A Unique Moment in Time: Common Core State Standards and Aligned Common Assessments

What Do They Mean For Leading School Districts?

Pascal (Pat) D. Forgione, Jr., Ph.D.

Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS

Presentation to 2012 Suburban School Superintendents Annual Meeting

November 4, 2011

Overview

•

A Look Back at Standards-Based Reforms and Recent Game Changers

•

Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers Consortium and SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium

•

Technology Enhancements in Next-Generation Assessments and Closing Thoughts

2

Part One

•

A Look Back at Standards-Based Reforms and Recent Game Changers

•

Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers Consortium and SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium

•

Technology Enhancements in Next-Generation Assessments and Closing Thoughts

3

A Look Back at Standards-Based Reforms



1990’s

 Each state developed their own content standards, performance standards, and assessments  State legislatures placed “high stakes” on assessments 

2001: NCLB Passed

 Required universal proficiency by 2013-14, with Annual Measurable Objectives  Significantly increased the amount of testing, and State costs 4

A Look Back at Standards-Based Reforms

An international study by Bill Schmidt (2008) found greater focus, coherence, rigor, and exposure time in top-performing countries.

Typical State’s Standards Highest Performing Countries Mathematics Topics Topic Whole Number Meaning Whole Number Operations Measurement Units Common Fractions Equations & Formulas Data Representation & Analysis 2-D Geometry: Basics Polygons & Circles Perimeter, Area & Volume Rounding & Significant Figures Estimating Computations Properties of Whole Number Operations Estimating Quantity & Size Decimal Fractions Relationship of Common & Decimal Fractions Properties of Common & Decimal Fractions Percentages Proportionality Concepts Proportionality Problems 2-D Coordinate Geometry Geometry: Transformations Negative Numbers, Integers & Their Properties Number Theory Exponents, Roots & Radicals Exponents & Orders of Magnitude Measurement Estimation & Errors Constructions w/ Straightedge & Compass 3-D Geometry Congruence & Similarity Rational Numbers & Their Properties Patterns, Relations & Functions Slope & Trigonometry Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

                                                                                                  

Focus in the Mathematics Curriculum: A Symptom or a Cause.”

Presented by William H. Schmidt Education Policy Center, Michigan State University. The Brooking Institution Presentation, January 23, 2008.

Science Topics Topic Organs, tissues Physical properties of matter Plants, fungi Animal types Classification of matter Rocks, soil Light Electricity Life cycles Physical changes of matter Heat & temperature Bodies of water Interdependence of life Habitats & niches Biomes & ecosystems Reproduction Time, space, motion Types of forces Weather & climate Planets in the solar system Magnetism Earth's Composition Organism energy handling Land, water, sea resource conservation Earth in the solar system Atoms, ions, molecules Chemical properties of matter Chemical changes of matter Physical cycles Land forms Material & energy resource conservation Explanations of physical changes Pollution Atmosphere Sound & vibration Cells

5

Human nutrition Building & breaking Energy types, sources, conversions Dynamics of motion Organism sensing & responding Evolution, speciation, diversity Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

                                                                                                                                        

A Look Back at Standards-Based Reforms



Problems:

 Standards vary by state, and often are “too many, too low”  Proficiency-based system is blind to progress of students and schools at either end of spectrum  Tests, rather than instruction, gained “center stage”  Financial strain on states 

Improvements in achievement were inadequate, given the need. Other countries were surpassing the U.S.

“The Proficiency Illusion,” The Fordham Institute, 2007 6

Game Changer #1: Common Core State Standards Initiative

In 2009, NGA and CCSSO launched the

Common Core State Standards Initiative

to, “provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them.” • 48 states joined the initiative in 2009-10 • 45 states have adopted the CCSS, as of September 30, 2011 National Governor’s Association and Council of Chief State School Officers. “Common Core State Standards Initiative.”

www.corestandards.org/assets/Common-Core State-Standards-March-2010.ppt

March 2010.

7

The Uniqueness of This Moment: Inflection Point

• Thomas Friedman in “The World is Flat” points out the importance of “inflection points” in history, such as the invention of the printing press. • The

Common Core State Standards

(CCSS) may become an “inflection point” for American public education - establishing a common foundation for building excellence and equity for all students.

