Common Core State Standards



Download 28,65 Kb.
Date conversion16.03.2017
Size28,65 Kb.

Common Core State Standards

  • What’s It All About?
  • Race to the Top Assessment Consortia
  • Kathryn Edwards, Ph.D
  • Consultant III,
  • Curriculum Support and Assessment Unit

Overview

  • Elementary and Secondary Education Act Assessment Requirements
  • California Assessments Used
  • Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)
  • Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Assessment Requirements

  • Reading/language arts in grades 3–8 and at least once in grades 10–12
  • Mathematics in grades 3–8 and at least once in grades 10–12
  • Science at least once during each of three specified grade spans: grades 3–5, 6–9, and 10–12

California Assessments Used for ESEA

  • Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program:
    • California Standards Tests (CSTs)
    • California Modified Assessment (CMA)
    • California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA)
  • California High School Exit Examination

The Impact: Changes in CA Assessment

  • This aspect of the new system is a needed change!
  • I am concerned or worried about . . .
  • Race to the Top
  • Assessment Grants

Two Consortia Awarded Funds

  • Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)
    • On September 2, 2010, SBAC awarded $160 million
  • Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career (PARCC)
    • On September 2, 2010, PARCC awarded $170 million
  • An additional $15.9 million awarded to each consortium for the purpose to help all participating states with the transition to common core and common assessments

RTTT Assessment Requirements for Comprehensive Systems

  • Requirements within the RTTT Assessment Program:
  • Build upon shared standards for college and career-readiness;
  • Measure individual growth as well as proficiency;
  • Measure the extent to which each student is on track, at each grade level tested, toward college or career readiness by the time of high school completion and;
  • Provide information that is useful in informing:
    • Teaching, learning, and program improvement;
    • Determinations of school effectiveness;
    • Determinations of principal and teacher effectiveness for use in evaluations and the provision of support to teachers and principals; and
    • Determinations of individual student college and career readiness, such as determinations made for high school exit decisions, college course placement to credit-bearing classes, or college entrance.
    • (US Department of Education, 2009)

The Comprehensive Consortia

Item Types

  • Constructed-response
  • Selected response (End-of-year)
  • Performance tasks
  • Computer-enhanced
    • Video, multimedia, interactive text

A Grain of Salt

Changing Landscape

  • New State Superintendent of Public Instruction
  • New Governor
  • New Legislature
  • Office of the Secretary of Education
  • Potential changes in State Board of Education
  • California Office to Reform Education (CORE)
    • Role of local educational agencies
  • Role of the U.S. Department of Education

Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)

  • Consortium of 26 states
    • California is currently a participating state
    • Governor, State Superintendent of Public Instruction and State Board of Education President required to sign MOU
  • Florida is fiscal agent
  • ACHIEVE is Project Manager
  • Assess grades 3 through 8 and once in grades 10-12
  • Possible high school end-of-course

PARCC States

  • Governing
  • Arizona
  • Arkansas
  • District of Columbia
  • Florida
  • Illinois
  • Indiana
  • Louisiana
  • Maryland
  • Massachusetts
  • New York
  • Rhode Island
  • Tennessee
  • Advisory
  • Alabama
  • California
  • Colorado
  • Delaware
  • Georgia
  • Kentucky
  • Mississippi
  • New Hampshire
  • New Jersey
  • North Dakota
  • Ohio
  • Oklahoma
  • Pennsylvania
  • South Carolina

PARCC Theory of Action

    • More Meaningful Standards: The Partnership’s assessment system will be anchored in the Common Core State Standards which are consistent across states, clear to the public, and provide an on-ramp to college and careers.
    • Higher Quality Tests: PARCC assessments will include sophisticated items and performance tasks to measure critical thinking, strategic problem solving, research and writing.
    • Through-Course Testing: Students will take parts of the assessment at key times during the school year, closer to when they learn the material.
    • Maximize Technology: PARCC assessments in most grades will be computer based.
    • Cross-State Comparability: States in PARCC will adopt common assessments and common performance standards.

