A & S March 9, 2010. Secondary Isolated to one district Elementary All schools received both calibration and non-calibration tests forms Non-calibration

A & S

March 9, 2010MARCH 9, 2010

FCAT PACKAGING

Secondary Isolated to one district

Elementary All schools received both

calibration and non-calibration tests forms

Non-calibration forms required rulers

Therefore, calibration schools needed rulers

FDOE solution: Provide calibration schools with rulers

SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY

Toward a Balanced Assessment

System

March 9, 2010

Summative & Formative Assessment

AssessmentOF Learning(Summative)

AssessmentFOR Learning

(Formative)

Reason for Assessing

REPORT ACHIEVEMENT

STATUS

PROMOTE MORE LEARNING

To Inform OTHERS ABOUT STUDENTS

STUDENTS ABOUT THEMSELVES

Focus of the Assessment

ACHIEVEMENT STANDARDS

ACHIEVEMENT TARGETS THAT

UNDERPIN STANDARDS

Driving Force ACCOUNTABILITY IMPROVEMENT




(Formative)


REPORT ACHIEVEMENT

STATUS







UNDERPIN STANDARDS





(Formative)


REPORT ACHIEVEMENT

STATUS







UNDERPIN STANDARDS


ESTABLISHING COMMON BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE

RESEARCH-BASED BEST PRACTICES

RESEARCH

ACCREDITATION

RULES AND REGULATIONS


NATIONAL RESEARCH-BASEDBEST PRACTICES

CURRICULUM/ACADEMIC GOALS

STAFF SELECTION/CAPACITY BUILDING

PROGRAMS/PRACTICES/ARRANGEMENTS

MONITORINGRECOGNITION/INTERVENTION

© National Center for Educational Accountability

Jean Rutherford, Ed. D.

Director of Educational Initiatives, NCEAJune 24, 2004

The Practices of High-Performing School Districts

State: Assessment

Teacher: Daily

Monitoring

NCEA Practices of High-Performing School Districts

Poor Practice

State: Assessment

District: Benchmark

Assessments

School: Unit Tests

Teacher: Daily

Monitoring

State: Assessment

Teacher: Daily

Monitoring


Poor Practice > Achievement < Gaps


META ANALYSESRESEARCH

2

4

8

10

11

12

15

31

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Cooperation

Leadership

School Climate

Parental Involvement

Pressure to Achieve

Monitoring

Time

Opportunity to Learn

* The average gain in percentile points of the average student in the experimental group compared to the average student in the control group.

Marzano, R., 2000; Borman, G.D.; Hewes, G.M. et al., 2000

Research-BasedGuaranteed and Viable Curriculum: Opportunity to Learn

Percentile Gain*

Opportunity to Learn affects student achievement

more than double any other school factors.

OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN

Articulates a rigorous curriculum (clear target) State Standards; FCAT Item Specs Scope and Sequence

Monitors extent teachers cover the curriculum Learning Team Meetings Collaborative Planning

Has assessments based on the curriculum Diagnostic Tests Benchmark Assessments

What to teach?

Is it being taught?

Are students learning?


NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL

RESEARCH FOCUSED ON FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT

RESEARCH In classrooms where teachers used formative assessment Rate of learning is double that found in other classrooms

Impact larger than most other educational interventions.

Particularly effective for students who have not done well in school (OECD, 2005)

Black and Wiliam (2004 & 2008)


LOCALBEST PRACTICES AND

RESEARCH FOCUSED ON FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT

FCAT Tests

Diagnostics

Common Assessments

Daily skills assessments, student work, observation

State: Assessment

District: Benchmark

Assessments

School: Unit Tests

Teacher: Daily

Monitoring

State: Assessment

Teacher: Daily

Monitoring


FY09

FORMATIVE ASSESSMENTS ADMINISTERED IN FY09

Over 70% of the schools voluntary used the common assessments

RESEARCH

Students with the highest usage of the Assessment Center Elementary schools:

gains in reading and math statistically higher than SDPBC mean.

High schools: gains in reading statistically higher than SDPBC mean.

SDPBC,DREA, 2009

NUMBER OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENTS ADMINISTERED IN FY09

School X


RULES AND REGULATIONS

FLORIDA

DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY

FLORIDA’S CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT MODEL

School administers screening, diagnostics, and provides remediation, acceleration, and enrichment.



District ensures real-time access to student achievement .

District prescribes formative (Benchmark mini-assessments) and summative (Benchmark baseline and mid-year) assessments in reading, mathematics, and science for Level 1-3 students.



Data chats are conducted between district administration and school administration; school administration and teachers; and teachers and students following baseline, mini-, and mid-year assessments.


