Assessing the Common Core State Standards

1. Assessing the Common Core State Standards Spring 2012 � CCSS Math Support Conference Idaho Math Initiative Nichole Hall SDE � Math Initiative Coordinator

2. What are the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for Mathematics Aligned with college and work expectations Focused and coherent Include rigorous content and application of knowledge through high-order skills Build upon strengths and lessons of current state standards Internationally benchmarked so that all students are prepared to succeed in our global economy and society Based on evidence and research State led � coordinated by NGA Center and CCSSO

3. Idaho State The State of Idaho adopted the Common Core State Standards on January 24, 2011. The Standards will go into effect in the 2013-2014 school year.

4. The Assessment Challenge How do we get from here...

5. A National Consortium of States 27 states representing 43% of K-12 students 21 governing, 6 advisory states Washington state is fiscal agent

6. Next Generation Assessments More rigorous tests measuring student progress toward �college and career readiness� Have common, comparable scores across member states, and across consortia Provide achievement and growth information to help make better educational decisions and professional development opportunities Assess all students, except those with �significant cognitive disabilities� Administer online, with timely results Use multiple measures

7. A Balanced Assessment System Reference the Components HANDOUT Assessment system that balances summative, interim, and formative components for ELA and mathematics: Summative Assessment (Computer Adaptive) Mandatory comprehensive assessment in grades 3�8 and 11 (testing window within the last 12 weeks of the instructional year) that supports accountability and measures growth Selected response, short constructed response, extended constructed response, technology enhanced, and performance tasks Interim Assessment (Computer Adaptive) Optional comprehensive and content-cluster assessment Learning progressions Available for administration throughout the year Selected response, short constructed response, extended constructed response, technology enhanced, and performance tasks Formative Processes and Tools Optional resources for improving instructional learning Assessment literacy Reference the Components HANDOUT Assessment system that balances summative, interim, and formative components for ELA and mathematics: Summative Assessment (Computer Adaptive) Mandatory comprehensive assessment in grades 3�8 and 11 (testing window within the last 12 weeks of the instructional year) that supports accountability and measures growth Selected response, short constructed response, extended constructed response, technology enhanced, and performance tasks Interim Assessment (Computer Adaptive) Optional comprehensive and content-cluster assessment Learning progressions Available for administration throughout the year Selected response, short constructed response, extended constructed response, technology enhanced, and performance tasks Formative Processes and Tools Optional resources for improving instructional learning Assessment literacy

8. Technology

9. SBAC Seven Key Principles Theory of Action

10. Seven Key PrinciplesSBAC: Theory of Action, pp. 1 & 2 An integrated system Assessments are grounded in a thoughtful, standards-based curriculum and are managed as part of an integrated system of standards, curriculum, assessment, instruction, and teacher development. Curriculum and assessments are organized around a well-defined set of learning progressions along multiple dimensions within subject areas. Formative and interim/benchmark assessments and instructional supports are conceptualized in tandem with summative assessments�all of them linked to the standards and supported by a unified technology platform.Assessments are grounded in a thoughtful, standards-based curriculum and are managed as part of an integrated system of standards, curriculum, assessment, instruction, and teacher development. Curriculum and assessments are organized around a well-defined set of learning progressions along multiple dimensions within subject areas. Formative and interim/benchmark assessments and instructional supports are conceptualized in tandem with summative assessments�all of them linked to the standards and supported by a unified technology platform.

11. An Integrated SystemAdequate Support & Resources, p. 4 SBAC Digital Library Content & Grade Level Specific model curriculum and instructional modules that are aligned to the CCSS and the SBAC Claims. CCSS Training Modules Formative, Interim/Benchmark Assessment Training Developing a digital library of formative assessment practices and professional development resources aligned to the CCSS. The library will include examples of instructional best practices at each grade level, strategies for cross-classroom collaboration, and professional development resources related to the assessment system, such as scoring rubrics for performance tasks.Developing a digital library of formative assessment practices and professional development resources aligned to the CCSS. The library will include examples of instructional best practices at each grade level, strategies for cross-classroom collaboration, and professional development resources related to the assessment system, such as scoring rubrics for performance tasks.

