1 / 35

Assessment of the Common Core State Standards

This article discusses the assessment consortia that were formed during the implementation of the Common Core State Standards. It compares the two remaining consortia, PARCC and SMARTER, and their assessment system designs.

rasia
Download Presentation

Assessment of 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. Assessment of the Common Core State Standards CCCOE Curriculum Council January, 2011

  2. Assessment Consortia Beginnings • During 1st Round of RTTT Application • There were 7 Assessment Consortia • CA joined 3-5 Consortia (no cost for membership) • By the 2nd Round of RTTT Application • the assessment consortia coalesced resulting in 2 remaining consortia

  3. Two Funded Assessment Consortia • Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College & Careers (PARCC) • http://www.fldoe.org/parcc/ • http://www.achieve.org/files/CCSS&Assessments.pdf • SMARTER Balanced Consortium (SBAC) • http://www.k12.wa.us/smarter/ • http://www.wested.org/cs/we/view/rs_press/100

  4. Next Generation Assessments PARCC and SMARTER will usher in a new and different approach to assessment design

  5. CA joined PARCC A consortium of 26 states Procurement state is Florida Achieve (American Diploma Project) is the managing partner Received $170 million SBAC Consortium of 31 (many Western) states Procurement state is Washington WestEd is the managing partner Received $160 million Comparing the Two Consortia

  6. A 3rd Grant Award • $10 million was earmarked for the development of high school (end of course) assessments • ED did not fund the group that applied to develop the high school assessments • PARCC was granted the additional funding to develop high school assessments

  7. PARCC States SMARTER States

  8. Current ESEA Requirements • ELA and math in grades 3-8 • In CA CSTs, CMA, & CAPA • ELA and math at least once in grades 10-12 • In CA CAHSEE grade 10 • Science at least once during each of three specified grade spans: 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12 • In CA grades • 5 & 8 science CSTS, CMA & CAPA • 10th grade Life Science, CMA & CAPA

  9. PARCC Assessment System Design Distributed Summative Assessment

  10. Achieve – PARCC’s Managing Partner • Created in 1996 by the nation's governors and corporate leaders • an independent, bipartisan, nonprofit education reform organization • based in Washington D.C. • leads the effort to make college and career readiness a national priority

  11. Assessment System Design: Distributed Summative Assessment Through-Course 2 End- Of-Year START OF SCHOOL YEAR END OF SCHOOL YEAR 25% 50% 75% 90% Through-Course 3 Through-Course 1 Through-Course 4 • Key components: • Three through-course components distributed throughout the year in ELA and mathematics, grades 3-11. • One Speaking/Listening assessment administered after students complete the third through course component in ELA; required but not part of summative score – could be used for course grades. • One end-of-year assessment 11 Source: Graphic adapted from a representation prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management (www.k12center.org)

  12. Assessment System Design: Distributed Summative Assessment Through-Course 2 START OF SCHOOL YEAR END OF SCHOOL YEAR 25% 50% Through-Course 1 • Through-Course 1 and 2: • ELA-1 and ELA-2: One or two tasks involving reading texts, drawing conclusions, and presenting analysis in writing. • Math-1 and Math-2: One to three tasks that assess one or two essential topics in mathematics (standards or clusters of standards). Source: Graphic adapted from a representation prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management (www.k12center.org) 12

  13. Assessment System Design: Distributed Summative Assessment Through-Course 2 START OF SCHOOL YEAR END OF SCHOOL YEAR 75% 25% 50% Through-Course 3 Through-Course 1 Through-Course 4 • Through-Course 3 and Through-Course 4 (ELA only): • ELA-3: Performance task(s) that require evaluating information from within a set of digital resources, evaluating their quality, selecting sources, 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 task(s) that require conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application of mathematical tools and reasoning. Source: Graphicadapted from a representation prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management (www.k12center.org) 13

  14. Assessment System Design: Distributed Summative Assessment Through-Course 2 End- Of-Year START OF SCHOOL YEAR END OF SCHOOL YEAR 90% 25% 50% 75% Through-Course 3 Through-Course 1 Through-Course 4 • End-of-Year: • EOY: Comprehensive, computer-scored assessment that includes a range of item types, including innovative, technology-enhanced items. Enables quick turnaround of student scores. • A student’s 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. Source: Graphicadapted from a representation prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management (www.k12center.org) 14

  15. Summative Score for Accountability A student’s summative score (used for accountability purposes) will include his/her performance on Through Course1, 2 and 3 as well as end of year assessment.

  16. Administration and Scoring: • Overall assessment system • will include a mix of constructed response items, performance tasks, and computer enhanced, computer-scored items. • Assessments for • grades 6-12 will be administered via computer • while 3-5 will be administered via paper and pencil (in the short term). • Combination of • artificial intelligence (AI) and human scoring will be employed; states will individually determine the extent to which teachers will be involved in scoring. 16

  17. SMARTER BALANCED ASSESSMENT Consortium (SBAC)

  18. SBAC Assessment Characteristics • State-of-the-art adaptive online exams • The online system will provide information to teachers and others on the progress of all students • including students with disabilities, English language learners and low- and high-performing students. • The system will include: • the required summative exams (offered twice each school year); • optional formative, or benchmark, exams; and • a variety of tools, processes and practices that will assist teachers in understanding what students are and are not learning on a daily basis

  19. Assessment Design Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium 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

  20. Assessment Design Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium

  21. Examples of Internationally Benchmarked Assessments NAEP Released Items

  22. Existing Internationally Benchmarked Assessments • National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) • http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/ • Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) • http://nces.ed.gov/timss/ • Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) • http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pirls/ NCES: National Center for Educational Statistics Part of US Department of Education (ED)

  23. Features of NAEP Items • 4th, 8th and 12th Grades • Multiple Choice, Short Constructed Response, Extended Constructed Response • Levels of Difficulty: Easy, Medium, and Hard • Primarily Math and ELA, but also given in various subject matter domains (typically in 12th grade)

  24. Multiple Choice 4th Grade NAEP, Medium Difficulty

  25. Short Constructed Response4th Grade NAEP, Medium Difficulty

  26. Extended Constructed Response 4th Grade NAEP, Medium Difficulty

  27. Extended Constructed Response4th Grade NAEP, Hard Difficulty

  28. Next Steps and Timelines Assessment and Textbook Adoption

  29. PARCC’s Timeline • Oct. 2010: Launch and design phase begins • Sept. 2011: Development phase begins • Sept. 2012: 1st year field testing and related research and data collection begins • Sept. 2013: 2nd year field testing and related research and data collection continues • Sept. 2014: Full administration of PARCC assessment begins.

  30. Textbook Adoption Timeline

  31. CaCCSS Collaboration and Implementation • California Mathematics Project (CMP) • Curriculum and Instruction Steering Committee (CISC) • Mathematics Subcommittee • California Mathematics Council (CMC) • California Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators (CAMTE) 1st Meeting on January 19, 2011

  32. Pamela Tyson, PhD Director, Educational Services Contra Costa County Office of Education Ptyson@cccoe.k12.ca.us

More Related