Kentucky’s Science Assessment System

1. Kentucky’s Science Assessment System A 3-part System in Support of 3-D Standards

2. Focus Questions • What IS a system of assessments? • Why would an SEA focus beyond the statewide summative? • How can policies drive effective teaching and learning? • How can an SEA walk the talk when they say: We’re from the state and we’re here to help?

3. Vision of Science Proficiency • [By] the end of 12th grade, all students: • have some appreciation of the beauty and wonder of science; • possess sufficient knowledge of science and engineering to engage in public discussions on related issues; • are careful consumers of scientific and technological information related to their everyday lives; • are able to continue to learn about science outside school; • and have the skills to enter careers of their choice, including (but not limited to) careers in science, engineering and technology.

4. A SYSTEM of Science Assessments • Built on teaching and learning in classroom • Each component adds and elicits new evidence of students’ learning • Defensible evidence of student attainment of the standard – as the standard was intended – is generated • Supports different purposes/users/uses PE

5. Board on Testing and Assessment (BOTA) The committee encourages a developmental path for assessment that is “bottom up” rather than “top down;” one that begins with the process of designing assessments for the classroom, perhaps integrated into instructional units, and moves toward assessments for monitoring. (page 8)

6. From a traditional view of … Science Standards

7. To: Provides cumulative, yet not necessarily duplicative information

8. A good assessment system can play a critical role in providing fair and accurate measures of the learning of all students and providing students with multiple ways of demonstrating their competency. (page 9)

11. Creating the TCTs: • Kentucky teachers from every grade/course selected to develop tasks for each grade K-12 • Tasks were piloted/revised in the developer’s classrooms • Facilitation guides created to accompany each task • Open window November-March for classroom implementation: EVERY teacher of science was asked to administer a task of their choosing • Post-task analysis resulted in the submission to KDE of one single representative sample per grade/course from each district for calibration and quality control

12. Grade 1 TCT Example: SEP/CCC Driven

13. What pattern in the shadows do you observe? What does the pattern tell you about the relationship between the sun and the shadow?

14. The pattern I observed in the shadow chart helped me know this because ______________________________

16. Creating the Summative: • 40+ Kentucky teachers selected to develop items • Bundled 2-3 Performance Expectations (PE) from the Kentucky Academic Standards within the context of a phenomenon • Developed “storylines” and stimuli that establish the outline of how the phenomenon will be used to elicit evidence for the PEs • Created clusters of items that provide evidence of student learning of the bundled PEs: • 6-7 selected response opportunities • 2-3 constructed response questions

17. State Summative Assessment Prototype: Phenomenon-based Cluster

18. State Summative Assessment Prototype

19. Essential Questions for Teaching, Learning and Assessment • What do we expect students to know and be able to do? • How will we know when they are successful? • What will we do to support further/deeper learning – to move all students forward?

20. Process for CEAs/TCTS • PLANNING • IMPLEMENTING • ANALYZING STUDENT WORK Note: Each of these corresponds to research on highly effective teaching, learning and assessment as well as Kentucky’s Framework for Teaching, Domains 1, 3, and 4

21. Policy and Practice Challenges: Rigorous and Aligned 3-D Tasks/Clusters • A customizable “template” assures the explicit pairing of SEPs that promote exploration of a DCI-based phenomena using a CCC as a sense-making lens. • KY teacher created, vendor supported • Phenomenologically centered to elicit evidence of and transfer of learning

22. Policy and Practice Challenges:Effective Professional Learning Opportunities • Professional learning vs “PD as activity” (leveraged by new PL Standards in regulation) • Intentionality of teachers engaging in the three-step process is key to establishing a focus on highly effective practices that effect student success • Quality over ‘quantity’ (in terms of teacher time, collaboration)

23. Policy and Practice Challenges:Focus on Effectiveness – from preservice throughout career • Involvement of higher ed faculty to develop assessments/support ongoing professional learning • Expectations for effective teaching congruent to effective implementation of system components • Focus on developing collective teacher efficacy

24. 2017 Field Test: Lessons Learned (TCT) • Teacher uncertainty regarding formative assessment and TCT—”Do your best” • Emphasis on SEP and CCC as ‘content’ • Phenomena well-received by teachers and students, engagement fosters perseverance • Emphasis on process vs task—quality conversations • Meaningful tasks aren’t created easily

25. 2017 Field Test: Lessons Learned (summative) • Phenomena/clusters well-received by teachers and students, engagement fosters perseverance • Storyline approach requires careful attention to reading levels/load • Student engagement dramatically different: students appreciated the storyline/cluster approach • Meaningful clusters aren’t created easily: 30+ hours per cluster rough draft

26. More about Kentucky’s Science Assessment System • http://education.ky.gov/curriculum/conpro/science/Pages/Science-Assessment.aspx Contacts: Stephen.Pruitt@education.ky.gov Rhonda.Sims@education.ky.gov Sean.Elkins@education.ky.gov Karen.Kidwell@education.ky.gov