OSPI UPDATE ON COMMON CORE
ASSESSMENTS, STUDENT GROWTH
PERCENTILES, AND ESEA WAIVER
DECEMBER 5, 2013
Presented by: Robin Munson, Ph.D.
Assistant Superintendent of Assessment and Student Information
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
TRANSITION TO
NEW ASSESSMENTS
2013-14 AND 2014-15
2
✔
Balanced Assessment
✔
Summative
Assessments for
Accountability
✔
•Coverage of full breadth/depth of Common Core
•Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT)
• Precise assessment of all students
• More engaging assessment experience
•Performance Tasks – real world problems
Interim
Assessments to
Signal Improvement
Formative Tools and
Resources for
Improved
Instruction
•Optional for district, school or classroom use
•Fully aligned with Common Core – same item pool
•Focus on set of standards or clone summative test
•Teachers can review and score responses
•Digital library gives access to high-quality resources
•Tools/materials for classroom-based assessments
•Professional social networking (Web-based PLCs)
•Useful for in-service and pre-service development
3
Major Milestones in Development of
Summative Assessments
✔
Cognitive
Labs
Apr – Aug
2012
✔
Small
Scale
Trials
Mar – Nov
2012
✔
Pilot
Testing
Feb – May
2013
Early Q.C. of items & software; no student results
Field
Test
Mar –
June 2014
Deploy For
Operational
Use
Fall 2014
Full system
run-through;
Establish
performance
standards
4
Accommodations
•
The Usability, Accessibility, and Accommodations Guidelines are available
at http://www.smarterbalanced.org/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2013/09/SmarterBalanced_Guidelines_091113.pdf
5
Learn More and Stay Engaged
www.smarterbalanced.org
•
•
•
Visit us at:
SmarterBalanced.org
Follow on Twitter:
@SmarterBalanced
Also OSPI’s page:
http://www.k12.wa.us/sm
arter/default.aspx
6
With Summative High School Assessments in
2014–15 and beyond
English/LA
Mathematics
Science
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
(no change)
Grade 3
SBAC
SBAC
Grade 4
SBAC
SBAC
Grade 5
SBAC
SBAC
Grade 6
SBAC
SBAC
Grade 7
SBAC
SBAC
Grade 8
SBAC
SBAC
MSP
Comprehensive ELA
exit exam
Year 1or Year 2
EOC exit exam
EOC Biology
exit exam (until NGSS)
SBAC – College and
Career Ready
SBAC – College and
Career Ready
Grades10
(until Class of 2019)
Grade 11
MSP
SBAC=SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium
MSP= Measurements of Student Progress
EOC= End of Course exams
7
HS Testing for Graduation (new June 30)
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
Graduation Assessment Requirements

Classes of 2013 and 2014


Classes of 2015 – 2018



HSPE Reading, HSPE Writing; 1 EOC Math
ELA exit exam; 1 EOC Math exit exam; EOC Biology
Smarter Balanced ELA and math tests taken in 11th for school
accountability
Class of 2019 and beyond

Smarter Balanced tests in ELA and Math; Biology or NGSS
8
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
What’s Happening This Year, 2013-14?

Exit exams remain the same (HSPE, EOC)

CAA options remain the same

Class of 2013 had some relaxation of Collection of Evidence
rules that had been newly implemented – these will not
continue (COE is limited to one submission per content area
throughout HS, and requires two attempts on general assessment
before submitting)

Some schools will administer Smarter Balanced field test
9
Smarter Balanced Field Testing
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION


March - June 2014
Purpose: Evaluate items and tasks for Smarter Balanced
pool…





Statistical data analysis of 22,000+ items
Divide items/tasks into secure (summative) pool and open
(interim) pool
Conduct standard setting for different performance levels (“cut
scores”)
Sampling requires about 10% of each state’s students for ELA
and about 10% for math
Washington has about 33% participating in grades 3-8, and
10% in 11th
10
Smarter Balanced Field Testing
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

US Dept of Ed is allowing states to participate in the
Smarter Balanced field test in 2013-14 (pending ESEA Waiver
approval):
 Washington has opted for the blended model (grades 3-8 only)
where some schools take current tests and some schools take
field tests



