Georgia’s Changing Assessment Landscape Assessment Update: Georgia’s Changing Assessment Landscape February 2014

Assessment Update This update pertains to anticipated changes to Georgia’s Student Assessment Program for the future. As more information and details become available, we will follow-up to keep everyone informed. Please Note: This update does not pertain to assessments administered this school year.

Federal Requirements for High Quality Assessments College & Career Ready standards and expectations Assessments in grades 3 – 8 and high school capable of measuring student growth over the course of the academic year accessible for all students, including SWD and EL ELP standards that correspond to CCR standards Administer no later than 2014 – 2015 Annually report college-going and college-credit accumulation rates for all students and student subgroups at district and high school levels

A New Assessment System Comprehensive single program, not series of tests (e.g., CRCT; EOCT; WA) Coherent consistent expectations and rigor to position Georgia students to compete with peers nationally and internationally consistent signal about student preparedness for the next level, be it the next grade, course, or college/career consistent signal about student achievement both within system (across grades and courses) and with external measures (NAEP; PSAT; SAT; ACT) Consolidate combine reading, language arts, and writing into a single measure to align to the standards

Coherency – Consistency Achievement of Georgia Students in Mathematics 2013 NAEP – Grade 8: 29% at/above proficient CRCT – Grade 8: 83% met/exceeded Coordinate Algebra EOCT: 37% met/exceeded SAT – Class of 2013: 42% college ready benchmark* ACT – Class of 2013: 38% college ready benchmark** 2012 PSAT – sophomores: 37% on track to be CCR *SAT data represent 71% of Class of 2013 **ACT data represent 51% of Class of 2013

Coherency – Consistency Achievement of Georgia Students in Reading 2013 NAEP – Grade 8: 32% at/above proficient CRCT – Grade 8: 97% met/exceeded 9th Grade Literature EOCT: 86% met/exceeded American Literature EOCT: 91% met/exceeded SAT – Class of 2013: 43% college ready benchmark* ACT – Class of 2013: 43% college ready benchmark** 2012 PSAT – sophomores: 40% on track to be CCR *SAT data represent 71% of Class of 2013 **ACT data represent 51% of Class of 2013

Georgia’s New Assessment System As we begin to build a new assessment system, the plan is: to consolidate reading, language arts, and writing into a single measure to align to the standards; to embed norm-referenced items to provide a national comparison; to share items with other states; to align expectations with other external measures to send consistent signal of how Georgia students are doing compared to their peers; and to involve USG and TCSG in the development to ensure the assessments signal college and career readiness.

Georgia’s Plan To accomplish this plan, Georgia must: include a variety of item types – more than just multiple choice; increase expectations for student learning and achievement; and continue to – and accelerate – transition to online administration

Georgia’s New Assessment System Guiding principles stipulate the new system must: be sufficiently rigorous to ensure Georgia students are well positioned to compete with other students across the United States and internationally; be intentionally designed across grade levels to send a clear signal of student progress/growth and preparedness for the next level, be it the next grade level, course, or college or career; be accessible to all students, including those with disabilities or limited English proficiency, at all achievement levels; support and inform educator effectiveness initiatives, ensuring items and forms are appropriately sensitive to quality instructional practices; and accelerate the transition to online administration, allowing – over time – for the inclusion of innovative technology-enhanced items.

Our Assessment Landscaping is Changing Assessment development is complicated Assessment development is a process, not an event as such, some components may need to be rolled- out in stages Georgia is transitioning from a set of long-standing, mature programs districts, schools, students, parents, and the public are familiar with and know what to expect This transition provides Georgia with an opportunity however, as with any change, there will be periods of uncertainty and discomfort

Knowns and Partial Knowns New program end of grade/end of course will include language arts, mathematics, science, social studies will no longer be solely multiple-choice IT requirements Online transition over time Accommodations CRCT-M discontinued Local scanning discontinued open-ended items require hand scoring Growth (SGPs) will continue Georgia educators will be involved in test design/development Partial Knowns Test blueprint Testing windows Administration protocols Reporting timelines scores will be delayed in year 1 due to technical work and standard setting requirement to hand-score some items may impact ability to report as quickly as we have in the past Timing of ancillary material availability Impact of the review of content standards Calculator policy specifics

