Preparing America’s Students for College and Career
3-5 Language Arts and Reading
Workgroup
DAY 3 June 15, 2011
PARCC and Performance Tasks
2010 Grade 4 FCAT Writing—to Tell a Story (Narrative)
• The Grade 4 narrative prompt directed the student to write a story about a day
some 4th grade students made lunch for the school.
CCSS Performance Task for Stories
& Poetry Grades 2-3
• Students read Paul Fleischman’s poem “Fireflies,”
determining the meaning of words and phrases in the
poem, particularly focusing on identifying his use of
non-literal language (e.g., “light is the ink we use”) and
talking about how it suggests meaning. [RL.3.4]
CCSS Performance Task for Stories & Poetry,
Grades 4-5
Students read Natalie Babbitt’s Tuck Everlasting
and describe in depth the idyllic setting of the story,
drawing on specific details in the text, from the color
of the sky to the sounds of the pond, to
describe the scene. [RL.4.3]
2
2011 Grade 4 FCAT Writing—to Explain (Expository)
• The Grade 4 narrative prompt directed the student to explain their favorite weather.
CCSS Performance Task for Informational Text
Grades 2-3
Students explain how the main idea that Lincoln
had “many faces” in Russell Freedman’s Lincoln: A
Photobiography is supported by key details in the
text. [RI.3.2]
CCSS Performance Task for Informational Text,
Grades 4-5
•
Students explain how Melvin Berger uses reasons
and evidence in his book Discovering Mars: The
Amazing Story of the Red Planet to support particular
points regarding the topology of the planet. [RI.4.8]
3
Current Writing Expectation Compared to
Common Core
2010 FCAT Writing Grade 8—Writing to Explain
• The Grade 8 expository prompt directed the student to explain the biggest
change he or she has experienced from elementary to middle school
CCSS Performance Task for Stories and Poetry Grades 6-8
• Students compare and contrast Laurence
Goals Yep’s fictional portrayal of Chinese
immigrants in turn-of-the-twentieth-century San Francisco in Dragonwings to
historical accounts of the same period (using materials detailing the 1906 San
Francisco earthquake) in order to glean a deeper understanding of how authors
use or alter historical sources to create a sense of time and place as well as
make fictional characters lifelike and real. [RL.7.9]
Current Writing Expectation Compared to
Common Core
2010 FCAT Writing Grade 8—Writing to Explain
• The Grade 8 expository prompt directed the student to explain the biggest
change he or she has experienced from elementary to middle school.
CCSS Performance Task for Language Arts Informational Text, Grades
Goals
6-8
• Students determine the figurative and connotative meanings of words
such as wayfaring, laconic, and taciturnity as well as of phrases such as
hold his peace in John Steinbeck’s Travels with Charley: In Search of
America. They analyze how Steinbeck’s specific word choices and
diction impact the meaning and tone of his writing and the
characterization of the individuals and places he describes. [RI.7.4]
Reading
•
•
Key Advances in the
Common Core ELA/Literacy Standards
Balance of literature and informational texts
Text complexity
Writing
•
•
Emphasis on argument and informative/explanatory writing
Goals
Writing about sources
Speaking and Listening
•
Inclusion of formal and informal talk
Language
•
Stress on general academic and domain-specific vocabulary
Key Advances in the
Common Core ELA/Literacy Standards
Standards for reading and writing in history/
social studies, science, and technical subjects
•
•
Complement rather than replace content standards
in those subjects
Responsibility of teachers in those subjects
Goals
Alignment with college and career readiness
expectations
The New Common Core State
Standards
Assessment Systems
Pascal (Pat) D. Forgione, Jr., Ph.D. and Nancy A. Doorey
Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS
www.k12center.org
The Uniqueness of This Moment:
Inflection Point
• Thomas Friedman in “The World is Flat” points out the importance of
“inflection points” in history.
• The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) can become an
“inflection point” for American public education - establishing a
common foundation for building excellence and equity for all students.
CCSS
CA
PA
CT
FL
Interactive Digital Library
IL
RI
State silos of cost, effort, expertise
23-Mar-16
Shared platform for collaboration, cost and effort
efficiencies, sharing of best practices
Race to the Top Assessment Program:
Comprehensive Assessments
Groups of 15 or more states could apply for a grant to design, develop and
pilot a next generation assessment system that:
•Builds upon shared standards in mathematics and English language arts (ELA) for
college- and career-readiness;
•Measures individual growth as well as proficiency;
•Measures 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;
•Provides 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)
23-Mar-16
The Comprehensive Assessment
System Proposals
Two Comprehensive Assessment System Proposals Funded:
 Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)
 24 states and the District of Columbia, more than 31 million students in K-12
 SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)
 31 states, over 20 million students in K-12
Ten states in both Consortia, five states in neither.
