1 / 36

Overview of Today’s Session

PARCC Higher Education Webinar: State-level Strategies for Engaging Stakeholders in the Public Review of the Draft College-Ready Determination Policy and Performance Level Descriptors July 2012 Presented by: Jeanne Burns, Associate Commissioner, Louisiana Board of Regents

drea
Download Presentation

Overview of Today’s Session

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PARCC Higher Education Webinar: State-level Strategies for Engaging Stakeholders in the Public Review of the Draft College-Ready Determination Policy and Performance Level Descriptors July 2012 Presented by: Jeanne Burns, Associate Commissioner, Louisiana Board of Regents Mike Krause, Director of Academic Affairs, Tennessee Higher Education Commission Allison Jones, Vice President for Postsecondary Collaboration, Achieve Callie Riley, Program Associate, Postsecondary Engagement, Achieve

  2. Overview of Today’s Session • Introduction and Welcome: 5 minutes • Review of PARCC College Ready and Performance Level Descriptions: 15 minutes • Q and A: 10 minutes • Engaging Postsecondary Stakeholders: 15 Minutes • Q and A: 10 Minutes • Public Comment: 5 Minutes • Survey Collection/Guidance: 5 Minutes • Expectations and Next Steps: 5 Minutes

  3. College-Ready Determination Policy

  4. College-Ready Determination Policy • Sections of the Policy • Meaning of the Determination • Benefit of Earning the Determination • Criteria Used for Making the Determination • Maintaining the Determination • Determining and Validating College Ready Threshold Scores

  5. Meaning of a College-Ready Determination • PARCC intends to make two College-Ready (CR) Determinations • Students who earn a College-Ready Determination in ELA/literacy will have demonstrated the knowledge and skills necessary to enter into and succeed in entry-level, credit-bearing courses in College English Composition and Literature, and introductory courses requiring college-level reading in a range of disciplines, such as history and the social sciences. • Students who earn a College-Ready Determination in Mathematics will have demonstrated the knowledge, skills, and practices* necessary to enter into and succeed in entry-level, credit-bearing courses in College Algebra and Introductory Statistics. *The practices referred to here are the Standards for Mathematical Practice included in the Common Core State Standards.

  6. Benefit of Earning a College-Ready Determination • Students who earn a CR Determination will be exempt from having to take and pass placement tests designed to determine whether they are academically prepared to enter directly into entry-level, credit-bearing courses in English language arts and mathematics. • The CR Determination is not intended to inform admission decisions or exempt students from taking tests designed to place them into more advanced courses than entry-level.

  7. Criteria for Earning a College-Ready Determination • CR Determinations will be awarded to students who achieve Level 4* on the designated PARCC high school assessments in ELA/literacy and mathematics. • In order to achieve Level 4, students will need to demonstrate a solid command of the knowledge and skills embodied by the Common Core State Standards assessed on the designated PARCC high school assessments. • Options for determining the specific PARCC high school assessments that will be used to make CR Determinations will be discussed at the September 2012 Governing Board meeting. *The proposal is to report the results of PARCC assessments using five performance levels, Level 5 being the highest.

  8. Maintaining a College-Ready Determination • Policy states that postsecondary institutions/ systems may impose additional requirements for maintenance, such as continuous enrollment through graduation from high school in: • Courses offered through dual/concurrent enrollment; or • High school courses that build on the standards used to make the College-Ready Determination.

  9. Standard-Setting/ Validation Studies The following statement will be used to inform standard-setting (determining cut scores for PARCC performance levels) and to conduct future studies to validate the efficacy of the CR Determinations. • At least 75 percent of the students who earn a College-Ready Determination by performing at level 4 in ELA/ literacy should earn college credit by attaining at least a grade of C or its equivalent in College English Composition or Literature, or introductory courses in disciplines requiring college-level reading, such as history and the social sciences. • At least 75 percent of the students who earn a PARCC College-Ready Determination by performing at Level 4 in Mathematics should earn college credit by attaining at least a grade of C or its equivalent in College Algebra or Introductory Statistics.

  10. Key Changes to the Draft College- Ready Determination Policy • The definition of entry-level, college credit-bearing courses in ELA was expanded to include disciplines that require college-level reading, such as history and the social sciences. • The definition of entry-level, college credit-bearing courses in mathematics was changed from “College Algebra and Introductory Statistics” to “College Algebra or Introductory Statistics”. • Revised “Maintaining a College-Ready Determination” section: • Dropped policy stating that determination will remain valid for 16 months • Postsecondary institutions/systems may impose additional requirements for maintenance, such as continuous enrollment or taking rigorous ELA and math course in the senior year.

