1 / 15

Vertical Articulation in the Context of States’ Transition to the Common Core State Standards

Vertical Articulation in the Context of States’ Transition to the Common Core State Standards. How did we get here, Where are we now, and How is that working out?. National Conference on Student Assessment June 25-27, 2014.

layne
Download Presentation

Vertical Articulation in the Context of States’ Transition to the Common Core State Standards

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. Vertical Articulation in the Context of States’ Transition to the Common Core State Standards How did we get here, Where are we now, and How is that working out? National Conference on Student Assessment June 25-27, 2014

  2. How did we get here?Vertical Articulation in the Context of States’ Transition to the Common Core State Standards Patricia A. Baron Educational Testing Service National Conference on Student Assessment June 25-27, 2014

  3. Where are we? • The current standards and testing movement is in transition from the multi-state standards to the Common Core State Standards (45 states and DC) http://www.academicbenchmarks.com/ccss-state-status

  4. How did we get here?Historical Highlights • U.S. Federal Policy and Initiatives • Research – ongoing and results since 1995

  5. US Education Policy Title I ESEA Launched development of the field of educational evaluation and school accountability NAEP Subject-area National Survey, Grades 4,8, and 12; subject area frameworks developed by NAGB NAEP State Assessments No Child Left Behind Act Annual testing for all subjects in grades 3-8; Annual progress objectives; State Standards in reading and mathematics ED Invitesstates to include achievement and growth models; vertical scaling not required but promise of greater comparability RTT Created to spur innovation & reforms in state & local districts; points for complying with CCSS

  6. Setting the Stage Three Related Areas of Research and Practice • Defining proficiency • Linking tests. Linking scales. Vertical scales and growth. • Standard Setting: Content and Performance Standards

  7. Defining proficiency Defining proficiency The Common Core is designed to promote deep learning through rigorous standards aligned with college and career readiness

  8. Vertical Scales & Growth Models • Vertical scales introduced with ED invitation (2006) to include growth models in state performance reporting. • Methods existed for linking different tests, different scales • Linking statewide tests to NAEP, accuracy of combining test results across states (Linn and Kiplinger, Ercikan) • Linking NAEP to international tests, e.g., TIMMS (Johnson)

  9. Vertical Scales & Growth Models • Issues for measuring growth & change scores • Scales measuring latent variables such as proficiency or achievement are not equal interval scales (e.g., Patz, 2007). ____+____+___+__+__+__+ • Valid vertical scales require a set of content standards that provide continuity across the grade span • Learning progressions (e.g., Wilson, 2009)

  10. Vertical Scales & Growth Models • Issues for measuring growth & change scores • Linking tests across grades without an anchor (common items) problematic • Standard setting conducted by grade not sufficient

  11. Standard Setting: Content and Performance Standards Content Standards: Content standards define the knowledge, concepts, and skills that students should acquire at each grade level. Performance Standards: These standards specify how much understanding of content students need at each level of performance (e.g., basic, proficient, advanced), relative to the content standards.

  12. Standard Setting: Content and Performance Standards • Best practice in standard setting • appropriately-informed panelists • alignment between test and content standards • Cross-grade expectations and learning progressions: • Cohesive content standards, e.g., Grades 3 to 4 to 5, …Grade 11. • Options for cross-grade alignment of performance standards • Vertical scaling and vertical moderation

  13. Good sources for further reading • The Future of Test-Based Educational Accountability, Ed. Ryan & Shepard, (2008) • Vertical Scaling in Standards-Based Educational Assessment and Accountability Systems, published by CCSSO, Rich Patz (2007) • Vertical Scaling • in Test Equating, Scaling and Linking: Methods and Practices, Kolen and Brennan (2004)

  14. Research Highlights • 2003 • Vertical equating for state assessments: Issues and solutions in AYP and school accountability (Lissitz and Huynh) • 2005 • Vertically Moderated Standards: Special Issue of Applied Measurement in Education • 2009 • Impact of vertical scaling decisions on growth interpretations (Briggs and Weeks) • 2010 • Post-standard-setting panel considerations for decision-makers (Geisinger and McCormick) • 2012 • Growth, Standards and Accountabiilty (Betebenner) in Cizek, Ed., Setting performance standards

  15. Today Current Research • Priya Kannan, Research Scientist, Educational Testing Service Current Practice • Deb Lindsey, Director of Assessment, Wyoming Department of Education Discussion • Marianne Perie, Co-Director at Center for Educational Testing and Evaluation, University of Kansas

More Related