1. Mathematics, Western Illinois University
Preparing for the PARCC and the Common Core:  PARCC and Common Core Mathematics Updates
 Dr. Bob Mann
Mathematics, Western Illinois University
to access full slide show from Heather Brown of ISBE

2. What Is PARCC?
The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers:
Made up of 19 states + DC and US Virgin Islands
KY and PA are participating states
Developing common, high-quality math and English language arts (ELA) tests for grades 3–11
Computer-based and linked to what students need to know for college and careers
For use starting in the 2014–15 school year

3. Assessments ELA/Literacy and Mathematics, Grades 3–11
Beginning of School Year
End of School Year
Flexible administration
Performance-Based
Assessment
Diagnostic Assessment
Mid-Year Assessment
End-of-Year
Assessment
Speaking and Listening Assessment
Key:
Optional
Required

4. What is Different About PARCC’s Development Process?
PARCC states first developed the Model Content Frameworks to provide guidance to key elements of excellent instruction aligned with the Standards.
The Model Content Frameworks were then used to provide guidance in the content emphasis for the mathematics assessment.
So, for the first time. . .
PARCC is communicating in the same voice to teachers as it is to assessment developers! 
PARCC is designing the assessments around exactly the same SHIFTS the standards expect of teachers and students.

5. Model Content Frameworks
Final version in November of 2012
Look at these to see exactly which standards should be covered in each grade or course

6. Pathways Traditional (Algebra, Geometry, Algebra II)
Integrated (Math 1, 2, 3)
For grades 9-12, PARCC is making tests for both pathways
High Schools in Illinois can choose which form they would like to use
By the end of grade 11, the standards covered would be the same

7. PARCC’s Core Commitments to Mathematics Assessment Quality
Focus: PARCC assessments will focus strongly on where the Standards focus. Students will have more time to master concepts at a deeper level.
Problems worth doing: Multi-step problems, conceptual questions, applications, and substantial procedures will be common, as in an excellent classroom.
Better Standards Demand Better Questions: Instead of reusing existing items, PARCC will develop custom items to the Standards.
Fidelity to the Standards: PARCC Evidence Statements are rooted in the language of the Standards so that expectations remain the same in both instructional and assessment settings.

8. What Are the Shifts at the Heart of PARCC’s Design?
Focus: The PARCC assessment will focus strongly where the Standards focus.
Coherence: Think across grades and link to major topics within grades.
Rigor: In major topics, pursue
conceptual understanding,
procedural skill and fluency,
and application.

9. College and Career Ready Determination (CCRD)
Students who achieve a College and Career Ready Determination on the high school assessment will be able to enter directly into certain entry-level, credit-bearing courses in college, without having to take placement tests.
At the heart of the PARCC assessment is the intent to make every student college and career ready by the time they exit the 12th grade.
One of the objectives of the PARCC assessment is to make determination regarding when a student is college and career ready. The PARCC assessment will offer a new way for officials in higher education to determine the likelihood of a student’s success without needing to rely primarily on entrance exams and placement tests. The CCR determination is an effort to predict a student’s likelihood of succeeding in entry-level college courses. If a student performs at a level 4 (of five) in ELA/Literacy, this should indicate that the student has at least a .75 or 75% chance of earning a C or better in an entry-level course (such as Composition, for example)
This is important because it provides a missing link between high school and university expectations, so that now, everything that a student does in high school is inextricably linked with the goal of achieving CCR readiness. This underscores the expectation that all students reach a high level of skill and knowledge.

10. What’s new? PARCC Performance Level Descriptors (PLDs)
PARCC Evidence Tables and test blueprints
PARCC Sample test items and prototypes: 
ISBE Mathematics Model Curriculum
Abundance of resources at PARCC, ISBE, and other sites

11. What are Performance Level Descriptors?
Performance Level Descriptors or PLDs describe what students at each performance level know and can do relative to grade-level or course content standards assessed.
What are Performance Level Descriptors?
Performance Level Descriptors or PLDs describe what students at each performance level know and can do relative to grade-level or course content standards assessed.

