Agenda

2. Agenda • Introduction • Periodic Assessment Program Overview • Key Topics • Discussion Session • Wrap-Up

3. Periodic Assessment Program • Acuity • Predictive Assessments • Instructionally Targeted Assessments (ITA) • Item Bank • Performance Series • Computer Adaptive Assessments • Teachers College Reading and Writing Project (TCRWP) • Predictive/TCRWP Package in grades 3-8 • TCRWP Assessments in K-2 • K-2 Assessments • ECLAS-2/E-PAL • Wireless Generation mCLASS Pilot • Other Assessment Options • DYO (K-12) • ELL (3-8) • Brigance

4. Key Topics for Discussion • Using data to guide instruction • Building local capacity around formative assessment • Aligning assessments with instruction • Reducing overall assessment time • Integrating Periodic Assessments into the school calendar and regular class schedule • Improving communication to support better planning & implementation

5. Questions • Do we understand the problem? • What do you think of our proposed solution? • What else might we consider?

6. Using data to guide instruction • Goal:Help teachers increasingly guide their instructional decisions based on good measures of their students’ strengths and weaknesses. • Feedback: • Acuity reporting site is slow and can be difficult to use • Acuity reports seem “teacher-unfriendly” and are difficult to manipulate • Educators need more support with analyzing data • Professional development should focus on specific, concrete topics • Possible Improvements: • Implement Acuity system improvements through • faster report generation • creating educator-proposed reports and uploadable reports such as student by item matrix and reports organized by skill • Offer improved professional development: • Performance Series data analysis sessions • Acuity hour-long online sessions with focus on data interpretation

7. Building local capacity around formative assessment • Goal:Build educator capacity to use formative assessments to guide instruction in the classroom. • Feedback: • Easier to build local capacity when educators are designing and implementing their own formative assessments • Current tools don’t provide enough opportunity for customization; customization tools not user-friendly • Possible Improvements: • Improve Acuity’s customization tools through • Introducing Item Authoring within the Acuity Item Bank • Improving the user-friendliness of the existing Acuity Item Bank • Making Acuity’s Instructional Resources printable • Professional Development • Performance Series data analysis sessions • Acuity hour-long online sessions with specific focus

8. Aligning assessments with instruction • Goal: Periodic Assessments are well-aligned with instruction. • Feedback: ELA Instructionally Targeted Assessments are not well-aligned with the pacing or scope and sequence being used in schools. • Possible Improvements: • Develop modular ITAs aligned to common units of instruction • Provide additional support to networks and schools that are using a common curriculum to develop customized ITAs • Improve the Acuity Item Bank for easier customization, including introducing educator-authored items

9. Reducing overall assessment time • Goal:Time spent on formative assessment is justified by helping teachers target their instruction more effectively to improve student learning and achievement. • Feedback:5 Periodic Assessments in ELA and Math is too much for many schools and doesn’t leave enough time to analyze data between assessments. • Possible Improvements: • Reduce the total number of Periodic Assessments • to four per year in ELA and Math for grades 3-8 • To three per year in ELA and Math for high school (until Regents passage)

10. Integrating Periodic Assessments into the school calendar and regular class schedule • Goal:Periodic Assessments integrate easily into regular instructional schedules and do not disrupt the regular functioning of the school. • Feedback:This year’s Periodic Assessments often required rearranging class schedules and were difficult to schedule in advance. February is not a good time for ITA administration in grades 3-8. • Possible Improvements: • Eliminate the February ITA in grades 3-8 (optional in 2007-08) • Schools choose specific assessments for 2008-09 this spring so that year-long assessment calendars can be planned well in advance • Make sure Periodic Assessment administration structures are explicitly arranged around typical class period lengths

11. Improving communication to support better planning & implementation • Goal:Educators clearly understand the expectations of the Periodic Assessment program. The Periodic Assessment Team provides timely, complete information so that educators can make informed decisions around the selection and implementation of assessments. • Feedback: • Fragmented assessment selection process was confusing • Summer selection window was too late • Piecemeal communications made it difficult for schools to plan a year-long strategy • Possible Improvements: • Improved year-long communication plan and selection process • Principals Guide • Periodic Assessment Web site within Principal’s Portal • P Weekly communications with links for Principals and data specialists • Earlier selection window (5/28-6/13) to support planning • In-person Information Sessions on selection process (5/5-5/30) • Webinars on selection process (May)

12. Contact Information • Periodic Assessment Team • Office of Accountability • Phone: 212-374-5162 • Email: periodicassessment@schools.nyc.gov