CA CT FL PA IL RI

State silos of cost, effort, expertise

Interactive Digital Library

Shared platform for collaboration, cost and effort efficiencies, sharing of best practices

8

“New” Competencies Measured in CCSS for ELA and Mathematics

“Use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing and to interact and collaborate with others.” (ELA Anchor Standard, Writing) 9

“New” Competencies Measured in CCSS for ELA and Mathematics

“Synthesize information from a range of sources (e.g., texts, experiments, simulations) into a coherent understanding of a process, phenomenon, or concept, resolving conflicting information when possible.” (ELA Standard, Science and Technical Subjects) 10

“New” Competencies Measured in CCSS for ELA and Mathematics

“When making mathematical models, [proficient students] know that technology can enable them to visualize the results of varying assumptions, explore consequences, and compare predictions with data. … They are able to use technological tools to explore and deepen their understanding of concepts.

” (Standards for Mathematical Practice) 11

Game Changer #2: RTTT Assessment Program Requirements Groups of 15 or more states could apply for a grant to develop online, next-generation assessment systems that:

• Build upon

shared standards

in mathematics and English language arts (ELA) 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.

12 (US Department of Education, 2009)

The Comprehensive Assessment System Proposals

Two Comprehensive Assessment System Proposals Funded to design, develop and pilot test the next-generation assessment systems

Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)



23 states and DC (with 16 Governing states)



30 states (with 21 Governing states)



about 25 million students in K-12



about 23 million students in K-12



$186 million funding



$176 million funding

NON-MEMBER STATES: Alaska, Minnesota, Nebraska, Texas & Virginia 13

Informal Survey on Your District’s Membership



A Show of Hands Poll: Question: Are you a Member State in:

1.

PARCC

2.

SBAC

3.

Both Consortia

4.

Neither Consortium

5.

I don’t know and I really have not been involved

14

Assessment Consortia Memberships Washington, DC

Hawaii PARCC State SBAC State Both consortia Confidential and Proprietary. Copyright © 2009 Educational Testing Service.

July 26, 2011 15

Advanced Organizer #1: An Implementation Heuristic



The “multi-leg stool” for approaching the implementation challenges that your district is facing

 My Version Standards  A More Accurate View Curriculum/ Instruction Assessment Professional Development Professional Development Curriculum/ Instruction Assessment Common Core State Standards as the Foundation 16

Advanced Organizer #2: An Implementation Schedule



A tool to stimulate your district’s self-analysis – an illustrative exercise:

Stages of the RTTT Reforms Standards Curriculum/ Instruction Professional Development Assessment 1. Preparation: • 2010-11 • 2011-12 • 2012-13 • 2013-14 2. Administration: • 2014-15 (Spring 2015) • 2015-16 (Spring 2016) 3. Use and Reporting: • • Post-Spring 2015 (Fall 2015) 2015-16 (Spring 2016) – – – –   17

Part Two

•

A Look Back at Standards-Based Reforms and Recent Game Changers

•

Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers Consortium and SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium

•

Technology Enhancements in Next-Generation Assessments and Closing Thoughts

18

Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers:

PARCC

Revised design as of June 2011, pending USED approval.

19

PARCC: Two Components of the Summative Assessment

In mathematics and in English language arts (ELA): +

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT END OF YEAR ASSESSMENT

• Given primarily on computer or other digital devices • Given on computer (most students), with multiple item types and technological tools • Composed primarily performance tasks with emphasis on hard-to-measure standards • Scored entirely by computer for fast results • Results returned within 2 weeks • Scores from the performance assessment and the end-of-year test will be combined for annual accountability scores .

20

PARCC: End-of-Year Assessment

• Composed of approximately 40 to 65 items per content area • Consisting of a range of item types including innovative technology-enhanced items to sample the full set of grade level standards • Will make major investment in enhanced item types • Will include items across a range of cognitive demand • Currently planned as a fixed-form test, PARCC will review the precision of scores for students at the tails of the performance distribution and, if needed, consider customizing for high- and low-performing students by either lengthening the test or using “staged” or “block” adaptive delivery.

END OF YEAR ASSESSMENT

21

PARCC: End-of-Year Assessment: Your Feedback

• • • • How many districts currently use

online computer testing

in your

local

testing program?

How many districts currently use

online computer testing

in your

state

testing program?

What will be the greatest

implementation challenges

?

Resource: The “IT Readiness Tool” for PARCC and SBAC: This is a technology audit survey of member states, districts and schools (to be conducted in early 2012)  see www.k12.wa.us/SMARTER/Jobs-Contracts.aspx

 State of Virginia has created a national model for helping schools make the technology transition to online testing: http://www.doe.virginia.gov/ 22

PARCC: Performance Assessment Final weeks of school year

Over several sessions/class periods, students will complete a project-like task that draws on a range of skills. • ELA/literacy tasks will focus on writing effectively when analyzing texts, using evidence drawn from the texts to support claims • Math tasks will require students to apply key mathematical skills, concepts and processes to solve complex problems of the types encountered in everyday life, work and decision-making.