12. Idaho State Dept. of Educationhttp://www.sde.idaho.gov/site/common/

13. Seven Key PrinciplesSBAC: Theory of Action, pp. 1 & 2 An integrated system Evidence-based approach Assessments produce evidence of student performance on challenging tasks that evaluate the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Instruction and assessments seek to teach and evaluate knowledge and skills that generalize and can transfer to higher education and multiple work domains. They emphasize deep knowledge of core concepts and ideas within and across the disciplines�along with analysis, synthesis, problem solving, communication, and critical thinking�thereby requiring a focus on complex performances as well as on specific concepts, facts, and skills.Assessments produce evidence of student performance on challenging tasks that evaluate the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Instruction and assessments seek to teach and evaluate knowledge and skills that generalize and can transfer to higher education and multiple work domains. They emphasize deep knowledge of core concepts and ideas within and across the disciplines�along with analysis, synthesis, problem solving, communication, and critical thinking�thereby requiring a focus on complex performances as well as on specific concepts, facts, and skills.

14. Evidence of Student PerformanceChallenging Tasks That Evaluate the CCSS

15. Draft Assessment Claims for Mathematics

16. Claim #1 � Content Drawn from the Clusters Content Specifications identifies the major clusters and other additional supporting clusters Content Specifications identifies the major clusters and other additional supporting clusters

17. Sufficient Evidence Selected Response Items Computer enhanced items Short Constructed Response Most likely be able to be machine scored Highly Scaffolded Tasks Students are guided through a series of short steps Extended Response Application Tasks Translation Tasks Explanation Tasks Computer enhanced items are created with keeping In mind that the items cannot be answered correctly just because a student has good test taking skills; the student must have an understanding of the mathematical content. Extended Response Application � Relatively standard applications of mathematics Translation � Represent concepts in a different way and translate between representations; i.e. words, numbers, tables, graphs, symbolic algebra Explanation � Explain why agiven standard procedure works.Computer enhanced items are created with keeping In mind that the items cannot be answered correctly just because a student has good test taking skills; the student must have an understanding of the mathematical content. Extended Response Application � Relatively standard applications of mathematics Translation � Represent concepts in a different way and translate between representations; i.e. words, numbers, tables, graphs, symbolic algebra Explanation � Explain why agiven standard procedure works.

18. Using Computer Adaptive Technology for Summative and Interim Assessments

19. Claim #2 � Aligned to the Mathematical Practices Meaning: Problem formulation is not necessary Solution path is not immediately obvious Requires students to formlate their own solution pathway Less structured than items and tasks presented under claim #1 Require students to select appropriate conceptual & physical tools to useMeaning: Problem formulation is not necessary Solution path is not immediately obvious Requires students to formlate their own solution pathway Less structured than items and tasks presented under claim #1 Require students to select appropriate conceptual & physical tools to use

20. Sufficient Evidence Selected Response Items Computer enhanced items Short Constructed Response Most likely be able to be machine scored Computer enhanced items are created with keeping In mind that the items cannot be answered correctly just because a student has good test taking skills; the student must have an understanding of the mathematical content. Extended Response Application � Relatively standard applications of mathematics Translation � Represent concepts in a different way and translate between representations; i.e. words, numbers, tables, graphs, symbolic algebra Explanation � Explain why agiven standard procedure works.Computer enhanced items are created with keeping In mind that the items cannot be answered correctly just because a student has good test taking skills; the student must have an understanding of the mathematical content. Extended Response Application � Relatively standard applications of mathematics Translation � Represent concepts in a different way and translate between representations; i.e. words, numbers, tables, graphs, symbolic algebra Explanation � Explain why agiven standard procedure works.

