Policy Definitions, Achievement Level Descriptors, and Math Standards

 Review Oregon’s Standards Setting process  Outline upcoming State Board actions on this topic  Discuss the draft Policy Definitions

 December, 2007 – State Board Adopts new K-8 Math Content Standards  June, 2009 – Board Adopts new High School Math Content Standards  Winter / Spring 2010 – Board reviews and adopts : ◦ Policy Definitions ◦ General Math Achievement Level Descriptors ◦ Grade Specific Math Achievement Level Descriptors

 August, 2010 – Stakeholders validate new Oregon Mathematics Achievement Standards (cut scores) ◦ Cut scores informed by analysis of national and international standards to be conducted spring 2010 by ODE staff  October, 2010 – Proposed date for State Board to adopt new mathematics cut scores

Policy Definitions:  Provide an overarching definition for each achievement level  Describe how rigorous and challenging the cut scores will be  General statements that describe rigor across grade levels and content areas  Used for all subjects

Achievement Level Descriptors:  Explain students’ knowledge and skills ◦ At a specific Achievement Level ◦ By grade ◦ By subject  Built with stakeholder engagement  Key criteria for establishment of Achievement Standards (cut scores)  Contribute to the height of the “bar”

Setting Achievement Standards takes judgments and values. The achievement level descriptors help set these judgments and values.

 Explain students’ knowledge and skills  Appropriately represent Oregon’s Core/Content Standards  Well-crafted building blocks for decisions by policy makers (i.e., diploma, accountability reports, etc.)  Help anchor Oregon’s Achievement Standards to national and international scales

 Current: ◦ Does Not Yet Meet ◦ Nearly Meets ◦ Meets ◦ Exceeds  Questions that will come before the Board: ◦ Confirm the number of levels ◦ Review the names ◦ Raise the rigor

National Best Practice:  Choose the fewest performance levels needed to fulfill the purpose. Typically, no more than four levels are needed.  Names should be thoughtfully chosen to relate to the purpose of the assessment “The terms themselves carry meaning, even without further description; therefore, naming a level is the first step in defining performance…The words chosen express the values of the policymakers and thus should be selected carefully.” Perie, 2008

 Comparisons to NAEP indicate that at least at Elementary and Middle School, Oregon’s “Meets” is well below NAEP’s “Proficient”  Inclusion of NAEP (national) and PISA (international) test items in this spring’s field test will provide additional information on how Oregon students compare to their peers

 Better aligning Oregon’s Achievement Standards to national and international standards requires raising our cut scores.  ODE staff anticipate that Oregon’s cut scores will be raised during this summers’ standards setting process.  Initial analysis indicates that NAEP’s “Proficient” is somewhere between Oregon’s “Meets” and “Exceeds” cut scores.  A possible new high school math cut score would be somewhere between 236 and 246. Currently 50% of high school students get a 236 in math and 14% percent get a 246.

 In raising the cut scores, there are several policy considerations to keep in mind: ◦ New graduation requirements/Essential Skills  What level of skill do we want graduates to have?  What impact will the change have on graduation rates?  Impact on disadvantaged students (minority and low SES graduation rates) ◦ Year of accountability being moved from 10 th grade to 11 th grade  Will the move help more students reach a higher standard?

… “the cut score is developed in a standard- setting process that depends heavily on the definition for each level of performance.” (Perie, 2008) Following national best practice, ODE will focus the panelists’ attention on a reasonable cut score given data on national and international benchmarks.

 In March, the Board will be asked to vote on the proposed Policy Definitions.  Review the proposed Policy Definitions  Discuss any needed adjustments  Provide feedback to ODE staff

 Level 1: Students do not demonstrate mastery of grade-level knowledge and skills required for proficiency.  Level 2: Students demonstrate partial mastery of grade-level knowledge and skills required for proficiency.  Level 3: Students demonstrate mastery of the grade-level knowledge and skills required for proficiency.  Level 4: Students demonstrate mastery of grade- level knowledge and skills exceeding the requirement for proficiency.