1 / 26

Defining Alignment and Achieving College Readiness

Defining Alignment and Achieving College Readiness. Joe Willhoft, Executive Director Susan Gendron, Policy Coordinator. May 9, 2011 SHEEO/Hunt Institute. The Purpose of the Consortium.

gaston
Download Presentation

Defining Alignment and Achieving College Readiness

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. Defining Alignment and Achieving College Readiness Joe Willhoft, Executive Director Susan Gendron, Policy Coordinator May 9, 2011 SHEEO/Hunt Institute

  2. The Purpose of the Consortium • To develop a system of comprehensive and innovative assessments for grades 3-8 and high school in English language arts and mathematics aligned to the Common Core State Standards, so that... • ...students leave high school prepared for postsecondary success in college or a career through increased student learning and improved teaching.

  3. "College and Career Readiness" “College- and career-ready (or readiness) means, with respect to a student, that the student is prepared for success, without remediation, in credit-bearing entry-level courses in and IHE (as defined in section 101(a) of the HEA), as demonstrated by an assessment score that meets or exceeds the achievement standards (as defined in the NIA) for the final high school summative assessment in mathematics or English language arts.” Notice Inviting Applications for the Comprehensive Assessment System, Part II.B Definitions, p. 72, May 2010

  4. Engagement with IHE

  5. 29 States in the SMARTER Balanced Consortium

  6. Institution of Higher Education (IHE) Partners • IHE partners • More than 180 public and private systems and institutions of Higher Education • Representing nearly 75% of the direct matriculation students from all SMARTER Balanced States • IHE representatives and/or postsecondary faculty serve on: • Executive Committee (2 of 9 members) • Item and scoring design committees • Standard-setting design and panels

  7. IHE Collaboration Resources of $2.5M for collaboration with IHE • IHE Coordinator Full-time person with from higher education leadership • IHE Advisory Committee 8-10 Higher Education representatives from across roles • IHE Consultants Resources to contract w/ Higher Ed consultants on special topics/issues • Test Design and Standard Setting for CCR Through IHE Coordinator engage w/ and bring Higher Ed into test development, definition of CCR, and standard setting

  8. Technical Advisory Committee Jamal Abedi UC Davis/CRESST Randy Bennett ETS Derek Briggs University of Colorado Greg Cizek University of North Carolina David Conley University of Oregon Linda Darling-Hammond Stanford University Brian Gong The Center for Assessment Ed Haertel Stanford University Joan Herman UCLA/CRESST Jim Pellegrino University of Illinois, Chicago W. James Popham UCLA, Emeritus Joe Ryan Arizona State University Martha Thurlow University of Minnesota/NCEO

  9. Seven SMARTER Balanced Design Principles • An integrated system • Summative/Interim/Formative • Design with evidence of student performance • “Evidence-based design” • Teacher involvement • Prototype design; item/task writing; scoring of complex items/tasks • State-led with transparent governance • Engagement in policy and implementation decisions

  10. Seven SMARTER Balanced Design Principles • Continuously improve teaching and learning • Regular feedback of progress; professional development supports • Useful information on multiple measures • Progression-based scores; extended response items and performance tasks • Adhere to established professional standards • AERA/NCME Standards for Testing • ATP Best Practices • JCSEE Standards (Utility, Reliability, Propriety, Feasibility)

  11. What Is Our Design?

  12. The Challenge How do we get from here... ...to here? Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness All studentsleave high school college and career ready ...and what can an assessment system do to help?

  13. Assessment System Components Adaptive summative assessments benchmarked to college & career readiness Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness All students leave high school college and career ready

  14. Summative Assessments Summative assessments using online computer adaptive technologies • The accountability component • Adaptive testing... • A way to select items for students • Highly individualized • Accurate measurement across the performance scale • Very efficient – less testing time needed • Reports current achievement and growth across time • Multiple item types • Two performance tasks per year per content area • Students may take twice a year; results in two weeks

  15. Assessment System Components Adaptive summative assessments benchmarked to college & career readiness Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness All students leave high school college and career ready Adaptive interim assessments that are flexible and open providing actionable feedback

  16. Interim Assessments Optional interim assessments using online adaptive technology • Non-secure and fully accessible • Timing and content are customizable • On same scale as the summative assessments • Includes performance tasks • Clear examples of the expected performance • Helps identify specific needs • Teachers included in item and task design and scoring

  17. Assessment System Components Adaptive summative assessments benchmarked to college & career readiness Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness Teachers can access formative tools and practices to improve instruction All students leave high school college and career ready Adaptive interim assessments that are flexible and open providing actionable feedback

  18. Formative Tools and Practices Optional Web-based formative resources • Online resources for... • Aligning instruction to CCSS • Classroom evidence of student learning • Formative assessment guides • Training in item and task development, creating scoring guides/rubrics • Best-practice support through online learning modules • Comprehensive information portal... • Access to information about student progress • Student performance history

  19. Assessment System Components Adaptive summative assessments benchmarked to college & career readiness Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness Teachers can access formative tools and practices to improve instruction All students leave high school college and career ready Adaptive interim assessments that are flexible and open providing actionable feedback

  20. Key Features

  21. Responsible Flexibility

  22. Responsible Flexibility for Implementation • Computerized testing • Paper/pencil option locally available during a 3-year transition • Spring 2011: State-by-state survey of technology/infrastructure gaps • End-of-course tests • Test-builder tool available to use interim item pool for EOCs • Common, interoperable open-source software • Accommodate State-level assessment options • Adoption of best practices procedures/protocols • Common protocols for item development: accessibility, language/cultural sensitivity, construct irrelevant variance • Common accommodation and translation protocols

  23. Getting the Work Done

  24. Timeline

  25. To find out more... ...the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium can be found online at www.k12.wa.us/SMARTER Thank You

More Related