1 Assessments of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Curriculum and Instruction Leadership Council (CILC) November, 2010

2 Presentation Outline Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Overview Next Steps: Transitioning to New Standards and Assessments Assessment Consortia: The beginnings Examples of Internationally Benchmarked Assessment Released Items

3 the same for everyone fundamental knowledge needed to be college & career ready adopted statewide; not federal Shared, rigorous academic content with clear expectations for students

4 CCSS Development Timeline National Deliberation over & Development of Drafts of CCSS – Sponsored by CCSSO and NGA (2009) – Voluntary participation of 48 states – to develop CCSS & deliberation over possible state adoption – Multiple drafts were reviewed and vetted by tens of thousands (including unions and professional math and ELA organizations)

5 California’s Adoption Process California to Adopt CCSS? (Jan. ‘10) – SB X5 1 created Academic Content Standards Commission (ACSC) (January 2010) – ACSCs goal was to “ensure that the rigor” of CA’s standards are maintained by the CCSS – ACSC recommends CCSS adoption with Additions – 85% Rule (July ‘10) SBE Unanimously Adopts CCSS “Plus” (August ’10) – at the last possible moment to remain a contender for the 2 nd round of RTTT funds

6 One or Two Sets of Standards? Common Core California Standards (CCCS) Which standards are more important to us? Common Core State Standards (CCSS)

7 CCSS Characteristics Alignment with college and work expectations – Knowledge and skills needed for success after high school Rigorous content Application of higher-order thinking skills International benchmarking – Informed by curriculum and assessments from top- performing countries to insure success in our global economy (e.g., NAEP, TIMSS, PIRLS) Evidence and/or research-based.

8 Next Steps: Transitioning to New Standards and Assessments Curriculum, Assessment, and Professional Development

9 Proposed Next Steps for CCCS California Department of Education (CDE) charged with proposing next steps for adoption of California Content California Standards (CCCS) to the State Board of Education (SBE)

10 SBE is Prohibited by Law from taking actions related to developing curriculum frameworks and adopting instructional materials until 7/1/13 (Ed Code ) Reversal of this requires the legislature to authorize and fund implementation-related activities, to amend this – If no action is taken, an instructional framework can not be presented to SBE for action until 2015 (followed by a 2017 textbook adoption).

11 CDE’s Proposal for Next Steps CTC and SBE will hold a joint meeting to provide information only on possible implementation scenarios for CCSS (11/8/10) – CDE will present a plan for next steps in (1) frameworks and textbook adoption, (2) professional development for administrators, teachers, and educators (including teacher educators), and (3) development of new assessments. Current text materials will be in use until these dates!

12 Accelerated Frameworks, Textbook & Assessment Development Timelines Frameworks and Textbook Adoption

13 Current Assessment Practices Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) requires assessing – ELA and math in grades 3-8 In CA CSTs, CMA, & CAPA – ELA and math at least once in grades In CA CAHSEE grade 10 – Science at least once during each of three specified grade spans: 3-5, 6-9, and In CA grades – 5 & 8 science CSTS, CMA & CAPA – 10 th grade Life Science, CMA & CAPA

14 Assessment Development Timelines New Common Core Assessments to – be developed and pilot tested in – be field tested in & – “go live” and conduct standards setting in

15 Assessment Consortia The beginnings

16 The Assessment Consortia Beginnings During 1 st Round of RTTT Application – There were 7 Assessment Consortia – CA joined 3-5 Consortia (no cost for membership) During 2 nd Round of RTTT Application – 7 assessment consortia joined/coalesced to which resulted in 2 remaining consortia

17 Request for Applications (RFA’s) Consortia Goals Competitive grants for consortia to develop comprehensive assessment systems that – Align to CCSS – Are designed to measure and documents students’ readiness for college and careers by the time they graduate from high school. Then work backward to measure students’ progress toward that goal. Measure longitudinal growth results have to be comparable across states at the student level (not at the aggregate level) Meet rigorous, internationally benchmarked assessments To be fully implemented by the school year

18 Assessment System Must Develop Common assessments, policies, procedures and definitions, for example – Test administration conditions – Release of test items – Test security – Accommodations allowed – Definition of English learners

19 Assessments Must Allow for multiple measures across a full range of performance Consist of formative assessments administered multiple times a year so teachers can use results to adjust instruction Allow for in-depth assessment of writing and mathematics problem-solving (higher order thinking) Be computer enhanced and scored

20 Must Produce Data to Inform Evaluation of school effectiveness Evaluation of principal and teacher effectiveness Determinations of principal and teacher professional development and support needs Teaching, learning and program improvement Student promotion and graduation decisions

21 Assessment Consortia Awarded Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College & Careers (PARCC) – pdf pdf SMARTER Balanced Consortium –

22 Comparing Consortia CA joined PARCC – A consortium of 26 states – Procurement state is Florida – Achieve (American Diploma Project) is the managing partner – Received $170 million SMARTER Balanced Consortium – Consortium of 31 states (many Western states) – Procurement state is Washington – WestEd is the managing partner – Received $160 million $75 million is CA’s combined budget for STAR and CAHSEE

23 A 3 rd Grant Award RFA $10 million earmarked for high school assessment development (specifically end of course assessment) ED did not fund the group that applied ED gave PARCC some additional funding that will probably be used for the high school assessment system.

24 PARCC Assessment Characteristics 3 “through-course” assessments given during the year (after 35%, 50%, and 75% of year) – Allow assessment of full breadth of standards – Provide frequent feedback to teachers and educators (formative assessment) Culminating assessment after 90% of instruction (current CA is after 85% of instruction) Likely that the assessments won’t be as long as current CSTs Proposal required many types of items: multiple choice, constructed response, computer enhanced and computer scored

25 Examples of Internationally Benchmarked Assessments NAEP Released Items

26 Existing Internationally Benchmarked Assessments National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) – Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) – Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) – NCES: National Center for Educational Statistics Part of US Department of Education (ED)

27 NAEP - Multiple Choice (MC) Grade 4, Medium Difficulty

28 NAEP - Short Constructed Response (SCR) Grade 4, Medium Difficulty

29 NAEP - Extended Constructed Response (ECR) Grade 4, Medium Difficulty

30 NAEP - Extended Constructed Response (ECR) Grade 4, Hard Difficulty

31 NAEP - Extended Constructed Response (ECR) Grade 8, Medium Describe what happens to the speaker of the poem and explain what this experience makes the speaker realize.

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