wes bruce – parcc brandt redd – smarter balanced scott elliot – elpa 21 assets – carsten...
DESCRIPTION
Are Your Schools Ready for the Next Generation Assessments ? What You Need to Know from All Six Multi-State Consortia. Wes Bruce – PARCC Brandt Redd – Smarter Balanced Scott Elliot – ELPA 21 ASSETS – Carsten Wilmes Neal Kingston – DLM Chris Domaleski - NCSC - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Are Your Schools Ready for the Next Generation Assessments?What You Need to Know from All Six Multi-State Consortia
Wes Bruce – PARCCBrandt Redd – Smarter BalancedScott Elliot – ELPA 21ASSETS – Carsten WilmesNeal Kingston – DLMChris Domaleski - NCSCPhilip Olsen – Wisconsin Department of Public InstructionAndy Middlestead – Michigan Department of Education
Assessment ConsortiaComprehensive
PARCCSmarter Balanced
English Language ProficiencyElpa21ASSETS
AlternateDynamic Learning Maps (DLM)NCSC
SETDA Guide to Technology Readinesshttp://gtr.setda.org
“Get ready cause here we come!”*NCSA – New Orleans
Wes BruceJune 27, 2014
* With apologies to The Temptations
4
PARCC Technology
Specifications
Desktops, Laptops, Tablets, Thin Client/VDI
Minimum Recommended
Operating System
Windows XP–SP3 (with caveats)Mac OS 10.6Linux*: Ubuntu 9-10, Fedora 6*iOS6Android 4.0*Chrome OS
Windows 7 or newerMac OS 10.7 or newerLinux*: Ubuntu 11.10, Fedora 16iOS6 or newerAndroid 4.0 or newer*Chrome OS
Memory By operating system 1 GB RAM
Processor By operating system 1 GHz
Screen Size 9.5 “ 9.5 “ or larger
Screen Resolution
1024 x 768 1024 x 768 or better
Bandwidth 5 kbps/ studentusing local caching
100 kbps/ studentto support instruction and assessment
• Counting devices and checking bandwidth is the tip of the iceberg….– Can schools actually deliver the tests?– Are test administrators ready for the logistics?– Can you provide the data to take advantage of the new
opportunities?– Do teachers and students know what is expected of them?– Are parents and key publics aware of the tests and the
possible results?– Have you addressed Opportunity to Learn?
6
Readiness, “Has Only Just Begun” with the Technical Specifications
• Determine if schools/districts are ready– What is your “due diligence” to validate that schools can
deliver? • Test administrators
– Even if you have been online, these systems are different and place different expectations on those administering the test
• Data Systems– Can you produce the kind of data needed to take
advantage of these new systems •PNP?
7
Schools, Districts and Systems
8
• Teacher Readiness– Have they taught the content and are they aware of the
tasks that will be used• Student Readiness
– Item types– Test interface
• Parent Readiness– Assessment itself– Results - both item and CCR
•Cite evidence vs. plagiarism
9
Teachers, Students and Parents
• Model Content Frameworks– www.parcconline.org/parcc-model-content-frameworks
• Test Specifications and Blueprints– http://www.parcconline.org/assessment-blueprints-test-specs
• Sample items, tutorials and practice tests (all grades & sub.)– http://www.parcconline.org/practice-tests
• Technology Specifications– http://parcconline.org/technology
• Technology Resources– http://parcc.pearson.com/support
PARCC Readiness Resources
14
Smarter Balanced
Brandt ReddCTO
National Conference on Student Assessment27 June 2014
• 22 member states and territories representing 39% of K-12 students
• 20 Governing States, 1 Advisory State, 1 Affiliate Member
• Washington state is fiscal agent
• UCLA Graduate School of Education will be permanent home.
A National Consortium of States
12
A Balanced Assessment System
Common Core State Standards
specify K-12
expectations for college and career readiness
All students leave
high school college
and career ready
Teachers and schools have
information and tools they need
to improve teaching and
learningInterim assessments
Flexible, open, used for actionable
feedback
Summative assessments
Benchmarked to college and career
readiness
Teacher resources for formative
assessment practices
to improve instruction
13
SmarterApp.org
• Smarter Balanced: A consortium of states developing common assessments for ELA and Mathematics that are aligned to the Common Core State Standards.
