Interim reading assessments frustrate teachers and students and devalue what students are learning, even though they鈥檙e intended to provide useful information about student progress and help teachers target instruction throughout the year. They have not moved the needle on reading proficiency or reducing inequities, as new confirm.

Today, we鈥檙e issuing a clarion call to assessment stakeholders at all levels: Do better for teachers, so they can do better for students.

Right now, periodic reading tests prompt students to 鈥渇ind the main idea鈥� or identify a 鈥減oint of view鈥� 鈥� discrete standards and skills that don鈥檛 add up to reading comprehension. They are misaligned with the on how kids learn to read well and ignore the foundational role of knowledge in reading comprehension. Reading is a meaning-making endeavor, and comprehension is an outcome that occurs when readers apply a dynamic set of reading processes and knowledge to a text.

But that鈥檚 not what we鈥檙e measuring. Consider this fourth-grade Reading Standard 3 for literature: 

Describe in depth a character, setting, or event in a story or drama, drawing on specific details in the text (e.g., a character鈥檚 thoughts, words, or actions).

Students could miss a test item tied to this standard because of weak decoding skills, insufficient vocabulary, difficulties parsing syntax or transitions, or insufficient background knowledge. Often, it鈥檚 a combination of these factors, not misunderstanding the standard itself, that contributes to a wrong answer. But the interim assessments we give students today can鈥檛 identify what went wrong.

Reporting test results by standards, strategies, genre or any single construct confuses cause and effect. Answering a question based on a standard is an effect of comprehension, not a cause. And a student鈥檚 response to any one question tied to a standard does not predict how well that student will do on a similar question using a different text.

It鈥檚 time to transform. Few schools 鈥� or teachers 鈥� will move to text-focused classrooms and abandon using standards as the organizing force for daily lessons if the assessments they鈥檙e provided use an outdated, ineffective approach. It鈥檚 a vicious and damaging cycle. There鈥檚 a better way.

Transforming Assessment Questions and Classroom Conversations 

We need new assessments that reflect the research base and diagnose the degree to which actual reading comprehension is occurring. 

Assessments should focus students on the most challenging sections of a text and pose questions that can determine whether students navigated the passage for meaning. Questions also should address what world knowledge can be learned from reading the text carefully. And, questions should focus on challenging vocabulary or phrases to see if students understand the contributions that vocabulary makes to meaning. Only then should tests feature standards-based questions that fit the text to determine if students鈥� comprehension reflects the depth and complexity called for by the standards. (For an example of this approach, see the Case Study .) 

Such assessments would provide more meaningful information and play a more powerful role in the classroom. Rather than issuing reports on mastery of this or that standard, assessment developers need to release their passages and items in full, along with guidance on how to discuss the results with students. Then teachers could use interim assessments to deconstruct student thinking in class, by revisiting reading assessment texts and asking students to share their thoughts, passage by passage, about each question they encountered and explain why they answered questions as they did. 

This is a low-tech, labor-intensive, and high-impact way to use interim data to inform instruction. We learn from our mistakes, and in the case of comprehension questions, the richest discoveries will come not from asking which items students missed, but by asking why. Students can go astray for a variety of reasons, and the best way to identify the path they followed, or where comprehension broke down, is to ask them what they were thinking. The challenges any text presents will vary, but the number and types of obstacles are not infinite. As obstacles are revealed, teachers 鈥� and eventually, students 鈥� can lead discussions that explore how best to overcome them. This collaborative approach enhances comprehension for all students, expanding their understanding by recognizing how ideas, language, and vocabulary interact with knowledge to make meaning. 

Deconstructing assessments with students connects instruction directly to the science of reading comprehension rather than treating reading as a disjointed series of atomized elements. Teachers might find that what they are already doing to support students鈥� reading comprehension is on the right track, but they need to do more of it, or some areas require less attention. Over time, teachers and students will recognize the nature of the various obstacles that complex text presents and how these can be addressed. In other words, assessments can do what is intended of them: inform instruction. 

Teachers face a learning curve, and these candid, text-driven conversations take time to do well. However, it is hard to imagine a more powerful way for teachers to support students in learning about texts, probing their thinking, tackling common challenges, deepening comprehension, and exploring the suite of constructs known as literacy. 