21. Claim #3 � Aligned to the Mathematical Practices

22. Sufficient Evidence Selected Response Items Computer enhanced items Short Constructed Response Most likely be able to be machine scored Extended Response Application Tasks Translation Tasks Explanation Tasks Computer enhanced items are created with keeping In mind that the items cannot be answered correctly just because a student has good test taking skills; the student must have an understanding of the mathematical content. Extended Response Application � Relatively standard applications of mathematics Translation � Represent concepts in a different way and translate between representations; i.e. words, numbers, tables, graphs, symbolic algebra Explanation � Explain why agiven standard procedure works.Computer enhanced items are created with keeping In mind that the items cannot be answered correctly just because a student has good test taking skills; the student must have an understanding of the mathematical content. Extended Response Application � Relatively standard applications of mathematics Translation � Represent concepts in a different way and translate between representations; i.e. words, numbers, tables, graphs, symbolic algebra Explanation � Explain why agiven standard procedure works.

23. Claim #4 � Aligned to the Mathematical Practices HIGH DOK A key feature of items and tasks in Claim #4 is the student is confronted with a contextualized, or ?real world? situation and must decide which information is relevant and how to represent it. As some of the examples provided below illustrate, ?real world? situations do not necessarily mean questions that a student might really face; it means that mathematical problems are embedded in a practical, application context. In this way, items and tasks in Claim #4 differ from those in Claim #2, because while the goal is clear, the problems themselves are not yet fully formulated (well-posed) in mathematical terms. Content Specifications, p. 70HIGH DOK A key feature of items and tasks in Claim #4 is the student is confronted with a contextualized, or ?real world? situation and must decide which information is relevant and how to represent it. As some of the examples provided below illustrate, ?real world? situations do not necessarily mean questions that a student might really face; it means that mathematical problems are embedded in a practical, application context. In this way, items and tasks in Claim #4 differ from those in Claim #2, because while the goal is clear, the problems themselves are not yet fully formulated (well-posed) in mathematical terms. Content Specifications, p. 70

24. Assessment System Components

25. Reporting Categories Based on Smarter Balanced�s commitment to providing student-level data from which valid inferences can be made, the reporting categories for the summative mathematics assessment include five scores: a Total Mathematics composite score and a subscore for each Claim identified on page 18. The table below provides a summary of these reporting categories. Based on Smarter Balanced�s commitment to providing student-level data from which valid inferences can be made, the reporting categories for the summative mathematics assessment include five scores: a Total Mathematics composite score and a subscore for each Claim identified on page 18. The table below provides a summary of these reporting categories.

26. Appendix A � Grade-Level Content Emphasis, pp. 79 - 86

27. Appendix B � CAT Sampling Proportions for Claim 1, pp. 87 - 91 92 92

28. Appendix C � Cognitive Rigor Matrix/Depth of Knowledge (DOK), pp. 92 & 93 The Common Core State Standards require high-level cognitive demand, such as asking students to demonstrate deeper conceptual understanding through the application of content knowledge and skills to new situations and sustained tasks. For each Assessment Target in this document, the depth(s) of knowledge (DOK) that the student needs to bring to the item/task has been identified, using the Cognitive Rigor Matrix shown below. This matrix draws from two widely accepted measures to describe cognitive rigor: Bloom's (revised) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives and Webb�s Depth-of-Knowledge Levels. The Cognitive Rigor Matrix has been developed to integrate these two models as a strategy for analyzing instruction, for influencing teacher lesson planning, and for designing assessment items and tasks. Math Content Specifications, p. 92 The Common Core State Standards require high-level cognitive demand, such as asking students to demonstrate deeper conceptual understanding through the application of content knowledge and skills to new situations and sustained tasks. For each Assessment Target in this document, the depth(s) of knowledge (DOK) that the student needs to bring to the item/task has been identified, using the Cognitive Rigor Matrix shown below. This matrix draws from two widely accepted measures to describe cognitive rigor: Bloom's (revised) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives and Webb�s Depth-of-Knowledge Levels. The Cognitive Rigor Matrix has been developed to integrate these two models as a strategy for analyzing instruction, for influencing teacher lesson planning, and for designing assessment items and tasks. Math Content Specifications, p. 92