• SmarterApp: A community of organizations devoted to collaboration on an open licensed software suite for the support of educational assessment.
14
Assessment DeliverySystem*
Consortium Hosted
Item Authoring(author, approve,
versions, etc.)
Test Item Bank(test items, test authoring, test packager, etc.)
Data Warehouse
and Reporting
Test Delivery
Item Scoring(Deterministic, AI,
Hand)Test
Administration and Registration
(student reg.,test scheduling)
State Student Data System
Adaptive Engine
Smarter Balanced Assessment Delivery Architecture
Aggregate and student-level‡
reports.
Student responses,item scores,
and test scores.
Student ID, school, grade, ethnicity, etc.
Items
Responses
DistrictSIS
Eligible students, scheduled tests
Test package
Determine next set of items
Operationalitems
*Operated by a State or Smarter Balanced-certified vendor.
District will need to register studentsif no State system is available
‡ Individual Student Reports will be generated by the Consortium for states that allow student identification data to be stored by the Consortium. Other states will host instances of the Data Warehouse and Reporting components.
Students
Test registration will Q/A registration info against previous years’ data in the Data Warehouse.
Extract filewith student-level results
Test Integration,Test Scoring
Parents and Educators
TestAdministrator
(Proctor)
15
Spring 2014 Field Test
• 4.2 Million Students• 16.5 Thousand Schools• 12.2 Million Tests completed
– 4.5 Million with accessibility features• Up to 4 tests per student. Average: 2.8.
• ELA• ELA Performance Task• Math• Math Performance Task
16
A New Generation of Standards & Assessments for ELLs
•11 states funded in September 2012 by the U.S. Department of Education
•Partners• Lead State: Oregon Department of Education• Project Management: Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) • Understanding Language Initiative (Stanford University), CRESST of the University of California, Los Angeles, and NCEO of the University of Minnesota
•Timeline• Item bank development (ongoing)• Field Test SY 2014-2015 • First Operational Summative SY 2015-2016 • Operational Screener SY 2016-2017 • Platform, Technical Requirements, and Reporting SY 2014-2015
ELPA21 Consortium States
Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington, and West Virginia
ELPA21 Structure
•New English Language Proficiency Standards• With guidance from states, WestEd, Understanding Language Initiative of Stanford University, and CCSSO developed completely new standards• College and career readiness focus
•Screener for each of 6 grade bands•Summative
Assessment System Features
•We are in the unique position of integrating new standards, assessments, technology, and teacher and administrator supports — all leading toward better systems of support and learning for ELLs. •Comprehensive web-based delivery • Innovative technology-enhanced items • Includes teacher-developed items
•Cohesive system •High quality communications and outreach within states
•Sustainability
•Reports• Screener & Summative
• Individual Student • Parent/Guardian • Aggregate (e.g., Classes, Schools, Districts, and States)
• Administrative and Technical (e.g., Registration, Q/A, Analyses)•Potential Reporting Information
• Scores for Listening, Reading, Writing, and Speaking – And comprehension
• Student Proficiency Level • Performance Level Descriptors
•Interpretive Guide•Professional Development
Features (cont.)