Contextualizing Assessments Is Key

An even more enduring and essential reform is to ensure tests actually measure what students are learning. Better interim reading assessments, then, would not only reflect the science of reading comprehension but they also would be based in curriculum and connected to the books and topics students study in class. 

This vision rejects the false premise that reading comprehension is a content-neutral skill that can be taught and tested in the abstract. Rather than asking students to address items tied to random passages they may not know anything about, a contextualized approach to reading assessment would offer a multidimensional view of students鈥� reading comprehension. It would be more fair, authentic and equitable, and would more accurately mirror the literacy tasks students will encounter after graduation.

It’s time to invest genuine energy and resources into creating interim assessments that provide actionable insights and align with research and the real world. Current assessments are standards-specific and knowledge-agnostic 鈥� the inverse of what research and experience tell us teachers and students need. This approach is a closed loop that is steering teachers and students off-course. 

Rather than assess frequently, study the error patterns in data meetings, map those errors onto matching discrete skills or standards, isolate those standards, and instruct teachers to repurpose reading into a relentless repeating pattern of practicing said standards 鈥� interim assessments, whether created by assessment providers or curriculum publishers, simply must focus on the real and varied causes of breakdowns in comprehension.  

Developers need to revamp their tests to tackle the challenges inherent in content-rich text. They need to abandon the practice of reporting by state standards, strategies or any other atomized element. They need to release items that allow teachers and students to thoroughly analyze and comprehend what students are learning. 

Designing the right tests will empower and incentivize the right teaching and make reading tests genuinely valuable to educators and students. The responsibility and power rests with interim assessment providers and publishers, as well as the state and local leaders who procure them. Test developers, hear our call: We need an interim assessment do-over.

Susan Pimentel is co-founder of StandardsWork, a nonprofit education consultancy that sponsors the Knowledge Matters Campaign. She was the lead author of the Common Core State Standards for English/language arts literacy and led development of the Knowledge Matters Review Tool. 

David Liben has worked with schools and districts nationwide to improve student learning for over 20 years.  He is the former principal of a high-performing school in Harlem and is the co-author of two highly acclaimed books on reading.

Missouri students are showing progress on standardized tests administered by the state, with results in some categories approaching 鈥� and even exceeding 鈥� pre-pandemic levels.

But in other areas 鈥� most notably English language arts 鈥� students continue to struggle.

The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education revealed preliminary scores in the Missouri Assessment Program, or MAP, to the State Board of Education Tuesday.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 蜜桃影视 Newsletter

Pamela Westbrooks-Hodge, a board member from Pasadena Hills, said she was 鈥渁 little deflated that we didn鈥檛 see more growth and progress.鈥�

DESE is implementing programs to address low levels of literacy, an issue throughout the United States, with interventions based on the science of reading and .

Westbrooks-Hodge said the intervention has worked like triage care; it 鈥渟topped the bleed鈥� and scores are static.

鈥淲e made lots of great investments in the last two years, and I think we鈥檙e going to see the fruit of that as our score starts to increase,鈥� she said. 鈥淎ll of these interventions are working. They鈥檙e stabilizing our educational system, and now we can start layering growth on top of that.鈥�

English language arts scores remain below pre-pandemic levels, according to data presented Tuesday, with 56% of students scoring in the 鈥渂asic鈥� or 鈥渂elow basic鈥� range. This percentage has held steady since 2022.

Lisa Sireno, assistant commissioner of quality schools, said it takes 鈥渃ontinuous, sustained focused implementation with fidelity at the local level, up to five years, before we start to see results on large-scale measures.鈥�

She noted that teacher shortages could be impacting the scores, as a battle of the 2023-24 school year.

When looking at scores across all subjects and grades, there is an observable improvement since 2021鈥檚 tests. That year, 24% of scores were in the 鈥渂elow basic鈥� range. That鈥檚 fallen to 22% this year, still higher than the 19% below basic in the  last pre-pandemic tests in 2019. The number of scores in proficient and advanced ranges are one-percent less than 2019鈥檚 achievement.

Math scores are exceeding pre-pandemic levels, with a one-percent boost in the advanced category compared to 2019 when looking at grades 3-8. Sireno noted that middle-school math has exceeded pre-pandemic levels.

Sireno expects additional analysis, especially as educators look at local-level data.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: info@missouriindependent.com. Follow Missouri Independent on and .

