment. Ultimately, that led us to identify gaps that we could address this year through curriculum and pacing decisions….”

Once again, we ask: if curriculum-aligned interims can demonstrate predictive capabilities, producing similarities in both results and alignment with summative, could they supplement or supplant traditional end of year assessments? 

The evidence from our study and the other studies from the Education First collaborative show that it is quite possible.  Learn more about these studies.

Our primary objective with these assessments is to create a cohesive system of curriculum, instruction, and evaluation. When these three essential elements align, we can ensure fair assessments for students and empower teachers with valuable insights to guide their instructional choices. We’re thrilled to continue our journey, expanding our research across districts and states. Our mission is to enhance classroom practices and make assessments more meaningful for both students and educators. With the right tools at our disposal, we’re committed to supporting educators every step of the way. As we look ahead, we envision a future where our partnership with educational communities has fostered significant, positive change in our education system, and we can’t wait to reflect on the impact we’ve made together.

Cheryl Harmon, Ed.D. is the Vice President of Learning Solutions at Cognia. Previously, Cheryl developed curriculum tools for a Khan Academy and Adobe Education partnership, and for Employment Learning Innovations. Prior to that, she was a senior director, instructional design at College Board where she managed the development of course materials and professional learning in humanities, world languages, and history Advanced Placement courses. Collectively, Cheryl has spent over twenty years as an instructional coach, technology specialist, K-12 classroom teacher, and instructor for higher education institutions, primarily in underserved communities.