Skip to main content
  • About Us
  • Careers
  • Contact

Search form

American Institutes for Research

  • Our Work
    • Education
    • Health
    • International
    • Workforce
    • ALL TOPICS >
  • Our Services
    • Research and Evaluation
    • Technical Assistance
  • Our Experts
  • News & Events

You are here

  • Home

NAEP Validity Studies (NVS) Panel

Project

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the only periodic measure of student achievement based on national probability samples, and it is the only method by which states can validly compare the academic progress of all their students against common high standards.

Since 1995, AIR has maintained the NAEP Validity Studies Panel (NVS), an independent panel of experts that meets to commission and discuss research addressing validity considerations for NAEP.

Below is a complete bibliography of reports produced to date by the NVS Validity Studies Panel:

2011 - Present │2001 - 2010 │1997 - 2000


2011 - Present

Durán, R. P. et. al. (2020). Effects of Visual Representations and Associated Interactive Features on Student Performance on National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Pilot Science Scenario-Based Tasks.

Valencia, S. W., Wixson, K., Kitmitto, S., & Doorey, N. (2020). A Comparison of NAEP Reading and NAEP Writing Assessments With Current-Generation State Assessments in English Language Arts: Expert Judgment Study.

Shepard, L. A., Kitmitto, S., Daro, P., Hughes, G., Webb, D. C., Stancavage, F., & Tucker-Bradway, N. (2020). Validity of the National Assessment of Educational Progress to Evaluate Cutting-Edge Curricula.

Hughes, G., Behuniak, P., Norton, S., Kitmitto, S., & Buckley, J. (2019). NAEP Validity Studies Panel Responses to the Reanalysis of TUDA Mathematics Scores.

Mullis, I. V. S. (2019). White Paper on 50 Years of NAEP Use: Where NAEP Has Been and Where It Should Go Next.

Kitmitto, S., Bohrnstedt, G., Park, J.B., Bertling, J., & Almonte, D. (2018). Developing New Indices to Measure Digital Technology Access and Familiarity.

Bohrnstedt, G., Kitmitto, S., & Park, J.B. (2017). Initial Tables From the 2015 Computer Access and Familiarity Study.

Valencia, S., Wixson, K., Ackerman, T., & Sanders, E. (2017). Identifying Text-Task-Reader Interactions Related to Item and Block Difficulty in the National Assessment for Educational Progress Reading Assessment.

Behuniak, P. (2015). Maintaining the Validity of the National Assessment of Educational Progress in a Common Core Based Environment.

Daro, P., Hughes, G. B., & Stancavage, F. (2015). Study of the Alignment of the 2015 NAEP Mathematics Items at Grades 4 and 8 to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for Mathematics.

Phillips, G. W. (2014). Linking the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in Reading to the 2011 Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS).

DeStefano, L. & Johnson, J. (2013). Study of the Feasibility of a NAEP Mathematics Accessible Block Alternative.

Hedges, L. V. & Bandeira de Mello, V. (2013). A Validity Study of the NAEP Full Population Estimates.

Stancavage, F. B. & Bohrnstedt, G. W. (Eds.) (2013) Examining the Content and Context of the Common Core State Standards: A First Look at Implications for the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Beaton, A. E., Linn, R. L., & Bohrnstedt, G. W. (2012). Alternative Approaches to Setting Performance Standards for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Mullis, I. V. S., Bohrnstedt, G. W., Preuschoff, A. C., de los Reyes, I., Stancavage, F., & Martin, M. O. (2012). Examining NAEP Achievement in Relation to School Testing Conditions in the 2010 Assessments.

Thissen, D. (2012). Validity Issues Involved in Cross-Grade Statements About NAEP Results.


2001 - 2010

Beaton, A. E., & Chromy, J. R. (2010). NAEP Trends: Main NAEP vs. Long-Term Trend.

Linn, R., McLaughlin, D., & Thissen, D. (2009). Utility and Validity of NAEP Linking.

Nellhaus, J., Behuniak, P., & Stancavage, F. (2009). Guiding Principles and Suggested Studies for Determining When the Introduction of a New Assessment Framework Necessitates a Break in Trend in NAEP.

Stancavage, F., Shepard, L., McLaughlin, D., Holtzman, D., Blankenship, C., & Zhang, Y. (2009). Sensitivity of NAEP to the Effects of Reform-Based Teaching and Learning in Middle School Mathematics.

Beaton, A. E. & Chromy, J. R. (2007). Partitioning NAEP Trend Data.

Daro, P., Stancavage, F., Ortega, M., DeStefano, L., & Linn, R. (2007). Validity Study of the NAEP Mathematics Assessment: Grades 4 and 8.

Grissmer, D. (2007). Estimating Effects of Non-Participation on State NAEP Scores Using Empirical Methods.

Durán, R. P. (2006). State Implementation of NCLB Policies and Interpretation of the NAEP Performance of English Language Learners.