Gov. Mike DeWine and the state Department of Education are paying more than $7.5 million in federal Covid relief funds to make the online lessons available for all Ohio middle school students for the next three school years. Students can log in to over 1,000 digital math lessons in class, with tutors and even at home tailored to their abilities and learning needs.

Along with adding support for in-person tutoring at schools, Zearn Math is the state鈥檚 biggest new strategy for pandemic recovery for this upcoming school year. 

鈥淥ne priority鈥s to provide students with tools to accelerate their learning, both for literacy and numeracy,鈥� said Chris Woolard, Ohio鈥檚 interim state education superintendent. 鈥淶earn Math is providing Ohio students increased opportunities to access grade-level math concepts no matter where they are.鈥�

Though student test scores in all subjects fell during the pandemic, math has been a particular concern in Ohio and nationally. In Ohio, the statewide proficiency rate in math fell 14 points from 66 percent to 52 percent during the pandemic, compared to eight in reading from 67 to 59 percent. Though scores for middle schoolers have rebounded some, proficiency rates for sixth, seventh and eighth grades were all still down by at least 10 points in 2022 results.

Score drops are higher for Black and low-income students, as well as for students learning English as a second language.

Data from Ohio鈥檚 spring 2023 tests will be released next month.

Nationally, the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress scores from 2022 showed the biggest drop in math for 4th and 8th graders since 1990, sparking calls for better intervention to help students.

How much Ohio teachers will use Zearn is still unclear. It鈥檚 not required and has not been well-promoted. Officials of the Ohio Council of Teachers of Mathematics said DeWine and the state did not consult them before contracting with Zearn.

鈥淭he announcement was the first that we had heard about it,鈥� said Bowling Green State University Professor Gabriel Matney, the council鈥檚 president.

Others said they were unfamiliar with the program, though the state has planned online webinars in September and October about how to use it and Zearn has since contacted the council.

Other Ohio educators are skeptical. Chad VanArnhem, superintendent of the Kirtland school district, an affluent rural district near Cleveland, said Zearn Math helped his students a few years ago 鈥� at first.

鈥淲e have found that online platforms and the gamification that comes with a lot of them, lose their luster after a few years,鈥� VanArnhem said. 鈥淪tudents eventually became less interested and motivated so we moved to another program.鈥�

A nonprofit company in New York City, Zearn claims to be used by one fourth of all elementary students in the U.S. and a million middle school students. It has gained prominence since the pandemic when the company made national news by providing some of the earliest national data about falling math scores and student recovery in the country.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is making Zearn part of its $1.1 billion push to improve national math skills over the next four years. And states like Colorado, Delaware, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Tennessee and Texas, along with Washington, D.C., are using Zearn in math tutoring and classes. And because the online program was readily available during pandemic school closures, Zearn鈥檚 sales grew 20 times larger from 2019 to 2021, according to one researcher.

Zearn has enthusiastic support from officials like Matthew Blomsted, Nebraska鈥檚 education commissioner, who told Congress last fall that it has been a big part of math recovery there since 2021, both during the school year and in summer programs.

The data on Zearn鈥檚 effectiveness is limited or not done by independent or accomplished researchers. Improvement results cited by Blomsted were partially prepared by Zearn. Boasts on its website of students in Washington, D.C.,and Louisiana making gains compared to non-Zearn users are backed by Zearn reports. A claim of students making 1.3 years of progress using Zearn in a single school year is attributed to a Harvard graduate student, not a professor.

A 2019 study by Johns Hopkins University researchers showed preliminary promising results, though cautioned that use of the program can be inconsistent, along with how well teachers are trained in using the program, so measuring gains can be hard.

Following a , during which he pointed to data from statewide assessments as being 鈥渁mong our most valuable tools鈥� in helping students recover from pandemic-related learning losses, the Collaborative for Student Success reached out to other state officials across the country who have been leading on data collection to guide efforts in accelerating learning.

Tennessee Education Commissioner Penny Schwinn agreed to share her department鈥檚 rationale on moving forward with state assessment this year 鈥� and how the state now plans to use the data to benefit schools, parents, and students.

This discussion was organized after Tennessee lawmakers pausing much of the state鈥檚 test-based accountability system, and after Schwinn had publicly defended the administration of tests, saying 鈥渋t鈥檚 important to know how our kids are doing, and it’s important for our families to know.”

Q: Why are you committed to the administration of statewide testing this year and the use of collected data to help guide educational recovery efforts in Tennessee schools?

