NEXT GENERATION ASSESSMENTS

1. NEXT GENERATION ASSESSMENTS K-12 Reinvention Symposium October 22-24, 2010

2. A Call for Next Generation Assessments “I am calling on our nation’s Governors and state education chiefs to develop standards and assessments that don’t simply measure whether students can fill in a bubble on a test, but whether they possess 21st century skills like problem-solving and critical thinking, entrepreneurship and creativity.” -- President Barack Obama March 10, 2009

3. HOW THE DEMAND FOR SKILLS HAS CHANGEDECONOMY-WIDE MEASURES OF ROUTINE AND NON-ROUTINE TASK INPUT (U.S.) Mean task input as percentiles of the 1960 task distribution The dilemma of schools: The skills that are easiest to teach and test are also the ones that are easiest to digitize, automate, and outsource (Levy and Murnane)

4. Concerns about the Effects of High-Stakes Multiple-Choice Tests on Instruction “I have seen more students who can pass the [state test] but cannot apply those skills to anything if it’s not in the test format. I have students who can do the test but can’t look up words in a dictionary and understand the different meanings…. As for higher quality teaching, I’m not sure I would call it that. Because of the pressure for passing scores, more and more time is spent practicing the test and putting everything in [the test] format.” -- A Texas Teacher

5. Worldwide Reform Initiatives • Expectations for higher- order skills • Rich content • Modes of inquiry • “Teach less, learn more” • Project work, tasks requiring research, analysis, application, self assessment, production • Performance tasks • Assessment of, as, and for learning • Learning progressions

6. COMMON PRACTICES ACROSS COUNTRIES • Tightly integrated system • Assessments include evidence of actual student work • Teachers integrally involved • Assessments inform course grades, provide information to colleges and employer, not to determine diploma • Assessments designed to continuously improve teaching and learning

7. HOW ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS AIM TO IMPROVE TEACHING AND LEARNING • Together on-demand and curriculum embedded assessments evaluate analytic & performance abilities – measure the full range of knowledge and skills • Moderated teacher scoring • Learning progressions (shape curriculum, personalizes learning, know where the student is • School based assessments model good instruction

8. The Challenge How do we get from here... ...to here? Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness All students leave high school college and career ready

9. … And How can Assessment contribute? How do we get from here... ...to here? Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness All students leave high school college and career ready

10. Race to the Top Assessment Program Competition • $350 million of Race to the Top Fund set aside for awards to consortia of states to design and develop common K-12 assessment systems aligned to common, college- and career-ready standards • Competition asked consortia to design assessment systems that meet dual needs of: • Instructional improvements • Accountability • In September 2010, the U.S. Department of Education awarded two grants: • Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) • Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) • The winning consortia have four years to develop assessment systems, and participating states will administer new assessment statewide by 2014-2015

11. Partnership for Assessment of College and Career Readiness (PARCC)

12. PARCC States

13. PARCC States 15 Participating States • Alabama • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Delaware • Georgia • Kentucky • Mississippi • New Hampshire • New Jersey • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Pennsylvania • South Carolina 11 Governing States • Arizona • District of Columbia • Florida-Fiscal Agent • Illinois • Indiana • Louisiana • Maryland • Massachusetts-Board Chair • New York • Rhode Island • Tennessee

16. BackgroundStates Involved Fiscal Agent: Washington State

17. Goals of Consortium

18. PARCC Assessment System Design: Measuring mastery of the Common Core Standards ELA/Literacy • Reading complex literary and informational text • Writing – both on demand and over time • Research • Speaking and listening • Language , conventions, vocabulary Mathematics • Conceptual understanding and procedural fluency • Application via modeling and strategic problem solving • Reasoning, explaining, justifying

19. PARCC Assessment System Design: Measuring mastery of the Common Core Standards ELA/Literacy • Reading complex literary and informational text • Writing – both on demand and over time • Research • Speaking and listening • Language , conventions, vocabulary Mathematics • Conceptual understanding and procedural fluency • Application via modeling and strategic problem solving • Reasoning, explaining, justifying

20. PARCC Assessment System Design The through-course components in both subjects will be administered after approximately 25 percent, 50 percent and 75 percent of instruction • ELA 1 and ELA 2 One or two tasks involving reading, drawing conclusions and presenting analysis in writing • Math 1 and Math 2 One to three tasks that assess one of two essential topics in mathematics (standards or clusters of standards)

21. PARCC ASSESSMENT SYSTEM DESIGN • ELA 3: Performance tasks) that require evaluating information from within a set of digital resources, evaluating their quality, selecting resources, and composing an essay or research paper • ELA 4 (speaking and listening) Students will present their work from ELA 3 to classmates and respond to questions. Teachers will score, using a standardized rubric, and can use results in determining students class grades. • Math 3 Performance tasks) that require conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application of mathematical tools and reasoning.

