MAC Common Assessment Training Modules

1. MAC Common Assessment Training Modules Session F3 Michigan School Testing Conference February 23, 2012

2. Session Topics What is the Michigan Assessment Consortium (MAC)? Why a common assessment module series? How might this series be used? How have districts used the assessment development series? What questions might you have?

3. World According to Yogi Berra I’m not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did.” You should always go to other people’s funerals, otherwise, they won’t come to yours.” What were you thinking as you chose this session?

4. MAC Purpose Promote assessment knowledge and practice Provide professional development Produce and share assessment tools and products

5. What is the Common Assessment Module Series? Overview of technically sound but understandable methods for creating common assessments Flexible PD presentation Step-by-step process Reliable and valid measures

6. Why a Module Series? State and national assessment requirements Need to build educator assessment literacy Pursuit of a balanced assessment system Power of focused educator conversations about assessment results to improve student achievement

7. Topics in this series include… Definition of common assessment and when to use them Criteria to select learning targets & match with appropriate assessment methods Development, editing, field testing, review and revision of assessments Use and reporting of assessment results Using assessment as a tool to improve student achievement

8. Resources 24 modules Video presentation, script, power point, companion documents, and user guide Intended to be flexible to meet local needs Free! www.michiganassessmentconsortium.org

13. Using this series Not just a PD exercise Defines the steps in the process Defines the flow of the process Provides tools to support steps in the process Provides PD resources to learn how to do each step

14. Learning vs. Doing Educators who are not knowledgeable and skillful in the development of assessments need to learn. The learning will take time and effort, but will be most meaningful in the context of an actual common assessment development project. Educators that are knowledgeable and skillful, can move through the development process much more quickly while paying appropriate attention to the details of each step and ensuring quality work.

15. A Rubric To Guide/Check The Work Dual Purpose – Guide the Work & Identify Quality Structure – Trait Analytic Guiding the Work – A trait for each module, arranged in the general order of the work flow Identifying Quality – Identifies three levels of implementation quality Creating evidence for valid use of results by documenting the details of each step as you go

16. Story from the Field Suzanne Finney Mecosta Osceola ISD Data and Curriculum Coach

17. Mecosta-Osceola ISDCommon Assessment Development Suzanne Finney Data-Curriculum Coach

18. Mecosta-Osceola ISD • Located in Big Rapids – 50 miles north of Grand Rapids • 6 Districts • Serve 8,900 students • Pearson Inform (Data Warehouse) • Limelight (Assessment Creation & Delivery) first year

19. Our Task Fall 2010 Superintendents requested that General Education revise end of grade Math and ELA assessments and provide them to each district ISD-wide to be given at the end of the year.

20. Professionals Involved • Grade Level Teams representing the 6 districts came to the ISD. ELA = 3 days Math = 2 days • Limelight was new so ISD staff took on the task of item creation.

21. Purpose of the Assessments These selected response assessments will be used • to determine what grade level content students have mastered. • to generate MOISD-wide data • to provide each teacher access to their own students’ data • (potentially) as one component of teacher evaluation

22. Process of Our Work • Review the 09-10 Test Blueprint • Double Code to Common Core • Understand Depth of Knowledge Alignment • Change to 3 Items per assessed Concept • Determine which Concepts to Assess

23. Process of Our Work 6. Create New Test Blueprint • Review Item Analysis Data – Math • Select Items • Check for Bias & Distortion • Assemble the Assessment • Cut Scores established by QDAT (Curriculum Advisory Group)

24. Products of Our Work • Piloted the tests in Spring 10-11 • Edited tests using feedback from pilot • 1 district is giving assessments 3 times this year Fall, Winter, Spring to generate student growth data for teacher evaluation.

25. Products of Our Work • All districts are scheduled to give the tests in Spring 11-12 • Following the administration we will generate MOISD-wide data at the standards level. • Results will be used to help determine professional learning offerings. • Requests are coming in to revisit the tests based on the data generated.

26. What Questions Might You Have?

27. Show me….

28. Development Team Kathy Dewsbury-White, Ingham ISD Bruce Fay, Wayne RESA Jim Gullen, Oakland Schools Julie McDaniel, Oakland Schools Edward Roeber, Michigan State University Ellen Vorenkamp, Wayne RESA Kimberly Young, MDE/BAA

29. Bruce FayWayne RESAfayb@resa.net Kimberly Young MDE/BAA youngk1@michigan.gov Suzanne Finney Mecosta Osceola ISD suzfinney@moisd.org Jim Gullen Oakland Schools James.gullen@oakland.k12.mi.us Stan Masters Lenawee ISD Stan.masters@lisd.us