21st Century Skills Assessment

A Partnership for 21st Century Skills e-paper

Why do we need assessments of 21st century skills?

Student assessment, whether by standardized tests or classroom-based measures,

is a cornerstone of effective teaching and learning. Taken as a whole, good
assessments can not only provide a reliable and valid measure of a student’s
learning and understanding, but also help guide both teachers and students on a
day-to-day basis.

Over the past two decades, assessment has played a central role in education
policy in the United States, as it has in other countries for many decades. Large-
scale, summative assessments, for example, are viewed as powerful levers for
influencing what happens in schools and classrooms, and as such, assessment
studies are routinely carried out to gauge the strengths and weaknesses of
students. Furthermore, with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001,
testing has become not only more routine but also increasingly influential and
focused on core content domains. Results from large-scale summative
assessments, along with other measures of achievement, are regularly used to
determine whether students can advance to the next grade, and to judge the
quality of schools and the educators who work in them.

In recent years, educators, business leaders, and policymakers in the U.S. have
questioned whether the current design of assessment systems focuses too much on
measuring students’ ability to recall discrete facts using multiple choice tests at the
cost of not adequately measuring a student’s ability to engage in and complete
complex thinking and problem-solving tasks. Outside observers of the U.S. school
system have been quick to note potential shortcomings, claiming that narrowly
focused high-stakes assessment systems produce at best only illusory student gains
(Ridgeway, McCusker and Pead 2004). The end result is a widening gap between
the knowledge and skills students are acquiring in schools and the knowledge and
skills needed to succeed in the increasingly global, technology-infused 21st century
workplace. While the current assessment landscape is replete with assessments
that measure knowledge of core content areas such as language arts, mathematics,
science and social studies, there is a comparative lack of assessments and analyses
focused on 21st century skills. Current tests fall short in several key ways:

• The tests are not designed to gauge how well students apply what they know
to new situations or evaluate how students might use technologies to solve
problems or communicate ideas.
 • While teachers and schools are being asked to modify their practice based on
standardized test data, the tests are not designed to help teachers make
decisions about how to target their daily instruction.
• Current testing systems are rarely designed to measure a school or district’s
contribution to learning from a student’s first day until his or her last day.

Meeting the demands of today’s world requires a shift in assessment strategies to

measure the skills now prized in a complex global environment. The Partnership for
21st Century Skills believes that such a shift is vital to the widespread adoption of
21st century skills in our schools. We must move from primarily measuring discrete
knowledge to measuring students’ ability to think critically, examine problems,
gather information, and make informed, reasoned decisions while using technology.
In addition to posing real world challenges, such assessments should accept a
range of solutions to a task. For example, one possible assessment of 21st century
skills would focus more on a student’s operational skills, such as her expertise in
using multiple sources appropriately and efficiently, rather than on whether or not a
correct response was submitted.

With spending on assessment development in the U.S. alone is expected to grow

into the billions of dollars this decade, it is vital that our investment focuses not
merely on fulfilling federal requirements, but on preparing today’s children to face
the challenges of tomorrow’s complex communities and workplaces.

How are summative and formative assessments different from one another
— and can they both support 21st century skills?

Assessments of 21st century skills, like assessments in general, fall under two broad
categories: summative and formative. All educators should be familiar with
summative tests, one common example being the National Assessment of
Educational Progress (NAEP) tests for reading, mathematics, science, writing, U.S.
history, civics, geography, and the arts. There also are summative classroom
assessments that, compared to the NAEP assessments, are administered more
narrowly and more frequently. Ideally, summative assessments of 21st century
skills should be given at the end of an instructional unit and provide accountability
as well as a measure of how schools, districts, and states are progressing in terms
of achieving 21st century skill competency in their students.

