COMMON CORE ASSESSMENT SELECTION WORK GROUP MAY 3, 2013 OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PARTICIPATION AND ADOPTION OF THE COMMON CORE STANDARDS INITIATIVE 1 Transforming Education in Kentucky Felicia Cumings Smith Associate Commissioner Michael.
Advertisements

ASSESSMENT GUIDANCE LocalAssessmentGuidance.
PARCC Tests: An Investment in Learning Test quality and rigor increase; Costs for states generally hold steady July 2013.
What’s New in PARCC: What ELC Members Need to Know … and Share with You.
STATE STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENTS. 1969The National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP) administered for the first time, Florida participated in the.
Common Core State Standards Impact on Transition 1.
On The Road to College and Career Readiness Hamilton County ESC Instructional Services Center Christina Sherman, Consultant.
Getting Organized for the Transition to the Common Core What You Need to Know.
SBAC Common Assessment November 17, 2011.
Why move to Common Core?  Preparation: The standards are college- and career-ready. They will help prepare students with the knowledge and skills they.
Making preparations in Ohio: Common Core and Ohio’s Revised Academic Content Standards New System of Assessments.
What This Means for Us Carol L. Jenkins Senior Director for Testing June 24, 2011 Carol L. Jenkins Senior Director for Testing June 24, 2011 Evaluation.
Brian Roget – Assistant Director Assessment Development and Construction Mathematics and Science Office of Curriculum and Assessment October 12, 2011.
 Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Adopted in summer 2010  Next Milestone: How to Assess?
Multnomah County Student Achievement Presented to the Leaders Roundtable November 25, 2008 Source: Oregon Department of Education, Dr. Patrick.
Accountability Assessment Parents & Community Preparing College, Career, & Culturally Ready Graduates Standards Support 1.
Professional Learning in the Learning Profession Effective Practice  Increased Student Learning Frederick Brown Director of Strategy.
The Five New Multi-State Assessment Systems Under Development April 1, 2012 These illustrations have been approved by the leadership of each Consortium.
Consortia of States Assessment Systems Instructional Leaders Roundtable November 18, 2010.
Sustainable Building Oregon Team Oregon Department of Education, June 2010.
Common Core State Standards: Changing the Game Lucille E. Davy, Senior Advisor June 27, 2011.
Graduation Conversation Doug Kosty Assistant Superintendent, Office of Learning Derek Brown Manager, Assessment of Essential Skills Cristen McLean Operations.
Understanding California’s New State Assessment Cambrian School District August 20, 2015.
1 1 (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers) Spring 2014 WSTA Field Test 1.
1 Building Mathematics Leadership Across Oregon Building Mathematics Leadership Across Oregon Mark Freed Oregon Department of Education February 2, 2010.
Common Core Math Summit Success Beyond the Test. Schedule of Events 9:00 Welcome 9:15 What is College Ready? 10:00 Understanding the Common Core 10:45.
Oregon Diploma & Essential Skills Task Force Phase I : Defining the Essential Skills Work Session August 15, 2007.
COMMON CORE ASSESSMENT SELECTION WORK GROUP MAY 10, 2013 OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
Update on Development of the Smarter Balanced Common Assessment February 14, 2012.
Fall 2010 Mathematics Standards of Learning Assessment Update - 1 -
Presentation by Robert L. King, CPE President SHEEO Annual Meeting, Boulder, CO July 13, 2011.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Overview of the Smarter Balanced Assessment System CTA Pre-Good.
Oxford Preparatory Academy Scholar Academy Parent Social Topic: Changes in State Testing May 4, 5, and 6, 2015.
EXAMINING THE MODULES: ASSESSMENT PRACTICES LT 2c. I can analyze the role of student-friendly learning targets, aligned assessment, and effective curriculum-
Alignment of K-12 and postsecondary.  Charge to the Academic Officers to develop a comprehensive inventory of collaborative efforts underway  Participation.
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION COSA PRINCIPAL’S CONFERENCE 2015 ODE Update on Educator Effectiveness.
DISTRICT NAME HERE Using Student Growth Percentiles (Option A)
Educator Evaluation and Support System Basics. Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems Alignment of State and Federal.
Summary of Assessments By the Big Island Team: (Sherry, Alan, John, Bess) CCSS SBAC PARCC AP CCSSO.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP Supporting Common Assessments (Time for Common Assessments) © AZ Board of Regents, All rights reserved, 2012.
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION COSA LAW CONFERENCE 2015 ODE Update on Educator Effectiveness.
New Jersey DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Amendments to N.J.A.C. 6A:8 Standards and Assessments Monday, January 11, 2016.
Performance Task Overview Introduction This training module answers the following questions: –What is a performance task? –What is a Classroom Activity?
29 States $176,000,000 for development Includes formative, interim & summative Governed and controlled by states Co-chairs, Judy Park, Utah; Tony Alpert,
TITLE I PLANNING MEETING May 16, 2013 Colleton Learning Annex.
Supporting Secondary-to-Postsecondary Collaboration To Support Rigorous, Effective Instruction Planning for the 2016 GEAR UP Summer Institute February.
ESSENTIAL SKILLS ACHIEVEMENT STANDARD ON SMARTER BALANCED Cristen McLean Policy Analyst Derek Brown Director of Assessment.
Raising the Bar for Oregon. Why Now?  New Mathematics Content Standards were adopted for grades K-8 in 2007 and high school in Oregon Statewide.
Common Core State Standards What you need to know Cambrian School District.
Smarter Balanced & Higher Education Cheryl Blanco Smarter Balanced Colorado Remedial Education Policy Review Task Force August 24, 2012.
1 Space is tight so please adjust accordingly. 2.
DECEMBER 7, 2015 Educator Effectiveness: Charter School Webinar.
A Day of Collaboration and Growth
Mastery-Based Learning:
Illinois Learning Standards:
Erie 2 Regional Curriculum Council March 14, 2012
Common Core Update May 15, 2013.
Facilitator: Drew Hinds, ODE (503)
PARCC Assessments Overview
Implementation Guide for Linking Adults to Opportunity
Deeper Investigations of the Standards: Iowa Core Mathematics
Common Core State Standards
Alignment of curriculum, instruction and classroom assessments
9-12 Professional Development PM Session: CCSS and literacy
District Mission & Vision Cluster Mission & Vision
Presentation transcript:

COMMON CORE ASSESSMENT SELECTION WORK GROUP MAY 3, 2013 OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

WELCOME Significance of this work Importance of impartial evaluation

OBJECTIVES May 3 rd I.Understand current assessment context and needs II.Determine which assessments will be evaluated III.Determine how to weight the features in the assessment evaluation IV.Begin evaluating the Common Core assessments against the criteria

OBJECTIVES May 10 th I.Finish evaluating the Common Core assessments against the criteria II.Determine best assessment III.Develop Common Core assessment recommendation

AGENDA Welcome and objectives 1:00-1:10 Discuss expectations1:10-1:20 Understand current assessment context and next assessment needs, options 1:20-2:00 Determine the weight for each feature2:00-2:25 Break2:25-2:35 Evaluate the Common Core assessments against the criteria 2:25-3:45 Break3:45-3:55 Evaluate the Common Core assessments against the criteria 3:55-4:55 Wrap up4:55-5:00

EXPECTATIONS: DISCUSSION Assumptions That you’ve read the fact sheets That you’re ready to engage in the discussion with an open mind Rules of Engagement Each member of the workgroup will have an opportunity to contribute to the comparison of assessments. Appropriate : Open mind to all options and discussion Not Appropriate: Predetermination about which assessment is right for Oregon

EXPECTATIONS: WORK GROUP WhoRole/TaskExpectations Work groupEvaluate Common Core assessment options. Make a recommendation to as to the assessment that will best meet the needs of our students, our schools, and our state. Critically evaluate each assessment option. Incorporate your professional and personal experiences with Oregon education into your evaluation.

EXPECTATIONS: WORK GROUP WhoRole/TaskExpectations Work groupEvaluate Common Core assessment options. Make a recommendation to as to the assessment that will best meet the needs of our students, our schools, and our state. Critically evaluate each assessment option. Incorporate your professional and personal experiences with Oregon education into your evaluation.

EXPECTATIONS: ODE WhoRole/TaskExpectations ODE Facilitate the work group and, as needed, collect additional assessment information that is already publicly available. Abstain from providing opinions about assessment preferences Follow up on requests from work group for additional information and obtain relevant information that is publicly available. Rob Saxton and Derek Brown, Facilitation Doug Kosty, Facilitation support Cristen McLean, Time keeper Steve Slater and Rachel Aazzerah, Assessment information support

UNDERSTAND CURRENT ASSESSMENT CONTEXT AND NEEDS OBJECTIVE I

CONTEXT: WORK GROUP TASK What: Reading, Writing, Mathematics state-wide assessment. Through school year school year and beyond Assessed standards Oregon state content standards Common Core AssessmentOAKS[This is your task]

CONTEXT: ASSESSMENT COSTS New assessment will cost more because the following factors, at least: New level of assessment authenticity – higher quality assessment Opportunity for comparability across states Opportunity for assessment system that includes more than just summative data