PARCC Distributed Summative Assessment System

  • Overall assessment system will include a mix of constructed response items, performance tasks, and computer-enhanced, computer-scored items
  • ELA/literacy
  • 3 “through-course” components
    • administered after 25%, 50%, and 75% of instruction
  • Speaking & listening components
    • administered after 75% of instruction (not part of summative score)
  • End-of-year component
    • administered after 90% of instruction
  • Mathematics
  • 3 “through-course” components
    • administered after 25%, 50%, and 75% of instruction
  • End-of-year component
    • administered after 90% of instruction

Distributed Assessment Advantages

  • Through-course approach will focus instruction throughout the year and nearer to the assessment
  • The sum of the components address the full range of the common core
  • Allows for multiple measures across the full range of performance
  • Allows for in-depth assessment of writing and mathematics problem-solving
  • Both through-course and end-of-year components provide data that teachers can use to adjust instruction

Sample Item

  • Extended Constructed Response
    • Delineate and evaluate the argument that Thomas Paine makes in Common Sense. Assess the reasoning present in his analysis, including the premises and purposes of his essay.
      • CCSS Match: 11-12.R1.8

Sample Item

  • Our school has to select a girl for the long jump at the regional championship. Three girls are in contention. We have a school jump-off. Their results, in meters are given in the table below.
  • Elsa
  • Miki
  • Aisha
  • 3.25
  • 3.55
  • 3.67
  • 3.95
  • 3.88
  • 3.78
  • 4.28
  • 3.61
  • 3.92
  • 2.95
  • 3.97
  • 3.62
  • 3.66
  • 3.75
  • 3.85
  • 3.81
  • 3.59
  • 3.73
  • Hans says, “Aisha has the longest average. She should do to the championship.
  • Do you think Hans in right? Explain your reasoning.
  • CCSS Match: 7.SP.4 and Mathematical Practice 2 and 3

PARCC: Two Types of Summative Tests

  • FOCUSED
  • ASSESSMENTS
  • END OF YEAR
  • COMPREHENSIVE
  • ASSESSMENT
  • One to three tasks that assess a
  • few “keystone” standards/topics
  • Given at three points during the
  • school year, near the end of quarters
  • Results within 2 weeks to inform
  • instruction and intervention
  • Taken on computer, with mixed
  • item types
  • Scored entirely by computer for
  • fast results
  • Scores from focused assessments and end-of-year test
  • will be combined for annual accountability score.

PARCC: Focused Assessments 1 and 2

  • 25%
  • Focused
  • ASSESSMENT 1
  • ELA
  • Math
  • 50%
  • Focused
  • ASSESSMENT 2
  • ELA
  • Math
  • In a single session/class period, students in grades 3 - 11 will:
  • ELA: Read texts, draw evidence to form conclusions, and prepare a written
  • analysis
  • Math: For each of 1 or 2 essential topics (standards or clusters of standards),
  • complete 1 to 3 constructed response tasks

PARCC: Focused Assessment 3

  • Focused
  • ASSESSMENT4
  • Speaking
  • Listening
  • 75%
  • Focused
  • ASSESSMENT 3
  • ELA
  • Math
  • Over several sessions/class periods, students will complete a project-like task that draws on a range of skills. Examples:
  • ELA: Locate digital information, evaluate and
  • select sources, and compose an essay or
  • research paper
  • Math: Perform a multi-step performance task
  • that requires application of mathematical
  • skills and reasoning and may require
  • technological tools
  • Speaking/Listening task: Conducted in classroom,
  • not used for accountability, scored by teacher.

PARCC: End-of-Year Assessment

  • 90%
  • END OF YEAR
  • COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT
  • Composed of 40 to 65 questions of a range of item types
  • including innovative technology-enhanced items to sample
  • the full year of standards
  • Scored by computer
  • Will make major investment in enhanced item types
  • To accurately assess high- and low-performing students, will
  • include items above and below grade level, and may consider
  • leveled or adaptive tests if needed

PARCC: Resources, Tools, Supports

  • PARTNERSHIP RESOURCE CENTER: Digital library of released items, formative assessments, model curriculum frameworks, curriculum resources, student and educator tutorials and practice tests, scoring training modules, and professional development materials
  • Partnership Resource Center:
  • Interactive Data Tool for accessing data and creating customized reports
  • Exemplar lesson plans
  • Formative assessment items and tasks
  • Professional development materials regarding test administration,
  • scoring, and use of data
  • Online practice tests
  • Item development portal
  • Tools and resources developed by Partner states
  • Optional “ready-to-use” performance tasks for K-2

