Statewide Networks of Middle Level Education Liaisons and Support Schools Friday, May 19, :30 a.m. – 9:45 a.m. The New York State Education Department Office of State Assessment Howard J. Goldsmith William McQuay Laura Hands

Reflecting on the administration and scoring of the new grade-by-grade assessments in ELA and Mathematics *A Constructive Discussion * NYS completed its first year of NCLB required testing in January (ELA) and March (Math) What are the upcoming critical events for this 1 st year of testing?

ELA Statewide Standard Setting June 5-9, 2006 Scores available to schools August 7, 2006 Mathematics Statewide Standard Setting July 17-21, 2006 Scores available to schools September 22, 2006

Numerous events ongoing in preparation for tests to be administered in 2007 and 2008 Math Focus Group Passage Review Item selection Item Review Range finding

Open discussion and input so that future testing cycles can be improved: Administration Issues Scoring Issues Communication and Team Work, i.e., understanding of statewide testing Miscellaneous Issues and Concerns

1)Were the test administration dates adequate given the various priorities of the statewide system? Administration DatesMake-up Dates ELA Grades 3, 4, & 5 January 9 – January 13, 2006January 17-20, 2006 ELA Grades 6, 7, & 8 January 17 – January 20, 2006January 23-27, 2006 Math Grades 3, 4, & 5 March 6 – March 10, 2006March 13-17, 2006 Math Grades 6, 7, & 8 March 13 – March 17, 2006March 20-24, 2006

2)How about time allocations for each test book? 3)Was the format and layout of the test booklets clear to students and teachers? 4)Were the teacher’s directions and SAM (School Administrator’s Manual) clear and helpful?

5)Did staff access these materials on-line? Was web access used effectively for dissemination of information from SED to schools? 6)Were the sample tests used by teachers to prepare students? 7)Was the use of calculators in Math Grades 7 & 8 clear?

8)What was the condition of math punch-out tools? If provided with the specifications of the tools needed, could schools provide better quality tools themselves in the future? 9)Were the scoring materials and their format clear and concise? Did you get an adequate number of copies? 10)Were the Consistency Assurance Sets (CAS) used effectively?

11)Were the complete sample scoring materials useful? 12)Any feedback from the 24 statewide Train-the- Trainers (TTT) sessions? 13)Were the scoring DVD’s useful? Could the format or presentation be improved upon for future years?

14)How was the scoring HELPLINE? Did raters use the web site and Q & A lists as well? 15)Was the electronic Teacher Evaluation Form (TEF) easy to locate? GENERAL COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK THANK YOU!!!!