McLaughlin, D.H., Scarloss, B.A., Stancavage, F.B., & Blankenship, C.D. (2005). Using State Assessments to Assign Booklets to NAEP Students to Minimize Measurement Error: An Empirical Study in Four States.

McLaughlin, D. H., Scarloss, B. A., Stancavage, F. B., & Blankenship, C. D. (2005). Using State Assessments to Impute Achievement of Students Absent from NAEP: An Empirical Study in Four States.

Chromy, J. & Mosquin, P. (2004). Federal Sample Sizes for Confirmation of State Tests in No Child Left Behind.

Linn, R. L., McLaughlin, D., Jiang, T., & Gallagher, L. (2004). Assigning Adaptive NAEP Booklets Based on State Assessment Scores: A Simulation Study of the Impact on Standard Errors.

McLaughlin, D., Gallagher, L., & Stancavage, F. (2004). Evaluation of Bias Correction Methods for “Worst-case” Selective Non-participation in NAEP.

Stancavage, F. B. et al. (2002). An Agenda for NAEP Validity Research.

Weston, T. J. (2002). The Validity of Oral Accommodation in Testing.

1997 - 2000

Durán, R. P. (2000). Implications of Electronic Technology for the NAEP Assessment.

Hedges, L. V., Konstantopoulos, S., & Thoreson, A. (2000). Computer Use and Its Relation to Academic Achievement in Mathematics, Reading, and Writing.

Jakwerth, P. R., Stancavage, F. B., & Reed, E. D. (1999). An Investigation of Why Students Do Not Respond to Questions.

Bock, R. D. & Zimowsi, M. F. (1998). Feasibility Studies of Two-Stage Testing in Large-Scale Educational Assessment: Implications for NAEP.

Chromy, J.R. (1998). The Effects of Finite Sampling on State Assessment Sample Requirements.

Jaeger, R. M. (1998). Reporting Results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Hedges, L. V. & Vevea, J. L. (1997). A Study of Equating in NAEP.

Mullis, I. V. S. (1997). Optimizing State NAEP: Issues and Possible Improvements.

Pearson, P. D. & Garavaglia, D. R. (1997). Improving the Information Value of Performance Items in Large Scale Assessments.

Related Work

15 Nov 2020
Report

Comparison of NAEP Assessments With Current-Generation State Assessments

NAEP conducts assessments and publishes reports on student achievement in a number of subject areas—including mathematics, reading, writing, and science, among others—that are widely used by federal, state, and local policymakers, educators, researchers, and the public. These studies use the judgments of expert panelists to compare 2017 NAEP assessment items in mathematics and reading and writing with 2017 items from a sample of state assessments.
2 Apr 2020
Report

Effects of Visual Representations and Associated Interactive Features on Student Performance on National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Pilot Science Scenario-Based Tasks

As part of the transition to an entirely digitally based assessment (DBA), new types of NAEP items have begun to be developed that leverage the DBA environment to measure a wider range of knowledge and skills, including science scenario-based tasks that are the focus of this report.
30 Oct 2019
Report

NAEP Validity Studies Panel Responses to the Re-analysis of TUDA Mathematics Scores

When the 2017 NAEP Mathematics TUDA (Trial Urban District Assessment) results were reported and it appeared that student performance trends on the NAEP were not similar to student performance trends on the state assessments that were aligned to college and career ready standards, a reanalysis study was designed to explore whether content misalignment might be a possible reason for the mismatched results. This report serves as a response from the NAEP Validity Studies Panel to the analysis.
30 Jun 2019
Report

50 Years of NAEP Use: Where NAEP Has Been and Where It Should Go Next

This paper traces the evolution of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) program with an emphasis on the concurrent evolution of NAEP’s primary and secondary purposes. The most detailed treatment is given to the modern era, with the author devoting separate sections to the legislation governing NAEP, the schedule of assessments, the primary reporting mechanism, and the transition to digital assessment.
View all
Share

Contact

Jack Buckley

Jack Buckley

Institute Fellow

Sami Kitmitto

Principal Researcher

Topics

NAEP

Latest News & Updates

26 Oct 2015
News Release

New Study Examines Alignment Between NAEP and Common Core State Standards in 4th, 8th Grade Mathematics

View all

RESEARCH. EVALUATION. APPLICATION. IMPACT.

About Us

About AIR
Board of Directors
Leadership
Experts
Clients
Contracting with AIR
Contact Us

Our Work

Education
Health
International
Workforce

Client Services

Research and Evaluation
Technical Assistance

News & Events

Careers at AIR


Search form


 

Connecting

FacebookTwitterLinkedinYouTubeInstagram

American Institutes for Research

1400 Crystal Drive, 10th Floor
Arlington, VA 22202-3289
Call: (202) 403-5000
Fax: (202) 403-5000

Copyright © 2021 American Institutes for Research®.  All rights reserved.

  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap