Testimony in support of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) before the Governor’s Council to Review CCSS and PARCC

May 6, 2015

Dana BreitweiserRetired Arkansas EducatorRetired PARCC, Inc. EmployeeContributor to the development of CCSS and PARCC for English language arts/Literacy

The Standards Writing ProcessStandards Writing Process AR Frameworks CCSSCommittee comprised of 50-60 members X X

Committee includes K-12 and post-secondary educators X X

Review most current research X X

Review standards from other states and countries X X

Write initial draft of standards X X

Revise multiple drafts of standards X X

Period of public feedback and revision X (begun 2015) X

Validate standards X

Adopt standards X X

Implement standards* X X

Written over 2 weeks in summer and 4-5 days in fall, as needed X

Written over 14 months (May 2009 – June 2010) X

*Standards are not piloted or tested before implementation.

Findings of the CCSS Validation Committee

• Reflective of the core knowledge and skills in ELA and mathematics that students need to be college- and career-ready• Appropriate in terms of their level of clarity and specificity• Comparable to the expectations of other leading nations• Informed by available research or evidence• The result of processes that reflect best practices for standards development• A solid starting point for adoption of cross-state common core standards• A sound basis for eventual development of standards-based assessments

“Reaching Higher: The Common Core State Standards Validation Committee.” A report from the National Governors Association Center for best practices & the Council of Chief State School Officers, June 2010.

http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CommonCoreReport_6.10.pdf

Conclusion of the Validation Committee

“These certified research- and evidenced-based standards—aligned with college and career expectations—respect unique state contexts and the authority of each state to govern its public education system. The lasting hallmark of this process on student achievement, then will be clear, easy, and straightforward comparability over time—standard by standard, assessment by assessment, and state by state. These common standards are an important step in bringing about a real and meaningful transformation of the education system for the benefit of all students.”“Reaching Higher: The Common Core State Standards Validation Committee.” A report from the National Governors Association Center for best practices & the Council of Chief State School Officers, June 2010.

http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CommonCoreReport_6.10.pdf

Developmental Appropriateness of the ELA/Literacy and Math CCSS Standards

“We believe that taken as a whole, the draft standards were fair and age appropriate for kindergarten through 3rd grade.”

Source: April 15, 2010 Summary of the March 10 CCSS draft standardsJoint Statement of the National Association for the Education of Young Children and the National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education on the Common Core Standards Initiative Related to Kindergarten through Third Grade

http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/policy/NAEYC-NAECS-SDE-Core-Standards-Statement.pdf

Developmental Appropriateness of the ELA/Literacy and Math CCSS Standards

“Because DAP can robustly incorporate learning standards in the years before kindergarten, teachers should be able to so in the early elementary years (K-3) through the Common Core.” (p 3)

Source: National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). 2015. Developmentally Appropriate Practice and the Common Core State Standards: Framing the Issues. Research brief. Washington, C: NAEYC.

https://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/15_Developmentally%20Appropriate%20Practice%20and%20the%20Common%20Core%20State%20Standards.pdf

ELA/Literacy Design: Reading literary and informational texts to build knowledge

1Evidence

to support conclusions drawn from

texts_____

10Range of complex

texts

Key Ideas and Details• 2: Determine central ideas or themes and analyze development; summarize

• 3: Analyze development and interaction of individuals, events, and ideas

Craft and Structure• 4: Interpret words and phrases; how word choice shapes tone• 5: Relationships among sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of text, and

the whole text• 6: How point of view or purpose shapes content or style

Integration of Knowledge and Ideas• 7: Integrate/evaluate content in diverse media and formats• 8: Evaluate the argument and claims in a text• 9: Analysis across texts that address similar themes or topics

ELA/Literacy Design: Writing effectively to communicate understandings gained from reading texts

Text Types and Purposes

1Argument

_____2

Informative/ Explanatory

_____3

Narrative

Production and Distribution of Writing• 4: Development, organization, and style appropriate to task, purpose, and

audience (incorporates language standards to write clearly and coherently)• 5: Strengthen writing through revision process• 6: Use technology to produce and publish writing

Research to Build and Present Knowledge• 7: Short as well as sustained research projects• 8: Integrate relevant, credible, and accurate information from multiple

print and digital sources• 9: Support analysis, reflection, and research with textual evidence