Formative assessment, by contrast, is a process that occurs during instruction using

activities that range from a performance task, to a thoughtful and thorough (though
not necessarily long) conversation between teacher and student. The Partnership
for 21st Century Skills believes formative assessments, along with summative
assessments, should be part of any school or districts’ overall assessment strategy
because they are integrally tied to teaching and learning. Consider the benefits of
formative assessments:
• Instead of merely checking students’ achievement, effective formative
assessments can actually enhance it. During the formative assessment, the

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 2

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
 focus is on making a student’s thought processes visible, so that a teacher
can adapt teaching strategies to better meet students’ needs. Black and
Wiliam (1998) explain it in this way: “[An] assessment becomes formative
assessment when the evidence is actually used to adapt teaching to meet
student needs.”
• Good formative tests clearly define the learning goals of an instructional unit,
and invite students to model their behaviors to fit those criteria and to
become more informed about themselves.
• As students become more aware of what and how they are learning, they
become more motivated. Hence educators need to build assessments for
learning, rather than assessments of learning. (Stiggins and Chappuis, 2006;
Quellmalz and Kozma, 2003).

Education experts recommend a balanced approach to using formative and

summative assessments and advocate that both types are important in order to
optimize teaching and learning. Assessment must be seen both as an instructional
tool for use while learning is occurring (formative), and as an accountability tool to
determine if learning has occurred (summative). Both functions are important and
should be used in concert in the classroom. An example of this concept in practice
is the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction’s Balanced Assessment System,
which comprises a continuum of assessments that includes formative, interim, and
large-scale testing varieties. Formative tests are used within and between lessons
to help educators determine next steps in a lesson; interim benchmark
assessments are given within and between instructional units to identify strengths
and gaps in instruction and curriculum; and large-scale assessments are
administered annually or bi-annually to measure school, district, and/or state
progress.

What are the characteristics of an effective summative assessment of 21st

century skills?

The primary goal of summative assessments is to determine whether the learning

that was intended actually occurred. Thus, a successful summative measure of 21st
century skills will produce data that is useful, valid, reliable, and fair so that it can
be used to inform curricular or policy decisions. Below is a list of several key
characteristics of effective summative assessments of 21st century skills.

Effective summative
assessments of 21st
century skills should: ∗
Example

∗
All examples in this document are just that: individual illustrations of a particular idea or
concept. The Route 21 database contains many more examples.

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 3

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
Focus on 21st century 21st century subject matter
skills and content (as includes, in addition to the
defined by the P21 standard core subjects,
Framework) important areas of study such as
global awareness, civic literacy,
etc., and skills, such as ICT
literacy, critical thinking,
problem-solving, and life skills.
Provide useful The assessment must be tied to
information about previously established learning
student achievement by goals for the teaching unit.
measuring the Assessing unimportant or trivial
comprehension, concepts is not an effective way
absorption and to assess student achievement.
application of higher-
order concepts.
Be valid. The assessment should measure
what it is supposed to measure.
Keeping questions short, to the
point, and free of ambiguity is
one way to assure this.
Be reliable. The assessment should provide
student scores that are not
affected by arbitrary factors. For
example, the number of items
and answer options on a test
should be high enough so that it
is unlikely that a student can get
a high score by simply guessing
randomly.
Be fair. The assessment must give the
same chance of success to all
students. Take-home tests that
require access to the Internet
may unfairly favor students from
higher-income families, for
Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills
All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
The K to the 8th Power
Technology Literacy
Assessment was
developed to assist
teachers and
administrators in
determining 6th, 7th,
and 8th graders’ level of
technology literacy. The
four-part, multiple-
choice test is aligned
with NETS standards
and proficiency
indicators.
The Cisco Networking
Academy Program
assessment and
curricular teams work
together to ensure that
what is included in each
assessment covers
important parts of the
curriculum and what
the instructors teach is
appropriately tested.
The Intermediate-Level
Geography Test created
by the National Council
for Geography
Education was revised
and reassessed in 2000
to ensure content
validity and reliability.
The Civic Outcomes for
Elementary School
Students assessment is
based on a set of valid
and reliable measures
of civic knowledge,
skills, attitudes, and
behaviors.
The UK’s Key Stage 3
ICT Literacy
Assessment
uses generic software
programs developed by
the QCA to provide the
4

Be administered widely.
example. same capabilities as
familiar productivity
software on the level
playing field of a non-
brand-specific platform.
This is important so that schools, The Program for
districts, states, as well as International Student
countries can be informed as to Assessment (PISA) is
whether learning has taken an internationally
place. It also allows educators to standardized
make comparisons within and assessment that is
between successively larger typically administered
populations of students (class, to 4,500-10,000
school, district, state, country). students in each
country. Sixty-two
countries have signed
up to participate in the
4th assessment in
2009.

