1. FairTest: Testing Our Children released testing Our Children A Report Card on State assessment Systems in Septemberof 1997. See below for links to reports on the individual states and to http://www.fairtest.org/states/survey.htm

FairTest Make a donation of $30 or more and receive our newsletter, the Examiner, for a year. Testing Our Children FairTest released Testing Our Children: A Report Card on State Assessment Systems in September of 1997. See below for links to reports on the individual states and to the report's introduction (Also see Examiner articles on the survey , on our recommendations and on how the states scored .) Use our order form to purchase the full report ($30 for individual copies, 5 for $125) or the executive summary ($10 for individual copies, 5 for $40). States: Introduction or click on the state below: AK AL AR AZ ... WY We have also made available the full text of the state-by-state report (not including the executive summary overview) to be downloaded: Zipped WordPerfect 5.1 Version (124k) or Uncompressed WordPerfect 5.1 Version

2. ACT : ACT Assessment : Registering : Test Dates Information about test dates for the ACT assessment. ACT assessment Test Dates. (within the 50 United states) This test date restriction may continue for the 20032004 testing year. http://www.act.org/aap/regist/actdates.html

ACT Assessment Test Dates (within the 50 United States) Missed the late registration deadline? See Standby Testing Test Date Regular Registration Postmark Deadline (regular fee) Late Registration Period (regular fee plus late fee) September 28, 2002 (available only in Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, and Washington) August 23, 2002 October 26, 2002 September 20, 2002 December 14, 2002 November 8, 2002 February 8, 2003* January 3, 2003 April 12, 2003 March 7, 2003 June 14, 2003 May 9, 2003 No test centers scheduled in New York for February test date. Test Date Regular Registration Postmark Deadline (regular fee) Late Registration Period (regular fee plus late fee) September 27, 2003 (available only in Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, and Washington) August 22, 2003 October 25, 2003 September 19, 2003 December 13, 2003 November 7, 2003 February 7, 2004*

3. Code Of Fair Testing Practices In Education The code states the major obligations to professionals who develop or use educational tests. The code is meant to apply broadly to the use of tests in education (admissions, educational assessment, educational diagnosis, and student placement). http://www.ericae.net/code.txt

4. ERIC Clearinghouse On Assessment And Evaluation, Home Page statewide) achievement testing. We then describe a. new approach to assessment that we believe holds $. ment for states has doubled from approximately http://ericae.net/

x We provide balanced information concerning educational assessment, evaluation and research methodology. X x We provide resources to encourage the responsible use of educational data. X x We promote the best resources within our scope. Full-Text We have organized more than 550 of the best books and articles in our Assessment Library Check out our on-line journal Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation to learn the latest techniques. The articles in PARE have been downloaded more than 1.2 million times since we went on-line in November 1999 Thank you Due to your patronage, Alexa.com ranks us among the 10,000 most popular sites on the internet. Each day , 12,000 of you look at more than 65,000 web pages and transfer more than 780 megabytes. That's the equivalent to 175 copies of the King James Bible! Announcements/FYI March - Sorry, but we have dropped our newsfeed- the free service ended and the cost is way too high. For education news go to newsisfree.com We often receive requests for lists of tests and instruments that are in the public domain. Although we don't have such a list, we have created a page with something close While there are now hundred's of web sites offering No Child Left Behind resources. The authoritative site is, of course, the

5. Assessment Reform Network - Homepage capacity to move a proactive assessment agenda forward The content of education andtesting has been attention, successive retreats in many states from testing http://www.fairtest.org/arn/about.html

More about the ARN FairTest pages Make a donation of $30 or more and receive the Examiner for a year. The Assessment Reform Network was formed at FairTest to support and enhance efforts by parents, teachers, students, civil rights groups and others to prevent and end the harmful use of standardized tests in public education, and to promote the use of authentic assessments in the classroom, district and state level. The goal of the network is to help open doors for disadvantaged children and to improve the quality of education for everyone. The primary strategy of the project is to facilitate the of exchange of ideas, materials, activities and strategies among assessment reformers to enhance their expertise and capacity to successfully organize and affect changes in assessment practice and policy. The ARN started as a loose affiliation of individual parents, teachers, civil rights leaders researchers and others citizens concerned with the wide range of issues surrounding standardized testing and test misuse. It has since grown to include newly formed parent-led groups that have sprung up at the grassroots level in many states and cities in response to the growing misuse of tests and the damage inflicted on their children and schools. Several of these groups are forming larger alliances with teacher unions and educational professional organizations, civil rights groups, parent and student organizations and others.