If only giving field tests, school accountability is carried over from
2013 MSP
Waiver will be submitted at end of November– approval likely in
December
High schools need to administer all current state tests due to
graduation requirements
11
A Balanced Assessment System
for 2014-15 and beyond
English Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics, Grades 3-8 and 11
School Year
Last 7-12 weeks of the 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; Teacher collaboration tools; Evaluation of publishers’ assessments.
Optional Interim
Assessment
Computer Adaptive
Assessment and
Performance Tasks
Optional Interim
Assessment
Computer Adaptive
Assessment and
Performance Tasks
PERFORMANCE
TASKS
• ELA/Literacy
• Mathematics
Scope, sequence, number and timing of interim assessments locally determined
COMPUTER
ADAPTIVE TESTS
• ELA/Literacy
• Mathematics
Re-take option
*Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions.
12
STUDENT GROWTH PERCENTILES
13
STUDENT GROWTH PERCENTILES VARIOUS USES
• Monitor and report growth for individual
students (parent reports)
• Monitor and report growth for schools
(new Achievement Index)
• Monitor and report growth, where
available and appropriate, as a part of
teacher and principal evaluations (TPEP)
14
KEY CONCEPTS FOR SGPS
• Growth levels (low, typical, high) are descriptive only
• To calculate SGPs, we use all previous consecutive
scores, not just the previous year
• SGPs are available for Math (4th – 10th graders) and
Reading (4th – 8th and 10th graders)
• Academic peers are students with a similar score
history and are defined using quantile regression
15
ADVANTAGES OF GROWTH
• SGPs show student progress over time, instead
of only looking at percent meeting standard at
one point in time
• SGPs can still be used if assessments or
standards change from year to year
• SGPs allow us to project how much growth is
needed for a student to meet standard
(adequate growth)
16
STUDENT GROWTH PERCENTILES WHERE WE ARE
• March 2013: SGPs from 2011 & 2012 provided to districts for
Grades 4–8 and high school (reading & math MSP, HSPE, & EOC)*
• October 2013: SGPs from 2013 provided to districts
• December 2013: SGPs made public in K-12 Data and Reports
Longitudinal Data System
• January 2014: SGPs used in new Achievement Index
• October 2014: SGPs from 2014 provided to districts for schools
that administer current state assessments
• October 2015: SGPs from 2015 (Smarter Balanced) provided to
districts
• October 2016: SGPs from 2016 (Smarter Balanced) provided to
districts (could use in 2016–17 evaluations)
*High school SGPs will be available for consecutive year tests (e.g., 8th MSP, 9th Algebra 1, 10th Geometry)
17
ESEA FLEXIBILITY TO IMPROVE STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT AND INCREASE
THE QUALITY OF INSTRUCTION
Implementation of School Improvement Requirements
– Flexibility from requirement for school districts to identify or take
improvement actions for schools identified for improvement, corrective
action, or restructuring
– Eliminates Public School Choice (PSC) as a mandate
– Eliminates Supplemental Educational Services (SES) as a mandate
– Eliminates the 20% district Title I set aside to fund PSC and SES
– Eliminates the 10% set aside for professional development for schools
18
WHAT DOES ESEA FLEXIBILITY REQUIRE
FROM STATES?
1. Ensure college- and career-ready expectations for all students
in Washington
– Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and Smarter Balanced
Assessment Consortium (SBAC)
2. Implement state-developed system of differentiated
recognition, accountability, and support
3. Support effective instruction and leadership in Washington—
Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project (TPEP)
4. Reduce duplication and unnecessary burden on school
districts by the state
19
PRINCIPLE 1: COLLEGE- AND CAREER-READY
EXPECTATIONS FOR ALL STUDENTS
To support States in continuing the work of transitioning students, teachers,
and schools to higher standards
• Adopt college- and career-ready (CCR) standards in at least
reading/language arts and mathematics
• Transition to and implement CCR standards
• Develop and administer Statewide, aligned, high-quality
assessments that measure student growth
• Adopt English Language Proficiency (ELP) standards
corresponding to the State’s new CCR standards and develop
aligned assessments
20
PRINCIPLE 1 - NEXT STEPS
Action
Timeline
Full implementation of Common Core
2013 – 2014
Smarter Balanced field tests in ELA and Math
April - June, 2014
Operational Smarter Balanced tests
2014 - 2015
Adopt English Language Proficiency Standards
December, 2013
21