What are characteristics of effective formative assessments of 21st century

skills?

The primary goal of formative 21st century tests is to make student learning and
understanding readily apparent, so that a teacher can adapt teaching strategies to
better meet students’ needs. Thus, successful formative assessments help
educators determine their students’ current knowledge, understandings,
misconceptions, and thinking processes. Below is a list of several key
characteristics of effective formative assessments of 21st century skills.

Effective formative
assessment of 21st
century skills
should: ∗
Example
Focus on 21st century 21st century subject matter includes, The Intel Education
skills and content (as in addition to the standard core Assessing Projects
defined by the P21 subjects, important areas of study tool is a database of
Framework) such as global awareness, civic assessments of hard-
literacy, etc., and skills, such as ICT to-measure 21st
literacy, critical thinking, problem- century skills like
solving, and life skills. critical thinking and
creativity.

∗
All examples in this document are just that: individual illustrations of a particular idea or
concept. The Route 21 database contains many more examples.

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 5

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
Make thinking visible Complicated, multi-dimensional, mClass: Math
by revealing the kinds real-world solutions rarely require diagnostic software
of conceptual mastery of a single, isolated skill or provides insight into
strategies a student understanding of a single subject students’
uses to solve a matter. Thus, a 21st century mathematical
problem. assessment must be able to thinking.
measure or observe a student’s
mastery along several different
axes. In addition, assessing student
work using established rubrics and
checklists is important. Not all
assessments need to be formal and
published.
Be structured so that This will help measure and clarify IMMEX is a problem-
educators can identify students’ knowledge-base and solving assessment
the background procedural proficiencies. software in which
knowledge a student students are
used to solve each presented with a
problem in real-time. problem, and can
access a palette of
menu options to
extract information to
solve the problem.
The program keeps a
record of the choices
each student makes.
Be largely Students need to hone the ability to TerraNova
performance-based apply content knowledge to critical Performance
and authentic, calling thinking, problem solving, and Assessments offer
upon students to use analysis tasks throughout their extended, open-
21st century skills. education, as well as understand ended tasks that
that successful learning is as much measure knowledge
about the process as it is about facts and critical process
and figures. In addition, tasks skills in Reading,
should mirror real-world situations Language Arts,
as much as possible, so that Writing and
students gain valuable training that Mathematics. They
will prepare them for success in present realistic
their future endeavors. scenarios and offer
students an
Authentic assessments use data and opportunity to
performance criteria that are related demonstrate
to the students’ projects. knowledge in unique
ways.
Generate data that can Evidence from formative assessment Princeton Review’s
be used to directly must be used, not just collected. formative
inform instructional Teachers need to be able to assessments are

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 6

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
practices. understand what the assessment designed to be
can reveal about the student’s administered
thinking in order to adapt their frequently and results
teaching to meet students’ needs. are reported in a
By discovering the background timely fashion and
knowledge, integration, or include an actionable
conceptual strategies that students analysis to help
may not have mastered, a teacher teachers interpret
can identify the skills that need results.
further work to adjust his or her
teaching.
Aim to build capacity Both teachers and students should DIAGNOSER is an
— both teachers’ and learn from formative assessments. interactive web-based
students’. Before a lesson is concluded, these program that provides
assessments can show where feedback to students
further teaching and learning is as they work through
needed, so teachers can discover their assignment.
ways to help students integrate 21st Teachers can view
century skills and knowledge into reports that detail
their learning, thereby building facets of their
pedagogical methods and student students' thinking
ability. about the assigned
topic and can use this
information to target
specific problem
ideas.
Be part of a 21st century skills assessment must BioLogica activities
comprehensive be ongoing. Students must visualize monitor students'
assessment their thought process and how it performance and
continuum. aligns with a strategy to solve or collect their
complete a problem. Since students’ investigations into
thought constructs are continually electronic portfolios
changing, formative assessment for later evaluation
should be regularly given so and assessment. They
students can see improvements in enable students to
their skills and strategies, as well as progress at their own
knowledge transfer to parallel or pace, and help the
related problems. teacher to identify
"teachable moments.”
Reflect an Formative assessments should relay The Full Option
understanding of to the student that high-quality Science System
learning as education involves a process of requires that students
multidimensional, knowledge integration, processing, produce a body of
integrated, and and performance. Students can then work related to their
revealed in focus on learning and integrating science
performance over 21st century skills to allow them to investigations.
time. conceptualize and think about Progress is assessed
problems, rather than divert focus using teacher

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 7

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
 only to procedures and answers. observation,
anecdotal notes,
student interviews,
and student written
work.