6. Page Title Public and private group classes, tutoring, assessment testing, and custom courseware development. Located in Arizona, United states. http://www.trainingalacarte.com

7. Assessment Of Susceptibility Testing Practices For Streptococcus Pneumoniae --- assessment of Susceptibility testing Practices for Streptococcus pneumoniae United states, February 2000. Streptococcus pneumoniae http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5118a2.htm

Assessment of Susceptibility Testing Practices for Streptococcus pneumoniae - United States, February 2000 Streptococcus pneumoniae is the leading cause of community-acquired pneumonia, otitis media, and meningitis in the United States. Antimicrobial susceptibility results are important for guiding therapy decisions and monitoring emerging resistance patterns. Appropriate methods for pneumococcal susceptibility testing are recommended by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) ( ). Recommendations for pneumococcal susceptibility testing are reviewed annually and were the same in 2000 and 2001. To assess laboratory practices for Streptococcus pneumoniae susceptibility testing on sterile site isolates, in February 2000, CDC conducted a multistate survey of clinical laboratories. This report summarizes the survey results, which found that most practices of clinical laboratories were consistent with NCCLS recommendations; however, some inconsistencies were noted. As antimicrobial resistance in pneumococci continues to worsen, clinical laboratories should be aware of emerging resistance patterns and follow new recommendations to provide clinicians with precise information about antimicrobial susceptibility. Laboratories were selected on the basis of their participation in CDC's Emerging Infections Program/Active Bacterial Core Surveillance ( ), through which, since 1995, state and local health departments and universities have conducted active population- and laboratory-based surveillance for invasive pneumococcal disease (defined as isolates from sterile sites such as blood and cerebrospinal fluid [CSF]) in seven to nine geographic areas in the United States. The survey was designed to assess 1) which susceptibility testing practices were being used by clinical laboratories, 2) whether practices followed current NCCLS guidelines, 3) which antimicrobials were being tested routinely, and 4) how microbiology laboratories were reporting susceptibility results to clinicians.

8. Environmental Management Resources, Inc. Offers a full array of environmental consulting, testing, engineering and construction services in approximately thirty states, including industrial hygiene, detection and assessment of lead and other heavy metals, and subsurface assessment and cleanup. http://www.emr-inc.com

Projects Services Locations About EMR ... Contact Us Environmental Management Resources, Inc. CEO of EMR, Inc. receives National Minority Small Business Person of the Year Award When you're seeking environmental assistance, the value is in the knowledge and qualifications of the people you select. EMR is a team of scientists and engineering professionals dedicated to providing customer-valued service by applying creative strategies, innovative technologies and cost-effective solutions to environmental needs. Web Address: http://www.emr-inc.com Webmaster: Email Us

9. Performance Of Laboratories In Testing For Rabies Virus -- United States Performance of Laboratories in testing for Rabies Virus United states. In response to a Public Health Laboratory Directors for an external assessment of the current status http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/00000477.htm

Performance of Laboratories in Testing for Rabies Virus United States A total of 136 public health laboratories were enrolled in the program: 46 main state health department laboratories, 41 branch or regional state health department laboratories, 38 county health department laboratories, six city health department laboratories, and five state university veterinary laboratories. One hundred twenty-nine (95%) of the 136 laboratories participated in the first shipment. Performance evaluations were based on the interpretation (positive or negative) reported for each sample by four CDC reference laboratories. Full credit was given for each interpretation agreeing with the reference laboratories' interpretations, and no credit was given for interpretations that were in disagreement. Participants who reported interpretations (in the initial or repeat shipment) for all samples that were in agreement with the reference laboratories' interpretations were awarded a certificate of achievement. In the repeat shipment, participants who reported one or more interpretations that did not agree with the reference laboratories' interpretations were contacted and offered on-site consultation and training services by either CDC or state laboratory personnel. After the consultation and training, participants were given the opportunity to examine another set of slides from CDC and receive certification, if successful. Editorial Note Editorial Note: The organization, planning, and conduct of the exercise represented a cooperative effort between CDC's Laboratory Program Office (LPO) and Center for Infectious Diseases (CID). The performance evaluation component of the exercise was administered by personnel of the Microbiology Section, Performance Evaluation Branch, Division of Technology Evaluation and Assistance, LPO. The consultation and training component was administered by personnel of the Virology Training Section, Laboratory Training Branch, Division of Laboratory Training and Consultation, LPO, through the respective state health departments. The Production Branch, Biological Products Program, CID, furnished the brain impression slides that were distributed to laboratories; other CID personnel served as consultants for the exercise.

