Transcript Race To The Top

Common Core State
Standards
What’s It All About?
Race to the Top
Assessment Consortia
Kathryn Edwards, Ph.D
Consultant III,
Curriculum Support and Assessment Unit
Overview
• Elementary and Secondary Education Act
Assessment Requirements
• California Assessments Used
• Partnership for Assessment of Readiness
for College and Careers (PARCC)
• Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium (SBAC)
Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA)
Assessment Requirements
• Reading/language arts in grades 3–8 and at
least once in grades 10–12
• Mathematics in grades 3–8 and at least once
in grades 10–12
• Science at least once during each of three
specified grade spans: grades 3–5, 6–9, and
10–12
3
California Assessments
Used for ESEA
• Standardized Testing and Reporting
(STAR) Program:
– California Standards Tests (CSTs)
– California Modified Assessment (CMA)
– California Alternate Performance
Assessment (CAPA)
• California High School Exit Examination
4
The Impact: Changes in CA
Assessment
• This aspect of the new system
is a needed change!
• I am concerned or worried
about . . .
Race to the Top
Assessment Grants
6
Two Consortia Awarded Funds
• Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)
– On September 2, 2010, SBAC awarded $160 million
• Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College
and Career (PARCC)
– On September 2, 2010, PARCC awarded $170 million
• An additional $15.9 million awarded to each consortium
for the purpose to help all participating states with the
transition to common core and common assessments
RTTT Assessment Requirements for
Comprehensive Systems
Requirements within the RTTT Assessment Program:
•
Build upon shared standards for college and career-readiness;
•
Measure individual growth as well as proficiency;
•
Measure the extent to which each student is on track, at each grade level
tested, toward college or career readiness by the time of high school
completion and;
•
Provide information that is useful in informing:
– Teaching, learning, and program improvement;
– Determinations of school effectiveness;
– Determinations of principal and teacher effectiveness for use in evaluations and
the provision of support to teachers and principals; and
– Determinations of individual student college and career readiness, such as
determinations made for high school exit decisions, college course placement to
credit-bearing classes, or college entrance.
(US Department of Education, 2009)
The Comprehensive Consortia
Item Types
• Constructed-response
• Selected response
(End-of-year)
• Performance tasks
• Computer-enhanced
– Video, multimedia,
interactive text
10
A Grain of Salt
11
Changing Landscape
•
•
•
•
•
•
New State Superintendent of Public Instruction
New Governor
New Legislature
Office of the Secretary of Education
Potential changes in State Board of Education
California Office to Reform Education (CORE)
– Role of local educational agencies
• Role of the U.S. Department of Education
Partnership for the Assessment of
Readiness for College and Careers
(PARCC)
•
Consortium of 26 states
– California is currently a participating state
– Governor, State Superintendent of Public Instruction and State Board of
Education President required to sign MOU
•
Florida is fiscal agent
•
ACHIEVE is Project Manager
•
Assess grades 3 through 8 and once in grades 10-12
•
Possible high school end-of-course
PARCC States
Governing
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Arizona
Arkansas
District of Columbia
Florida
Illinois
Indiana
Louisiana
Maryland
Massachusetts
New York
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Advisory
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Alabama
California
Colorado
Delaware
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
PARCC Theory of Action
•
•
•
•
•
More Meaningful Standards: The Partnership’s assessment system will
be anchored in the Common Core State Standards which are consistent
across states, clear to the public, and provide an on-ramp to college and
careers.
Higher Quality Tests: PARCC assessments will include sophisticated
items and performance tasks to measure critical thinking, strategic
problem solving, research and writing.
Through-Course Testing: Students will take parts of the assessment at
key times during the school year, closer to when they learn the material.
Maximize Technology: PARCC assessments in most grades will be
computer based.
Cross-State Comparability: States in PARCC will adopt common
assessments and common performance standards.