How can states create and implement assessments to promote 21st century
skills in their classrooms?

Implementing an assessment of 21st century skills strategy is a challenging process

that will require effort from educators at all levels of a state. Both summative and
formative assessments need to be aimed at core subject knowledge, as well as
learning and thinking skills, 21st century content, ICT literacy, and life skills. This
will require a large commitment from your state as well as the recognition that the
implementation process will be a gradual one and will require multiple cycles of
creation, implementation, and evaluation strategies. With that in mind, it is
important to start with the following actions:

1) Create necessary standards. Guidelines and standards need to be drawn

by the state for teachers and educators to begin the process of creating
summative and formative assessments. Assessments should be made to
match the units and lessons outlined in the states’ reformed standards. The
standards could provide examples of assessments as well as indicate how
and when to use them. For further assistance with this, see the Standards
section on the Route 21 website.

2) Develop, implement, evaluate and improve assessments. A plan must

be created to implement the created assessments into districts, schools, and
classrooms and to evaluate their effectiveness in adjusting teacher strategies
to target students’ 21st century skills. In addition, the assessments must be
evaluated, in terms of their adherence to state standards, their usefulness in
improving teaching and learning, and their effective use in the classroom.
Any or all of these aspects will probably require constant adjustment and
improvement across several years before truly effective strategies for
assessment can be realized. Structured research, consultations with
assessment experts, and regular multi-level, multidisciplinary discussions
amongst stakeholders will provide a strong preliminary step towards bringing
21st century skills into the education system.

3) Align formative and summative assessments to curriculum and

instruction. In many ways, assessment drives what is taught, as schools
focus resources and time on the content and skills that are tested. Helping
teachers understand how to integrate 21st century skills within their
classroom practice and how to adjust teaching strategies accordingly is a
vital step to reforming statewide assessment strategies.

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 8

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
 4) Develop a professional development strategy. A professional
development initiative that will help teachers incorporate skills necessary for
using assessments of 21st century skills, especially of the formative variety,
is another important step in the process. Utilizing this assessment strategy
will likely require the development of several new skills, including assessment
creation, implementation, analysis, and teaching strategy adjustment. For
further assistance with this, see the Professional Development section on the
Route 21 website.

Where can I learn more about assessments that support 21st century
skills?

Amabile, T.M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-
Verlag Incorporated.

Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261-271.

Andrade, A. (1999). The thinking classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Project Zero.
Retrieved May 5, 2007, from http://learnweb.harvard.edu/alps/thinking/index.cfm

Angelo, T.A., & Cross, K.P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook
for college teachers, 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Araisian, P.W. (1991). Classroom assessment. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Araisian, P. W. (2001). Classroom assessment, 2nd edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Askew, M., Brown, M., Rhodes, V., Wiliam, D., & Johnson, D. (1997). Effective
teachers of numeracy. London: King's College, University of London.

Assessment Reform Group. (1999). Assessment for learning: Beyond the black box.
Cambridge: University of Cambridge School of Education.

Association for Achievement and Improvement through Assessment. (2002). Self

Assessment. Birmingham, England: Author

Bangert-Drowns, R.L., Kulick, J.A., & Morgan, M.T. (1991). The instructional effect
of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 213-238.

Bernard-Powers, J., Darling-Hammond, L., Der Ramos, A., Kass, M., LaBoskey, V.,
& Markowitz, M., et al. (2000). Principles of high quality teacher development. San
Jose, CA: The Teacher Quality Collaborative.

Beyer, B. K. (1987). Practical strategies for the teaching of thinking. Boston: Allyn
& Bacon.

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 9

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for
learning: Putting it into practice. Berkshire, England: Open University Press.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in
Education, 5(1), 7-74.

Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box? Raising standards through
classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148. Retrieved May 8, 2007,
from http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/kbla9810.htm

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2001). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in
Education, March, 7-74.