  11. Proposed PARCC Performance Levels

  12. Key Changes to the Performance Level Descriptors • The Performance Level Descriptors now allow for three different reporting conditions: • To report the results of assessment(s) used to make College-Ready Determinations by explicitly stating whether or not a student is exempt from additional placement tests • To report the results of high school end-of-grade ELA/literacy assessments and end-of-course math assessments (grades 9 and 10) by indicating whether or not a student is “on-track” to earn a College-Ready Determination • To report the results of end-of-grade assessments for grades 3-8 by indicating a student’s preparedness to engage successfully in further studies in the content area

  13. Proposed Number of Levels • Five levels are being proposed • No names for the levels have been proposed at this time; however, Level 4is pitched to a level of rigor currently described by NAEP’s Proficient Level (solid command of the content). It is also the proposed level for earning a CR Determination. • Reasons for Five Levels (rather than four) • PARCC assessments will support the accurate classification of student performance into five levels • Five levels will help schools target assistance to students • Five levels will provide states with options for using performance levels in various accountability mechanisms • Five levels will provide increased opportunities for students, schools and districts to demonstrate growth • The PARCC Technical Advisory Committee supports five levels

  14. Components of Performance Levels • Each of the proposed performance levels includes: • Policy claims, which describe the educational implications for students at a particular performance level. • General content claims , which describe the academic knowledge and skills students across grade levels performing at a given performance level are able to demonstrate. * *Once general content claims are adopted, grade/course-specific content claims will be developed (e.g. grade 4 ELA/literacy, Algebra I)

  15. General Definition of Each Level • Level 5: Superior command of the knowledge, skills, and practices embodied by the CCSS assessed at the grade level/ course. • Level 4: Solid command … • Level 3: Partial command … • Level 2: Limited command … • Level 1: Very Limited command …

  16. General Content Claims • In ELA/literacy, general content claims at each level describe how well students are able to • Read and comprehend a range of sufficiently complex text independently • Write effectively when using and/or analyzing sources • Build and present knowledge through the integration, comparison, and synthesis of ideas • Use of context to determine the meaning of words and phrases • In Mathematics, the general content claims at each level describe how well students are able to • Solve problems involving the major content with connections to the practices • Solve problems involving the additional and supporting content with connections to the practices • Express mathematical reasoning by constructing viable arguments • Solve real world problems, engaging particularly in the Modeling Practice • Demonstrate fluency (grades 3-6)

  17. PLDs for Reporting Results of Assessments used to make College-Ready Determinations • Level 5 • Superior command of the knowledge and skills contained in the CCSS assessed • Academically well prepared to engage successfully in entry-level credit bearing courses in ….. • Exempt from having to take and pass placement tests designed to determine whether they are prepared for entry-level, credit bearing courses without need for remediation • Level 4 • Solid command … • Academically prepared … • Exempt … • Level 3 • Partial command … • Will likely need academic support to engage successfully in entry-level, credit-bearing courses • Not exempt … • Level 2 • Limited command … • Will need academic support … • Not exempt … • Level 1 • Very limited command … • Will need extensive academic support … • Not exempt …

  18. PLDs for Reporting Results of Grades 9 and 10 Assessments • Level 5 • Superior command… • Academically well prepared to engage successfully in further studies in the content area • On-track to become academically prepared to engage successfully in entry-level, credit bearing courses in … • Level 4 • Solid command … • Academically prepared … • On-track … • Level 3 • Partial command … • Will likely need academic support to engage successfully in further studies … • Will likely need academic support to become prepared to engage successfully in entry-level …. • Level 2 • Limited command… • Will need academic support to engage successfully in further studies … • Will need academic support to become prepared to engage successfully in entry-level … • Level 1 • Very limited command … • Will need extensive academic support to engage successfully in further studies … • Will need extensive academic support to become prepared to engage successfully in entry-level …

  19. PLDs for Reporting Results of End-of-Grade Assessments for Grades 3-8 • Level 5 • Superior command … • Academically well prepared to engage successfully in further studies in the content area • Level 4 • Solid command … • Academically prepared … • Level 3 • Partial command • Will likely need academic support to engage successfully … • Level 2 • Limited command … • Will need academic support … • Level 1 • Very limited command • Will need extensive academic support

  20. Questions and Discussion

  21. Public Review Period: Engaging Postsecondary Stakeholders

  22. The Purpose of the Stakeholder Input Process • Strengthen the draft PARCC CRDs and PLDs through strong and targeted feedback from multiple perspectives. • Build awareness and understanding of the draft policies among critical stakeholders. • Encourage support and buy-in for the draft policies by giving critical players and the public the opportunity to engage in the development process. • Inform the decisions of the Governing Board and ACCR members when they finalize the PARCC college-ready determination policy and PLDS later this fall.

  23. Suggested Process for Public Engagement • The PARCC Performance Level Operational Working Group and Achieve staff recommend a process with the following components for gathering stakeholder input on the draft policies: • States gather stakeholder input from key K-12 and postsecondary leaders and groups;  • PARCC gathers general public input via online survey; and  • PARCC gathers national stakeholder input via briefing for national membership and advocacy groups. • State leaders are encouraged to seek feedback by facilitating conversations with targeted sets of stakeholders.

