Assessment of the Common Core State Standards

1
Assessment of the Common Core State Standards

• CCCOE Curriculum Council
• January, 2011

2
Assessment Consortia Beginnings

• During 1st Round of RTTT Application
• There were 7 Assessment Consortia
• CA joined 3-5 Consortia (no cost for membership)
• By the 2nd Round of RTTT Application
• the assessment consortia coalesced resulting in 2
  remaining consortia

3
Two Funded Assessment Consortia

• Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for
  College Careers (PARCC)
• http//www.fldoe.org/parcc/
• http//www.achieve.org/files/CCSSAssessments.pdf
  
• SMARTER Balanced Consortium (SBAC)
• http//www.k12.wa.us/smarter/
• http//www.wested.org/cs/we/view/rs_press/100

4
Next Generation Assessments

• PARCC and SMARTER will usher in a new and
  different approach to assessment design

5
Comparing the Two Consortia

• CA joined PARCC
• A consortium of 26 states
• Procurement state is Florida
• Achieve (American Diploma Project) is the
  managing partner
• Received 170 million

• SBAC
• Consortium of 31 (many Western) states
• Procurement state is Washington
• WestEd is the managing partner
• Received 160 million

6
A 3rd Grant Award

• 10 million was earmarked for the development of
  high school (end of course) assessments
• ED did not fund the group that applied to develop
  the high school assessments
• PARCC was granted the additional funding to
  develop high school assessments

7
PARCC States
SMARTER States
8
Current ESEA Requirements

• ELA and math in grades 3-8
• In CA CSTs, CMA, CAPA
• ELA and math at least once in grades 10-12
• In CA CAHSEE grade 10
• Science at least once during each of three
  specified grade spans 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12
• In CA grades
• 5 8 science CSTS, CMA CAPA
• 10th grade Life Science, CMA CAPA

9
PARCC Assessment System Design

• Distributed Summative Assessment

10
Achieve PARCCs Managing Partner

• Created in 1996 by the nation's governors and
  corporate leaders
• an independent, bipartisan, nonprofit education
  reform organization
• based in Washington D.C.
• leads the effort to make college and career
  readiness a national priority

11
Assessment System Design Distributed Summative
Assessment

• Key components
• Three through-course components distributed
  throughout the year in ELA and mathematics,
  grades 3-11.
• One Speaking/Listening assessment administered
  after students complete the third through course
  component in ELA required but not part of
  summative score could be used for course
  grades.
• One end-of-year assessment

11
Source Graphic adapted from a representation
prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment
Performance Management (www.k12center.org)
12
Assessment System Design Distributed Summative
Assessment

• 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).

12
Source Graphic adapted from a representation
prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment
Performance Management (www.k12center.org)
13
Assessment System Design Distributed Summative
Assessment

• 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.

13

Source Graphic adapted from a representation
prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment
Performance Management (www.k12center.org)
14
Assessment System Design Distributed Summative
Assessment

• 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 students summative scoreused for
  accountability purposeswill include his/her
  performance on Through-Courses 1, 2, and 3 as
  well as the End-of-Year assessment.

14

Source Graphic adapted from a representation
prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment
Performance Management (www.k12center.org)
15
Summative Score for Accountability

• A students summative score (used for
  accountability purposes) will include his/her
  performance on Through Course1, 2 and 3 as well
  as end of year assessment.

16
Administration and Scoring

• Overall assessment system
• will include a 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).
• 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.

16
17
SMARTER BALANCED ASSESSMENT Consortium (SBAC)
18
SBAC Assessment Characteristics

• 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

19
Assessment Design

• The Consortium will provide the following by the
  2014-15 school year
• 3. Formative tools and resources
• 4. Responsible flexibility
• 5. Distributed summative assessment
• Content clusters throughout a course
• Most appropriate time for each student
• Scores rolled up

Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium
20
Assessment Design
Type of Component Type of Data produced Frequency Number 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
21
Examples of Internationally Benchmarked
Assessments

• NAEP Released Items

22
Existing Internationally Benchmarked Assessments

• National Assessment of Educational Progress
  (NAEP)
• http//nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/
• Trends in International Mathematics and Science
  Study (TIMSS)
• http//nces.ed.gov/timss/
• Progress in International Reading Literacy Study
  (PIRLS)
• http//nces.ed.gov/surveys/pirls/

NCES National Center for Educational
Statistics Part of US Department of Education (ED)
23
Features of NAEP Items

• 4th, 8th and 12th Grades
• Multiple Choice, Short Constructed Response,
  Extended Constructed Response
• Levels of Difficulty Easy, Medium, and Hard
• Primarily Math and ELA, but also given in various
  subject matter domains (typically in 12th grade)

24
Multiple Choice 4th Grade NAEP, Medium
Difficulty
25
Short Constructed Response4th Grade NAEP, Medium
Difficulty
26
Extended Constructed Response 4th Grade NAEP,
Medium Difficulty
27
Extended Constructed Response 4th Grade NAEP,
Hard Difficulty
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
Next Steps and Timelines

• Assessment and Textbook Adoption

32
PARCCs Timeline

• Oct. 2010 Launch and design phase begins
• Sept. 2011 Development phase begins
• Sept. 2012 1st year field testing and related
  research and data collection begins
• Sept. 2013 2nd year field testing and related
  research and data collection continues
• Sept. 2014 Full administration of PARCC
  assessment begins.

33
Textbook Adoption Timeline
34
CaCCSS Collaboration and Implementation

• California Mathematics Project (CMP)
• Curriculum and Instruction Steering Committee
  (CISC)
• Mathematics Subcommittee
• California Mathematics Council (CMC)
• California Association of Mathematics Teacher
  Educators (CAMTE)

1st Meeting on January 19, 2011
35
Pamela Tyson, PhD

• Director, Educational Services
• Contra Costa County
• Office of Education
• Ptyson_at_cccoe.k12.ca.us