PRINCIPLE 2: STATE-DEVELOPED DIFFERENTIATED
RECOGNITION, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SUPPORT
To support states’ efforts to move forward with next-generation accountability systems
• Set ambitious but achievable Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)
• Reward schools: Provide incentives and recognition for high-progress
and highest performing Title I schools
• Priority schools: Identify lowest performing schools and implement
interventions aligned with the turnaround principles
• Focus schools: Close achievement gaps by identifying and implementing
interventions in schools with the greatest achievement gaps or low
graduation rates
• Provide incentives and supports for other Title I schools (Emerging
Schools)
• Build State Education Agency (SEA), Local Education Agency (LEA), and
school capacity to improve student learning in all schools
22
PRINCIPLE 2 - NEXT STEPS
Action
Timeline
Double testing waiver request submitted
Nov 20, 2013
Achievement and Accountability Workgroup
developed new Achievement Index
Jan - July, 2013
Modeling of Reward, Priority and Focus schools
Nov-Dec, 2013
lists using new Achievement Index
Principle 2 amendment to use new Achievement
December ?, 2013
Index to be submitted
Identification of Reward, Priority and Focus
Schools
January-March
2014 ?
23
PRINCIPLE 3: SUPPORTING EFFECTIVE
INSTRUCTION AND LEADERSHIP
To support SEA and LEA development of evaluation systems that go beyond
NCLB’s minimum HQT standards
• Develop and adopt SEA guidelines for local teacher and
principal evaluation and support systems
• Ensure LEAs implement teacher and principal evaluation and
support systems that are consistent with SEA guidelines
24
PRINCIPLE 3 - NEXT STEPS
Action
Timeline
Principle 3 amendment submitted
July 19, 2013
Response from U.S. Dept. of ED (high-risk
status)
August 14, 2013
WA State response to “high-risk” status
September 12,
2013
Legislation request/change
January-March
2014
25
STATE
FEDERAL
E2SSB 6696 contains language
around student growth
including:
ESEA Flexibility -- Frequently Asked
Questions (C-53): What are an SEA’s
responsibilities with regard to ensuring
that an LEA’s evaluation and support
systems consider student growth?
Student growth data that is relevant to
the teacher and subject matter must be
a factor in the evaluation process and
must be based on multiple measures
that can include classroom-based,
school-based, district-based, and statebased tools. Student growth means the
change in student achievement
between two points in time.
An SEA is responsible for ensuring that an LEA
develops and implements evaluation and support
systems consistent with the guidelines the SEA
has developed under principle 3 (as described in
the document titled ESEA Flexibility). This
includes ensuring that LEA evaluation and
support systems take into account data on student
growth in significant part in determining teacher
and principal performance levels….
For grades and subjects in which assessments are
required under ESEA section 1111(b)(3), an SEA
must define a statewide approach for measuring
student growth based on such assessments.
26
PRINCIPLE 3: ESEA WAIVER
• USED requires state test
scores in tested grades and
subjects to be a significant
part of teacher evaluation
• Waiver requires change from
“can be used” to “must be
used” regarding state tests
• Supt. Dorn will seek request
legislation to change ESSB
5895 language from can to
must. It will also include a
statement that will delay the
implementation of using
state test scores in teacher
evaluations to 2016-17
• Smarter Balanced assessment
system will have an effect on
timeline for implementation
• Waiver decision expected May
2014
• 20% of Title 1 funds return to
mandated use without a waiver:
– $44M total available to
Supplemental Educational
Service (SES) providers and
to support School Choice
– $18M used three years ago
– $2.6M in Seattle
27
USE OF STATE ASSESSMENTS TO MEASURE
STUDENT GROWTH FOR TEACHER EVALUATION
Upshot:
• State-based tools have limited applicability.
• Only teachers in Grades 4–8 with ELA or math courses can use summative
testing as part of their evaluation.
(HS math teachers with students in 9th grade Algebra or 10th grade Geometry could be included)
– Since evaluations are due in early May and SGP ratings aren’t available
until Sept. 1, analysis will always be one year behind.
– Teacher attribution is challenging at all levels:
• Middle school students are reported by individual classes in CEDARS
• Elementary school students are reported by homeroom teacher in
CEDARS
– Transition to a new set of standards and a new exam system will take
time.
28
QUESTIONS?
29
Thank you!
3