10. HIV Testing Among Pregnant Women --- United States And Canada, 1998--2001 nine states for CDC's Pregnancy Risk assessment Monitoring System based survey conductedin 32 states and New Data on state prenatal HIVtesting policies were http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5145a1.htm

HIV Testing Among Pregnant Women - United States and Canada, 19982001 Since 1994, the availability of increasingly effective antiretroviral drugs for both the prevention of perinatal human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission and maternal treatment has resulted in a greater emphasis on prenatal HIV testing and substantial increases in prenatal testing rates. In 2000, preliminary data indicated that 766 (93%) of 824 HIV-infected women in 25 states knew their HIV status before delivery (CDC, unpublished data, 2002). However, an estimated 280370 perinatal HIV transmissions continue to occur in the United States each year ( ). The primary strategy to prevent perinatal HIV transmission is to maximize prenatal HIV testing of pregnant women. States and Canadian provinces have implemented three different prenatal HIV-testing approaches. To assess their effectiveness, CDC reviewed prenatal HIV-antibody testing rates associated with these approaches. Medical record data suggest that the "opt-in" voluntary testing approach is associated with lower testing rates than either the "opt-out" voluntary testing approach or the mandatory newborn HIV testing approach. Under the opt-in approach, women typically are provided pre-HIV test counseling and must consent specifically to an HIV-antibody test. Under the opt-out approach, women are notified that an HIV test will be included in a standard battery of prenatal tests and procedures and that they may refuse testing (

11. Assessment, Testing, And Evaluation Links and Student testing (CRESST) technical reports covering assessment and standards implementation Education Standards, assessment, and Accountability in the states. Prepared by the http://www.middleweb.com/Assmntlinks.html

Assessment and Evaluation: Resources on the Internet To suggest additions to this list or to report bad links, e-mail us at MiddleWeb@middleweb.com Everything About Assessment on the Internet An index to just about every resource on the Internet that addresses assessment and evaluation. Fully searchable. Start here! ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation Basic resource for anyone exploring assessment and evaluation issues. Tools for Accountability Project Project by the Annenberg Institute for School Reform to promote a wholistic approach to accountability. "Accountability systems will not bring about school improvement unless they include two [critical] elements: the will and the capacity of schools to analyze data and to use that analysis to improve their practices. In addition, effective accountability must involve stakeholders outside of the school building, fostering the development of a rich reciprocal relationship between schools and their publics." Eric Digest on Performance Assessment A brief overview of the topic with suggested resources. Also see "A Long Overview on Authentic Assessment,"

12. JAMA -- Page Not Found Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report assessment of Susceptibility testing Practicesfor Streptococcus pneumoniae United states, February 2000 http://jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v287n23/ffull/jwr0619-1.html

Select Journal or Resource JAMA Archives of Dermatology Facial Plastic Surgery Family Medicine (1992-2000) General Psychiatry Internal Medicine Neurology Ophthalmology Surgery MSJAMA Science News Updates Meetings Peer Review Congress The page you requested was not found. The JAMA Archives Journals Web site has been redesigned to provide you with improved layout, features, and functionality. The location of the page you requested may have changed. To find the page you requested, click here HOME CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES ... HELP Error 404 - "Not Found"

13. States' Assessment Programs FAQ In addition to state testing programs, Congress authorized Department of Educationto provide states with the based upon the National assessment of Education http://ericae.net/faqs/states/states.htm

States' Assessment Programs A frequently asked question of: The ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation [ERIC/AE] 1129 Shriver Laboratory University of Maryland - College Park College Park MD 20742 Toll Free: 1.800.464.3742 E-mail: askae#064;ericae.net WWW: http://ericae.net Example queries: How can I ascertain what standardized tests are being used by which states for their testing programs? What about criterion-referenced tests that have been developed for individual state curricula? What states have implemented large-scale performance based assessments? Are test scores available for individual cities or school districts? If so, then how may I procure them? Table of Contents Introduction Surveys of State Assessment Programs Statistical Compendia National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Compendia ... Publication Notes INTRODUCTION Most states have implemented statewide testing programs for K-12 student achievement (48, according to the most recent survey by Education Week ) as the primary means of accountability to the public. State testing programs vary in terms of grades required to participate in the test administration, content, and format of the tests. Some states use well-known standardized tests that are purchased directly from test publishers; some state education agencies develop their tests internally in order to match the curriculum, whereas others may contract with outside vendors to do so.