  24. Postsecondary Stakeholders • State Directors and Commissioners of Higher Education • Presidents of Two- and Four-Year Colleges • Directors of Developmental Education Programs at Two and Four Year Colleges • Governor’s Office • Education Advocacy Organization Representatives • Foundations/Philanthropy • Legislative Leaders • Faculty Leaders • Department Chairs

  25. State Examples • Louisiana • Campus-level teams and meetings • Each team will submit responses to state HELT member • Tennessee • Key stakeholders by institution • Statewide meeting in central location • Each attendee is committed to submitting survey response to state HELT member • Other States • Regional meetings • Reaching out via listservs and previously established professional development opportunities

  26. Questions and Discussion

  27. Public Review Period: Collecting and Reporting Stakeholder Feedback

  28. Materials Provided to States as Communication and Engagement Tools • Draft PARCC College-Ready Determination Policy and Performance Level Descriptors • Cover memo, including suggested stakeholder engagement process • PowerPoint presentation for use with stakeholder groups • State-specific survey link for collecting key stakeholder feedback, including non-online version • General public review survey link for collecting stakeholder feedback (www.parcconline.org/crd-pld-survey)

  29. Feedback Sought in Stakeholder Survey • Number of performance levels • Names of performance levels • Clarity of policy and content claims • Do policy claims clearly describe students’ academic preparedness at each level? • Do policy claims clearly describe academic implications of earning a CRD? • Do content claims clearly describe students’ command of the knowledge and skills assessed? • Level of agreement with criteria that 75% of students at Level 4 will earn a C in entry-level, credit-bearing courses • Level of agreement with introductory credit bearing courses to which the College Ready Determination should apply: • Math: College Algebra or Introductory Statistics • ELA: College English Composition or “Literature and introductory courses that require college level reading, such as the social sciences and history.”

  30. Example of State Survey Each survey contains: Overview and Directions 6 questions Additional narrative option Each participant is asked: Name State Job Title Affiliation

  31. Managing the Survey at the State Level • State-specific survey tool • K-12 and Higher Education Leadership Team members are owners (along with key Achieve staff) • Questions may be easily added or deleted • Owners of survey can download state-specific responses • Responses will be monitored to track trends within and across states • May use hard copy of survey to track responses • Submitting results • Each state should submit aggregated responses to PARCC by September 21, 2012 via electronic means • Option of submitting one documents and multiple supporting documents

  32. Expectations for Collaborating with K-12 to Compile and Report Survey Data • Assemble K-12 and postsecondary teams of critical stakeholders • Disseminate draft College-Ready Determination policy and Performance Level Descriptors via multiple communication and engagement methods • Continuous access and review of feedback and responses collected on the state-specific survey • K-12 and Higher Education Leadership Team members will work together to analyze and report state responses • K-12 and Higher Education Leadership Team members will present state responses to state Governing Board and ACCR members • State K-12 and Higher Education leadership team members will provide a state-level summary of feedback and recommendations for revisions to the draft policies by September 21, 2012

  33. Next Steps • Compile comments and revise CRD policy and PLDs as needed • Conduct follow-up higher education webinar on August 16, 2012 • Present preliminary results of CRD policy and performance levels feedback to the joint Governing Board and Advisory Committee on College Readiness for discussion on September 2012 • Present final results of CRD policy and performance levels feedback to the joint Governing Board and ACCR for adoption in late October 2012 • Begin development of grade- and course-specific content claims in Fall 2012

  34. Public Review Timeline:Summer/Fall 2012 • July 12– September 21, 2012: Public feedback/review period (feedback will be accepted on a rolling basis in order to present preliminary feedback on September 12th) • July 24, 2012: National Partners Briefing in Washington, DC • August 20, 2012: Preliminary feedback from states due (for inclusion in September 12th Joint ACCR/GB meeting information) • September 12, 2012: Present preliminary aggregated feedback to Joint ACCR/GB • September 21, 2012: End of public feedback/review period • September 22– October 12, 2012: Review feedback and revise CRD/PLDs policy proposal (with Performance Level Operational Working Group) • October 15, 2012: Send revised CRD/PLDs policy proposal to ACCR/GB for review • October 25 or 26, 2012 (in conjunction with Transition and Implementation Institute): Hold special face-to-face session with ACCR/GB members (conference in remote members) for final vote on CRD/PLD policy

  35. Questions and Discussion

  36. Contact Information: Allison Jones: ajones@achieve.org Callie Riley: criley@achieve.org Jeanne Burns: burnsj@regents.la.gov Mike Krause: mike.krause@tn.gov www.parcconline.org/crd-pld-survey

More Related