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

•

ELA

•

Math

23

PARCC: Performance Assessment: Your Feedback

• • •

How many districts are currently administering

performance tasks

as part of your

local

testing program?

How many districts are currently administering

performance tasks

as part of your

state

testing program?

Do these performance tasks

count

as part of the

summative student test score

? Including a student’s AYP score?

24

PARCC Supports: Speaking/Listening Assessment Final weeks of school year

•

ELA/Literacy Speaking

•

Listening

Flexible timing • Required assessment, but not used for accountability • Administered in the ELA classroom, with flexible window for administration • Scored by classroom teacher using standardized rubric • Scores may be used within students’ grades 25

PARCC Supports: Formative Assessments EARLY ASSESSMENT

Early indicator of knowledge and skills to inform instruction, supports, PD

MID-YEAR ASSESSMENT

Mid-Year Performance Based Assessment (Potentially summative*) Timing of formative components is flexible * Over time, states may consider using scores from these tasks in the summative/accountability scores.

• Formative early assessment designed to provide an indicator of student knowledge and skills so that instruction, supports and professional development can be tailored to student needs • •

Formative mid-year performance tasks

designed to prepare students for Summative Performance Assessment and to yield instructionally useful feedback. Teachers will be given an online scoring tool to score tasks and improve understanding of the CCSS expectations.

For voluntary use, the timing of the administration is to be locally determined 26

PARCC Supports: Formative Assessments: Your Feedback

•

How many districts would be interested in replacing current local interim or benchmark tests with the PARCC

formative early or end-of-year assessments

as part of your

local

testing program?

•

How many districts would be interested in using the PARCC

early assessment

as a pre-test to be linked to the PARCC EOY assessment as a post-test for

teacher evaluation

purposes?

•

How many

states

are envisioning using the

PARCC

pre- and post-testing for

teacher evaluation

?

27

PARCC Supports: The Partnership Resource Center PARTNERSHIP RESOURCE CENTER: Digital library of released items, formative assessments, model content frameworks, instructional and formative tools and resources; student and educator tutorials and practice tests, scoring training modules; professional development materials; and an interactive report generation system Partnership Resource Center:

• • • • Interactive Data Tool for accessing data and creating customized reports Model 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 28

PARCC Supports: Supplemental Application Grant

• • • • Transition and Implementation Planning – State Leadership Teams – – Educator Leadership Cadres Technical Working Groups Collaboration on Instructional Tools – Framework of priority assets – Prototypes of through-course components – – Set of 38 voluntary instructional units Voluntary college-readiness tools such as model grade 12 bridge courses for struggling students Support for Technology Transitions Coordination with SBAC Website for PARCC documents: www.fldoe.org/parcc 29

The PARCC Assessment System

(July 2011 revision, pending USED approval)

English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3–8 and High School

PARTNERSHIP RESOURCE CENTER: Digital library of released items; formative assessments; model content frameworks; instructional and formative tools and resources; student and educator tutorials and practice tests; scoring training modules; professional development materials; and an interactive report generation system.

Component 1 EARLY ASSESSMENT

Early indicator of knowledge and skills to inform instruction, supports, PD

Component 2 MID-YEAR ASSESSMENT

Mid-Year Performance Based Assessment (Potentially summative) Timing of formative components is flexible

Comp 5

•

ELA/Literacy Speaking

•

Listening

Flexible timing

Comp 3 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

•

ELA

•

Math Comp 4 END-OF-YEAR ASSESSMENT

Formative Assessment Summative, but not used for accountability Summative assessment for accountability

Developed by The Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS, version 4, July 2011. For detailed information on PARCC, go to http://PARCConline.org

.

30

PARCC Implementation Milestones

2011-2012 2012-2014 2014-2015 Item and task development, piloting of components Release of Model Content Frameworks and prototype items and tasks Development of professional development resources and online platform Field testing New summative assessments in use Summer 2015 Setting of common achievement standards 31

Summary: Implementation Challenges and Opportunities

Stages of the RTTT Reforms Standards Curriculum/ Instruction Professional Development Assessment 1. Preparation: • 2010-11 • 2011-12 • 2012-13 • 2013-14 2. Administration: • 2014-15 (Spring 2015) • 2015-16 (Spring 2016) 3. Use and Reporting: • Post-Spring 2015 (Fall 2015) • 2015-16 (Spring 2016) X X X X X X X X X Y Y Y Z Z 32

The SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium

SBAC

33

SBAC: Two Components of the Summative Assessment PERFORMANCE TASKS

+

COMPUTER ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENT

• • • • Measure the ability to integrate knowledge and skills, as required in CCSS Each task administered in two hour long sittings.

