Are you looking for the Classworks Special Education program from TouchMath? Click here to go to their site.

Classwork Logo

The History and Policy Foundations of Through-Year Assessment

The Evolution of Through-Year Assessment

Through-year assessment
has emerged as one of the most significant innovations in U.S. education policy since the No Child Left Behind era. It represents a philosophical shift away from single, high-stakes summative testing toward measuring student progress throughout the academic year.

This new approach reflects both state-level creativity and federal flexibility. It’s a movement rooted in the recognition that once-a-year tests do not provide teachers with enough actionable information to improve instruction during the year.

A group of school administrators in a boardroom viewing a digital presentation titled 'Continuous Learning Loop.' The screen features a bridge graphic where Classwork.com acts as the central link connecting 'Compliance' on the left to 'Growth' on the right, symbolizing the transition to an instructionally supportive system.

Federal DOE Waivers and the ESSA Foundation

The turning point came with the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015. Section 1204 of ESSA created the Innovative Assessment Demonstration Authority (IADA), giving the U.S. Department of Education authority to approve up to seven state pilots testing new forms of accountability and assessment.

Under IADA, states could experiment with assessments that:

  • Replace the traditional end-of-year summative exam,
  • Administer multiple tests throughout the year, and
  • Aggregate those results into a valid annual score for accountability.

These federal waivers opened the door to innovation, allowing states to rethink how to measure learning over time.

Florida FAST: The First Fully Implemented Model

Florida became the first state to operationalize the through-year concept statewide. The Florida Assessment of Student Thinking (FAST), launched in 2022–23, measures reading and math progress across three checkpoints per year.

  • The Florida Department of Education (FLDOE) develops the tests and manages psychometric scaling.

  • Cambium Assessments provides the delivery platform.

Teachers receive results quickly, allowing them to track student progress more continuously.

Early research suggests improved engagement and reduced end-of-year test anxiety. Yet, challenges remain: maintaining psychometric comparability across administrations and preventing test fatigue among students.

Other State Pilots

Florida’s bold move accelerated interest nationwide. Several states—including Texas, Indiana, North Carolina, and Nebraska—are piloting or developing through-year systems of their own.

  • Texas is testing its Through-Year Assessment Pilot (TTAP) under ESSA flexibility.

     

  • Indiana has launched a multi-year ILEARN Through-Year Pilot.

     

  • North Carolina is studying longitudinal growth models.

     

  • Nebraska is implementing its Through-Year Assessment and Reporting System (TARS).

     

Each state’s approach differs, but all share the goal of making assessment more instructionally supportive and less disruptive.

Pros and Cons of Through-Year Testing

Advantages:

  • Provides multiple data points to estimate growth.

  • Reduces pressure on a single test.

  • Increases teacher engagement with data.

  • Improves student familiarity with testing formats.

Challenges:

  • Requires complex psychometric scaling.

  • Demands technical infrastructure and training.

  • Raises questions about instructional time balance.

What the Research Says

Studies from the CAP (2024) and the Education-First (2023) find that through-year testing improves instructional alignment but depends heavily on data quality and teacher readiness.

The evidence also shows that systems work best when paired with daily classroom data—something that state systems alone cannot provide.

Platforms like Classwork.com fill that gap by connecting daily instructional evidence with the broader assessment cycle.

Conclusion

Through-year assessment represents a new era in accountability—one focused on growth rather than compliance.

Florida led the way; other states are refining the model. The next challenge is integrating through-year testing with classroom-level systems so data becomes not just a score, but a continuous learning feedback loop.

Classwork.com was built for that integration—bridging formative and summative, daily and quarterly, classroom and state.

References

 This article is part of The Future of Instructionally Supportive Assessment white paper. Read the full series here.

What was the primary driver behind the shift toward through-year assessment? The shift was driven by a move away from the “No Child Left Behind” (NCLB) era’s focus on a single, high-stakes end-of-year test. Policymakers and educators recognized that “autopsy data”—results received after students have already left a grade—cannot help teachers adjust instruction in real time. Through-year assessment focuses on growth and instructional support by providing data checkpoints throughout the year.

 

What is the “Innovative Assessment Demonstration Authority” (IADA)? Created under Section 1204 of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in 2015, the IADA gives the U.S. Department of Education the power to grant waivers to states. These waivers allow states to pilot new, innovative assessment systems—like through-year models—that can eventually replace traditional statewide summative exams for federal accountability.

 

How do states like Florida and Texas differ in their through-year approaches? Florida’s FAST system is a fully operational statewide model that measures reading and math progress three times a year. Texas, on the other hand, is currently using the TTAP (Texas Through-Year Assessment Pilot) as an exploratory, optional program. While Florida has replaced its old summative test (FSA) entirely, the Texas pilot runs alongside the existing STAAR test as the state evaluates its long-term feasibility for 2027.

 

What are the biggest technical challenges when implementing a through-year model? The biggest challenge is psychometric scaling—the complex math required to ensure that a shorter test in October is “equal” in difficulty and predictive power to a test in May. Additionally, states must manage “test fatigue” to ensure that more frequent testing doesn’t lead to a loss of instructional time or student disengagement.

 

Why is daily classroom data still necessary even with through-year state tests? While through-year assessments provide great “snapshots” every few months, they are still too infrequent for daily lesson planning. Research shows that these systems are most effective when paired with daily formative evidence. This creates a complete feedback loop where daily classroom activities (supported by platforms like Classwork.com) feed into quarterly state checkpoints, which then build toward the final annual growth score.