Tests that will be used to make consequential decisions need to meet higher technical standards than tests that are used for lower-stakes decisions. Rigorous technical standards are vital for assessments used to make decisions about student placement, attainment, and accountability. For instance, if students’ scores fluctuate significantly from one administration to the next purely by chance (low reliability), then real concerns arise that students might not be placed appropriately or, even worse, might be prevented from progressing to the next level in their schooling for arbitrary reasons unrelated to their academic ability. Concerns like these are the main reason that few large-scale accountability systems use performance assessments. When tests carry important consequences, it is critical that a student’s score not be influenced by an individual rater or task.
6. 21st century competencies cannot be measured equally well, and competencies that are not well defined are particularly difficult to measure.
7. If the desired assessments do not exist, districts can work with partners to develop them (partners can include other districts, researchers, and assessment organizations).
8. Context and culture matter, and assessments that work in one setting might not work as well in another. It is often necessary to conduct additional research to validate measures locally.
9. Acquiring information about students’ understanding of 21st century competencies can make educators and students more intentional about improving the competencies.
10. Educators (and learning scientists) do not know as much about teaching and learning 21st century competencies as they do about teaching traditional academic content, so expectations for improvement need to be realistic.
11. Assessments can have unintended consequences, which should be monitored in each local context.
12. Measures of 21st century competencies should be part of a balanced assessment strategy.