1 March 2011 SBE Presentation on CCSS Assessment Consortia CCCOE Curriculum Council March, 2011

2 Why a Board Item in March 2011? PARCC requires  Notification of participation in consortium within 5 months after a change in state officials Select participation in either or both or no consortia Select level of participation

3 The Assessment Consortia PARCC  The Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers Consortium SBAC  The SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium

4 Assessment Consortia Theories of Action Distributed Summative Assessment  PARCC Assessment Based on Iterative Integrated Interaction  SBAC

5 Consortia Were Funded to … Develop CCSS assessments that adhere to ESEA Requirements  Both Consortia are to develop formative assessments with multiple formats assessments that use computer technology to create a faster feedback loop on results

6 ESEA Assessment Requirements Testing in ELA and Math  grades 3 through 8  once in grades 10 through 12 Testing in Science  grades 5, 8, and 10 Note: These are the assessments required by ESEA not those that will factor into the accountability system Also note: The competitive grant does not include the development of science assessments

States + DC Have Adopted the Common Core State Standards * Maine and Washington have adopted the CCSS provisionally ** Minnesota adopted the CCSS in ELA only

8 PARCC States Varied State Roles Fiscal Agent (Procurement State) Governing States Participating/Advisory States Southeast vs. Northwest

9 CA and the Two Consortia CA is a member of PARCC  A consortium of 25 states  Procurement state is Florida  Achieve (American Diploma Project) is the managing partner  Received $170 million CA could join or switch to SBAC  Consortium of 31 (many Western) states  Procurement state is Washington  WestEd is the managing partner  Received $160 million $10 million more to develop high school assessments Nearly 63% of K-12 in US

10 Both PARCC and SBAC Received an additional $15.9 million to  help states transition to the common core state standards and the common assessments Scheduled to “go live” in

11 Distributed Summative Assessment PARCC’s March Presentation to CA SBE

12 PARCC’s Stated Goals 1. Pathway to college and career readiness for ALL students Involve IHEs & have EAP characteristics 2. High quality assessments that measure authentic student performance Short answer, performance base & longer open response in addition to MC 3. Support Educators in the classroom PD & Real-Time Student Achievement Data 4. Keep students on the path to success Coordinated K-16 system

13 Distributed Summative Assessment 13 START OF SCHOOL YEAR END OF SCHOOL YEAR Through- Course 1 Through- Course 2 25%50% Through- Course 3 75% Through- Course 4 90% End- Of-Year Source: Graphic adapted from a representation prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management (

14 Distributed Summative Assessment 14 START OF SCHOOL YEAR END OF SCHOOL YEAR Through- Course 1 Through- Course 2 25% 50% Through-Course 1 and 2: ELA-1 and ELA-2: One or two tasks involving reading texts, drawing conclusions, and presenting analysis in writing. Math-1 and Math-2: One to three tasks that assess one or two essential topics in mathematics (standards or clusters of standards). Source: Graphic adapted from a representation prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management (

15 Through Course Assessments Shouldn’t be thought of as “mini-tests.” They will look like assignments or tasks  Could be open-ended  May take a few days to complete Sample Item: Given a set of texts, students are to write a letter to their congress person that advocates a position on whether congress should limit oil drilling.

16 Through-Course 3 and Through-Course 4 (ELA only): ELA-3: Performance task(s) that require evaluating information from within a set of digital resources, evaluating their quality, selecting sources, and composing an essay or research paper. ELA-4 (speaking and listening): Students will present their work from ELA-3 to classmates and respond to questions. Teachers will score, using a standardized rubric, and can use results in determining students’ class grades. Math-3: Performance task(s) that require conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application of mathematical tools and reasoning. START OF SCHOOL YEAR END OF SCHOOL YEAR Through- Course 1 25% Through- Course 2 50% Through- Course 3 75% Through- Course 4 Distributed Summative Assessment Source: Graphic adapted from a representation prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management (