12. Performance Level Descriptor Language
Level 5: Students performing at this level demonstrate a distinguished command of the knowledge, skills, and practices embodied by the Common Core State Standards assessed at their grade level.
Level 4: … strong command …
Level 3: … moderate command …
Level 2: … partial command …
Level 1: … minimal command …

13. Evidence-Centered Design (ECD) for the PARCC Assessments
Claims
Design begins with the inferences (claims) we want to make about students
Evidence
In order to support claims, we must gather evidence
Tasks
Tasks are designed to elicit specific evidence from students in support of claims
PARCC utilizes Evidence-Centered Design to inform the development of the summative assessments. ECD is a deliberate and systematic approach to assessment development that will help to establish the validity of the assessments, increase the comparability of year-to year results, and increase efficiencies/reduce costs. The Design begins with the inferences (claims) we want to make about students. In order to support claims, we must gather evidence. Tasks are then designed to elicit the specific evidence from students that supports the claims.
ECD is a deliberate and systematic approach to assessment development that will help to establish the validity of the assessments, increase the comparability of year-to year results, and increase efficiencies/reduce costs.
Confidential - Not for Distribution

14. Claims for Mathematics
Master Claim: Students are on-track or ready for college and careers
Sub-claim A: Students solve problems involving the major content for their grade level with connections to practices
Sub-Claim B: Students solve problems involving the additional and supporting content for their grade level with connections to practices
Sub-claim C: Students express mathematical reasoning by constructing mathematical arguments and critiques
Sub-Claim D: Students solve real world problems engaging particularly in the modeling practice
Sub-Claim E: Student demonstrate fluency in areas set forth in the Standards for Content in grades 3-6
Master Claim: Students Are “On Track” to College and Career Readiness
This Master Claim reflects the overall goal of the Common Core State Standards and Model Content Frameworks—to prepare students for college and careers, and specifically to ensure students have the skills and understandings required for success. The measure of progress towards this essential goal will be reflected by a student’s overall performance on the summative components (both the Performance-Based Assessment and End-of-Year Assessment) of the PARCC Assessment System.

15. Evidence-Centered Design (ECD) for the PARCC Assessments
Claims
Design begins with the inferences (claims) we want to make about students
Evidence
In order to support claims, we must gather evidence
Tasks
Tasks are designed to elicit specific evidence from students in support of claims
PARCC utilizes Evidence-Centered Design to inform the development of the summative assessments. ECD is a deliberate and systematic approach to assessment development that will help to establish the validity of the assessments, increase the comparability of year-to year results, and increase efficiencies/reduce costs. The Design begins with the inferences (claims) we want to make about students. In order to support claims, we must gather evidence. Tasks are then designed to elicit the specific evidence from students that supports the claims.
ECD is a deliberate and systematic approach to assessment development that will help to establish the validity of the assessments, increase the comparability of year-to year results, and increase efficiencies/reduce costs.
Confidential - Not for Distribution

16. Evidence Statement Tables: Types of Evidence Statements
Several types of evidence statements are being used to describe what a task should be assessing, including:
Those using exact standards language
Those transparently derived from exact standards language, e.g., by splitting a content standard
Integrative evidence statements that express plausible direct implications of the standards without going beyond the standards to create new requirements
Sub-claim C & D evidence statements, which put MP.3, 4, 6 as primary with connections to content
Evidence Statements
Several types of evidence statements are being used to describe what a task should be assessing, including:
Those using exact standards language
Those transparently derived from exact standards language, e.g., by splitting a content standard (see 3.OA.3 (1-4) above)
Integrative evidence statements that express plausible direct implications of the standards without going beyond the standards to create new requirements
Sub-claim C & D evidence statements, which put MP.3, 4, 6 as primary with connections to content

17. Evidence-Centered Design (ECD) for the PARCC Assessments
Claims
Design begins with the inferences (claims) we want to make about students
Evidence
In order to support claims, we must gather evidence
Tasks
Tasks are designed to elicit specific evidence from students in support of claims
PARCC utilizes Evidence-Centered Design to inform the development of the summative assessments. ECD is a deliberate and systematic approach to assessment development that will help to establish the validity of the assessments, increase the comparability of year-to year results, and increase efficiencies/reduce costs. The Design begins with the inferences (claims) we want to make about students. In order to support claims, we must gather evidence. Tasks are then designed to elicit the specific evidence from students that supports the claims.
ECD is a deliberate and systematic approach to assessment development that will help to establish the validity of the assessments, increase the comparability of year-to year results, and increase efficiencies/reduce costs.
Confidential - Not for Distribution