23-Mar-16
The Comprehensive Consortia
23-Mar-16
Partnership for the Assessment of
Readiness for College and Careers:
PARCC
23-Mar-16
Why Common, Next-Generation
Assessments?
CURRENT ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS…
PARCC’S NEXT-GENERATION
ASSESSMENT SYSTEM WILL…
• Include tests with disconnected purposes (e.g.,
instructional improvement vs. accountability vs.
college admissions)
• Include “through-course” assessments in each grade
in addition to end-of-year tests to produce a more
complete picture of student performance
• Are not challenging enough to measure college
and career readiness and therefore have no
currency with higher education (or most
students)
• Provide a common measure of college and career
readiness, and will include a college-ready cut score
to signal readiness for credit-bearing, college-level
coursework that will be valued by postsecondary
• Fail to generate information for educators and
students quickly enough or at all
• Leverage new technologies in assessment and
reporting to get timely and actionable student data
to educators and parents
• Do not measure the full range of college- and
career-ready knowledge and skills (e.g.,
research, critical thinking, and collaboration)
• Include a range of item types that allow for the
assessment of higher-order skills and measure the
CCSS in full
• Are widely inconsistent across states, and
impossible to compare
• Measure students’ mastery of Common Core State
Standards, and mitigate challenges associated with
14 the
student mobility by ensuring students will have
same expectations wherever they live
PARCC: Two
Types of Summative Tests
In mathematics and in English language arts (ELA):
THROUGHCOURSE
ASSESSMENTS
• One to three tasks that assess a
few “keystone” standards/topics
• Given at three points during the
school year, near the end of quarters
END OF YEAR
COMPREHENSIVE
ASSESSMENT
• Taken on computer (most students), with
multiple item types
• Scored entirely by computer for
fast results
• Results within 2 weeks to inform
instruction and intervention
• Scores from the through-course assessments and the end-of-year
test will be combined for annual accountability scores.
23-Mar-16
PARCC:
Through-Course Assessments 1 and 2
25%
50%
Through-course
ASSESSMENT 1
• ELA
• Math
Through-course
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
23-Mar-16
PARCC:
Through-Course Assessment 3 (and 4)
75%
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.
23-Mar-16
Through-course
ASSESSMENT 3
• ELA
• Math
Through-course
ASSESSMENT4
• Speaking
• Listening
PARCC:
End-of-Year Assessment
90%
• 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
• Will include items across a range of cognitive demand
23-Mar-16
END OF YEAR
COMPREHENSIVE
ASSESSMENT
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:
•
•
•
•
23-Mar-16
•
•
•
•
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 Assessment
System
English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3 - 11
25%
50%
75%
90%
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
Through-course
ASSESSMENT 1
• ELA
• Math
Summative
assessment for
accountability
23-Mar-16
Through-course
ASSESSMENT 2
• ELA
• Math
Required, but
not used tor
accountability
Through-course
ASSESSMENT 3
• ELA
• Math
Through-course
ASSESSMENT4
• Speaking
• Listening
END OF YEAR
COMPREHENSIVE
ASSESSMENT
PARCC Implementation Milestones
23-Mar-16
2010-2011
Design Phase: Development and approval by member
states of common policies and procedures
2011-2012
Development Phase begins: Initial item and task
development, piloting of components
2011 - 2012
Development of professional development resources
and online platform
2012-2014
Field testing
2014-2015
New summative assessments in use
Summer 2015
Setting of common achievement standards
Will This Become an Inflection Point?
Benefits:
• Fewer, clearer, next-generation standards
• Systems of high quality, aligned summative and
formative assessments, with rapid results to teachers
• Online digital libraries for sharing of instructional
resources, professional development modules, student
support materials, identification of effective practices,
etc.
23-Mar-16
PARCC benefits:
• Students who will know if they are on track to graduate ready
for college and careers
• Teachers with regular results available to guide learning and
instruction
• Parents with clear and timely information about the progress
of their children
• States with valid results that are comparable across the
member states
• The nation as it is based on college- and career-ready,
internationally-benchmarked CCSS
Visit www.k12center.org for periodic updates on the
development of these assessment systems
Coming Together to Raise Achievement:
New Assessments for the Common Core
State Standards
Download this free 20-page guide at
www.k12center.org
Contact:
Pascal (Pat) D. Forgione, Jr., Ph.D.
Distinguished Presidential Scholar and Executive Director
Center for K-12 Assessment and Performance Management at ETS
Educational Testing Service
823 Congress Avenue, Suite 816
Austin, TX 78701
E-Mail: pdforgione@k12center.org
Nancy Doorey
Director of Programs
ndoorey@k12center.org
www.k12center.org