17 START OF SCHOOL YEAR END OF SCHOOL YEAR Through- Course 1 Through- Course 2 25%50% Through- Course 3 75% Through- Course 4 90% End- Of-Year End-of-Year: EOY: Comprehensive, computer-scored assessment that includes a range of item types, including innovative, technology-enhanced items. Enables quick turnaround of student scores. A student’s summative score—used for accountability purposes—will include his/her performance on Through-Courses 1, 2, and 3 as well as the End-of- Year assessment. Distributed Summative Assessment Source: Graphic adapted from a representation prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management (

18 Assessment Based on Iterative, Integrated Interaction SBAC’s March Presentation to CA SBE

19 SBAC Building Assessments Based on Student Input State-of-the-art adaptive online exams The online system will provide information to teachers and others on the progress of all students  including students with disabilities, English language learners and low- and high-performing students. The system will include:  the required summative exams (offered twice each school year);  optional formative, or benchmark, exams; and  a variety of tools, processes and practices that will assist teachers in understanding what students are and are not learning on a daily basis

20 Computer Adaptive Testing Items selected for individual students based on past performance Accurate measurement across performance scale Efficient – less testing time needed Adaptive tests tailors test questions for the level of the student.  enables the collection of very accurate scores  Provides a detailed and unique record of student paths of student development

21 Assessment Design The Consortium will provide the following by the school year: 3. Formative tools and resources 4. Responsible flexibility 5. Distributed summative assessment a. Content clusters throughout a course b. Most appropriate time for each student c. Scores rolled up Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium

22 Optional Interim Assessments Non-secure and fully accessible Timing and content customizable Include performance tests Helps identify specific student needs Teachers are included in the item and task design Comprehensive Information Portal  Includes student progress and performance history

23 Assessment Design Type of Component Type of Data produced FrequencyNumber of items Administration Mode Scoring Method Summative assessing Common Core Scale score for achievement and growth Once annually 1- 2 opportunities 30 Selected response 3 Extended constructed response 7 Technology enhanced 1 Performance event Computer Adaptive, SR, ECR, TE Computer Delivered: teacher administered performance event Computer Adaptive: automated computer scoring Performance Event Combination of AI and teacher Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium

24

25

26

27 Comparing the Consortia PARCC vs. SBAC

28  Overall assessment system mix of constructed response items, performance tasks, and computer enhanced, computer-scored items.  Assessments for grades 6-12 will be administered via computer while 3-5 will be administered via paper and pencil (in the short term). Grade K-2 will be developed but are optional  Combination of artificial intelligence (AI) and human scoring will be employed; states will individually determine the extent to which teachers will be involved in scoring. PARCC’s Administration and Scoring

29 SBAC Benefits Better service for ELs and SWDs Consistent Identification of needs for stable and mobile students

30 PARCC’s Implementation Support Consortium-wide strategic planning institutes to map out and monitor implementation Collaborative efforts to develop curricular and instructional tools Multi-state leadership cadres of educators deeply engaged in use of assessments and tools

31 SBE Question Areas What is the difference between being college ready and community college ready? How address/adapt for English Learners?

32 CA’s English Learners and PARCC Look at traditional accommodations Item development is sensitive to language load of questions being asked EL is highest growth subgroup in MA so we are very sensitive to these issues My hope is this will signal a language rich curriculum that focuses on vocabulary and reading and writing Are resources ($$) allocated to states based on the number of students each state serves? P=no

33 Compare Presenters 2 east coast vs 4 (3 of which west coast) – 1 univ professor spoke english as a second language – UC Davis Use latest of technology Very much state led – states are at the table constantly; committed to communication; newsletter

34 Two Funded Assessment Consortia Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College & Careers (PARCC)   pdf pdf SMARTER Balanced Consortium (SBAC)  

35 Pamela Tyson, PhD Director, Educational Services Contra Costa County Office of Education