SOUTHERN ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES AND SCHOOLS

COUNCIL ON ACCREDITATION AND

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT (SACS CASI)

SACS CASISTANDARD 4: QUALITY SCHOOL INDICATORS

4.2 Develops and implements a comprehensive assessment system for assessing progress toward meeting the expectations for student learning

4.3 Uses student assessment data for making decisions for continuous improvement of teaching and learning processes

IN SUMMARY

Formative assessment is a national research-based best practice

Local research supports the national research

External agencies require formative assessments


INVITATION TO NEGOTIATE


Responses received Vendor selected Negotiations not yet begun

ITN SELECTION COMMITTEE Marc Baron – Chief of Performance

Accountability Bill Thompson – Director, Assessment Liz Perlman – Elementary District Director,

Curriculum Development & School Improvement

Hernando Celada – Director, Infrastructure and System Support

Debbie Battles – Principal, North Grade Elementary School

Sandy Jinks – Principal Palm Springs Middle School

Carla Kendall – Manager, Online Assessment Mark Howard – Manager, Educational

Technology Heidi Galloway -- Analyst, Diversity and

Business Practices


Currently negotiating


INITIAL FEEDBACK RECEIVED


Diagnostic Test Too little time between

administrations Some items too difficult Some misalignment of items and

benchmarks Tests/items repeated each year Disagreement about correctness

of answers Fall Science more difficult than

Winter Science


Embedded Assessments Print (PDF) format not consistent

with online Science text too complex (Lexile) Printing scanner sheets

burdensome Problems with teacher logins Rosters don’t match classes Assessments not aligned to

instruction Window too early, late, short


Embedded Assessments Too many tests Not enough time to prepare for test administration

Occasional errors in scoring Unclear about relationship to grading

Online technical difficulties Test creation issues Scanner operation issues


STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK RECEIVED

FEBRUARY 26, 2010

SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS FOR FORMATIVE TESTS

Fix technology

Provide new tests /multiple forms Offer a variety of tests (benchmark and multiple benchmark) Plan tests for entire year Align tests with the Scope and

Sequence Provide Diagnostic Assessments for all

schools and students

SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS FOR FORMATIVE TESTS

Provide schools more flexibility in scheduling tests

Align schedule with school and student needs

REMEMBER

Research-based best practices

Research Differentiated Accountability

SACS/CASI Accreditation Local Feedback


ROLLOUT OF FCAT II

NEXT GENERATIONSUNSHINE STATE

STANDARDS

FCAT II SUBJECT AREA PLANS FOR NGSSS: FY2010 – FY2014

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Mathematics

Mathematics

Reading Reading

Science Science Science

Writing Writing Writing

Algebra I

Algebra I

Algebra I

Geometry

Geometry

Geometry

Biology Biology Biology

US History

US History

US History

Key: FT = Field Test SS = Standard SettingB = Baseline

FCAT Tests

Diagnostics & EOCs

Mini Assessments


State: Assessment

District: Benchmark

Assessments

School: Unit Tests

Teacher: Daily Monitoring

State: Assessment



FY11

FCAT Tests

Diagnostics & EOCs

Mini Assessments


State: Assessment

District: Benchmark

Assessments

School: Unit Tests


State: Assessment



Provide Diagnostics

& EOCs

Provide Mini Assts

Provide item bank

for teachers

ITN

Provide NGSSS teacher item bank

27,000 items



27,000 items


Provide NGSSS mini assessments

13,500 items


13,500 items


27,000 items


Provide Assessment Centertest delivery/collection (via computer, scanning, and

clickers), scoring, reporting, links to instructional materials, and parent access

Provide NGSSSmini assessments

13,500 items




Provide resources for PD and community outreach

Data transfers


27,000 items


13,500 items





Provide NGSSS Diagnostics &

EOCs180 tests

Data transfers


27,000 items


13,500 items





Provide program management for service, support and PD

Data transfers

Provide NGSSS Diagnostics &

EOCs180 tests


27,000 items

COMPARATIVE RESOURCES FOR DEPLOYMENT

Provide NGSSS mini

assessments13,500 items

Provide NGSSS

teacher item bank

27,000 items


Provide NGSSS

Diagnostics & EOCs

180 tests

COMPARATIVE COSTS:

SDPBC Provides CORE K-12

Teacher item bank

$3,800*/school

Minis $9.28/student

Diagnostics** $6.30/student

* Progress testing- aka FCAT Test Maker **includes 1-time printing fees

COMPARATIVE COSTS:


Teacher item bank

$3,800*/school $774/school

Minis $9.28/student $.93/student

Diagnostics** $6.30/student $2.87/student



4. Provide Assessment Centertest delivery, collection (via computer, scanning, and


Central Data Server

ASSESSMENT PLATFORM

Test Item data bank

TestItem

Authoring Tool

Test Assembly

ToolINTERNET

Test Administration130k students take

tests created by teachers or

administrators via computer, scanners,

clickers

Test Developme

nt

Test Delivery

Access to Results

Test Scoring and Reporting

Immediate access to student reports

by teachers, administrators,

and parents

Instruction Implications

Links to resources for

students, teachers,

administrators, and parents

Data transfers and security protocolsInstructional Decision Making

COMPARATIVE COSTS:


Teacher item bank



Diagnostics**

$6.30/student $2.87/student

Assessment platform

$12.22/student (2 yr. build) $9.51/student

(per year)


COMPARATIVE COSTS:


Teacher item bank



Diagnostics**

$6.30/student $2.87/student

Assessment platform

$12.22/student (2 yr. build) $9.51/student

(per year)

$5.30/student


IN SUMMARY

Formative assessment is a national research-based best practice

Local research supports the national research

External agencies require formative assessments

CORE K12 won ITN

FY11 DEPLOYMENT: CURRENT THINKING Planning and alignment Multiple tests School schedule based on needs of

school/student Enable district and differentiated

accountability schools to meet differentiated accountability assessment requirements

Provide non-differentiated accountability schools access to the CORE K12

Diagnostics for all schools and students

Documents

A & S March 9, 2010. Secondary Isolated to one district Elementary All schools received both calibration and non-calibration tests forms Non-calibration