1. Georgia’s Changing Assessment Landscape Melissa Fincher, Ph.D. Associate Superintendent for Assessment and Accountability Georgia Department for Education Winter GAEL February 2014

2. Federal Requirements for High Quality Assessments College & Career Ready standards and expectations Assessments in grades 3 – 8 and high school – capable of measuring student growth over the course of the academic year – accessible for all students, including SWD and EL ELP standards that correspond to CCR standards Administer no later than 2014 – 2015 Annually report college-going and college-credit accumulation rates for all students and student subgroups at district and high school levels

3. A New Assessment System Comprehensive – single program, not series of tests (e.g., CRCT; EOCT; WA) Coherent – consistent expectations and rigor to position Georgia students to compete with peers nationally and internationally – consistent signal about student preparedness for the next level, be it the next grade, course, or college/career – consistent signal about student achievement both within system (across grades and courses) and with external measures (NAEP; PSAT; SAT; ACT) Consolidate – combine reading, language arts, and writing into a single measure to align to the standards

4. Coherency – Consistency Achievement of Georgia Students in Mathematics 2013 NAEP – Grade 8: 29% at/above proficient CRCT – Grade 8:83% met/exceeded Coordinate Algebra EOCT: 37% met/exceeded SAT – Class of 2013:42% college ready benchmark * ACT – Class of 2013:38% college ready benchmark ** 2012 PSAT – sophomores:35% on track to be CCR *SAT data represent 71% of Class of 2013 **ACT data represent 51% of Class of 2013

5. Georgia’s New Assessment System As we begin to build a new assessment system, the plan is: to consolidate reading, language arts, and writing into a single measure to align to the standards; to embed norm-referenced items to provide a national comparison; to share items with other states; to align expectations with other external measures to send consistent signal of how Georgia students are doing compared to their peers; and to involve USG and TCSG in the development to ensure the assessments signal college and career readiness.

6. Georgia’s Plan To accomplish this, Georgia must: – continue strong partnership between K – 12 and post-secondary (USG and TCSG); – include a variety of item types – more than just multiple choice; – increase expectations for student learning and achievement; and – continue to – and accelerate – transition to online administration

7. Resources to Move Us Forward

8. Resources Even with many of the specifics of the new assessment system unknown at this time, there are many, many resources that will prepare educators and students: – Content standards frameworks, formative lessons, PARCC evidence statements – Sample items: PARCC; SBAC; Georgia OAS; other states (KY, NY) – CRCT Readiness Indicators – Lexiles

9. CRCT Readiness Indicators: Reading, ELA, Mathematics Indicators are designed to send a signal to stakeholders about where students are relative to the expectations in the our standards Indicators are to provide feedback about our preparedness for the increase in rigor and expectation for student achievement that is on the horizon Feedback will consist of the percent of students who achieved each readiness level – state, district, and school levels – for instructional planning purposes

10. CRCT Readiness Indicators: Reading, ELA, Mathematics For instructional planning and decision making: Needs Additional Support: The student has demonstrated that his or her command of the knowledge and skills described in the CCGPS warrants additional instructional supports. On Track: The student has demonstrated that his or her command of the knowledge and skills described in the CCGPS is sufficient; the student is on track for success at the next level. Commendable: The student has demonstrated that his or her command of the knowledge and skills described in the CCGPS is exemplary.

11. CRCT Readiness Indicators: Reading, ELA, Mathematics For accountability purposes - at the student (promotion/retention), school, district, and state levels (CCRPI) - we will continue to use 800 and 850. It is strongly advised, however, that schools use the scale scores associated with the Readiness Indicators as targets - we need to be working actively to get students to these levels because we believe the new tests will be more in line with those expectations than the 800 / 850. The readiness indicators will be provided during the interim as additional feedback to districts and schools so they have "better" information about where students are in relation to where they need to be in 2014- 2015 (with the increased rigor).  Bottom line: shooting for 800 isn't going to be sufficient in future years. 11

12. Lexiles

15. Lexiles with CRCT Readiness Indicators Lexiles Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Common Core Stretch Text – Lower Limit 5207408309259701010 Common Core Stretch Text – Upper Limit 8209401010107011201185 On Track6257758459309701070 Commendable8909901085115512101265 Reader – Lower Limit330445565665735805 Reader – Upper Limit700810910100010651100 2013 Median790860940107010951210