29. Appendix D � Grade 8 Assessment Sampler, pp. 94 - 145

30. Seven Key PrinciplesSBAC: Theory of Action, pp. 1 & 2 An integrated system Evidence-based approach Teacher involvement Teachers are integrally involved in the development and scoring of assessments. While many assessment components are efficiently scored with computer assistance, teachers must also be involved in the formative and summative assessment systems so that they deeply understand and can teach in a manner that is consistent with the full intent of the standards, while becoming more skilled in their own assessment practices.Teachers are integrally involved in the development and scoring of assessments. While many assessment components are efficiently scored with computer assistance, teachers must also be involved in the formative and summative assessment systems so that they deeply understand and can teach in a manner that is consistent with the full intent of the standards, while becoming more skilled in their own assessment practices.

32. How will teachers be selected to participate in the training cadres? Each state will convene an average of 90 teachers A total of five days to participate in trainings on professional development modules PD related to the assessment system Teachers will also select formative practices and tools for inclusion in the digital library. It is expected that states will work with existing networks for professional development, and will invite the regional representatives of professional organizations to recommend teachers to participate in the sessions. It is expected that states will work with existing networks for professional development, and will invite the regional representatives of professional organizations to recommend teachers to participate in the sessions.

33. Seven Key PrinciplesSBAC: Theory of Action, pp. 1 & 2 An integrated system Evidence-based approach Teacher involvement State-led with transparent governance The development and implementation of the assessment system is a State-led effort with a transparent and inclusive governance structure. Since December 2009, SBAC has hosted weekly conference calls and several face-to-face meetings open to all States interested in establishing a Consortium of States for the development of assessments aligned to the CCSS. Those activities have resulted in a governance structure that has established a consensus decision-making model and clear leadership roles. Each State�s commitment to our collaborative process and products will facilitate the development of our complex system and signal ongoing support for its implementation.The development and implementation of the assessment system is a State-led effort with a transparent and inclusive governance structure. Since December 2009, SBAC has hosted weekly conference calls and several face-to-face meetings open to all States interested in establishing a Consortium of States for the development of assessments aligned to the CCSS. Those activities have resulted in a governance structure that has established a consensus decision-making model and clear leadership roles. Each State�s commitment to our collaborative process and products will facilitate the development of our complex system and signal ongoing support for its implementation.

35. Item/Task Specification To provide guidance on how to translate the Common Core State Standards into actual assessment items. In addition, guidelines for: bias and sensitivity accessibility and accommodations Style Sample Assessment Items & Tasks http://www.smarterbalanced.org/smarter-balanced-assessments/ These specifications are being reviewed by member states school districts and higher education. Further information on specific tasks in next presentation.These specifications are being reviewed by member states school districts and higher education. Further information on specific tasks in next presentation.

36. SBAC Communication & Updates SBAC Communication & Updates Website: http://www.smarterbalanced.org/ Sign up for emails: http://www.smarterbalanced.org/stay-connected/ SBAC FAQs http://www.smarterbalanced.org/resources-events/faqs/

37. Idaho State Dept. of Education Communication & Updates SDE Website Teacher Newsletter � Ed Source

38. Seven Key PrinciplesSBAC: Theory of Action, pp. 1 & 2 An integrated system Evidence-based approach Teacher involvement State-led with transparent governance Focus: improving teaching and learning Assessments are structured to continuously improve teaching and learning. Assessment as, of, and for learning is designed to develop understanding of what learning standards are, what high-quality work looks like, what growth is occurring, and what is needed for student learning.Assessments are structured to continuously improve teaching and learning. Assessment as, of, and for learning is designed to develop understanding of what learning standards are, what high-quality work looks like, what growth is occurring, and what is needed for student learning.