Resources to Move Us Forward

Resources Even with many of the specifics of the new assessment system unknown at this time, there are many, many resources that will prepare educators and students: Content standards frameworks, formative lessons, PARCC evidence statements Sample items: PARCC; SBAC; Georgia OAS; other states (KY, NY); NAEP released items CRCT Readiness Indicators Lexiles

CRCT Readiness Indicators: Reading, ELA, Mathematics Indicators were designed to send a signal to stakeholders about where students are relative to where they need to be headed Indicators provide feedback about our preparedness for the increase in rigor and expectation for student achievement that is on the horizon Feedback consists of the percent of students who achieved each readiness level – state , district, and school levels – for instructional planning purposes While we cannot guarantee that students who achieve the On-Track level will be proficient on the new assessment, we do know they will be better prepared and positioned to be successful.

CRCT Readiness Indicators: Reading, ELA, Mathematics For instructional planning and decision making: Needs Additional Support: The student has demonstrated that his or her command of the knowledge and skills described in the CCGPS warrants additional instructional supports. On Track: The student has demonstrated that his or her command of the knowledge and skills described in the CCGPS is sufficient; the student is on track for success at the next level. Commendable: The student has demonstrated that his or her command of the knowledge and skills described in the CCGPS is exemplary.

CRCT Readiness Indicators: Reading, ELA, Mathematics For accountability purposes - at the student (promotion/retention), school, district, and state levels (CCRPI) - we will continue to use 800 and 850 for the 2013-2014 school year.  It is strongly advised, however, that schools use the scale scores associated with the Readiness Indicators as targets - we need to be working actively to get students to these levels because we believe the new tests will be more in line with those expectations than the 800 / 850. The readiness indicators will be provided during the interim as additional feedback to districts and schools so they have "better" information about where students are in relation to where they need to be in 2014-2015 (with the increased rigor).  Bottom line: shooting for 800 isn't going to be sufficient in future years. 

Lexiles

Lexiles

Lexiles

Lexiles with CRCT Readiness Indicators Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Common Core Stretch Text – Lower Limit 520 740 830 925 970 1010 Common Core Stretch Text – Upper Limit 820 940 1070 1120 1185 On Track 625 775 845 930 Commendable 890 990 1085 1155 1210 1265 Reader – Lower Limit 330 445 565 665 735 805 Reader – Upper Limit 700 810 910 1000 1065 1100 2013 Median 790 860 1095

Assessment Literacy Professional Learning Benchmark Assessments Formative Assessment Initiatives Bringing a Balanced Assessment Focus to the Classroom 1600 new items loaded Statewide launch in summer 2013 Assessment Literacy Professional Learning Benchmark Assessments Formative Item Bank Phase I available February 2014; Phase II pilot in winter 2014

Key Findings from Pilots of Formative Open-Ended Items Overall performance shortfalls Students are not familiar with these types of items Many respond “dnk” – as in ‘do not know’ Don’t know how to approach the items or how to organize (show) their responses/answers Don’t seem to understand the need to “show” their work, detail their thoughts, rationales, cite evidence to support their answer or claim Tendency is to cite answer only – as if they were multiple-choice items Don’t read careful and answer all parts Didn’t answer all parts of questions or label appropriately

Overall ELA Phase I Pilot Summary Data Grade   Number and Percent of Students Achieving Each Score Point Total student N/ % 1 2 3 4 475 1613 713 202 45 3048 15.60% 52.90% 23.40% 6.60% 1.50% 100% 323 1518 814 199 83 2937 11.00% 51.70% 27.70% 6.80% 2.80% 5 367 1100 901 518 125 3011 12.20% 36.50% 29.90% 17.20% 4.20% 6 155 960 811 418 111 2455 6.30% 39.10% 33.00% 17.00% 4.50% 7 218 1387 1275 617 146 3643 6.00% 38.10% 35.00% 16.90% 4.00% 8 264 1140 1029 338 89 2860 9.20% 39.90% 36.00% 11.80% 3.10% 9 - 10 175 1016 783 361 81 2416 7.20% 42.10% 32.40% 14.90% 3.40% 11 - 12 376 1018 763 196 46 2399 15.70% 42.40% 31.80% 8.20% 1.90%

