1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 4 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

5. Highest Performing Countries Typical State’s Standards 5 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. An international study by Bill Schmidt (2008) found greater focus, coherence, rigor, and exposure time in top-performing countries. A Look Back at Standards-Based Reforms

6. 6  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

7. 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 7 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.www.corestandards.org/assets/Common-Core- State-Standards-March-2010.ppt

8. 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. RI IL FL CA CT PA State silos of cost, effort, expertise Interactive Digital Library Shared platform for collaboration, cost and effort efficiencies, sharing of best practices 8 The Uniqueness of This Moment: Inflection Point

9. 9 “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)

10. 10 “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)

11. 11 “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)

12. 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. (US Department of Education, 2009) 12 Game Changer #2: RTTT Assessment Program Requirements

13. 13 The Comprehensive Assessment System Proposals Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)  23 states and DC (with 16 Governing states)  about 25 million students in K-12  $186 million funding SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)  30 states (with 21 Governing states)  about 23 million students in K-12  $176 million funding Two Comprehensive Assessment System Proposals Funded to design, develop and pilot test the next-generation assessment systems NON-MEMBER STATES: Alaska, Minnesota, Nebraska, Texas & Virginia

14. Informal Survey on Your District’s Membership 14  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

15. Confidential and Proprietary. Copyright © 2009 Educational Testing Service. Washington, DC Hawaii SBAC State PARCC State Both consortia July 26, 2011 Assessment Consortia Memberships 15

16. Advanced Organizer #1: An Implementation Heuristic 16  The “multi-leg stool” for approaching the implementation challenges that your district is facing  My Version  A More Accurate View Professional Development Standards Curriculum/ Instruction Assessment Professional Development Curriculum/ Instruction Assessment Common Core State Standards as the Foundation

17. Advanced Organizer #2: An Implementation Schedule 17  A tool to stimulate your district’s self-analysis – an illustrative exercise: Stages of the RTTT ReformsStandardsCurriculum/ 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) ––––  

18. 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

19. Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers: PARCC Revised design as of June 2011, pending USED approval. 19

20. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT END OF YEAR ASSESSMENT Given primarily on computer or other digital devices Composed primarily performance tasks with emphasis on hard-to-measure standards Results returned within 2 weeks Given on computer (most students), with multiple item types and technological tools Scored entirely by computer for fast results Scores from the performance assessment and the end-of-year test will be combined for annual accountability scores. In mathematics and in English language arts (ELA): + 20 PARCC: Two Components of the Summative Assessment

21. END OF YEAR ASSESSMENT 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. 21

22. PARCC: End-of-Year Assessment: Your Feedback 22 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.aspxwww.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/http://www.doe.virginia.gov/

23. 23 PARCC: Performance Assessment PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT ELA Math 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. Final weeks of school year

24. 24 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?

25. 25 Final weeks of school year 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 Flexible timing ELA/Literacy Speaking Listening PARCC Supports: Speaking/Listening Assessment

26. 26 Timing of formative components is flexible Early indicator of knowledge and skills to inform instruction, supports, PD EARLY ASSESSMENT Mid-Year Performance- Based Assessment (Potentially summative*) MID-YEAR ASSESSMENT 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 * Over time, states may consider using scores from these tasks in the summative/accountability scores. PARCC Supports: Formative Assessments

27. 27 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?

28. 28 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 PARCC Supports: The Partnership Resource Center

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

30. 30 The PARCC Assessment System (July 2011 revision, pending USED approval) END-OF-YEAR ASSESSMENT English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3–8 and High School 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.http://PARCConline.org Comp 3 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT ELA Math Timing of formative components is flexible ELA/Literacy Speaking Listening Comp 5 Flexible timing Comp 4 Early indicator of knowledge and skills to inform instruction, supports, PD Component 1 EARLY ASSESSMENT Mid-Year Performance- Based Assessment (Potentially summative) Component 2 MID-YEAR ASSESSMENT 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. Formative Assessment Summative assessment for accountability Summative, but not used for accountability

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

32. 32 Summary: Implementation Challenges and Opportunities Stages of the RTTT ReformsStandardsCurriculum/ Instruction Professional Development Assessment 1.Preparation: 2010-11 2011-12XXXY 2012-13XXXY 2013-14XXXY 2.Administration: 2014-15 (Spring 2015)Z 2015-16 (Spring 2016) 3.Use and Reporting: Post-Spring 2015 (Fall 2015)Z 2015-16 (Spring 2016)

33. The SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium SBAC 33

34. 34 SBAC: Two Components of the Summative Assessment * Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions. 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 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 Scores from the performance assessment and the computer adaptive assessment will be combined for annual accountability scores. PERFORMANCE TASKS COMPUTER ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENT +

35. 35 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

36. 36 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 www.k12.wa.us/SMARTER/Jobs-Contracts.aspx

37. 37 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. 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. PERFORMANCE TASKS Reading Writing Math

38. 38 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 as part of your state testing program? Do any of you wish to emphasize interdisciplinary learning objectives – learning across the curriculum – in your local testing program? What will be the greatest implementation challenges?

39. 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 INTERIM 39 SBAC Supports: Interim Assessment Systems

40. 40 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?

41. 41 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 Professional development modules and videos Item development/scoring training modules and tools * Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions. SBAC Supports: The Digital Clearinghouse

42. 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 42 SBAC Supports: Supplemental Application Grant Website for SBAC documents: www.k12.wa.us/SMARTER/Resources.aspxwww.k12.wa.us/SMARTER/Resources.aspx

43. 43 The SBAC Assessment System Optional Interim assessment system — no stakes Summative assessment for accountability 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. Scope, sequence, number, and timing of interim assessments locally determined PERFORMANCE TASKS Reading Writing Math COMPUTER ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENT Re-take option * Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions. English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3 – 8 and High School Computer Adaptive Assessment and Performance Tasks INTERIM ASSESSMENT Computer Adaptive Assessment and Performance Tasks INTERIM ASSESSMENT

44. 44 SBAC Implementation Milestones 2011 - 2012Develop, 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 2012 - 2013Develop exemplar modules of formative assessment tasks and tools and PD modules; Conduct teacher training Pilot test items and tasks 2013 – 2014Conduct field test of items and tasks 2015Administer summative assessments; verify and adopt final achievement level standards

45. 45 SBAC Implementation Milestones Stages of the RTTT ReformsStandardsCurriculum/ Instruction Professional Development Assessment 1.Preparation: 2010-11 2011-12XXXY 2012-13XXXY 2013-14XXXY 2.Administration: 2014-15 (Spring 2015)Z 2015-16 (Spring 2016) 3.Use and Reporting: Post-Spring 2015 (Fall 2015)Z 2015-16 (Spring 2016)

46. 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

47. Noteworthy Features 47  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 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. 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. Mathematics Standard, High School:Writing Standard, Grades 6 - 12:

48. 48 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. A secure, artificial web environment is created for the task. Students are given a research prompt and must then locate the needed information. Examinees are scored on the characteristics of their searches as well as their ability to modify their search strategy in response to feedback.

49. 49 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.

50. Noteworthy Features (continued) 50 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.

51. Will This Become an Inflection Point? 51 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

52. Will This Become an Inflection Point? 52 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”?

53. The Imperative for Continued Leadership 53  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?

54. 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: pdforgione@k12center.org Nancy Doorey Director of Programs Wilmington, DE E-Mail: ndoorey@k12center.org www.k12center.org