Schwinn: We know student assessments help families and educators get an accurate picture of what our students know, where there are opportunities for growth, and how they can best support students. Moreover, we owe that level of honesty and transparency to our families to ensure they can better partner and support their child鈥檚 growth and progress.

Simply put, when we are able to measure student growth and learning through statewide assessments, we are able to best focus our efforts and student supports. We鈥檙e tremendously grateful to share that priority and understanding with both the Governor and Tennessee General Assembly, and as we support districts in their strategic ESSER [Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund] spending, we want to ensure we have that critical roadmap for responsible investments.

How do you envision your staff and the Tennessee Department of Education using the data you collect this year to make decisions about what’s next for public schools in Tennessee? 

Tennessee鈥檚 accountability system is central to the academic progress made in the state over the last decade and provides a critical view of how well educators, schools, and districts are serving all students.

Our team relies on the data to support strategy, best practices, and implementation across all our districts. Only with that information can we strategically invest money, time, and energy that our students and communities deserve. Understanding where our students are at this year will continue to provide critical insights to our state, districts, and educators as we tackle those learning gaps head-on.

How were you, other education leaders, and advocacy organizations in Tennessee able to reach broad agreement on the importance of statewide testing this year? 

Tennessee is fortunate to have an active, committed group of education stakeholders who share the same belief of the importance of statewide testing this year. We know those honest conversations about data and growth are essential to move the needle further, farther, and faster than has occurred before.

Some of your counterparts had sought to seek a blanket testing waiver from the Education Department, which the Biden administration has said it won鈥檛 do. Do you believe that would have been good policy? Would such waivers have led to increased pressure on you and your counterparts to suspend testing? 

Regardless of USDoE action, Tennessee will hold the line on assessments because we owe that level of reporting and transparency to our taxpayers and communities. Districts and educators need a roadmap for strategic, responsive supports. Moreover, parents deserve clear, easy-to-understand information about how their child and their child鈥檚 school is performing.

That being said, we also know the COVID-19 pandemic has created the need for common-sense flexibilities regarding student grades, educator evaluations, and school and district accountability. Tennessee鈥檚 hold harmless legislation ensures we can maintain priorities for honest reporting while also recognizing this year has been anything but normal, and our education community has been impacted as a result.

Should the federal government be offering waivers for state accountability systems while requiring that the tests are still administered to every student? Do we need the data if not for accountability? 

In Tennessee, we appreciate the Governor and General Assembly鈥檚 commitment to hold harmless for the 2020-21 school year, removing any negative consequences associated with evaluations and accountability, when districts meaningfully participate in state assessments. On Jan. 21, the Tennessee General Assembly took action by passing the Accountability Hold Harmless Law (SB7001/HB7003) to hold schools, teachers, and students harmless from negative consequences resulting from the 2020-21 TCAP assessments. This law excludes student growth data generated from this year鈥檚 TCAP assessments from a teacher鈥檚 evaluation unless such inclusion results in a higher overall final evaluation score for the teacher. In turn, that means assessment scores would only be incorporated into evaluations or accountability measures if it benefited the teacher, school, or district. We want to reward the tremendous work of our educators, districts, and students who grew despite the challenges and disruptions of the year. Further, we want to have an accurate roadmap for the 2021-2022 school year.

Should districts simply be able to decide which test to administer this year, rather than the TCAP? Why is it important that the statewide test be administered on top of any local testing?

Statewide tests are essential for that continuity and understanding of growth over time. Though we value that local decision-making, we can鈥檛 compare dissimilar tests and varied assessments district to district. TCAP provides us the accurate picture of where Tennessee students are and what supports are needed to offset any learning loss. Further, it gives the state a clearer sense of the areas of opportunity and growth we can foster and support across regions.

Related 鈥� A few of our other recent interviews with key education leaders about the pandemic: 

• Social-Emotional Learning: Expert Elizabeth Englander on preserving SEL development during the pandemic, the key to managing screen time 鈥� and why families should eat dinner together (Read the full interview)
• Equity: 4 Black mothers reflect on parent activism, self-determination and the fight for educational change post-pandemic (Read the full interview)
• Family Engagement: National Parent Union鈥檚 Keri Rodrigues on public school disenrollment amid the COVID crisis (Read the full interview)
• Go Deeper: See our complete archive of 74 Interviews