39. A Balanced Assessment System

40. Assessment System Components

41. Assessment System Components

42. Assessment System Components Few initiatives are backed by evidence that they raise achievement. Formative assessment is one of the few approaches proven to make a difference. - Stephanie Hirsh, Learning Forward

43. Seven Key PrinciplesSBAC: Theory of Action, pp. 1 & 2 An integrated system Evidence-based approach Teacher involvement State-led with transparent governance Focus: improving teaching and learning Actionable information � multiple measures Assessment, reporting, and accountability systems provide useful information on multiple measures that is educative for all stakeholders. Reporting of assessment results is timely and meaningful�offering specific information about areas of performance so that teachers can follow up with targeted instruction, students can better target their own efforts, and administrators and policymakers can more fully understand what students know and can do, in order to guide curriculum and professional development decisions.Assessment, reporting, and accountability systems provide useful information on multiple measures that is educative for all stakeholders. Reporting of assessment results is timely and meaningful�offering specific information about areas of performance so that teachers can follow up with targeted instruction, students can better target their own efforts, and administrators and policymakers can more fully understand what students know and can do, in order to guide curriculum and professional development decisions.

45. Seven Key PrinciplesSBAC: Theory of Action, pp. 1 & 2 An integrated system Evidence-based approach Teacher involvement State-led with transparent governance Focus: improving teaching and learning Actionable information � multiple measures Established professional standards Design and implementation strategies adhere to established professional standards. The development of an integrated, balanced assessment system is an enormous undertaking, requiring commitment to established quality standards in order for the system to be credible, fair, and technically sound. SBAC is committed to developing an assessment system that meets all Critical Elements required by USED Peer Review, relying heavily on the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA, APA, NCME, 1999) as its core resource for quality design. Other key sources of professional standards that will guide SBAC�s work include a reasoning-from-evidence approach (e.g., see NRC, 2001; Mislevy, Almond, & Lukas, 2004); Operational Best Practices in Large Scale Assessment (ATP, CCSSO, in press); and the ANSI-endorsed Student Evaluation Standards, Program Evaluation Standards, and Personnel Evaluation Standards (JCSEE, 2002, 1994, 2008, respectively).Design and implementation strategies adhere to established professional standards. The development of an integrated, balanced assessment system is an enormous undertaking, requiring commitment to established quality standards in order for the system to be credible, fair, and technically sound. SBAC is committed to developing an assessment system that meets all Critical Elements required by USED Peer Review, relying heavily on the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA, APA, NCME, 1999) as its core resource for quality design. Other key sources of professional standards that will guide SBAC�s work include a reasoning-from-evidence approach (e.g., see NRC, 2001; Mislevy, Almond, & Lukas, 2004); Operational Best Practices in Large Scale Assessment (ATP, CCSSO, in press); and the ANSI-endorsed Student Evaluation Standards, Program Evaluation Standards, and Personnel Evaluation Standards (JCSEE, 2002, 1994, 2008, respectively).

46. In order for the SBAC system to be credible, fair, and technically sound� Meets all Critical Elements required by USED Peer Review, Relying heavily on the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA, APA, NCME, 1999) as its core resource for quality design. Other key sources of professional standards Operational Best Practices in Large Scale Assessment (ATP, CCSSO, in press) ANSI-endorsed Student Evaluation Standards Program Evaluation Standards Personnel Evaluation Standards (JCSEE, 2002, 1994, 2008, respectively).

47. Accessibility & Accommodations SBAC Guidelines

48. Support for Special Populations Accurate measures of progress for students with disabilities and English Language Learners Accessibility and Accommodations Work Group engaged throughout development Outreach and collaboration with relevant associations

49. Accessibility & Accommodations SBAC Content Specifications for Math Claim #1 � pp. 27 & 28 Claim#2 � p. 58 Claim #3 � p. 64 Claim #4 � p. 71 SBAC Guidelines General Accessibility ELL Audio Tactile-Braille Sign Bias & Sensitivity Style Guide

50. Timeline SDE & SBAC

51. Idaho State Dept. of Education

52. SBAC Timeline

53. 2010 � 2011

54. 2011 � 2012

55. 2012 � 2013

56. 2013 � 2014

57. 2014 � 2015

59. Find Out More Idaho State Dept. of Education can be found online at: www.sde.idaho.gov