Range of Writing• 10: Write routinely for a range of tasks, purposes, and audiences

Factors That Make the CCSS High-Quality Standards

Factors to Consider CCSS

Writing process reflects accepted practice

Knowledge and skills are developmentally and age appropriate

Standards are clear and specific

Standards are informed by research and evidence

Design and structure support integrated approach to teaching and learning

Standards support a strong, vertically- and horizontally-aligned curriculum Emerging evidence

Longitudinal data indicate positive impact on student learning Emerging evidence

Assessing the Letter and the Spirit of the CCSS

Build an Arkansas assessment.

Cost of developing and implementing an online assessment.

Limited human resources for test development and creation of supporting resources.

Collaborate with other states to build an assessment.

Shared burden of cost and human resources to develop and implement online assessment.

Access to more supporting resources.

Assessment Choices• Computer Fixed Form, Criterion-Referenced Assessment• Aligned to the CCSS • Created by statesPARCC*• Computer Adapted Criterion-Referenced Assessment• Aligned to the CCSS• Created by states

SBAC• Computer Fixed Form Criterion-Referenced Assessment• Not aligned to the CCSS; aligned to ACT standards• Not created by states; created by ACTACT Aspire

*PARCC is the only CCSS assessment in which Arkansas educators have had a voice.

Achieving Alignment: CCSS Prompt Changes in Assessment Design

Assessing Previous ELA/Literacy Standards Assessing the CCSS ELA/Literacy Standards

Paper/pencil Online

“What” questions “How” and “why” questions

No textual evidence required Textual evidence required

Questions about a single text Questions about multiple texts

All printed texts Texts include print and digital media

More knowledge-level questions More critical thinking tasks

Stand-alone writing prompts (if any) Writing prompts tied to reading multiple texts

Big Shifts in Summative Assessment!

PARCC Achieves Alignment through Evidence-Based

DesignCCSS make claims

about what students should

know and be able to do at each grade

level

PARCC Summative Assessment makes claims about what

students should know and be able to

do at each grade level

Evidences of student learning align with the CCSS

Classroom Learning Activities Assessment Tasks

PARCC: Created by Arkansas Educators

for Arkansas StudentsArkansas Participates in All Decision-making Groups

Governing Board ADE Commissioner

State Leads ADE Assessment Director

Operational Working Groups ADE Specialists

Passage Review Committee AR Educators and ADE Specialists

Item Review Committee AR Educators and ADE Specialists

Bias Review Committee AR Educators and ADE Specialists

Data Review Committee AR Educators and ADE Specialists

Test Construction Committee AR Educators and ADE Specialists

Forms Review Committee ADE Specialists

Rangefinding Committee AR Educators and ADE Specialists

Rangefinder Committee AR Educators and ADE Specialists

Training Set Review Committee AR Educators and ADE Specialists

See also: Testimony before Senate Education Committee

False PARCC ClaimsThe federal government will receive

personally identifiable student information.

FALSE• PARCC Statement: “States retain

responsibility for and control over their data. Neither PARCC nor PARCC contractors will share student data with any outside entity, including the federal government.” http://parcconline.org/data-privacy-security

• Read: PARCC Data Privacy and Security Policy http://www.parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCC%20Privacy%20Security%20Policy_Adopted%20by%20GB_12-05-13.pdf

PARCC has a built-in 30% fail rate.

FALSE• No PARCC blueprint or guidance document

states that PARCC has a 30% fail rate.

• On criterion-referenced tests, including PARCC, students achieve levels of proficiency as guided by Performance Level Descriptors• PARCC College- and Career-Ready

Determination Policy and Policy-Level PLD’s http://parcconline.org/ccr

• PARCC Grade- and Subject-level PLD’s http://parcconline.org/plds

Factors That Make PARCC a High-Quality Assessment

Factors to Consider PARCC

Uses accepted practice for building a new assessment

Test design supports tight alignment to the standards it assesses

Tasks reflect the type of learning implicated by the standards

Passages and items reviewed for potential bias

Online Accessibility Features and Accommodations for special populations

State education leaders make policy-level decisions

State educators are decision makers on all content committees

Student- and district-level reports provide data useful for students, parents, teachers