PARCC Distributed Summative
Assessment System
Overall assessment system will include a mix of constructed response items,
performance tasks, and computer-enhanced, computer-scored items
ELA/literacy
•
3 “through-course” components
– administered after 25%, 50%, and 75% of instruction
• Speaking & listening components
– administered after 75% of instruction (not part of summative score)
• End-of-year component
– administered after 90% of instruction
Mathematics
• 3 “through-course” components
– administered after 25%, 50%, and 75% of instruction
• End-of-year component
– administered after 90% of instruction
Distributed Assessment
Advantages
• Through-course approach will focus instruction
throughout the year and nearer to the assessment
• The sum of the components address the full range of
the common core
• Allows for multiple measures across the full range of
performance
• Allows for in-depth assessment of writing and
mathematics problem-solving
• Both through-course and end-of-year components
provide data that teachers can use to adjust instruction
Sample Item
• Extended Constructed Response
– Delineate and evaluate the argument that
Thomas Paine makes in Common Sense.
Assess the reasoning present in his analysis,
including the premises and purposes of his
essay.
• CCSS Match: 11-12.R1.8
Sample Item
•
Our school has to select a girl for the long jump at the regional championship. Three
girls are in contention. We have a school jump-off. Their results, in meters are given
in the table below.
Elsa
Miki
Aisha
3.25
3.55
3.67
3.95
3.88
3.78
4.28
3.61
3.92
2.95
3.97
3.62
3.66
3.75
3.85
3.81
3.59
3.73
Hans says, “Aisha has the longest average. She should do to the championship.
Do you think Hans in right? Explain your reasoning.
CCSS Match: 7.SP.4 and Mathematical Practice 2 and 3
PARCC: Two Types of
Summative Tests
FOCUSED
ASSESSMENTS
• One to three tasks that assess a
END OF YEAR
COMPREHENSIVE
ASSESSMENT
few “keystone” standards/topics
• Taken on computer, with mixed
item types
• Given at three points during the
school year, near the end of quarters
• Scored entirely by computer for
fast results
• Results within 2 weeks to inform
instruction and intervention
• Scores from focused assessments and end-of-year test
will be combined for annual accountability score.
PARCC: Focused
Assessments 1 and 2
25%
50%
Focused
ASSESSMENT 1
• ELA
• Math
Focused
ASSESSMENT 2
• ELA
• Math
In a single session/class period, students in grades 3 - 11 will:
• ELA:
Read texts, draw evidence to form conclusions, and prepare a written
analysis
• Math: For each of 1 or 2 essential topics (standards or clusters of standards),
complete 1 to 3 constructed response tasks
PARCC:
Focused Assessment 3
75%
Over several sessions/class periods, students will
complete a project-like task that draws on a range of
skills. Examples:
• ELA:
Locate digital information, evaluate and
select sources, and compose an essay or
research paper
• Math: Perform a multi-step performance task
that requires application of mathematical
skills and reasoning and may require
technological tools
• Speaking/Listening task: Conducted in classroom,
not used for accountability, scored by teacher.
Focused
ASSESSMENT 3
• ELA
• Math
Focused
ASSESSMENT4
• Speaking
• Listening
End-of-Year
Assessment
PARCC:
90%
• Composed of 40 to 65 questions of a range of item types
including innovative technology-enhanced items to sample
the full year of standards
• Scored by computer
• Will make major investment in enhanced item types
• To accurately assess high- and low-performing students, will
include items above and below grade level, and may consider
leveled or adaptive tests if needed
END OF YEAR
COMPREHENSIVE
ASSESSMENT
PARCC:
Resources, Tools, Supports
PARTNERSHIP RESOURCE CENTER: Digital library of released items, formative assessments, model
curriculum frameworks, curriculum resources, student and educator tutorials and practice tests,
scoring training modules, and professional development materials
Partnership Resource Center:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Interactive Data Tool for accessing data and creating customized reports
Exemplar lesson plans
Formative assessment items and tasks
Professional development materials regarding test administration,
scoring, and use of data
Online practice tests
Item development portal
Tools and resources developed by Partner states
Optional “ready-to-use” performance tasks for K-2
The PARCC System
English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3 - 11
25%
50%
75%
90%