Technical Challenges
•Demands of Speaking, Listening, Writing•Hardware Requirements for Listening and Speaking
•Assessment of Earliest Learners (K-2)
© 2012 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System, on behalf of the WIDA Consortium www.wida.us
ASSETS Project Overview
24ASSETS
WIDA Consortium with ASSETS
35 member states - WIDA 35 member states - ASSETS
25ASSETS
Development Timeline
2015-16: Fully Operational
26ASSETS
ASSETS System
27ASSETS
Updates
2014 Field Test wrapping up this monthAnalyzing results of student/LEA/SEA surveys to better deliver Field Test in 2015Selecting technology vendor via RFP process (completed by August)Assisting SEAs/LEAs with technology readiness preparation
28ASSETS
For more information
• ASSETS Project Website: http://www.assetsproject.org/
• ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 Field Test resources: http://assetsproject.org/implementation/fieldtest.aspx#overview
• ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 Operational Test resources: http://assetsproject.org/implementation/operational.aspx
School Readiness: Lessons Learned during DLM Field Testing
Neal KingstonMeagan Karvonen
Nicholas Studt
June 27, 2014
30
31
Overview of the Dynamic Learning Maps Alternate Assessment• Fine-grained learning maps
• A subset of particularly important nodes that serve as content standards – Essential Elements
• Instructionally-embedded and year-end assessments
• Instructionally relevant testlets• Accessibility and alternate pathways• Dynamic assessment• Status and growth reporting that is readily
actionable• Professional development• A technology platform to tie it all together
32
Lessons Learned about Providing Resources
• How your organize information makes a difference– Quick checklists– Comprehensive documents
• District people need to have role-specific information
• State capacity is critically important to the district staff
33
Lessons Learned About Training
• District people need a training structure, not just good self-directed training materials
• Different teachers learn best with different approaches
• Confusion between required and optional resources
• Educators need time and experience before a new system becomes routine
34
Lessons Learned about Help Desk Support
• Educators are a immensely flexible group.• Educators initiate contact via email more often
than phone. • Minor changes to resources and training
provided are visibly amplified at the help desk. – A single sentence can cause noticeable increase in
calls & emails.• Smaller testing populations, with more
educators, require a larger than expected staff to support. – The economies of scale work against DLM
educators.
THANK YOU!For more information, please contact:
Go to: www.dynamiclearningmaps.org
For Professional Development, contact:[email protected]
The present publication was developed under grant 84.373X100001 from the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. The views expressed herein are solely those of the author(s), and no official endorsement by the U.S. Department should be inferred.
National Conference on Student Assessment, June 2014
Chris Domaleski
National Center and State Collaborative
Overview• Five partner organizations
– National Center on Educational Outcomes– edCount, LLC.– National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment– University of North Carolina at Charlotte– The University of Kentucky
• 13 partner states and 11 tier 2 states• Long-term goal is to ensure that students with significant cognitive
disabilities achieve increasingly higher academic outcomes and leave high school ready for post-secondary options.
• Theory of Action: a well-designed summative assessment alone is insufficient. To achieve this goal, an AA-AAS system also requires: – Curricular & instructional frameworks – Teacher resources and professional development
NCSC Technology Framework
NCSC Technology Customized Open Source• Compliant with commonly used AT/AAC devices• Paper & pencil alternative delivery• Verify student profile LCI/PNP data • Hand scoring/interaction for teachers• Keyboard only navigation• Adaptive testing features• Accessibility features (e.g., Text to speech, magnification,
high contrast)• Upload evidence for an item feature• PD training, survey, practice tests• Federally funded and open source system/content available
to all schools and states without licensing fees
Assessment Development Timeline
Spring 2014 - Pilot Test 1: Item Tryouts
Summer 2014 – Item Data Review, Finalize Test Specs
Fall 2014 – Pilot Test 2: Form Tryouts
Spring 2015 – Census/ Operational Test
Summer/Fall 2015 – •Standard Setting•Finalize Technical Docs
Additional Resources
• www.ncscpartners.org• Curriculum and instruction resources• Technology architecture and
specifications• Presentations, papers, handouts and
more for various audiences…
Q&AConsortia
PARCC: http://www.parcconline.orgSmarter Balanced: http://www.smarterbalanced.orgElpa21: http://www.elpa21.org ASSETS: http://www.wida.us DLM: http://dynamiclearningmaps.org NCSC: http://www.ncscpartners.org
GuidesSETDA – Guide to Technology Readiness: http://gtr.setda.orgCoSN – Becoming Assessment Ready: http://www.cosn.org/focus-areas/it-management/becoming-assessment-readyETS – Coming Together to Raise Achievement: http://www.k12center.org/publications/raise_achievement.html