18. Overview of Task Types
The PARCC assessments for mathematics will involve three primary types of tasks: Type I, II, and III.
Each task type is described on the basis of several factors, principally the purpose of the task in generating evidence for certain sub claims.
Source: Appendix D of the PARCC Task Development ITN on page 17

19. Overview of PARCC Mathematics Task Types
Description of Task Type
I. Tasks assessing concepts, skills and procedures
Balance of conceptual understanding, fluency, and application
Can involve any or all mathematical practice standards
Machine scorable including innovative, computer-based formats
Will appear on the End of Year and Performance Based Assessment components
Sub-claims A, B and E
II. Tasks assessing expressing mathematical reasoning
Each task calls for written arguments / justifications, critique of reasoning, or precision in mathematical statements (MP.3, 6).
Can involve other mathematical practice standards
May include a mix of machine scored and hand scored responses
Included on the Performance Based Assessment component
Sub-claim C
III. Tasks assessing modeling / applications
Each task calls for modeling/application in a real-world context or scenario (MP.4)
Sub-claim D
Previous items were Type I, II and III
For more information see PARCC Task Development ITN Appendix D.

20. Type II
Conceptual Understanding
- Error analysis

21. Type III
True application

22. Algebra II/Math III Sample Task
Most Relevant
Standards for
Mathematical
Content
S-IC.3: Recognize the purposes of and differences among sample
surveys, experiments, and observational studies; explain how
randomization relates to each.
This standard is major content in the course based on the PARCC
Model Content Frameworks.

23. Algebra II/Math III Sample Task

24. Algebra II/Math III Sample Task

25. Claims Structure: Mathematics
Master Claim: On-Track for college and career readiness. The degree to which a student is college and career ready (or “on-track” to being ready) in mathematics.
Total Exam Score Points:
82 (Grades 3-8), 97 or 107(HS)
Sub-Claim C: Highlighted Practices MP.3,6 with Connections to Content3 (expressing mathematical reasoning) .
Sub-Claim A: Major Content1 with Connections to Practices
Sub-Claim B: Additional & Supporting Content2 with Connections to Practices
~14 pts (3-8),
~23 pts (HS)
~37 pts (3-8),
~42 pts (HS)
14 pts (3-8),
14 pts (HS)
4 pts (Alg II/Math 3 CCR)
Master Claim: Students Are “On Track” to College and Career Readiness
This Master Claim reflects the overall goal of PARCC based on the Common Core State Standards and the PARCC Model Content Frameworks—to prepare students for college and careers, and specifically to ensure students have the skills and understandings required for success. The measure of progress towards this essential goal will be reflected by a student’s overall performance on the summative components (both the Performance-Based Assessment and End-of-Year Assessment) of the PARCC Assessment System.
Sub-Claim D: Highlighted Practice MP.4 with Connections to Content (modeling/application)
Sub-Claim E: Fluency in applicable grades (3-6)
12 pts (3-8),
18 pts (HS)
6 pts (Alg II/Math 3 CCR)
7-9 pts (3-6)

26. What’s Important? The content itself has not changed that much
The way it is packaged and delivered should be different
The way it will be assessed should be different
The expectations are higher throughout
The Mathematical Practices must not be forgotten

27. Standards for Mathematical Practice
Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them.
Reason abstractly and quantitatively.
Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others.
Model with mathematics.
Use appropriate tools strategically.
Attend to precision.
Look for and make use of structure.
Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning.
Summing up that these are the math practices.
August 2011

28. Engagement Tasks and Talk Work and Words
Practices?
Engagement Tasks and Talk Work and Words

29. ·       When students transform expressions purposefully, they are looking for and making use of structure (MP.7).
·       When modeling a situation, students often can get started by working repetitively with numerical examples and then look for and express regularity in that repeated reasoning by writing equations or functions (MP.8).
·       Throughout high school, students construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others (MP.3). As in geometry, important questions in advanced algebra cannot be answered definitively by checking evidence. Results about all objects of a certain type — the factor theorem for polynomials, for example — require general arguments. And deciding whether two functions are equal on an infinite set cannot be settled by looking at tables or graphs; it requires a deeper argument.

