1. STATE STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENTS

2. 1969The National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP) administered for the first time, Florida participated in the assessment. 1971The Educational Accountability Act of 1971 implemented the Statewide Assessment Program. 1976The Educational Accountability Act of 1976 authorized the nation’s first high stakes graduation test; however, the Debra P. v. Turlington court case delayed implementation of this requirement until the graduating class of 1982-83. 1992The Florida Writing Assessment Program began and the Grade 10 Assessment Test was first administered. 1998The FCAT was administered statewide for the first time at select grade levels in reading and mathematics. 2001FCAT Reading and Mathematics were expanded to grades 3-10. 2002Grade 3 retention requirements became effective for students scoring Level 1 on FCAT Reading. History of K-12 Assessment

3. 3 2003FCAT Science was administered statewide for the first time. First high school graduating class required to pass Grade 10 FCAT Reading and Mathematics. 2006The Fall FCAT Retake was Florida’s first computer-based test administration and was administered to schools and districts that volunteered to participate. 2011FCAT 2.0 developed to measure student mastery of Next Generation Sunshine State Standards FCAT 2.0 administered statewide for the first time in reading and mathematics. Florida End-of-course (EOC) assessment program began with the spring administration of the Algebra 1 End-of-course Assessment. 2012FCAT 2.0 Science and the Geometry and Biology 1 End-of-course Assessments were first administered. 2013The U.S. History End-of-course Assessment administered for the first time. 2014The Civics EOC Assessment will be administered for the first time.

4. Why Does Florida Need an Assessment Tied to the Standards? Florida’s assessments are required to be aligned to Florida’s content standards – Measure what you teach Provide information to students and parents - are students on grade level and have they mastered the standards? Provide information to teachers – have their students mastered the standards taught? Provides information to use in the state’s accountability systems Key Reminder: In 2014-15, Florida’s third graders will have been taught only the Common Core state standards since kindergarten. 4

5. Key Criteria for Selecting Assessments Assessment is aligned to the standards Provide meaningful information for parents and teachers Timely reporting of results Valid and reliable for a variety of purposes (e.g.: promotion, graduation, accountability) Quality test items and tasks Testing time Cost Technology requirements/ paper-based options Comparability of Florida’s results with those of other states

6. Three Assessment Options Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) – Consortium of states funded through Race to the Top Grant. – Assessment development work by contractors is led and reviewed by states. – Nationwide field testing is scheduled for spring 2014 with full assessments available in spring 2015 Custom Assessment – Designed by Florida and developed by a contractor overseen by the department and reviewed by Florida educators. – Field testing in Florida for use in operational assessment “Shelf” or “Semi-Shelf” Assessment Product – A number of assessment developers have indicated that “shelf” products may be available to assess the common core standards – These products may allow for some state customization – Some states are buying or intend to buy these types of assessments.

7. PARCC - Advantages Florida K-12 and higher education faculty and staff, and department staff, have been key contributors, and would continue to be part of the work. External validation of item quality and very high degree of alignment of items to standards Timely and meaningful reports are anticipated Economies of scale - Shared costs and access to best national expertise in numerous areas Results can be compared to other PARCC states Paper-based option available for first year

8. PARCC - Disadvantages Approximately twice the testing time of FCAT 2.0 in Grades 3-8, and Grades 9 and 10 Reading PARCC End-of-Course (EOC) tests are about 1 hour longer than Florida EOCs Higher costs than for comparable FCAT 2.0 tests/ EOCs. Will be somewhat higher if fewer states remain in PARCC. Florida will likely use paper-based tests at some grades, further increasing costs. Paper and pencil option may not be available for as long as needed Although PARCC is state led, initial design and any adjustments to major aspects require federal approval until the grant ends in late 2014. Governance and purchasing process for 2015 and beyond still to be determined.

9. Custom Assessment - Advantages 9 Long Florida history of quality custom assessments Customized to measure the standards Florida uses Florida has the capacity to continue to perform this work. Timely and meaningful student and teacher reports completely customized for Florida More opportunity for extensive engagement by Florida stakeholders in every aspect of design, development and scoring of performance tasks More control over cost and testing time More control over technical qualities that ensure the strength of the assessment as a measurement tool More control over standard setting More control over technology requirements Paper-based option would be required to meet state needs.

10. Custom Assessments - Disadvantages 10 Reduced comparability of results with other states Would not have access to other states’ resources and national experts as PARCC does Reduced purchasing power

11. ‘Shelf’ or ‘Semi-Shelf’ Assessment – Advantages Comparability of results with other states using the assessment May allow for engagement by Florida stakeholders in design, development and scoring of performance tasks Some control over cost and testing time Paper-based option would be required Timely and meaningful reports would be required

12. ‘Shelf’ or ‘Semi-Shelf’ Assessment – Disadvantages Number, quality and alignment of assessments an unknown Little or no Florida input into student field test statistics, initial test design, or initial item development May have less control over standard setting Comparability with other states and amount of cost savings depend on how many states adopt the assessment. Exact technology requirements unknown

13. Moving Forward State Standard Assessments - Assessments that replace FCAT 2.0 and associated EOCs must accurately measure mastery of the more challenging standards that will be taught to our students, provide timely and meaningful performance information, and must be cost effective.