CCSS Assessment Implementation in Washington State May, 2012

1. CCSS Assessment Implementation in Washington State May, 2012

2. Statewide Assessment Landscape and Update New Assessment System for CCSS: What we know so far

3. The Assessment Challenge How do we get from here... ...to here? Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness All studentsleave high school college and career ready ...and what can an assessment system do to help?

4. Next Generation Assessments • More rigorous tests measuring student progress toward “college and career readiness” • Have common, comparable scoresacross 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 Source: Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 68 / Friday, April 9, 2010 pp. 18171-85

5. A National Consortium of States • 28 states representing 44% of K-12 students • 21 governing, 7 advisory states • Washington state is fiscal agent

6. A Balanced Assessment System:ELA and Math --Grades 3-8 and High School Summative assessments Benchmarked to college and career readiness Teachers and schools have information and tools they need to improve teaching and learning Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness All students leave high school college and career ready Teacher resources for formative assessment practices to improve instruction Interim assessments Flexible, open, used for actionable feedback

7. Technology • PARCC and Smarter developing technology assessment tool to identify infrastructure gaps • Paper/pencil option locally available during a 3-year transition • 12-week administration window reduces pressure on computer labs Addressing State Concerns Compatibility Long-term Governance Cost • Developing a business plan for post-2014 • Seeking additional funding for ongoing support • Member states will be actively involved in determining the future of the Consortium • On average, Smarter states pay $31 per student for current assessments • Third-party cost estimate for Smarter Balanced: Summative assessment $19.81/ student; Optional interim assessments $7.50/ student • Common, interoperable, open-source software accommodates state-level assessment options • Test-builder tool available to use interim item pool for end-of-course tests Adoption of best practices • Common protocols for item development: accessibility, language/cultural sensitivity, construct irrelevant variance • Common accommodation and translation protocols

8. Faster results • Turnaround in weeks compared to months today Using Computer Adaptive Technology for Summative and Interim Assessments Shorter test length • Fewer questions compared to fixed form tests Increased precision • Provides accurate measurements of student growth over time Tailored to student ability • Item difficulty based on student responses Greater security • Larger item banks mean that not all students receive the same questions Mature technology • GMAT, GRE, COMPASS (ACT), Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)

9. A Balanced Assessment System

10. Grades Supported Through Smarter Balanced 8 3 10 9 11 12

12. Assessment Claims for English Language Arts/Literacy • Total English language arts/literacy (Grades 3–8) — “Students can demonstrate progress toward college and career readiness in English language arts and literacy.” • Total English language arts/literacy (High School) — “Students can demonstrate college and career readiness in English language arts and literacy.” • Reading — “Students can read closely and analytically to comprehend a range of increasingly complex literary and informational texts.” • Writing — “Students can produce effective and well-grounded writing for a range of purposes and audiences.” • Speaking and Listening — “Students can employ effective speaking and listening skills for a range of purposes and audiences.” • Research/Inquiry — “Students can engage in research and inquiry to investigate topics, and to analyze, integrate, and present information.”

13. Rigorous Provides Data for Policy Decisions • Focused on being on track for college and career readiness • Built on technology we can all trust • Incorporates the expertise of multiple states and vendors • Helps understand what is working within and across states • Allows districts to connect with each other across state lines • Supports variety of growth and accountability models Summative Assessment Universal Design • Based on deliberative approach so that meaning of the results is clear • Incorporates tools into the system that provide access to all students

14. Time and format Summative, ELA and Math (last 12 weeks of year): • Computer Adaptive Testing • Selected response (MC), Constructed Response (open-ended), Technology enhanced (e.g., drag and drop, video clips, limited web-interface) • Shorter option for states (~3 hours ELA, ~2 hours Math) • Scale score on comprehensive test (met/not met determination) • Longer option for states (~5 hours ELA, ~3 hours Math) • Able to report data on claims for individual students • Performance Tasks (like our CBAs) • Up to 2 per content area in grades 3-8 • Up to 6 per content area in High School

15. Flexible Authentic Measures • Optional for states • Non-secure • Includes full range of item types • Uses the same scale as the Summative Assessment • Includes performance assessments Interim Assessment Supports Proficiency Based Instruction • Teachers can match assessments with scope and sequence • Teachers can review student responses • Teachers can score student responses

16. Time and format Interim assessments • Can be used as often as needed • Can be customized by districts/schools • To focus on selected strands • To clone summative test • Will use Computer Adaptive Technology • Released items from summative item bank

17. Improves Instruction • Optional for states • Non-secure Formative Assessment Pooled Resources • Access to the best resources available without re-inventing the wheel

18. Still to be worked out: System Development and Implementation Details • How can teachers volunteer for item writing? • How can schools volunteer for limited pilot? • Will everyone have to participate in the field test? • What retake opportunities will there be? • Mandatory testing schedule? • Will translations be available? • What tools will be allowed (e.g., calculator, highlighter, thesaurus)? • What accommodations will be allowed?

19. Still to be worked out: System Development and Implementation Details • What technology infrastructure will be required (survey for districts coming this spring)? • What if there are not enough computers? • What will parent and classroom reports look like? • What happens to the Smarter Balanced Consortium at the end of the grant (Oct 2014)?

20. Smarter Balanced Timeline Formative Processes, Tools, and Practices Development Begins Summative Master Work Plan Developed and Work Groups Launched Writing and Review of Pilot Items/Tasks (including Cognitive Labs and Small-Scale Trials) Writing and Review of Field Test Items/Tasks (throughout the school year) Field Testing of Summative and Interim Items/Tasks Conducted Final Achievement Standards (Summative) Verified and Adopted Procurement Plan Developed Content and Item Specifications Development Pilot Testing of Summative and Interim Items/Tasks Conducted Preliminary Achievement Standards (Summative) Proposed and Other Policy Definitions Adopted Operational Summative Assessment Administered Common Core State Standards Adopted by All Member States

21. Washington’s Smarter Involvement… OSPI staff involved in workgroups 2010-12 Including Higher Education representative Widespread Input on Item Specifications (March 2012) District Input on Current Technology Capacity and Infrastructure (Spring 2012) – Survey Teachers from all states involved in focus groups and item writing (Spring / Summer 2012) Limited pilot in 2012-13 and Comprehensive field test in 2013-14

22. Washington’s Testing System Transition Current Testing System • Reading and Math: Grades 3–8 and 10 • Writing: Grades 4, 7, 10 • Science: Grades 5, 8, 10 SBAC/CCSS Testing System • English/Language Arts and Math: Grade 3–8 and 11* • Science exams (grades 3, 8, high school) are required under ESEA but are not included in SBAC *11th grade to measure college and career readiness. We are working with higher ed to explore the possible use of these measures as an alternative for college placement (or entrance). ()

23. Still to be worked out: Washington’s Policy Discussion… • Will 11th grade exam be used for graduation (exit exam) in Washington? • If these exams are our exit exams what will the CAA options be? • Will the Summative SBAC test replace our End of Course exams or will SBAC have End of Course exams too? • How will Washington’s science tests mesh with these tests?

24. How to Find Out More: www.SmarterBalanced.org OSPI Contact: Robin.Munson@k12.wa.us

25. http://www.smarterbalanced.org/smarter-balanced-assessments/ Zip files with ELA and Math Item Specifications and Sample Student Tasks