30. Questions
Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

32. Mathematics Performance-based Assessment and End-of-Year Assessment
Illinois State Board of Education
Mathematics Performance-based Assessment and End-of-Year Assessment
PARCC Subclaim
Percentage of Items on High School Assessments
Task Types
A: Solve problems with major content
39%
Balance of conceptual understanding, fluency, and application
Can involve any or all mathematical practice standards
B: Solve problems with additional and supporting content
21%
C: Express mathematical reasoning
17%
Each task calls for written arguments / justifications, critique of reasoning, or precision in mathematical statements
Can involve other mathematical practice standards
D: Solve real-world problems engaging in modeling
22%
Each task calls for modeling/application in a real-world context or scenario

33. Prairie State Achievement Exam
Illinois State Board of Education
Prairie State Achievement Exam
Approximately 50% of the items on the ACT Mathematics Test involve knowledge and skills
Approximately 30% of items involve direct application
Approximately 20% of the items involve understanding concepts/integrated conceptual understanding

34. PARCC Comprehensive Accessibility Policies
The draft Manual details a three-tiered process to providing access to the assessments for all students:
Embedded Supports: Tools embedded in the computer-delivered system available to all students to use (e.g. font magnification, highlighting tool, bolding, underlining)
Accessibility Features: Tools embedded in the computer-delivered system open to all students to use, but must be made available at the discretion of school-based educators (e.g. background/font color, answer masking)
Accommodations: Supports for SWD and ELs that increase access while maintaining a valid and reliable score (e.g. braille form, extended time, small group testing, word-to-word native language dictionary)

35. Accessibility Features for All Students
Audio Amplification
Blank Paper (provided by test administrator)
Eliminate Answer Choices
Flag Items for Review
General Administration Directions Clarified (by test administrator)
General Administration Directions Read Aloud and Repeated (by test administrator)
Highlight Tool
Headphones
Magnification/Enlargement Device
NotePad
Pop-Up Glossary
Redirect Student to Test (by test administrator)
Spell Checker
Writing Tools

36. Accessibility Features Identified in Advance
Available to all students (i.e., not limited to students with IEPs, 504 plans, or English learners), but will be selected and “turned on” by school-based educators prior to the assessment, based on each student’s Personal Needs Profile (PNP).
Based on each student’s individual needs, a PNP is created for the student to ensure that he or she receives appropriate access without the distraction of other tools and features that are not required by the student.
Although school-based educators will enable specific accessibility features for students, the student will decide whether or not to use the feature. These accessibility features will be readily available on the computer-delivered testing platform.
Individualizing access needs for the assessment provides increased opportunities for each student to accurately demonstrate knowledge and skills, and will reduce the chances of giving students incorrect accommodations or supports on the day of the test. Examples of accessibility features include: answer masking, background/font color, line reader, etc.

37. Accessibility Features Identified in Advance
Answer Masking
Background/Font Color (Color Contrast)
General Masking
Line Reader Tool
Text-to-Speech for the Mathematics Assessments

38. Administrative Considerations for All Students
Detailed guidelines on the administration of the PARCC assessments will be included in the PARCC Test Administration Manual.
Principals may determine that any student may require one or more of the following test administration considerations, regardless of the student’s status as a student with a disability or who is an English learner:
Small group testing
Frequent breaks
Time of day
Separate or alternate location
Specified area or seating
Adaptive and specialized equipment or furniture

39. PARCC Information Release
July 2013
Summative assessment cost estimates
Final English Language Learners policy
Final accommodations manual for students with disabilities
Final performance level descriptors for all grades/courses in ELA/literacy and mathematics
August 2013
Additional sample items
Specific information about windows for traditional and block scheduling, when assessment components will be available within the window, models of what PARCC will look like in schools, and proctor requirements

42. Contact Heather Brown – hedi0201@me.com
Jennie Winters –
For “End-of-Course” Questions, Rachel Jachino,
Any publicly released assessment policies, item prototypes, PARCC Model Content Frameworks, and other valuable resources can be found at