PARCC Mathematics Evidence Tables

1. PARCC Mathematics Evidence Tables

2. Today’s Outcomes • Identify how Evidence-Centered Design informs the PARCC Summative Assessment. • Identify the PARCC Evidence Tables and how educators can use them for meaningful professional learning opportunities.

3. Evidence-Centered Design for the PARCC Assessments Evidence-centered design is a deliberate and systematic approach to assessment development that will help to establish the validityof the assessments, increase the comparability of year-to year results, andincrease efficiencies and reduce costs.

5. Evidence Statement Tables:Types of Evidence Statements Several types of evidence statements are being used to describe what a task should be assessing, including: • Those using exact standards language • Those transparently derived from exact standards language, e.g., by splitting a content standard • Integrative evidence statements that express plausible direct implications of the standards without going beyond the standards to create new requirements • Sub-claim C & D evidence statements, which put MP.3, 4, 6 as primary with connections to content

6. Evidence Statements using Exact Standards Language 1. Those using exact standards language

7. Evidence Statements Derived from Exact Standards 2. Those transparently derived from exact standards language, e.g., by splitting a content standard. Here 8.F.5 is split into 8.F.5-1 and 8.F.5-2.

8. Evidence Statements Derived from Exact Standards “MP” - Mathematical Practices provide guidance on how content should be connected to practices. “Clarifications” provide item developers with guidance on the depth and breadth of the tasks. For the PBA, tasks will assess 3.OA.3. This CCSS has been split into 4 Evidence Statements 3.OA.3-1, 3.OA.3-2, 3.OA.3-3 and 3.OA.3-4. The full text of 3.OA.3 is listed in the CCSS. For Type 1 tasks, “Evidence Statement Text” may represent all or part of CCSS. Mathematical Practices listed on the top row are Ipso Facto. The se MP’s are a direct consequence of the Evidence Statement. MP’s listed on the second row were considered when developing items.

9. Integrative Evidence Statements • 3. Integrative evidence statements that express plausible direct implications of the standards without going beyond the standards to create new requirements • An Evidence Statement could be integrated across • Grade/Course – Ex. 4.Int.2 (Integrated across Grade 4) • Domain – F.Int.1 (Integrated across the Functions Domain) • Cluster - S-ID.Int.1 (Integrated across S-ID Interpreting Categorical & Quantitative Data ) The extension numbers “.1, .2, 3-3” on all “Int” Evidence Statements are used for numbering/ordering purposes for item developers.

10. Integrative Evidence Statements Grade/Course – Ex. 4.Int.1 (Integrated across Grade 4) Draws on content from ALL of grade 4

11. Integrative Evidence Statements Cluster - S-ID.Int.1 (Integrated across S-ID Interpreting Categorical & Quantitative Data )

12. Sub-claim C and Sub-claim D Evidence Statements 4. Sub-claim C & Sub-claim D Evidence Statements, which put MP. 3, 4, 6 as primary with connections to content High School Evidence Statement Subclaim C (Reasoning)

13. Sub-claim C and Sub-claim D Evidence Statements Within these Subclaim C (Reasoning) and Subclaim D (Modeling) Evidence Statements, the Content Scope lists the CCSS that will be assessed Within “Evidence Statement Key”, these Evidence Statements will address Subclaim C (Reasoning) and Subclaim D (Modeling) . Please note within 3.C.7 and 3.D.2, the Evidence Statements will address on grade level Reasoning (3.C.7) and Modeling (3.D.2) but will utilize “securely held (grade 2) content”.

14. Math Sample Item- Type I

15. Math Sample Item- Type I

16. Math Sample Item- Type III

17. Math Sample Item- Type III

18. Math Sample Item- Type III

19. Using the Evidence Table to Plan Lessons: Step 1: Determine which of the evidence statements he/she would want students to be able to demonstrate. Step2: Create or find lessons and tasks that elicit that evidence. Step 3: Anticipate student misconceptions and develop quality follow up questions . Step 4: Address any misconceptions and help students find appropriate strategies to use to accurately answer all tasks related to the evidence statements.

20. Evidence Tableswww.parcconline.org

21. Resources • Any publicly released assessment policies, item prototypes, PARCC Model Content Frameworks, and other valuable resources can be found at www.PARCConline.org

22. Instructional uses of the evidence statements/tables for teachers • To use in Vertical Alignment Conversations • To use to evaluate a curriculum’s Scope and Sequence • To recognize the transparency of PARCC assessment design • To see how the evidence tables, which lead to PARCC Assessment design, are tied to the standards and the language of the standards • To see ways to combine standards naturally when designing instructional tasks • To develop the stem for questions/tasks for instruction aligned with the standards • To determine and create instructional scaffolding (to think through which individual, simpler skills can be taught first to build to more complex skills)  • To develop rubrics and scoring tools for classroom use

23. Resources It All Comes Down To Implementation!

24. Resources from ISBE • http://education.illinoisstate.edu/casei • Shift Kits online • Listserv • http://www.isbe.net/common_core/pls/default.htm • Implementation Support • Webinars • www.ilclassroomsinaction.org – Level 3

25. Contact Information Thank You Mathematics Specialists Dana Cartier dcartier@illinoiscsi.org Heather Brown hedi0201@me.com