Computer-delivered, during final 12 weeks of the school year* Results within 2 weeks • • • A computer adaptive assessment given during final 12 weeks of the school year* Multiple item types, scored by Computer, including tasks Students will have the opportunity to take the summative assessment twice • Scores from the performance assessment and the computer adaptive assessment will be combined for annual accountability scores.

* Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions.

34

SBAC: Computer Adaptive Assessment

Last 12 weeks of year* • Composed of approximately 40 to 65 items per content area • Uses adaptive delivery for more efficient testing and more accurate measurement of all students, across the performance spectrum (important in measuring growth) • 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 • Students who are approved to do so may take the assessment a second time, but will see a new set of items * Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions.

COMPUTER ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENT

Re-take option 35

SBAC: Computer Adaptive Assessment: Your Feedback

• • • • How many districts are currently using

online computer adaptive testing

in your

local

testing program?

How many districts are currently using

online computer adaptive testing

in your

state

testing program?

What will be the greatest

implementation challenges

?

Resource: The “IT Readiness Tool” for PARCC and SBAC: This is a technology audit survey of member states, districts and schools (to be conducted in early 2012). See www.k12.wa.us/SMARTER/Jobs-Contracts.aspx

36

SBAC: Performance Tasks

Last 12 weeks of year* One reading task, one writing task and 2 math tasks per year. Examples: • 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.

* Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions.

37

SBAC: Performance Tasks: Your Feedback

• How many districts are currently administering

performance tasks

as part of your

local

testing program?

• How many districts are currently administering

performance tasks

program?

as part of your

state

testing • Do any of you wish to emphasize

interdisciplinary learning objectives

in your

local

– learning across the curriculum – testing program?

• What will be the greatest implementation challenges?

38

SBAC Supports: Interim Assessment Systems INTERIM INTERIM INTERIM

• • • • • Optional system of computer adaptive interim assessments Includes multiple item types, similar to the end-of-year summative assessment, including performance tasks (delayed scoring) The number, timing, and standards assessed (full grade level or smaller clusters) can be customized based on the local curriculum Non-secure and fully accessible -- teachers will be able to see how their students responded to each item Reports of student results will link teachers to related student resources and teacher professional development resources 39

SBAC Supports: Interim Assessment Systems: Your Feedback

•

How many districts would be interested in replacing current local interim or benchmark tests with the SBAC

interim formative assessments

as part of your

local

testing program?

•

How many districts would be interested in using the SBAC

interim assessment

as a pre-test to be linked to the SBAC EOY assessment as a post-test for

teacher evaluation

purposes?

•

How many states are envisioning using the SBAC for pre- and post-testing of teachers?

40

SBAC Supports: The Digital Clearinghouse

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, interactive reporting system; 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 curriculum units and formative tools, processes and exemplars • Research-based instructional strategies and interventions • Issue-focused chat rooms • Released performance tasks and rubrics • * Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions.

• Professional development modules and videos Item development/scoring training modules and tools 41

SBAC Supports: Supplemental Application Grant

• • • • Support to States and Districts for Transition to CCSS – Membership in CCSSO’s “Implementing the Common Core System” – Instructional materials – identification, adaptation, development – – Formative processes and tools/Professional development Communications Alignment of Assessments to College and Career Readiness – Validity studies to connect SBAC college-readiness determinations to – evidence of success in college or careers Enhancement of Interim system to support high school EOC exams aligned to CCSS Support for Technology Transitions Coordination with PARCC Website for SBAC documents: www.k12.wa.us/SMARTER/Resources.aspx

42

The SBAC Assessment 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; an interactive reporting system; scorer training modules; and teacher collaboration tools.

INTERIM ASSESSMENT

Computer Adaptive Assessment and Performance Tasks

INTERIM ASSESSMENT

Computer Adaptive Assessment and Performance Tasks Scope, sequence, number, and timing of interim assessments locally determined

PERFORMANCE TASKS

• • •

Reading Writing Math COMPUTER ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENT

Re-take option Optional Interim assessment system — no stakes Summative assessment for accountability * Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions.

