Presented by: Sara Bryant, Measured Progress Michigan Assessment Consortium April 15, 2013

1. Measuring Growth Without a Measuring Tape:What Teachers Need to Consider in Thinking About Teacher Effectiveness Presented by: Sara Bryant, Measured Progress Michigan Assessment Consortium April 15, 2013 1:00—2:30

2. Acknowledgment The work described here has been developed for the Literacy Design Collaborative by Measured Progress and the Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning, and Equity with funding by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

3. Overview • Objectives for today’s session • Teacher Moderated Scoring Systems (TeaMSS) • Literacy Design Collaborative (LCD) • Teacher Effectiveness • “Take 5s”

4. Session Objectives • To learn about Measured Progress’ work on TeaMSS • To learn about a partnership with the LDC • To think about how this project might inform your own local work on teacher effectiveness models

5. Take 5s The Big Question: As I learn about Measured Progress’ work with LDC and the Gates Foundation, what connections am I making to my own local work?

6. Project Components

7. Measured ProgressScoring Professional Development

8. Teacher Moderated Scoring Systems (TeaMSS) • Teachers scoring student tasks • Common rubrics aligned to Common Core Standards (CCS) • Common summative assessments (“tasks”) aligned to rubrics and CCS • Other PD tools and resources to help teachers learn to score and become calibrated with others

9. PD Components • Grade student work with no rubric/guidance • Learn the intricacies of a common rubric • Learn how anchor sets are used as a scoring tool • Practice scoring rubric elements • Reflect on essential Scoring Principles • Practice, Practice, Practice • Score two final papers to look for calibration • Continue practicing with additional student tasks

11. Learning ObjectivesBig Ideas Adopting a Mind-Set of “Learning to Score” Understanding and Using Rubrics Understanding and Using Anchor Sets Scoring Application to Classroom

12. Grading vs. ScoringWhat’s the Difference? • Grading:reflects the performance of students relative to expectations at a particular point in time. • Scoring:uses fixed standards of quality that do not change over time.

13. Analytic vs. Holistic ScoringWhat’s the Difference? Holistic Scoring: balances characteristics of writing to arrive at a score appropriate to its overall quality. Analytic Scoring: considers criteria of assessment separately, identifying a single score for each criterion.

14. Take 5 When thinking about your own experiences with organizing and implementing scoring common student work, what tools and trainings might be helpful to enhance the experiences? What tools and resources might be helpful to learn more about scoring common student work?

16. 1. Know the rubric.

17. 2. Trust evidence, not intuition.

18. 3. Match evidence to language inthe rubric.

19. 4. Weigh evidence carefully;base judgments on the preponderance of evidence.

20. 5. Know your biases;leave them at the door.

21. 6. Focus on what the student does, not on what the student does not do.

22. 7. Isolate your judgment: One bad element does not equal a bad paper.

23. 8. Resist seduction: One good element does not equal a good paper.

24. 9. Recognize direct copy or plagiarism.

25. 10. Stick to the rubric.

26. Literacy Design Collaborative Examples on the following slides and more information about LDC can be found at: www.literacydesigncollaborative.org

27. What is LDC? • A framework for building literacy skills and core content knowledge - aligned to Common Core Standards (CCS) • “Template Tasks” built on text-based essential questions and a genre of writing (e.g. essay) • Common rubrics for argumentation, informational and narrative writing

29. Template Task “LDC ‘template tasks’ provide fill-in-the-blank shells that teachers use to create powerful assignments. For example, Template Task 2 calls for student analysis that builds an argument.” - www.literacydesigncollaborative.org/tasks

30. Template Tasks “[Insert question] After reading _____ (literature or informational texts), write _________ (essay or substitute) that addresses the question and support your position with evidence from the text(s). L2 Be sure to acknowledge competing views.” - www.literacydesigncollaborative.org/tasks

31. Rubric Scoring Elements • Focus • Controlling Idea • Reading/Research • Development • Organization • Conventions • Content Understanding

33. Scoring Element Example Controlling Idea

34. Scoring Element Example Organization

35. Scoring Element Example Reading Research

36. Scoring Element Example Content Understanding

37. Take 5 When thinking about your common assessment work in your districts, what LDC processes and structures might appeal to you and your colleagues?

38. Putting it All Together • Local teacher development of modules • Common modules and tasks used across districts and states • Student work samples and common rubrics used to develop scoring professional development • Teachers scoring student tasks across districts and states

39. Putting it All Together

40. Professional Dialogue

41. Calibration

42. Take 5 How might a common assessment model that includes common local modules, assessment and teacher scoring be part of a Michigan teacher effectiveness model?

43. Final Thoughts • Models such as LDC honors teacher involvement in the process of curriculum, instruction, and assessment. • Scoring professional development allows teachers to become part of the game. • Teacher dialogue about student work enhances teacher knowledge. • Teacher effectiveness can be measured using processes such as these!

44. For More Information Sara Bryant bryant.sara@measuredprogress.org Literacy Design Collaborative www.literacydesigncollaborative.org Measured Progress www.measuredprogress.org