14. Assessment Of Testing For And Completeness Of Reporting Of Vancomycin-Resistant assessment of testing for and Completeness of Reporting of VancomycinResistant Enterococci Connecticut, resistant to vancomycin United states, 1989-1993. MMWR 1993;42597-9. http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/00040774.htm

Assessment of Testing for and Completeness of Reporting of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci Connecticut, 1994 From 1989 through 1993, the proportion of enterococcal isolates resistant to vancomycin (VRE) reported to CDC's National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) system increased from 0.3% to 7.9% (1). Since January 1994, clinical laboratories in Connecticut have been required to report all sterile-site VRE isolates to the Connecticut Department of Public Health (CDPH) to determine the epidemiology of VRE infection in the state. In 1995, CDPH surveyed all clinical laboratories in the state to identify microbiologic methods used to determine antimicrobial susceptibility of enterococcal isolates and to assess the completeness of reporting in 1994. This report summarizes the survey findings and the assessment of reporting for VRE, which confirmed for the first time that VRE infections were occurring statewide in Connecticut. During April 1995, CDPH mailed questionnaires to the laboratory directors at the 125 clinical laboratories in Connecticut and received completed questionnaires from the 46 (37%) laboratories with the capacity to identify enterococcal isolates and perform vancomycin-susceptibility testing of enterococci. A total of 37 laboratories were hospital- affiliated; nine were commercial. Of the 46 laboratories, 33 (72%) tested all enterococcal isolates for vancomycin resistance, and 13 (28%) tested isolates from sterile sites only.

15. The Case For A National Testing System. Davey, Lynn integrates objectives, standards, teaching, assessment, and accountability normededucational achievement testing in America's How all fifty states are above http://ericae.net/pare/getvn.asp?v=3&n=1

16. High Stakes Testing For Tracking, Promotion, And Graduation Board on testing and assessment. Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Educational tests and measurementsUnited states. 2. Educational accountabilityUnited states. http://www.nap.edu/html/highstakes

17. 5/29/02 -- States Testing Computer-Scored Essays -- Education Week Other states are watching the trial closely. Oregon is in the second yearof pilot testing a multiple-choice online assessment. http://www.edweek.org/ew/newstory.cfm?slug=38essays.h21

18. 1/9/02 -- Testing Systems In Most States Not ESEA-Ready -- Education Week the director of the state education assessment center for education adviser, said, We believe that states must show, in their plans, a testing system that http://www.edweek.org/ew/newstory.cfm?slug=16test.h21

19. Nat'l Acad Press Catalog: Testing, Teaching, And Learning: testing, Teaching, and Learning is written to help states and school offering guidancefor designing and implementing assessment and accountability http://www.nap.edu/catalog/9609.html

Read it Online - FREE! SEARCH THIS BOOK Testing, Teaching, and Learning: A Guide for States and School Districts Richard F. Elmore and Robert Rothman, Editors; Committee on Title I Testing and Assessment, National Research Council 136 pages, 8.5 x 11, 1999. PURCHASE OPTIONS PAPERBACK PDFs not Available for Sale Sorry, there are no electronic versions of this report available for purchase, but we are working hard to make as many available as possible. International Price Related Links: Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (DBASSE) Related Titles Press Release State education departments and school districts face an important challenge in implementing a new law that requires disadvantaged students to be held to the same standards as other students. The new requirements come from provisions of the 1994 reauthorization of Title I, the largest federal effort in precollegiate education, which provides aid to "level the field" for disadvantaged students. Testing, Teaching, and Learning is written to help states and school districts comply with the new law, offering guidance for designing and implementing assessment and accountability systems. This book examines standards-based education reform and reviews the research on student assessment, focusing on the needs of disadvantaged students covered by Title I. With examples of states and districts that have track records in new systems, the committee develops a practical "decision framework" for education officials. The book explores how best to design assessment and accountability systems that support high levels of student learning and to work toward continuous improvement.

20. Nat'l Acad Press Catalog: Testing Teacher Candidates: Teacher Quality, Center for Education, Board on testing and assessment, NationalResearch of using licensure test results to hold states and institutions http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10090.html

Read it Online - FREE! SEARCH THIS BOOK Testing Teacher Candidates: The Role of Licensure Tests in Improving Teacher Quality Karen J. Mitchell, David Z. Robinson, Barbara S. Plake, and Kaeli T. Knowles, Editors , Committee on Assessment and Teacher Quality, Center for Education, Board on Testing and Assessment, National Research Council 360 pages, 6 x 9, 2001. PURCHASE OPTIONS HARDBACK PDFs not Available for Sale Sorry, there are no electronic versions of this report available for purchase, but we are working hard to make as many available as possible. International Price Related Links: Center for Education (CFE) More Titles from CFE Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (DBASSE) Related Titles ... Press Release Americans have adopted a reform agenda for their schools that calls for excellence in teaching and learning. School officials across the nation are hard at work targeting instruction at high levels for all students. Gaps remain, however, between the nation’s educational aspirations and student achievement. To address these gaps, policy makers have recently focused on the qualifications of teachers and the preparation of teacher candidates. This book examines the appropriateness and technical quality of teacher licensure tests currently in use, evaluates the merits of using licensure test results to hold states and institutions of higher education accountable for the quality of teacher preparation and licensure, and suggests alternatives for developing and assessing beginning teacher competence.

A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z

Page 1     1-20 of 96    1  | 2  | 3  | 4  | 5  | Next 20