The PARCC System

  • Focused
  • ASSESSMENT4
  • Speaking
  • Listening
  • 25%
  • Focused
  • ASSESSMENT 1
  • ELA
  • Math
  • 50%
  • Focused
  • ASSESSMENT 2
  • ELA
  • Math
  • 90%
  • END OF YEAR
  • COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT
  • 75%
  • Focused
  • ASSESSMENT 3
  • ELA
  • Math
  • PARTNERSHIP RESOURCE CENTER: Digital library of released items, formative assessments, model curriculum frameworks, curriculum resources, student and educator tutorials and practice tests, scoring training modules, and professional development materials
  • Summative assessment for accountability
  • Required, but
  • not used tor accountability
  • English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3 - 11

Formal Reporting Mechanisms

  • Periodic Feedback Reports
    • After each through-course and end-of-year component
    • Audience: Parents, students, teachers, and school and district leaders
  • Annual Stakeholder Reports
    • Comprehensive annual report
    • Audience: Parents, students, teachers, school and district leaders, higher education officials and leaders, state officials/administrators, and policymakers
  • Item Analysis Reports
    • Annual report provides detailed analysis of content and quality of student responses to items and tasks
  • Reporting Levels
    • Ethnic group, ED, gender, SWD, ELL

PARCC Proposed Timeline

SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium

  • Consortium of 30 states
    • California is currently not participating with this consortium
  • Washington is fiscal agent
  • WestEd is Project Manager
  • Assess grades 3 through 8 and grade 11

SBAC States

  • Governing
  • Connecticut
  • Hawaii
  • Idaho
  • Kansas
  • Maine
  • Michigan
  • Missouri
  • Montana
  • North Carolina
  • New Mexico
  • Nevada
  • Oregon
  • Utah
  • Vermont
  • Washington
  • Wisconsin
  • West Virginia
  • Advisory
  • Alabama
  • Colorado
  • Delaware
  • Iowa
  • Kentucky
  • North Dakota
  • New Hampshire
  • New Jersey
  • Ohio
  • Oklahoma
  • Pennsylvania
  • South Carolina
  • South Dakota

SBAC: Two Components of the Summative Assessment

  • PERFORMANCE TASKS
  • END OF YEAR
  • ADAPTIVE
  • ASSESSMENT
  • A computer adaptive assessment
  • given during final 12 weeks* of the
  • school year
  • Multiple item types, scored by
  • computer
  • Re-take option, as locally
  • determined
  • One reading task, one writing
  • task and 2 math tasks per year
  • Measure the ability to integrate
  • knowledge and skills, as required
  • in CCSS
  • Computer-delivered, during final
  • 12 weeks of the school year*
  • Scored within 2 weeks
  • +
  • * Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions.

SBAC: Performance Tasks

  • Last 12 weeks of year*
  • Sample performance tasks:
  • ELA: Select texts on a given theme,
  • synthesize the perspectives presented,
  • conduct research, and write a reflective
  • essay.
  • Math: Review a financial document and read
  • explanatory text, conduct a series of
  • analyses, develop a conclusion, and provide
  • evidence for it.
  • Roughly half of the performance tasks for grades 9 through 11 will assess
  • ELA or math within the context of science or social studies.
  • PERFORMANCE
  • TASKS
    • Reading
    • Writing
    • Math

SBAC: End-of-Year Assessment

  • Last 12 weeks of year*
  • Composed of approximately 40 to 65 questions per content
  • area.
  • Uses adaptive delivery to provide maximally accurate scores
  • across the full spectrum of student achievement and to
  • increase student engagement.
  • Includes selected-response, technology-enhanced constructed-
  • response, and extended constructed-response items.
  • Scores from items that can be scored immediately will be
  • reported, and then updated as scores from those requiring
  • human scoring or artificial intelligence are completed.
  • A re-take option is available.
  • END OF YEAR
  • ADAPTIVE
  • ASSESSMENT
  • Re-take option

SBAC: Summative Components

  • Last 12 weeks of year*
  • PERFORMANCE
  • TASKS
    • Reading
    • Writing
    • Math
  • END OF YEAR
  • ADAPTIVE
  • ASSESSMENT
  • Re-take option
  • Note: This Consortium will also investigate an alternative summative format in which the end-of-year adaptive assessment is replaced with a series of adaptive assessments, each of which assesses a smaller block of standards.
  • Student scores from the performance tasks
  • and end-of-year adaptive assessment will be
  • combined for each student’s annual score
  • for accountability.
  • Performance tasks may begin prior to the
  • final 12 weeks of the year, based on research
  • studies and final implementation decisions.

