{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023018867924528303, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010566037735849057, 'mean_word_length': 5.387951807228916, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Large-Scale Assessments Combined With Curriculum Alignment: Agents of Change

Jean J. McGehee is assistant professor and Linda K. Griffith is professor of mathematics, both at the University of Central Arkansas. L ARGE-SCALE ASSESSMENTS ARE BECOMING an important part of the education culture of our country, and mathematics achievement has been a particular target of interest. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) have found their way into the popular press and have stimulated a great deal of dialogue about the effectiveness of mathematics education in the United States (Klein & Hamilton, 1999; U.S. Department of Education, 1997a, 1997b). NAEP and TIMSS results provide information about the state of mathematics education in the United States and make comparisons between students in this country and those in others. These findings and comparisons have been generally disappointing and have led to political pressure to increase the accountability of public education. The calls for higher levels of accountability have led to a dramatic increase in the use of largescale assessments by many states (Jerald, 2000; Mathers, 1999). The reasoning seems to be that the results of these large-scale assessments will provide much needed individual student data, allowing states, districts, schools, and teachers to make instructional decisions that are data driven. These assessments may themselves become agents of change for mathematics education. Smith, Stevenson, and Li (1998) report that one of the primary benefits of such an accountability system is that it would serve as an impetus for reform by mobilizing teachers, parents, legislators, and members of the local community to support educational improvement. While the simple common goal is higher student achievement, educators in states that are using or considering implementation of large-scale assessments face many complex issues. An important job for mathematics educators involved in theory, research, and teacher education is to make these issues understandable in a way that informs teacher practice. The authors have been involved in Texas’s 1980s transition from the Texas Educational Assessment of Minimal Skills (TEAMS) to the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) and the writing of the content standards in Arizona and Arkansas. Currently we are involved in professional development projects to improve student achievement in Arkansas and Louisiana by aligning the written and taught curriculum with the criterion-tested curriculum. We have identified four major issues in our work: