Abstract
This paper grabs hold of the “assessment tiger” by considering the history of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Arts Report Cards for the visual arts, which were constructed and have been administered four times within thirty-five years. Two purposes of the NAEP have persisted since its founding: (1) measuring learning and (2) developing expectations for change and reform in education from a national platform. These purposes provided the basis for a functional analysis derived from Efland (1976) that looked closely at the NAEP's collaborative context, consensus building, and block content. Hamblen's 1995 critical theory analysis exemplar also serves as a means for reviewing the politics of assessment, influences on policy directions, and curricular emphases within a subject area. Using Persky's 2004 critical evaluation of the 1997 NAEP Arts Assessment, this article considers recommendations she derived from the 1997 NAEP Arts Report Card that guided the 2008 NAEP construction and administration. The 2008 NAEP Arts Report Card, released in June 2009, informs a number of initial interpretations, recommendations, implications, and applications for those who want to “own” the tiger.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
