Abstract
This article examines the reliability of content analyses of state student achievement tests and state content standards. We use data from two states in three grades in mathematics and English language arts and reading to explore differences by state, content area, grade level, and document type. Using a generalizability framework, we find that reliabilities for four coders are generally greater than .80. For the two problematic reliabilities, they are partly explained by an odd rater out. We conclude that the content analysis procedures, when used with at least five raters, provide reliable information to researchers, policymakers, and practitioners about the content of assessments and standards.
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.