Bowman, B.T., Donovan, M.S., & Burns, M.S. (Eds.). (2001). National Research
Council: Eager to learn: Educating our preschoolers. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.

Bruce, L. B. (2001). Student self-assessment: Making standards come alive.

Classroom leadership, 5(1), 1-6.

Buchler, B. (2003). Terms of engagement—Rethinking teachers' independent

learning traits. Naperville, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Retrieved April 11, 2007, from
www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/educatrs/profdevl/pd400.htm

Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2000). Building a system for assessing thinking. In A. L.
Costa (Ed.), Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking, (pp. 517-
534). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Crawford, V., & Toyama, Y. (2002). Assessment of student technology proficiency

and an analysis of the need for technology proficiency assessments: A review of
state approaches. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Duschl, R.D., & Gitomer, D.H. (1997). Strategies and challenges to change the
focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educational Assessment,
4(1), 37-73.

Elawar, M.C., & Corno, L. (1985). A factorial experiment in teachers' written

feedback on student homework: Changing teacher behavior a little rather than a
lot. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 162-173.

ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology. (1993). ERIC Digest:

Alternative assessment and technology. Syracuse, NY: Author.

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 10

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
Fontana, D., & Fernandes, M. (1994). Improvements in mathematics performance
as a consequence of self-assessment in Portuguese primary school pupils. British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 64(3), 407-417.

Frederiksen, J.R., & White, B.J. (1997). Reflective assessment of students' research
within an inquiry-based middle school science curriculum. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

Garrison, D.R. (1997, Fall). Self-directed learning: Toward a comprehensive model.

Adult Education Quarterly, 48(1), 18-34.

Guskey, T. R. (2005). Mapping the road to proficiency. Educational leadership,

63(3), 32-38.

Herman, J.L., Ashbacher, P.R., & Winters, L. (1992). A practical guide to alternative
assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.

Johnson, N., & Rose, L. (1997). Portfolios: Clarifying, constructing, and enhancing.
Lancaster, Pa.: Technomic Pub. Co.

Kennedy, M. (1991). Policy issues in teaching education. Phi Delta Kappan, 72(9),
661-666.

Kitsantis, A., Reisner, R. A., & Doster, J. (2004). Developing self-regulated

learners: Goal setting, self-evaluation, and organizational signals during acquisition
of procedural skills. The Journal of Experimental Education. 72(4), 269-288.

Kulm, G. (1994). Mathematics assessment: What works in the classroom. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Langer, E. J. (1989). Mindfulness. New York: Merloyd Lawrence.

Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Classroom assessment—
minute by minute, day by day, Educational Leadership, 63(3), 18-24.

Marzano, R. J. (1998). A theory-based meta-analysis of research on instruction.

Aurora, CO: McREL. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from
www.mcrel.org/PDF/Instruction/5982RR_InstructionMeta_Analysis.pdf

McCurdy, B.L., & Shapiro, E.S. (1992). A comparison of teacher monitoring, peer
monitoring, and self-monitoring with curriculum-based measurement in reading
among students with learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 26(2), 162-
180.

McMillan, J. H. (2000). Basic assessment concepts for teachers and school

administrators. College Park, MD: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and
Evaluation.

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 11

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
Moon, J., & Schulman, L. (1995). Finding the connections: Linking assessment,
instruction, and curriculum in elementary mathematics. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.

Neesom, A. (2000). Report on teachers' perception of formative assessment.

London: The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.

Nickerson, R. S. (1999). Enhancing creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed), Creativity

handbook, (pp. 392-430). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Noonan, B. & Duncan, R. (2005). Peer and self-assessment in high schools.

Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10(17), 1-8. Retrieved online May
5, 2007, from http://pareonline.net/pdf/v10n17.pdf

North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. (2003). enGauge 21st Century

skills: Literacy in the digital age. Naperville, IL: Author. Retrieved online May 8,
2007, from www.ncrel.org/engauge/skills/engauge21st.pdf

Paris, S., & Ayres, L. (1994). Becoming reflective students and teachers.
Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Pausch, L.M., & Popp, M.P. (1997). Assessment of information literacy: Lessons
from the higher education assessment movement. Retrieved October 30, 2001,
from http://www.ala.org/acrl/paperhtm/d30.html

Pellegrino, J.W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (2001). Knowing what students know:
The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.