43

SBAC Implementation Milestones

2011 - 2012 2012 - 2013 2013 – 2014 2015 Develop, procure and review materials to populate the digital library Develop test specifications and test blueprints for summative assessments; vet state-submitted items and tasks and determine procurement needs Develop sample item/task sets and initial achievement level descriptors Develop exemplar modules of formative assessment tasks and tools and PD modules; Conduct teacher training Pilot test items and tasks Conduct field test of items and tasks Administer summative assessments; verify and adopt final achievement level standards 44

SBAC Implementation Milestones

Stages of the RTTT Reforms Standards Curriculum/ Instruction Professional Development Assessment 1. Preparation: • 2010-11 • 2011-12 • 2012-13 • 2013-14 2. Administration: • 2014-15 (Spring 2015) • 2015-16 (Spring 2016) 3. Use and Reporting: • Post-Spring 2015 (Fall 2015) • 2015-16 (Spring 2016) X X X X X X X X X Y Y Y Z Z 45

Part Three

•

A Look Back at Standards-Based Reforms and Recent Game Changers

•

Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers Consortium and SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium

•

Technology Enhancements in Next-Generation Assessments and Closing Thoughts

46

Noteworthy Features



Advanced uses of technology

•

In delivery:

 SBAC: computer adaptive delivery of EOY component  PARCC: online, but fixed-form, at least initially • Within test items to assess the CCSS college/career readiness skills

Mathematics Standard, High School: Writing Standard, Grades 6 - 12:

Graph functions expressed symbolically … using technology for more complicated cases. … Graph exponential and logarithmic functions, showing intercepts and end behavior, and trigonometric functions, showing period, midline, and amplitude.

Gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources, using search terms effectively; assess the credibility and accuracy of each source; and quote or paraphrase the data and conclusions of others while avoiding plagiarism and following a standard format for citation.

47

A secure, artificial web environment is created for the task. Students are given a research prompt and must then locate the needed information.

A successful examinee must enter the correct search terms and combine them using Boolean operators and syntax… and must also select other appropriate parameters for the search.

Examinees are scored on the characteristics of their searches as well as their ability to modify their search strategy in response to feedback.

48

In light of the initial feedback, the examinee performs a second search that · includes the key content words, and · properly limits and expands the search.

The feedback becomes increasingly specific with each unsuccessful search. After either a successful search or three unsuccessful searches, the task proceeds to the next step.

49

Noteworthy Features (continued)

•

In scoring sytems:

 Both SBAC and PARCC use electronic and artificial intelligence scoring  For items requiring human scoring, both will build electronic systems to provide training to scorers, distribute student response files to scorers remotely, and moderate the scoring process, for faster turnaround 

Digital Libraries:

Both SBAC and PARCC include a digital library of released items, formative assessments, model curriculum frameworks and instructional units, professional development materials, student and educator tutorials and practice tests, etc.



Through-Course Summative Assessments:

PARCC originally proposed three through-course assessment windows per year for ELA and math. However, in June 2011 PARCC revised its assessment design to remove the through-course components which is under USED review. SBAC does not have through-course as a design feature.

50

Will This Become an Inflection Point?

Benefits:

• Fewer, clearer, next-generation standards • Systems of high quality, aligned summative and formative assessments, with rapid results to teachers • Online digital libraries for sharing of instructional resources, professional development modules, student support materials, identification of effective practices, etc.

• Leveraging of human and financial capital across states 51

Will This Become an Inflection Point?

Challenges:

•

Measurement challenges:

 Measuring individual growth and “on track” to college/career readiness  Use of individual student growth in determinations of teacher and principal effectiveness  Aggregation and weighting of scores from multiple assessments •

ESEA Reauthorization:

 Will the re-authorized ESEA accountability framework align with the RTTT Assessment Program requirements?

•

Political Will:

 Will states continue their membership in Consortia over time?

•

Information System:

 Will it be possible to mine the data to identify “what works” and “what has worked for similar students”?

52

The Imperative for Continued Leadership

 What will it take for leading suburban Superintendents to maintain rigorous and high-quality curriculum and instruction systems that are aligned to the Common Core State Standards?  How can leading suburban Superintendents maximize the opportunity to incorporate into their local testing system the new high-quality assessment and data resources to be developed by the Assessment Consortia?

 How can the voice of leading suburban Superintendents be a positive force on behalf of schools and children in the development and implementation of next-generation assessment and data systems for state and local uses?

53

GUIDE TO THE ASSESSMENT CONSORTIA:

Coming Together to Raise Achievement: New Assessments for the Common Core State Standards

Pascal (Pat) D. Forgione, Jr., Ph.D.

Distinguished Presidential Scholar and Executive Director Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 823 Congress Avenue, Suite 816 Austin, TX 78701 E-Mail: [email protected]

Nancy Doorey

Director of Programs Wilmington, DE E-Mail: [email protected]

www.k12center.org