CONTEXT: ASSESSMENT COSTS But we will have access to other cost-saving measures, including: Ability to share resources with other states using same assessment system Ability to leverage broader base for expertise Economy of scale for alignment costs, including: Alignments of state to state comparability Alignment of assessment to college readiness and college placement

CONTEXT: ASSESSMENT OPTIONS Assessment DeveloperCost ACT (ASPIRE) “Competitively priced” NWEA (MAP) -- Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) 22 Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium Renaissance Learning (STAR) 3,200 one time cost for Reading and Math assessments. 860 annually College Board (SAT) 50

CONTEXT: REQUIREMENTS Aligned to Common Core State Standards Available in reading, writing, and mathematics Available at 3-8 and high school Online administration Comparable across multiple states Operational in academic year

CONTEXT: REQUIREMENTS See hand out: Requirement Table Which assessments should we evaluate? Assessment Developer Evaluate? ACT (ASPIRE) Yes NWEA (MAP) Yes Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) Yes Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium Yes Renaissance Learning (STAR) No College Board (SAT) No

CONTEXT: REACTIONS AND INTRODUCTIONS Please introduce yourself and say: Name Role and district or organization One challenge you anticipate in this transition One opportunity this transition presents

DETERMINE HOW TO WEIGHT THE FEATURES IN THE ASSESSMENT EVALUATION OBJECTIVE II

WEIGHTING: PROCESS (25 MIN) 1.Introduce features and criteria, including rationale (5 min) 2.Individually review features and criteria (10 min) 3.Discuss different weights for the features (5 min) 4.Each person anonymously votes on weight for each feature (5 min) ODE calculates mean weight for each feature (during break) Feature weighting finalized (after break)

WEIGHTING: INTRODUCE FEATURES See hand out: Feature Description As a group discuss structure of feature and criteria information. 5 minutes

WEIGHTING: INDIVIDUAL REVIEW See hand out: Feature Description Individually review each feature and criteria. 10 minutes

WEIGHTING: DISCUSSION See hand out: Feature Description Discuss how much should each feature be weighted? 5 minutes 1. Quality Assessment 2. Accommodations Available 3. Suite of Resources Available 4. Aligned with college and career 5. Oregon can contribute to content

WEIGHTING: VOTING See hand out: Feature Weight Vote Place your vote for how much should each feature be weighted? 5 minutes

BREAK

WEIGHTING: FINAL WEIGHT FeatureFinal Percent 1. Quality Assessment Accommodations Available Suite of Resources Available Aligned with college and career 7 5. Oregon can contribute to content 10

BEGIN EVALUATING THE COMMON CORE ASSESSMENTS AGAINST THE CRITERIA OBJECTIVE III

EVALUATING: PROCESS (20 MIN EACH) 1.Each participants individually reviews fact sheet and write notes about which assessment best meets the criteria and why (10 min) 2.Participants discuss their selections (5 min) 3.Participants will take additional notes (5min) Schedule: Three criteria Break Three criteria Wrap up

EVALUATING: SCHEDULE Evaluate assessments against 2 criteria (including a longer one) Break Evaluate assessments against 4 criteria Wrap up

EVALUATING: 1.1 (FIRST ONE, 30 MIN) 1.Individually review Criteria 1.1 Fact Sheet Take notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet: Feature 1. Assessment Quality (10 min) 2.Discuss selections and rationales (15 min) 3.Take additional notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet (5 min)

EVALUATING: 1.2 (NOW, 20 MIN) 1.Individually review Criteria 1.2 Fact Sheet Take notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet: Feature 1. Assessment Quality (10 min) 2.Discuss selections and rationales (5 min) 3.Take additional notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet (5 min)

EVALUATING: Individually review Criteria 1.4 Fact Sheet Take notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet: Feature 1. Assessment Quality (10 min) 2.Discuss selections and rationales (5 min) 3.Take additional notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet (5 min)

BREAK Please be back by 3:55.

EVALUATING: Individually review Criteria 1.4 Fact Sheet Take notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet: Feature 1. Assessment Quality (10 min) 2.Discuss selections and rationales (5 min) 3.Take additional notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet (5 min)

EVALUATING: Individually review Criteria 2.1 Fact Sheet Take notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet: Feature 2. Accommodations Available (10 min) 2.Discuss selections and rationales (5 min) 3.Take additional notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet (5 min)

EVALUATING: Individually review Criteria 2.2 Fact Sheet Take notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet: Feature 2. Accommodations Available (10 min) 2.Discuss selections and rationales (5 min) 3.Take additional notes on Assessment Evaluation Sheet (5 min)

WRAP UP Process 1.Please put all of your material in the envelope on your desk. 2.Seal the envelope and sign your name across the seal. 3.Leave the envelope on your desk. Thank you for your hard work today – see you on May 10 th.