PARTNERSHIP RESOURCE CENTER: Digital library of released items, formative assessments, model
curriculum frameworks, curriculum resources, student and educator tutorials and practice tests,
scoring training modules, and professional development materials
Focused
ASSESSMENT 1
• ELA
• Math
Summative
assessment for
accountability
Focused
ASSESSMENT 2
• ELA
• Math
Required, but
not used tor
accountability
Focused
ASSESSMENT 3
• ELA
• Math
Focused
ASSESSMENT4
• Speaking
• Listening
END OF YEAR
COMPREHENSIVE
ASSESSMENT
Formal Reporting Mechanisms
• Periodic Feedback Reports
– After each through-course and end-of-year component
– Audience: Parents, students, teachers, and school and district
leaders
• Annual Stakeholder Reports
– Comprehensive annual report
– Audience: Parents, students, teachers, school and district
leaders, higher education officials and leaders, state
officials/administrators, and policymakers
• Item Analysis Reports
– Annual report provides detailed analysis of content and quality of
student responses to items and tasks
• Reporting Levels
– Ethnic group, ED, gender, SWD, ELL
PARCC Proposed Timeline
Oct. 2010
Sept. 2011
Launch and
design phase
begins
Development
phase begins
Sept. 2012
Sept. 2013
Sept. 2014
Summer 2015
First year field
testing and
related
research and
data collection
begins
Second year
field testing
begins and
related
research and
data collection
continues
Full
administration
of PARCC
assessments
begins
Set
achievement
levels,
including
college-ready
performance
levels
SMARTER Balanced
Assessment Consortium
• Consortium of 30 states
– California is currently not participating with this consortium
• Washington is fiscal agent
• WestEd is Project Manager
• Assess grades 3 through 8 and grade 11
SBAC States
Governing
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Connecticut
Hawaii
Idaho
Kansas
Maine
Michigan
Missouri
Montana
North Carolina
New Mexico
Nevada
Oregon
Utah
Vermont
Washington
Wisconsin
West Virginia
Advisory
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Alabama
Colorado
Delaware
Iowa
Kentucky
North Dakota
New Hampshire
New Jersey
Ohio
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
South Dakota
SBAC: Two Components of the
Summative Assessment
PERFORMANCE
TASKS
+
• One reading task, one writing
task and 2 math tasks per year
• Measure the ability to integrate
knowledge and skills, as required
in CCSS
• Computer-delivered, during final
12 weeks of the school year*
• Scored within 2 weeks
END OF YEAR
ADAPTIVE
ASSESSMENT
• A computer adaptive assessment
given during final 12 weeks* of the
school year
• Multiple item types, scored by
computer
• Re-take option, as locally
determined
* Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions.
SBAC:
Performance Tasks
Last 12 weeks of year*
Sample performance tasks:
• ELA: Select texts on a given theme,
synthesize the perspectives presented,
conduct research, and write a reflective
essay.
PERFORMANCE
TASKS
• Reading
• Writing
• Math
• Math: Review a financial document and read
explanatory text, conduct a series of
analyses, develop a conclusion, and provide
evidence for it.
• Roughly half of the performance tasks for grades 9 through 11 will assess
ELA or math within the context of science or social studies.
SBAC:
End-of-Year Assessment
Last 12 weeks of year*
• Composed of approximately 40 to 65 questions per content
area.
• Uses adaptive delivery to provide maximally accurate scores
across the full spectrum of student achievement and to
increase student engagement.
END OF YEAR
ADAPTIVE
ASSESSMENT
• Includes selected-response, technology-enhanced constructedresponse, and extended constructed-response items.
• Scores from items that can be scored immediately will be
reported, and then updated as scores from those requiring
human scoring or artificial intelligence are completed.
• A re-take option is available.
Re-take option
SBAC:
Summative Components
Last 12 weeks of year*
• Student scores from the performance tasks
and end-of-year adaptive assessment will be
combined for each student’s annual score
for accountability.
• Performance tasks may begin prior to the
final 12 weeks of the year, based on research
studies and final implementation decisions.
PERFORMANCE
TASKS
• Reading
• Writing
• Math
END OF YEAR
ADAPTIVE
ASSESSMENT
Re-take option
Note: This Consortium will also investigate an alternative summative format
in which the end-of-year adaptive assessment is replaced with a series of
adaptive assessments, each of which assesses a smaller block of standards.
