Transcript No Slide Title

Transitioning to the Future: Common
Core State Standards, New
Assessments and ESEA
Reauthorization
California Educational
Research Association
November 18, 2010
Deborah V.H. Sigman
Deputy State Superintendent
Curriculum, Learning and Accountability Branch
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction
Changing Landscape
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• 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
2
California and the Common
Core State Standards
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• August 2010 – State Board of
Education (SBE) adopted:
– Common Core State Standards for
English Language Arts & Literacy in
History/Social Studies, Science, and
Technical Subjects
– Common Core State Standards for
Mathematics
• CCSS and specific additional
standards
3
Common Core Resources
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• CDE Web page:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cc/
– Informational flyers
•
•
•
•
Overview
ELA
Math
Algebra I
– Presentations
– Frequently asked questions
4
Common Core Next Steps
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• Frameworks and instructional materials
• Professional development
• Assessments
The California Department of Education
presented implementation timelines to a joint
meeting between SBE and the Commission on
Teacher Credentialing in November, 2010.
5
Common Core
Implementation
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• Timelines dependent on actions by the
Legislature to authorize and fund
implementation-related activities
• Current law restricts the SBE from taking
actions on curriculum frameworks and
instructional materials until July 2013
• Without Race to the Top funding, activities will
need to be supported by Legislature
• Professional development focused on the
CCSS is needed
• New assessments based on the CCSS are
needed
6
Implementation Timeline 1
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• Assumes legislation to lift
suspension under Education Code
Section 60200.7
• Assumes the Curriculum
Commission is funded for 2011
and subsequent years
7
Implementation Timeline 1
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
Milestone
Math
Curriculum Commission completed
approves plan, timeline
and criteria committee
application
Field review of
9/2012
framework
SBE action on
5/2013
framework
Materials submission
3/2014
Common core
2014-15
assessments
SBE approves materials 11/2014
ELA
1/2012
9/2013
5/2014
3/2016
2014-15
11/2016
8
Implementation Timeline 2
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• Assumes no legislative action to lift
suspension under EC Section
60200.7
• Assumes the activities of the
Curriculum Commission are
funded
9
Implementation Timeline 2
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
Milestone
Math
Curriculum Commission completed
approves plan, timeline
and criteria committee
application
Common core
2014-15
assessments
Field review of
9/2014
framework
SBE action on
5/2015
framework
Materials submission
3/2017
SBE approves materials 11/2017
ELA
1/2015
2014-15
9/2016
5/2017
3/2017
11/2019
10
Race to the Top Assessment
Program Competition
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• 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
11
Two Consortia Awarded
Funds
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• 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
12
RTTT Assessment Requirements
for Comprehensive Systems
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
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)
13
17-Jul-15
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
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
14
SBAC States
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
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
15
SBAC Theory of Action
Adaptive summative
assessments
benchmarked to college
& career readiness
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
Common
Core State
Standards
specify K-12
expectations
for college
and career
readiness
Teachers
can access
formative
tools and
practices to
improve
instruction
All students leave
high school college
and career ready
Interim
assessments that
are flexible and
open
16
SBAC Summative
Assessments
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
Using online computer adaptive technologies:
• Efficiently provide accurate measurement of all
students, across the spectrum of knowledge and skills,
with shorter tests
• Incorporate adaptive precision into performance
tasks and events
• Will assess full range of CCSS in English language
arts and mathematics; will include a variety of item
types
• Describe both current achievement and growth
across time, showing progress toward college- and
career-readiness
• Scores can be reliably used for state-to-state
comparability, with standards set against research17
based benchmarks
SBAC Interim Assessments
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
Optional interim assessments
• Are aligned to and reported on the same scale as
the summative assessments
• Help identify specific needs of each student, so
teachers can provide appropriate, targeted
instructional assistance
• Incorporate significant involvement of teachers
in item and task design and scoring
• Are non-secure and fully accessible for use in
instruction and professional development activities
• Provide students and teachers with clear
examples of the expected performance on
common standards.
18
SBAC Formative Tools
and Practices
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
Optional web-based formative assessment
resources
• Online resources on assessment literacy,
aligning assessments to CCSS, and formative
assessment guides
• Training for local development of item and tasks
and design and use of scoring guides
• Support of best practices through online
learning modules
19
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
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
20
PARCC States
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
Governing
Participating
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Arizona
Arkansas
District of Columbia
Florida
Illinois
Indiana
Louisiana
Maryland
Massachusetts
New York
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Alabama
California
Colorado
Delaware
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
21
PARCC Theory of Action
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
•
•
•
•
•
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.
22
PARCC Intended Purposes
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
•
•
•
•
Report achievement results based on a clear definition
of college and career readiness, so students will
know if they are on track early enough to make
adjustments.
Compare results against a common high standard
because readiness shouldn’t differ across states or
income levels.
Help make accountability policies better drivers of
improvement by basing them on more sophisticated
and meaningful assessments.
Promote good instruction by providing teachers
useful, meaningful and timely information, which will
help them adjust instruction, individualize interventions,
and fine-tune lessons throughout the school year.
23
PARCC Distributed Summative
Assessment System
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
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
–
•
Speaking & listening components
–
•
administered after 25%, 50%, and 75% of instruction
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
24
Distributed Assessment
Advantages
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• 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
25
PARCC Formative Tools
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• Partnership Resource Center (PRC): an
online, digital resource that includes two
supports –
• Released items with item data,
student work, rubrics.
• Model curriculum frameworks.
• Text Complexity Diagnostic Tool: a
computer-adaptive tool to identify students’
proximate zone of development and supply
suggestions for appropriate texts for
students to read.
• K-2 Assessments in ELA/Literacy and
Mathematics.
26
Consortium 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
JACK O’CONNELL
Readiness for Computer-Based Testing
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
•
•
California’s assessment vendor conducted a survey and inperson 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
28
ESEA Reauthorization
Blueprint
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
29
ESEA Reauthorization
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
John Kline, R-MN
• “[Republicans] are wary of too
much power coming out of the
federal government. The
longstanding Republican position
is to hold back the federal
government. There isn’t universal
agreement on how to fix it.”
• It was irresponsible of Congress to
give [Duncan] $5B with no strings
attached. [RTT] did some pretty
bold things and some were in line
with the Republican agenda like
expanding charter schools. Other
parts can be problematic.
http://dropoutnation.net/category/eight-questions/
30
ESEA Reauthorization
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• Sen. Alexander upon introducing the
State Student Achievement Contract
Act in 2007:
“In other words, instead of saying: ‘Do
it exactly this way’ to the States, the
federal government would be saying:
‘Give us results, and we will give you
more flexibility.’”
Lamar Alexander, R-TN
– S.2312 – A bill to amend the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 to provide for State student
achievement contracts.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-s2312/show
31
ESEA Reauthorization
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
• Schools identified for improvement
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
More accountability with fewer schools
Recognize school realities – one size does not fit all
Lessons learned from NCLB
Sustainability & consistency
Focus on lowest performing
Biggest achievement gaps
Look at levels and rates of growth
Discussion on intervention models
• Additional models
• Look at research
• More flexibility
32
Reflections
JACK O’CONNELL
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
•
•
•
•
Our role
Our expertise
Our responsibility
Our commitment
33
Resources
JACK O’CONNELL
•
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)
•
ESEA reauthorization:
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/blueprint.pdf (Outside
Source)
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
34