1. New York Performance-Based Assessment System Martha Foote New York Performance Standards Consortium www.performanceassessment.org Princeton Conference - April 24, 2009

2. What is the Consortium? 30 small high schools in NYS. Committed to inquiry learning. Committed to performance assessment. Variance to use own assessment system. Must give the ELA Regents exam.

3. Demographics of Consortium Schools Source: NYC Dept. of Education, “Annual School Report Cards” (2002-2003) & NYS Dept. of Education, “NYS School Report Card Comprehensive Information Report” (2002-2003). The Consortium schools’ data were compiled from each school’s report card or info report. The overall NYC high schools’ data are found on every NYC school report card for comparison purposes.

4. Components Schools need seven components to implement the performance-based assessment system 1)Active learning 2)Formative and summative documentation 3)Strategies for corrective action 4)Multiple ways for students to express and exhibit learning 5)Graduation level performance-based tasks aligned with Learning Standards 6) External evaluators of student work 7)A focus on professional development

5. Performance-based tasks required for graduation from Consortium schools and aligned with NYS learning standards: Analytic literary essay Social studies research paper Original science experiment Application of higher level mathematics Additional school-based tasks

6. Multiple ways for students to express and exhibit learning: Writing: literary essays, research papers, playwriting, poetry, lyrics. Oral presentations: discussions, debate, poetry reading, dramatic presentation, external presentations. Artistic renderings: Sculpture, painting, drawing, photography.

7. How did we develop our system? Collaborative effort. We asked: what will be expected of students in college? Alignment with NYS Performance Standards. Development of rubrics.

8. Analytic Literary Essay

9. Social Studies Research Paper

10. Social Studies continued

11. Extended Science Project or Original Experiment

12. Application of higher level mathematics

13. higher level mathematics continued

14. Student Exemplars

15. Potential Threats Threat: District mandate for periodic assessments. Response: Immediate collaboration. Used it as steps towards the literary and math PBATs.

16. How do we know the system is working? External evaluators. Performance Assessment Review (PAR) Board. Comparison with district data. College study.

17. Consortium Four-Year Graduation Rate Consortium Schools*65% NYC High Schools50% Source: New York State Department of Education Annual Report (Spring 2007) - 2002 Cohort *Including ELL schools but not including transfer schools

18. Consortium Drop-Out Rates Consortium Schools8% (4-Year) 12% (5-Year) NYC High Schools20% (4-Year) 29% (5-Year) Source: New York State Department of Education Annual Report (Spring 2007) - 2001 and 2002 Cohorts

19. Consortium College-Going Rates Consortium Schools: 87.8% NYC High Schools:70.1% Source: NYC Dept. of Education, “Annual School Report Cards” (2002-2003) & NYS Dept. of Education, “NYS School Report Card Comprehensive Information Report” (2002-2003). The overall NYC high schools’ data are found on every NYC school report card for comparison purposes. However, because the “Annual School Report Cards” base college-bound rates on student reports of intention, which are historically unreliable, the Consortium schools’ college-bound rate was instead calculated from school reports on the Class of 2004, prepared for the NY Performance Standards Consortium in August/September 2004.

20. Consortium Graduates: Types of Colleges

22. Consortium Graduates: Academic Achievement

23. Consortium Graduates: College Persistence National Data Source: Thomas Mortenson, “Freshman-to-Sophomore Persistence Rates by Institutional Control, Academic Selectivity and Degree Level, 1983 to 1998,” Postsecondary Education Opportunity, Number 74 (Oskaloosa, IA: The Mortenson Research Seminar on Public Policy Analysis of Opportunity for Postsecondary Education, August 1998).

24. Why is the system working? Clarity of goals. Culture of revision - students & teachers. Culture of on-going, continuous professional development. Belief in teacher as professional. Inclusive definition of success.

25. Knowledge and Skills for University Success (KSUS) Standards Critical thinking skills Analytical thinking skills Problem solving skills Inquisitive nature Open to and utilizes critical feedback Open to possible failures at times Clear & convincing written and oral expression Can weigh sources for importance and credibility Can draw inferences & reach conclusions independently Time management skills Uses technology as a tool to assist learning, not a crutch

26. Circle chart