Teachers report changing high-quality instruction to match state and interim test formats, limiting deep learning opportunities¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Teachers report cutting projects, discussions, and model-drawing and adding test-preparation activities to match state and interim assessment formats, trading off features of high-quality learning experiences. → Badrinarayan 2025

Evidence¶

Badrinarayan 2025¶

Badrinarayan, A. (2025). Instructionally relevant assessment systems: What is the role of performance assessments? Learning Policy Institute. https://doi.org/10.54300/411.469

q2 · i? · qualitative · r1

A multi-state listening tour asked teachers and district instructional leaders what instructional changes they make and why; educators unprompted reported altering instruction to match statewide summative and interim assessments, including cutting projects and adding test review.

"teachers frequently share that they change high-quality instructional materials and approaches to better match the tests. These changes typically serve to limit opportunities for deep, engaging, and meaningful learning."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The book argues that quality assessments can provide accurate and timely information to maximize student learning, in contrast to punitive testing rhetoric — related
• Multiple-choice state tests are prone to ceiling and floor effects and do not measure higher-order skills well — related
• Wise's simulation under continuous learning recommended projection-based weighted averages for aggregating interim scores — related