22. PARCC ASSESSMENT SYSTEM DESIGN End-of-Year – Comprehensive, computer-scored assessment that includes a range of item types, including innovative, technology-enhanced items. Enables quick turnaround of student work. A students summative score – used for accountability purposes – will include his/her performance on Through-Courses 1, 2, and 3 as well as the end of year assessment

23. PARCC Assessment System Design:Formative Assessment Formative Tools “[Thoughtful, curriculum-aligned, and valid ways of determining what students know, rather than leaving the burden of planning and assessing on the teacher alone.” Shavelson et al. (2008): • Partnership Resource Center (PRC)―an online, digital resource that includes two supports: • released items with item data, student work, rubrics • model curriculum frameworks • Text Complexity Diagnostic Tool: a computer adaptive tool to identify students’ proximate zone of development and supply suggestions for appropriate texts for students to read • K-2 Assessments in ELA/Literacy and Mathematics

24. PARCC Assessment System Design Data to Support Instruction, Professional Development, and Accountability Decisions • Types of Data • Student achievement scores and growth measures • Information on readiness for college and careers • Item analysis of released items • Reporting • Periodic Feedback Reports • Annual Stakeholder Reports • Item Analysis Reports • Interactive Data Tool (online) • Available data will be aggregated at a level appropriate for each audience and report

25. PARCC Assessment System Design Accessibility and Accommodations • Students with disabilities and English Learners will be considered from onset of development process • Items and test forms will be created using an evidence centered design approach • Universal design methods will be considered in every step of the process • Accessibility and Accommodations committee will be formed to advise Partnership

26. PARCC Timeline

27. http://www.fldoe.org/parcc/ Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers

28. Computer Adaptive SMARTER Historical Development of the SMARTER Balanced Consortium • Formative Capacity MOSAIC • Integrated System Balanced

29. The Purpose of the Consortium To develop a set 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. The assessments shall be operational across Consortium states in the 2014-15 school year.

30. Theory of Action • A model of verifiable accomplishments/milestones, leading to the desired outcome • Accomplishments/milestones are inter-dependent • The theory of action is closely linked to the validation argument for the assessment system

31. The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action Technology supports innovative & comprehensive assessments Technology provides increased access to learning Summative adaptive assessments are benchmarked to college & career readiness State policies and practices support increased expectations Clear communication of expectations to stakeholders Teachers use formative tools and practices to improve instruction All students leave high school college and career ready Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness Professional capacity-building PD and other supports for teachers to instruct on the CCSS Teachers design and score assessment items & tasks Interim/Benchmark assessments are used as progress checks

32. The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action Technology supports innovative & comprehensive assessments Technology provides increased access to learning Summative adaptive assessments are benchmarked to college & career readiness State policies and practices support increased expectations Clear communication of expectations to stakeholders Teachers use formative tools and practices to improve instruction All students leave high school college and career ready Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness Professional capacity-building PD and other supports for teachers to instruct on the CCSS Teachers design and score assessment items & tasks Interim/Benchmark assessments are used as progress checks

33. Theory of Action Assessment system that balances summative, interim/benchmark, performance, and formative components for ELA and mathematics: • Computer adaptive assessment system/summative • Grades 3–8 and 11 (testing window within the last 12 weeks of the instructional year) • Selected response, enhanced constructed response, technology enhanced, and performance events (grades 3–8, 2/year: HS up to 6) • Adaptive interim/benchmark • Learning progressions • Administered throughout the year • Formative Processes and Tools

34. Assessment Design The Consortium will provide the following by the 2014-15 school year: 3. Formative tools and resources 4. Responsible flexibility 5. Distributed summative assessment • Content clusters throughout a course • Most appropriate time for each student • Scores rolled up Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium

35. Assessment System Highlights

36. System Highlights Summative assessments using online computer adaptive technologies • Efficiently provide accurate measurement of all students, across the spectrum of knowledge and skills • Incorporate adaptive precision into performance tasks and events • Will assess full range of CCSS in English language arts and mathematics • Describe both current achievement and growth across time, showing progress toward college- and career-readiness • Scores can be reliably used for state-to-state comparability, with standards set against research-based benchmarks • The option of giving the summative tests twice a year.

38. System Highlights Optional interim/benchmark assessments • Are aligned to and reported on the same scale as the summative assessments • Help identify specific needs of each student, so teachers can provide appropriate, targeted instructional assistance • Incorporate significant involvement of teachers in item and task design and scoring • Are non-secure and fully accessible for use in instruction and professional development activities • Provide students and teachers with clear examples of the expected performance on common standards.

39. System Highlights Digital library of formative tools • Instructionally sensitive, on-demand measures that enable differentiation of instruction • Use is associated with improved teaching and increased student learning

40. System Highlights Computer Adaptive Technology • Allows for the breadth of the Common Core State Standards to be comprehensively assessed while minimizing test length. • Allows increased measurement precision relative to fixed form assessments. • Allows items to be presented as a function of student ability as measured during the test.

41. System Highlights Online, tailored reporting system • Supports educator access to information about student progress toward college- and career-readiness • Allows for exchange of student performance history across districts and states • Uses a Consortium-supported backbone, while individual states retain jurisdiction over access permissions and front-end “look” of online reports.

42. System Highlights Benefits and efficiencies from “economies of scale” due to a multi-state consortium • Cost savings • Shared interoperable open source software platforms: Item generation, item banking, and adaptive testing no longer exclusive property of vendors • Common, agreed-upon protocols for accommodations for students with disabilities and ELL students.

43. Professional Capacity and Outreach

45. Collaboration with Higher Education

46. IHE Collaboration GOAL: Better prepare students for college- and career-readiness. • Collaborate with IHEs to create student achievement standards that define college-ready. • Students will enter IHE systems having met common, clear college-ready standards. • Students will be able to track readiness for college and careers throughout high school.

47. Timeline

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