SBAC Supports: Interim Assessment System

  • Optional system of computer adaptive assessments
  • The number, timing, and standards assessed (full grade level or smaller clusters) can be customized based on the local curriculum
  • Multiple item types, similar to end-of-year summative assessment, including performance tasks (delayed scoring)
  • Reports of student results will link teachers to related student resources and teacher professional development resources

SBAC Supports: Comprehensive Electronic Platform

  • Last 12 weeks of year*
  • DIGITAL CLEARINGHOUSE of formative assessments, released items and tasks, model instructional units, educator training and professional development tools and resources, scoring training modules, and teacher collaboration tools.
  • The system portal for information about the CCSS, SBAC, and assessment results:
    • Reporting suite with differentiated tools available to students, educators,
    • parents, and policymakers, with visualization tools
    • Vetted instructional units and model curricula
    • Research-based instructional strategies and interventions
    • Issue-focused chat rooms
    • Formative assessment items, released performance tasks, and rubrics
    • Professional development modules and videos
    • Item development/scoring training modules and tools

The SBAC System

  • Optional Interim assessment system —
  • no stakes
  • Summative assessment for accountability
  • Last 12 weeks of year*
  • DIGITAL CLEARINGHOUSE of formative tools, processes and exemplars; released items and tasks; model curriculum units; educator training; professional development tools and resources; scorer training modules; and teacher collaboration tools.
  • PERFORMANCE
  • TASKS
    • Reading
    • Writing
    • Math
  • END OF YEAR
  • ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENT
  • Re-take option
  • English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3 – 8 and High School
  • Computer Adaptive Assessment and Performance Tasks
  • INTERIM ASSESSMENT
  • Computer Adaptive Assessment and Performance Tasks
  • INTERIM ASSESSMENT

Implementation Milestones

  • 2010 – 2012
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2013
  • January 2015
  • August 2015
  • Development of formative tools, processes, practices, and professional development begins
  • Review of screened state-owned item and development of new summative and interim items
  • Interim item pool becomes available for use
  • Field testing
  • Operational summative assessments available
  • Adoption of common achievement standards
  • 2010-2011
  • 2011-2012
  • 2011 - 2012
  • 2012-2014
  • 2014-2015
  • Summer 2015
  • Development and approval by member states of common policies and procedures
  • Initial item and task development, piloting of components
  • Development of professional development resources and online platform
  • Field testing
  • New summative assessments in use
  • Setting of common achievement standards
  • SBAC
  • PARCC

California Context

  • Readiness for Computer-Based Testing
  • California’s assessment vendor conducted a survey and in-person site visits
  • Conclusions:
    • Feasible but expensive
    • Need multi-year rollout
    • District/school environment difficult for administering fair, standard & secure test
    • Budget commitment
  • Education Week
    • CA ranked lowest quintile in overall technology leadership among states
    • Average of 3.8 students to one computer in U.S.
    • Average of 5 students to one computer in CA

Challenges and Considerations

  • Measurement
    • Use of individual student growth in determinations of teacher and principal effectiveness
    • Equating and reliability of through-course assessments
  • Curricular Flexibility at the local level
    • Tension: Modular assessments given across the year require greater uniformity in sequencing of instruction, but place assessment closer to the time of instruction.
  • ESEA Reauthorization
    • Will it align?
  • Political Will
    • Will states that didn’t win state RTTT grants remain in the consortia? Will new Governors?

Other Challenges and Considerations

  • California Assessment System
    • STAR, CAHSEE Reauthorization in 2012-2013
    • Grade 2 testing
    • End of course assessments
  • Implementation Funding
    • Technology infrastructure/hardware
  • Professional Development
    • Leadership and funding
  • What else?

Implications for My Work . . .

Resources

  • Full text of the Common Core California Standards: http://www.scoe.net/castandards/index.html (Outside Source)
  • Information about the common core: http://www.corestandards.org/ (Outside Source)
  • Information about the common core including implementation timelines: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cc/
  • PARCC information: http://www.fldoe.org/parcc/ (Outside Source)
  • SBAC information: www.k12.wa.us/SMARTER (Outside Source)
  • Center for K-12 and Performance Management at ETS: http://www.k12center.org/publications.html (Outside Source)


The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2016
send message

    Main page