Developing Assessment Literacy in Michigan

1. Developing Assessment Literacy in Michigan Judy Backes Kathy Dewsbury-White Edward Roeber

2. Overview of this Session • What is “assessment literacy?” • Why is assessment literacy needed? • How are the Assessment Literacy Standards being developed? • What do the Standards look like? • What difference would the Standards make for Michigan education? • If this vision is desired, how can we push this vision forward?

3. What is “assessment literacy?” An assessment literate individual is one who understands how student assessment can enable them to better carry out their role in education better, believes that assessment can improve teaching and learning, and puts activities and behaviors to act on these beliefs into place.

4. Parsing the Definition What are the essential elements of this statement? An assessment literate individual is one who understands how student assessment can enable them to better carry out their role in education better, believes that assessment can improve teaching and learning, and puts activities and behaviors to act on these beliefs into place.

5. What is Assessment Literacy? • There are three essential elements of ALS: • Dispositions – Attitudes and beliefs about assessments • Knowledge – What should be known about assessments • Performances – What should be done with assessments

6. Why is assessment literacy needed? • Assessment literacy is needed for several reasons: • Increased volume of student assessment • Changes in types of assessments • Assessment stakes for students and educators are higher • Continued lack of pre-service preparation for educators • Lack of understanding about assessment by those who adopt policy and laws, and govern our schools

7. Why is assessment literacy needed? • Research shows that students more involved in their own learning – and assessment – achieve more • Effective use of formative assessment – such as FAME – requires teachers to understand how instructionally-embedded assessment will help all student achieve at higher levels • Administrator involvement in school improvement activity is also related to higher student achievement

8. Who needs assessment literacy? • Assessment literacy is needed by several types of individuals • Students • Teachers • Building Administrators • Central Office Administrators • Policymakers at the state and local levels

9. Michigan Assessment Consortium • The MAC is a non-profit organization designed to promote greater understanding about and use of assessment in Michigan • The goal of the MAC is to help educators use assessment to improve teaching

10. Michigan Assessment Consortium Vision • …is to improve student learning and achievement through a system of coherent curriculum, balanced assessment and effective instruction. We do this by collaboratively: • Promoting assessment knowledge and practice. • Providing professional development. • Providing and sharing assessment tools and products.

11. We Believe… • All educators can learn to implement a balanced assessment system • Teachers, principals, and central office staff must be assessment literate • Development and use of a coherent system of assessment ensures quality for each student • An effective assessment system includes a balance of school, district, and state measures and uses a variety of methods

12. Michigan Assessment Consortium • The MAC has prepared a number of assessment-related resources • Videoconferences on various topics (which are archived) • Papers on various assessment topics • Common Assessment Development Series • These can be accessed at: • www.michiganassessmentconsortium.org • Now working on Arts education instructional and assessment resources for MDE

13. ALS Development • The MAC has been developing assessment literacy standards for two years • The goal is to provide a common basis for work to help all become more assessment literate

14. ALS Development • The work started with input from the entire MAC Board • Then the Board’s Knowledge and Practices Committee created a first draft • The first draft was reviewed internally • Then, a critical friend reviewed the document • A second draft was produced

15. ALS Development • After internal review and revision, several external reviewers were asked to comment on the standards, including: • Susan Brookhart • Carol Commodore • Margaret Heritage • Ken O’Connor • Jim Popham • Rick Stiggins • MASSP, MEMSPA and MASCD

16. Reviewers’ Reactions • Admired the MAC for undertaking such a comprehensive set of assessment standards, especially for policymakers and for students • Concern about whether there are too many standards • Several thought the sets of standards should “roll up” from teachers to building administrators to district administrators, so as to reduce redundancy

17. Reviewers’ Reactions • The provision of disposition standards and performance standards was supported • Are they dispositions or attitudes? What is the difference? • There were a number of specific comments on individual standards • There is a need to coordinate standards from teachers to administrators

18. ALS Development • The MAC’s Knowledge and Practices Committee is reviewing each set of standards, standard by standard • It has currently reviewed the teacher and the building administrator set (version 4) • Still to do: district administrator, policymaker, and students (which are still in version 3)

19. ALS Development • Once the MAC K & P Committee has reviewed and edited the remaining sets of standards, additional activities are planned: • Write a longer introduction to the document • Create a standard overview presentation in order to introduce the ALS more broadly • Create an online survey to use to gain broader field and organizational input and support for the ALS • Reach out to educational and other organizations to seek their reactions and support to the ALS

20. Time to Process • 3 to 5 minutes on your own: Read through the standards – for teachers, building administrators, district administrators, policymakers and students • Respond to these Qs silently on an index card • What, if anything, needs to be clarified? • What, if anything, needs to be added or deleted? • In which area(s) do you think teachers in your district would need the most PD?

21. Elbow Partner Time • Turn to the person next to you. Each person share one thought/comment related to the questions or the standards

22. Your Thoughts About the ALS • Group Discussion – Share your main thoughts and ideas: • What is your vision for what these standards would do for Michigan’s students if they were implemented? • What would need to be done to push this vision forward? • We’ll chart the main comments • Hand in your index cards so we can benefit from the thinking of all of you!

23. Your Suggestions • How do you see the assessment literacy standards being useful to you? • What types of assessment literacy-building activities do you feel would be useful? • What other ideas and suggestions do you have?

24. Assessment Literacy Development • In closing, the ultimate goal of this effort is to use these standards in ways that address the current state of assessment illiteracy • The stakes are too high not to do so • We hope that you will partner with us as we try to improve our assessment understanding

25. For Further Information Judy Backes 248.821.1951 jdbackes@comcast.net Kathy Dewsbury-White (517) 927-7640 kdwhite@innovateandeducate.org Edward Roeber (517) 614-4877 eroeber@wisc.edu