1 common core state standards assessments based on the common core state standards vince dean, ph.d....
TRANSCRIPT
1
COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS
Assessments based on the Common Core State Standards
Vince Dean, Ph.D.Office of Educational Assessment & Accountability
MAASE 12/8/10
Common Core State Standards
English Language Arts Reading, Writing, Listening & Speaking
Mathematics K-12 content standards College and Career Readiness Standards Learning Progressions
Common Core State Standards
Provide a common definition of college and career readiness in ELA and Mathematics.
Are internationally benchmarked
“The Common Core State Standards are built on the best state standards. These standards provide the content; they aren’t telling states or school districts how to teach these content
standards.” - Superintendent Michael Flanagan
MDE Curriculum Unit - OEII Abbie Groff, Interim Supervisor, Curriculum and Instruction [email protected] • 517.241.4285
Ruth Anne Hodges, Elementary Mathematics Consultant [email protected] • 517.373.4226
Ruth Isaia, English Language Arts Consultant [email protected] • 517.335.3678
Dan LaDue, Secondary Mathematics Consultant [email protected] • 517.373.4226
Kevin Richard, Science Consultant [email protected] • 517.373.4226
Race to the Top Assessment Competition
Assessments based on the Common Core State Standards RTTT Assessment Competition
350 million total 320 million for at least 3-8 and one H.S. grade 30 million for H.S. solution, likely end-of-course
Alternate Assessments based on Alternate Achievement Standards Grant Competition
English Language Proficiency Grant Competition (next federal fiscal year)
Race to the Top Assessment Competition
Assessment ConsortiaDevelopment of an infrastructure and content
for a common assessment in measuring CCSS in English Language Arts and Mathematics
Two consortiaSMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium
(SBAC)Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness
for College and Career (PARCC)
Race to the Top Assessment Competition
U.S. Education Department Requirements Measure the full breadth of the Common
Core State Standards Extend the range of high quality
measurement in both directions Assessments operational by 2014-15 Consortia must offer an online version Must take advantage of technology for
reporting speed and be instructionally relevant
Race to the Top Assessment Competition
The consortia:SMARTER/Balanced
31 states 18 governing states CAT beginning in 2014-2015
PARCC 26 states 11 governing states CBT beginning in 2014-15
Introduction to theSMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium(SBAC)
History
Theory of ActionGoal
To ensure that all students leave high school prepared for postsecondary success in college or a career through increased student learning and improved teaching
Theory of Action
SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium shaped by the following principles:
1. Integrated system
2. Evidence of student performance
3. Teachers integrally involved
4. State-led, transparent and inclusive
governance structure
Theory of Action
SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium shaped by the following principles:
5. Continuously improve teaching and learning
6. Useful information on multiple measures
7. Design and implementation adhere to established professional standards
SBAC Specific Priorities
Ensure all students have access to the technology needed to participate in each component (summative, interim/benchmark, formative)
Support research on how to use technology to increase access for all students, in particular those needing accommodations
SBAC Specific Priorities
Use technology to efficiently deliver training, resources, reports and data; social networks for teachers to develop and disseminate effective CCSS curriculum and instructional tools
Create innovative item types that utilize technology and represent real-world contexts
SBAC Specific Priorities
Use Computer Adaptive Testing engine to maximize accuracy for individual students across the CCSS
Standardized accommodations policy and administration practices across states to ensure comparability
SBAC Assessment Design Proposal
SBAC Assessment Design Proposal
Summative Assessment Measure full range of CCSS Computer Adaptive Testing for precision Timely results Engage Institutions of Higher Education
to ensure achievement standards reflect college and career readiness
Scale scores help inform growth model
SBAC Assessment Design Proposal
Interim Benchmark Assessment Allow for finer grain of measurement
(e.g., end of unit) Inform teachers if students on track to be
proficient on summative assessments Multiple opportunities for students to
participate Scale scores help inform growth model
SBAC Assessment Design Proposal
Formative Assessment Repository of tools available to teachers
to support quick adjustment and differentiated instruction
Help define student performance along the CCSS learning progressions
Concrete strategies for immediate feedback loops
SBAC Assessment Design Proposal
Teacher Engagement Integral role in developing test maps for
each grade and content area Item writing, specifications, reviewing,
and range-finding for all test types Teacher-moderated scoring of
performance events to inform professional development
Technology Enhanced Item
Prototype item courtesy of the Minnesota Department of Education
SBAC Assessment Design Proposal
Assessment window vs. single day administration
Multiple opportunities to assess Quick results available to support
instruction Emphasis on problem-solving and
critical thinking
Dynamic Learning Maps Alternate Assessment
Consortium
Alternate Assessments Based on the Common Core State Standards
State Participants
IowaKansasMichiganMississippiMissouriNew JerseyNorth CarolinaOklahomaUtahWest VirginiaWisconsin
Other Participants
University of Kansas Center for Educational
Testing and Evaluation Center for Research
Methods and Data Analysis
Center for Research on Learning
Special Education Department
AbleLink Technologies The ARC The Center for Literacy
and Disability Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Edvantia
Moving to Online Assessment
Survey of state testing directors (+D.C.)41 responses5 of 41 states have no CBT initiatives36 of 41 states have current CBT initiatives,
including: Operational online assessment Pilot online assessment Plans for moving online
Moving to Online Assessment
Survey of state testing directors (+D.C.)Of 36 states with some initiative
21 states currently administer large-scale general populations assessments online
9 states have plans to begin (or expand) online administration of large-scale general populations assessments
8 states currently administer special populations assessments online
2 states have plans to begin (or expand) online administration of special populations assessments
Moving to Online Assessment
Survey of state testing directors (+D.C.) Of 36 states with some initiative
5 states currently use Artificial Intelligence (AI) scoring of constructed response items
4 states currently use Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT) technology for general populations assessment
0 states currently use CAT technology for special populations assessment
7 states offer online interim/benchmark assessments 7 states offer online item banks accessible to teachers for
creating “formative”/interim/benchmark assessments tailored to unique curricular units
Online Assessment -The Online Assessment -The Michigan StageMichigan Stage
Michigan’s online initiativesPilot in 2006Pilot in 2011 (English Language Proficiency)Pilot in 2012 (Alternate Assessments)Pilots leading up to operational adoption of
SMARTER/Balanced Assessment Consortium products in 2014/15
Constitutional amendment barring unfunded mandates
Challenges
LEA capacity for online assessment Bandwidth issues, especially in rural
areas Minnesota challenge Utah example USED working with FCC on National
Broadband Initiative
Timeline for Transition
2010-2011 Getting to know the CCSS/Alignment work 2010 MEAP/2011MME remain the same State focus will be on technical assistance
2011-2012 Implementation of CCSS in classrooms 2011 MEAP/2012 MME remain the same State focus will be on
instruction/professional development
Timeline for Transition2012-2013 2012 MEAP minimally modified as necessary to
reflect the CCSS 2013 MME remains the same State focus will be on student learning
2013-2014 2013 MEAP based on 2012 model 2014 MME remains the same State focus will be on preparing for new
assessments from SMARTER Consortium
2014-2015 Full implementation - Instruction and assessment
based on CCSS
DRAFT 381
Contact Information
Vince Dean, State Assessment Manager [email protected]
Office of Educational Assessment & Accountability www.michigan.gov/oeaa
SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium http://smarter.k12partners.org/