Popham, W.J. (2006). Defining and enhancing formative assessment. Washington,

DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.

Quellmalz, E.S., & Haertel, G.D. (2006). Assessing new literacies in science and
mathematics. Menlo Park, CA: Center for Technology in Learning, SRI International.

Quellmalz, E.S., & Kozma, R. (2003). Designing assessments of learning with

technology. Assessment in Education, 10(3), 389-407.

Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28(1),

4-13.

Renyi, J. (1996). Teachers take charge of their learning: Transforming professional

development for student success. New York: National Foundation for the
Improvement of Education.

Ridgeway, J. MCCusker, S. & Pead, D. (2004). Literature review on e-assessment.

United Kingdom: Nesta Futurelab Series. Report 10.

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 12

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
Rolheiser, C., & Ross, J. A. (2000). Student self-evaluation—What do we know?
Orbit, 30(4), 33–36.

Sadler, D.R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems.
Instructional Science, 18(2), 119-144.

Sawyer, R. J., Graham, S., & Harris, K.R. (1992). Direct teaching, strategy
instruction, and strategy instruction with explicit self-regulation: Effects on the
composition skills and self-efficacy of students with learning disabilities. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 84(3), 340-352.

Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Developing self-efficacious readers and

writers: The role of social and self-regulatory processes. In J. T. Guthrie & A.
Wigfield (Eds.), Reading engagement (pp. 34-50). Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.

Scriven, M.S. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R. Tyler, R. Gagne, & M.

Scriven, (Eds.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation, (AERA Monograph Series on
Curriculum Evaluation). Chicago: Rand McNally.

Shepard, L. A. (2005). Linking formative assessment to scaffolding. Educational

leadership, 63(3), 66-70.

Stiggins, R.J. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment FOR learning.
Phi Delta Kappan. 83(10), 758-765.

Stiggins, R. & Chappuis, J. (2006). What a difference a word makes: Assessment

FOR learning rather than assessment OF learning helps students succeed. Journal of
Staff Development, 27(1), 10-14.

Stiggins, R. (2004). New assessment beliefs for a new school mission. Phi Delta
Kappan, 86(1), 22-27.

Stiggins, R.J. (1997). Student-centered classroom assessment, 2nd edition. Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Stiggins, R. J. (1994). Student-centered classroom assessment. New York:

Macmillan Publishing Company.

Svedkauskaite, A., & McNabb, M. (2004). Critical issue: Multiple dimensions of

assessment that support student progress in science and mathematics-- A
research-based exploration of how different kinds of assessment can improve
student achievement. Naperville, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Retrieved April 11, 2007, from
http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/science/sc700.htm

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 13

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.
Taylor, B. (1995). Self-directed learning: Revisiting an idea most appropriate for
middle school students. Paper presented at the Combined Meeting of the Great
Lakes and Southeast International Reading Association, Nashville, TN, Nov 11-15.
[ED395287]

Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). Differentiation of instruction in the elementary grades.

Champaign, IL: Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education.

Venezky, R. L., & Davis, C. (2002). Quo vademus? The transformation of schooling
in a networked world. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development. Retrieved May 10, 2007, from
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/48/20/2073054.pdf

Vispoel, W.P., & Austin, J.R. (1995). Success and failure in junior high school: A
critical incident approach to understanding students' attributional beliefs. American
Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 377-412.

Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and

improve student performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Washington, DC: American
Institute for Research.

Wilson, S. M., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of
professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional
development. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of Research in
Education (pp. 173-209). Washington, DC: American Educational Research
Association.

Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation: A peer-reviewed journal that

addresses issues of assessment.
http://pareonline.net/

Audio/Visual Resources

Edutopia Radio Show Archive: August 12, 2004, Authentic Assessment, Grant
Wiggins

Dr. Grant Wiggins, an expert in the hot topic of Assessment, will talk about
changing the way we measure student progress and authentic assessment.
http://www.edutopia.org/php/radio.php?id=R154

Copyright © 2007, Partnership for 21st Century Skills 14

All rights reserved. Last revised 10.14.07.