SBAC Supports:
Interim Assessment System
•
Optional system of computer adaptive assessments
•
The number, timing, and standards assessed (full grade level or smaller
clusters) can be customized based on the local curriculum
•
Multiple item types, similar to end-of-year summative assessment,
including performance tasks (delayed scoring)
•
Reports of student results will link teachers to related student resources
and teacher professional development resources
SBAC Supports:
Comprehensive Electronic Platform
Last 12 weeks of year*
DIGITAL CLEARINGHOUSE of formative assessments, released items and tasks, model
instructional units, educator training and professional development tools and resources, scoring
training modules, and teacher collaboration tools.
The system portal for information about the CCSS, SBAC, and assessment results:
• Reporting suite with differentiated tools available to students, educators,
parents, and policymakers, with visualization tools
• Vetted instructional units and model curricula
• Research-based instructional strategies and interventions
• Issue-focused chat rooms
• Formative assessment items, released performance tasks, and rubrics
• Professional development modules and videos
• Item development/scoring training modules and tools
The SBAC System
English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3 – 8 and High School
Last 12 weeks of year*
DIGITAL CLEARINGHOUSE of formative tools, processes and exemplars; released items and tasks; model
curriculum units; educator training; professional development tools and resources; scorer training
modules; and teacher collaboration tools.
INTERIM ASSESSMENT
Computer Adaptive
Assessment and
Performance Tasks
INTERIM ASSESSMENT
Computer Adaptive
Assessment and
Performance Tasks
PERFORMANCE
TASKS
• Reading
• Writing
• Math
END OF YEAR
ADAPTIVE
ASSESSMENT
Scope, sequence, number, and timing of interim
assessments locally determined
Re-take option
Optional Interim
assessment system —
no stakes
Summative assessment
for accountability
Implementation Milestones
SBAC
PARCC
2010 – 2012
Development of formative tools,
processes, practices, and
professional development begins
2010-2011
Development and approval by member
states of common policies and
procedures
2013
Review of screened state-owned
item and development of new
summative and interim items
2011-2012
Initial item and task development,
piloting of components
2011 - 2012
Development of professional
development resources and online
platform
2012
Interim item pool becomes available
for use
2013
Field testing
2012-2014
Field testing
January 2015
Operational summative assessments
available
2014-2015
New summative assessments in use
August 2015
Adoption of common achievement
standards
Summer
2015
Setting of common achievement
standards
California Context
Readiness for Computer-Based Testing
• California’s assessment vendor conducted a survey and in-person
site visits
• Conclusions:
– Feasible but expensive
– Need multi-year rollout
– District/school environment difficult for administering fair,
standard & secure test
– Budget commitment
• Education Week
– CA ranked lowest quintile in overall technology leadership
among states
– Average of 3.8 students to one computer in U.S.
– Average of 5 students to one computer in CA
Challenges and Considerations
• Measurement
– Use of individual student growth in determinations of teacher and
principal effectiveness
– Equating and reliability of through-course assessments
• Curricular Flexibility at the local level
– Tension: Modular assessments given across the year require
greater uniformity in sequencing of instruction, but place
assessment closer to the time of instruction.
• ESEA Reauthorization
– Will it align?
• Political Will
– Will states that didn’t win state RTTT grants remain in the
consortia? Will new Governors?
Other Challenges and
Considerations
• California Assessment System
– STAR, CAHSEE Reauthorization in 2012-2013
– Grade 2 testing
– End of course assessments
• Implementation Funding
– Technology infrastructure/hardware
• Professional Development
– Leadership and funding
• What else?
40
Implications for My Work . . .
Resources
•
Full text of the Common Core California Standards:
http://www.scoe.net/castandards/index.html (Outside Source)
•
Information about the common core: http://www.corestandards.org/
(Outside Source)
•
Information about the common core including implementation
timelines: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cc/
•
PARCC information: http://www.fldoe.org/parcc/ (Outside Source)
•
SBAC information: www.k12.wa.us/SMARTER (Outside Source)
•
Center for K-12 and Performance Management at ETS:
http://www.k12center.org/publications.html (Outside Source)