1. THE INNOVATION LAB NETWORK: STATES SUPPORTING ASSESSMENT OF DEEPER LEARNING AND ORGANIZATIONAL TRANSFORMATION David T. Conley, PhD CEO, EPIC Professor, U of O

2. ILN Partners  EPIC: Educational Policy Improvement Center  Eugene/Portland, Oregon  David Conley, CEO  SCALE: Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning, and Equity  Ray Pecheone, Director  SCOPE: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education  Linda Darling-Hammond, Co-Director 2

3. The Innovation Lab Network’s Principles of Next Generation Learning World-class Knowledge and Skills Personalized Learning Student Agency Performance-based Learning Anytime, Anywhere Learning Comprehensive Systems of Support 3

4. World-class Knowledge and Skills… students acquire, practice, and demonstrate the various dimensions of learning that lead to college and career readiness throughout the disciplines. An important component of this work is defining, recognizing and demonstrating a clear vision of student success

5. Task Force Definition of Readiness  Knowledge – mastery of rigorous content and the facile application or transfer of what has been learned to novel situations.  Skills – the capacities and strategies that enable students to learn and engage in higher-order thinking, meaningful interaction with the world around them, and planning for the future  Dispositions – Socio-emotional skills or behaviors (sometimes referred to as habits of mind) that associate with success in both college and career 5

6. 6 Leading states should take action to define the goal of CCR reform. Codify in state policy/law a definition of college, career, and civic- readiness consistent with next-generation/student- centered/deeper learning (see CCSSO ILN CCR Definitional Elements) to drive policy and practice Establish a clear commitment in policy and practice to innovation, evaluation, and continuous improvement

7. 7 Leading states create a clear “line of sight” to drive policy/ practice and continuous improvement. Realign program requirements, applications, reporting, and funding to key goals/areas; enhance funding flexibility where appropriate/ needed. 1.Learning Process – Standards, Curriculum, Instruction 2.Assessment, Accountability, Supports 3.Human Capital – Teachers and Leaders 4.Infrastructure – Time and Technology 5.System Learning – Innovation

8. Educate state leadership on the Continuum of Assessment of Deeper Learning Conduct environmental scans of each state policy context. Assist state leadership in plans to implement performance assessment. Three Phases of EPIC/SCOPE/SCALE Technical Assistance 8

9. Assist state leadership in plans to implement performance assessment. Three Phases of EPIC/SCOPE/SCALE Technical Assistance Conduct environmental scans of each state policy context. Educate state leadership on the Continuum of Assessment of Deeper Learning 9

10. Traditional State Assessments Standardized, multiple-choice tests of routine skills Examples: WKSE-CRT, OAKS New CCSS Assessments Standardized tests with multiple-choice and open- ended items, plus 1-2 day performance tasks Examples: SBAC and PARCC Common Performance Tasks Standard performance tasks lasting 1- 3 weeks that demand more integrated skills Examples: C-PAS and SCALE NY Learning Tasks Performance tasks that require students to carry out inquiries, analyze findings, and revise Examples: C-PAS and SCALE OH Student- Designed Projects Longer, deeper investigations lasting 2-3 months requiring students to initiate, design, conduct, analyze, revise, and present their work Examples: Envision Schools, NY Performance Standards Consortium, IB CONTINUUM OF ASSESSMENT FOR DEEPER LEARNING 10

11. Education state leadership on the Continuum of Assessment of Deeper Learning Assist state leadership in plans to implement performance assessment. Three Phases of EPIC/SCOPE/SCALE Technical Assistance Conduct environmental scans of each state policy context. 11

12. What We Did & Why  Interviewed state leadership  Gathered extant data from websites, waiver requests, and other public documents  Analyzed across states for trends, themes, commonalities, and nuances  Viewed the analysis as a continuing process  Learning about ILN districts, state policy plans and directions 12

13. Policy Definition of College & Career Readiness Accountability System Flexibility for Innovation Governance Structure State Fiscal Status Assessment System Current and Past Assessment for Deeper Learning Elements of State Policy Scans 13

14. High-level Overview KYMENHOHORWVWI Define CRYesYes-MLRCCSSYesNo Yes Measure CRACT EOC SATNo (future) No (2015) No (future) No (future) ACT Acct’y Emphasis YesNCLB (2017) NCLB only PARCC EOC NCLB other NCLB Grad ExamsYesNo YesNo ConsortiaPARCCSBAC PARCCSBAC Perf AssmtPrior Future Prior Current Local PilotsPrior Writing Prior Waiver MMYesComp Yes Fiscal Impact====—=— Alignment+LC +++ Draft only 14

15. Some Key Observations from Scans  Several states are moving toward including CCR indicators in state accountability systems in various ways  Wide range of prior experience with performance assessment. What’s the legacy?  Tangled underbrush of current and former assessments complicates introduction of new models  Strong interest in student-centered measures that help individualize learning 15

16. Some Key Observations from Scans  Proficiency demonstration is a motivator in several states for more complex, deeper assessments  Real capacity issues in all states at state level  Very little evidence of significant HE involvement/ownership or clear plan for stronger alignment 16

17. Some Key Questions from Scans  An Assessment System vs a System of Assessments: What measures should be collected for high-stakes decisions, and which ones inform classroom instruction, and how do they combine for a student-centered profile of readiness?  “Local Control” and SEA Leadership: How do we take local innovation to scale?  Where do we go from here? 17

18. Education state leadership on the Continuum of Assessment of Deeper Learning Three Phases of EPIC/SCOPE/SCALE Technical Assistance Conduct environmental scans of each state policy context. Assist state leadership in plans to implement performance assessment. 18

19. Key Strategies  Direct support for assessment development, piloting, and implementation  Professional development / technical assistance to build educator / system capacity  Facilitation of higher education involvement  Treat this work as rapid prototyping exercises that are both bottom-driven and top-supported 19

20. ILN Activities in Oregon  Working with Chalkboard TIF districts and other interested parties to implement ThinkReady as a means to assess the Essential Skills not measured on OAKS/SBAC  Consulting with Governor’s Office Education Policy Advisors on strategies to create multiple measure system of college and career readiness  Share and learn from other ILN states’ pilot initiatives to assess college and career readiness 20

21. Other Key ILN Activities 21 Kentucky’s recent legislation created “innovation zones” and opened new door to design and pilot new systems of defining and measuring a more comprehensive definition of readiness. New Hampshire’s ESEA waiver request puts forth a new theory of action for accountability built on a balanced system of assessments to measure readiness in a competency-based system. The state will be piloting performance tasks as part of this balanced system of assessments. Ohio is entering a critical year scaling up its OPAPP initiative, building educator capacity to administer performance tasks and linking tasks to forthcoming PARCC assessments.

22. QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION Then one last thought…

23. “Innovation is invention made accessible.”