Overall ELA Phase II Pilot Summary Data Grade Number and Percent of Students Achieving Each Score Point Total Student N/ % 1 2 3 4 812 1107 762 174 26 2881   28.18% 38.42% 26.45% 6.04% 0.90% 100% 906 1145 765 168 63 3047 29.73% 37.58% 25.11% 5.51% 2.07% 5 839 948 1294 537 183 3801 22.07% 24.94% 34.04% 14.13% 4.81% 6 626 1467 1028 408 86 3615 17.32% 40.58% 28.44% 11.29% 2.38% 7 695 1002 1035 515 140 3387 20.52% 29.58% 30.56% 15.21% 4.13% 8 1116 1534 827 391 80 3948 28.27% 38.86% 20.95% 9.90% 2.03% 9 - 10 1262 1816 559 106 9 3752 33.64% 48.40% 14.90% 2.83% 0.24% 11 - 12 739 1389 1175 388 131 3822 19.34% 36.34% 30.74% 10.15% 3.43%

Overall Mathematics Phase I Pilot Summary Data Grade Number and Percent of Students Achieving Each Score Point Total student N/ %   1 2 3 4 771 667 373 81 36 1928 40.00% 34.60% 19.30% 4.20% 1.90% 100% 795 800 360 87 58 2100 37.90% 38.10% 17.10% 4.10% 2.80% 5 548 513 252 124 44 1481 37.00% 17.00% 8.40% 3.00% 6 927 768 269 65 14 2043 45.40% 37.60% 13.20% 3.20% 0.70% 7 896 632 243 62 11 1844 48.60% 34.30% 3.40% 0.60% 8 984 791 314 100 51 2240 43.90% 35.30% 14.00% 4.50% 2.30% 9-10 798 697 186 45 27 1753 45.50% 39.80% 10.60% 2.60% 1.50% 11-12 690 602 178 63 9 1542 44.70% 39.00% 11.50%

Overall Mathematics Phase II Pilot Summary Data Grade Number and Percent of Students Achieving Each Score Point Total Student N / % 1 2 3 4 1378 1152 539 121 47 3237   42.57% 35.59% 16.65% 3.74% 1.45% 100% 1323 1264 325 83 25 3020 43.81% 41.85% 10.76% 2.75% 0.83% 5 1351 1049 391 64 15 2870 47.07% 36.55% 13.62% 2.23% 0.52% 6 1579 1171 370 135 53 3308 47.73% 35.40% 11.19% 4.08% 1.60% 7 1602 856 219 72 36 2785 57.52% 30.74% 7.86% 2.59% 1.29% 8 1529 619 217 88 3502 43.66% 29.95% 17.68% 6.20% 2.51% 9 - 12 2570 1435 299 59 23 4386 58.60% 32.72% 6.82% 1.35%

Benchmark Assessment Implementation Schedule Phase I Fall 2013 pilot Available Winter 2014 Phase II Winter 2014 pilot Available Fall 2014 ELA Grades 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, and 10 Mathematics Grades 1, 2, 3, and Coordinate Algebra U.S. History ELA Grades 4, 5, 9, and 11 Mathematics Grades 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, Analytic Geometry, and Advanced Algebra Biology

FIP Learning Modules Introduction to Formative Instructional Practices Clear Learning Targets Collecting and Documenting Evidence of Student Learning Analyzing Evidence and Providing Effective Feedback Student Ownership of Learning: Peer Feedback, Self-Assessment, and More Leading Formative Instructional Practices (for district and/or school leaders) Coaching Formative Instructional Practices (for instructional coaches and/or teacher leaders)

NAEP Item Tool Workshops Available: Bobbie Bable, NAEP State Coordinator (404.657.6168; bbable@doe.k12.ga.us)

Assessment Update In closing – as a reminder: This update pertains to anticipated changes to Georgia’s Student Assessment Program for the future. As more information and details become available, we will follow-up to keep everyone informed. Please Note: This update does not pertain to assessments administered this school year.