16. Formative Assessment Initiatives Bringing a Balanced Assessment Focus to the Classroom Assessment Literacy Professional Learning Benchmark Assessments Formative Item Bank 1600 new items loaded Statewide launch in summer 2013 Phase I available February 2014; Phase II pilot in winter 2014

17. Key Findings from Pilots of Formative Open-Ended Items Overall performance shortfalls – Many students lacked organization and neatness – Don’t seem to understand what question required – Don’t follow directions well – Didn’t answer all parts of questions – Don’t follow through with “units” in Mathematics answers 17

18. Overall ELA Phase I Pilot Summary Data Grade Number and Percent of Students Achieving Each Score Point Total student N/ % 01234 3 4751613713202453048 15.60%52.90%23.40%6.60%1.50%100% 4 3231518814199832937 11.00%51.70%27.70%6.80%2.80%100% 5 36711009015181253011 12.20%36.50%29.90%17.20%4.20%100% 6 1559608114181112455 6.30%39.10%33.00%17.00%4.50%100% 7 218138712756171463643 6.00%38.10%35.00%16.90%4.00%100% 8 26411401029338892860 9.20%39.90%36.00%11.80%3.10%100% 9 - 10 1751016783361812416 7.20%42.10%32.40%14.90%3.40%100% 11 - 12 3761018763196462399 15.70%42.40%31.80%8.20%1.90%100%

19. Overall ELA Phase II Pilot Summary Data Grade Number and Percent of Students Achieving Each Score Point Total Student N/ % 01234 3 8121107762174262881 28.18%38.42%26.45%6.04%0.90%100% 4 9061145765168633047 29.73%37.58%25.11%5.51%2.07%100% 5 83994812945371833801 22.07%24.94%34.04%14.13%4.81%100% 6 62614671028408863615 17.32%40.58%28.44%11.29%2.38%100% 7 695100210355151403387 20.52%29.58%30.56%15.21%4.13%100% 8 11161534827391803948 28.27%38.86%20.95%9.90%2.03%100% 9 - 10 1262181655910693752 33.64%48.40%14.90%2.83%0.24%100% 11 - 12 739138911753881313822 19.34%36.34%30.74%10.15%3.43%100%

20. Overall Mathematics Phase I Pilot Summary Data Grade Number and Percent of Students Achieving Each Score PointTotal student N/ % 01234 3 77166737381361928 40.00%34.60%19.30%4.20%1.90%100% 4 79580036087582100 37.90%38.10%17.10%4.10%2.80%100% 5 548513252124441481 37.00%34.60%17.00%8.40%3.00%100% 6 92776826965142043 45.40%37.60%13.20%3.20%0.70%100% 7 89663224362111844 48.60%34.30%13.20%3.40%0.60%100% 8 984791314100512240 43.90%35.30%14.00%4.50%2.30%100% 9-10 79869718645271753 45.50%39.80%10.60%2.60%1.50%100% 11-12 6906021786391542 44.70%39.00%11.50%4.10%0.60%100%

21. Overall Mathematics Phase II Pilot Summary Data Grade Number and Percent of Students Achieving Each Score Point Total Student N / % 01234 3 13781152539121473237 42.57%35.59%16.65%3.74%1.45%100% 4 1323126432583253020 43.81%41.85%10.76%2.75%0.83%100% 5 1351104939164152870 47.07%36.55%13.62%2.23%0.52%100% 6 15791171370135533308 47.73%35.40%11.19%4.08%1.60%100% 7 160285621972362785 57.52%30.74%7.86%2.59%1.29%100% 8 15291049619217883502 43.66%29.95%17.68%6.20%2.51%100% 9 - 12 2570143529959234386 58.60%32.72%6.82%1.35%0.52%100%

22. ELA – Grades 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, and 10 Mathematics – Grades 1, 2, 3, and Coordinate Algebra U.S. History ELA – Grades 4, 5, 9, and 11 Mathematics – Grades 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, Analytic Geometry, and Advanced Algebra Biology Benchmark Assessment Implementation Schedule Phase I Fall 2013 pilot Available Winter 2014 Phase II Winter 2014 pilot Available Fall 2014

23. FIP Learning Modules 1.Introduction to Formative Instructional Practices 2.Clear Learning Targets 3.Collecting and Documenting Evidence of Student Learning 4.Analyzing Evidence and Providing Effective Feedback 5.Student Ownership of Learning: Peer Feedback, Self-Assessment, and More 6.Leading Formative Instructional Practices (for district and/or school leaders) 7.Coaching Formative Instructional Practices (for instructional coaches and/or teacher leaders)